• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Philosophical arguments against the existence of God

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
You seem to be itching to have an argument about race. Earlier you asked "Can you come up with any examples of science that wasn't even a theory when the UB was published but shown to be true later?" I provided the link but you didn't really want an answer. Now you are further diverting away from criticism about a 2,000 page book you haven't read to an argument about race.

Here, let me give you what you want:

* Is it true that all people have the same IQ? No!
* Is everyone equally intelligent like Albert Einstein, except we didn't go to the schools he went to, if we did we would all be equally smart? No!
* Is it true that all people are identical in intellect? All created equal? No, obviously not.
* Do I think all people are loved by God without condition YES! Does the UB teach that? Yes, without question!
* Generally speaking were some pure line races superior to others? Yes, welcome to evolution.
* If one race has a greater distribution of intelligence does that mean it can oppress or take advantage of another in todays world? Absolutely not!!!
* Are there any pure line races on earth today? No!
* Were Homo heidelbergensis equal to Neanderthals and Denisova hominin's? No, but I'm sorry if it hurts their feelings.

I'm not trying to have an argument about race Colt...I'm just trying to point out the faulty pseudo-science in the UB. I'm not sure where you're getting this irrelevant stuff regarding Neanderthals...they weren't mentioned at all in the passages I quoted.

The passage I quoted talks about the racial superiority of whites and inferiority of blacks. You said you know about the Kellogg family...are you familiar with their views on eugenics? That was a popular scientific movement at the time of the UB. Do you think it's a coincidence that the UB talks about the racial superiority of whites?

Also...what race are you referring to when you said...

"Generally speaking were some pure line races superior to others? Yes, welcome to evolution.
* If one race has a greater distribution of intelligence...."

Feel free to clear that up for the record, I certainly don't want to get accused of putting words in your mouth. Do you think that some races have more intelligence than others? Or was all that stuff about individual intelligence just a straw man?
 
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,407
61
✟100,301.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
I'm not trying to have an argument about race Colt...I'm just trying to point out the faulty pseudo-science in the UB. I'm not sure where you're getting this irrelevant stuff regarding Neanderthals...they weren't mentioned at all in the passages I quoted.

The passage I quoted talks about the racial superiority of whites and inferiority of blacks. You said you know about the Kellogg family...are you familiar with their views on eugenics? That was a popular scientific movement at the time of the UB. Do you think it's a coincidence that the UB talks about the racial superiority of whites?

Also...what race are you referring to when you said...

"Generally speaking were some pure line races superior to others? Yes, welcome to evolution.
* If one race has a greater distribution of intelligence...."

Feel free to clear that up for the record, I certainly don't want to get accused of putting words in your mouth. Do you think that some races have more intelligence than others? Or was all that stuff about individual intelligence just a straw man?

You need to reread the quote you posted, it says that on the evolutionary worlds the "Red" man is usually the dominant race not "racial superiority of whites and inferiority of blacks". What you saw and what it says are not the same. That's what happens when you seek out skeptical sources rather than the source itself and read with biased glasses.

answers to your questions:

* Yes, I'm aware of J.H. Kellogg's interest in eugenics. He started the Race Betterment Foundation. Margaret Sanger, founder of the misguided slaughter house Planned Parenthood was a eugenicist of sorts. After the Nazis eugenics fell out of favor.

I think the revelators of the UB selected intelligent, Liberal spiritualist of the age to work with that would be open minded to these more difficult topics. But the eccentric J. H. Kellogg isn't the same Kellogg associated with the UB. Dr. Sadler married J.H.Kellogg's niece Lena Sadler. He worked with J.H. at the Battle Creek Sanitarium. The Kellogg that was on the contact commission Wilfred Custer Kellogg was a distant cousin of the Kellogg cereal empire brothers.

* The UB talks about the racial superiority of Reds and Blues, but you continue to talk out of ignorance as you are desperate to find a reason to reject the entire book.....which you haven't read.

* There are no pure races left in the world. If Adam and Eve (who incarnate on an evolved, populated earth) had not defaulted we would be a fully homogenized people by now.

* I see people within what we currently characterize as different races that are debased and unfit for parenting and self support. Living in the south in America, I see a LOT of white people that don't seem fit to reproduce. LOL! But we don't have the genetic sciences yet to predetermine what the best pairings would be if we as a society were to approach eugenics in a practical way. But I can defiantly see a future age when one would seek out a partner based on genetic compatibility for their children as an altruistic practice for the betterment of the world.




PAPER 51: Section 4. The Six Evolutionary Races
  • P584:3, 51:4.1The race of dominance during the early ages of the inhabited worlds is the red man, who ordinarily is the first to attain human levels of development. But while the red man is the senior race of the planets, the succeeding colored peoples begin to make their appearances very early in the age of mortal emergence.
  • P584:4, 51:4.2 The earlier races are somewhat superior to the later; the red man stands far above the indigo -- black -- race. The Life Carriers impart the full bestowal of the living energies to the initial or red race, and each succeeding evolutionary manifestation of a distinct group of mortals represents variation at the expense of the original endowment. Even mortal stature tends to decrease from the red man down to the indigo race, although on Urantia unexpected strains of giantism appeared among the green and orange peoples.
  • P584:5, 51:4.3 On those worlds having all six evolutionary races the superior peoples are the first, third, and fifth races -- the red, the yellow, and the blue. The evolutionary races thus alternate in capacity for intellectual growth and spiritual development, the second, fourth, and sixth being somewhat less endowed. These secondary races are the peoples that are missing on certain worlds; they are the ones that have been exterminated on many others. It is a misfortune on Urantia that you so largely lost your superior blue men, except as they persist in your amalgamated "white race." The loss of your orange and green stocks is not of such serious concern.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
You need to reread the quote you posted, it says that on the evolutionary worlds the "Red" man is usually the dominant race not "racial superiority of whites and inferiority of blacks". What you saw and what it says are not the same. That's what happens when you seek out skeptical sources rather than the source itself and read with biased glasses.

answers to your questions:

* Yes, I'm aware of J.H. Kellogg's interest in eugenics. He started the Race Betterment Foundation. Margaret Sanger, founder of the misguided slaughter house Planned Parenthood was a eugenicist of sorts. After the Nazis eugenics fell out of favor.

I think the revelators of the UB selected intelligent, Liberal spiritualist of the age to work with that would be open minded to these more difficult topics. But the eccentric J. H. Kellogg isn't the same Kellogg associated with the UB. Dr. Sadler married J.H.Kellogg's niece Lena Sadler. He worked with J.H. at the Battle Creek Sanitarium. The Kellogg that was on the contact commission Wilfred Custer Kellogg was a distant cousin of the Kellogg cereal empire brothers.

* The UB talks about the racial superiority of Reds and Blues, but you continue to talk out of ignorance as you are desperate to find a reason to reject the entire book.....which you haven't read.

* There are no pure races left in the world. If Adam and Eve (who incarnate on an evolved, populated earth) had not defaulted we would be a fully homogenized people by now.

* I see people within what we currently characterize as different races that are debased and unfit for parenting and self support. Living in the south in America, I see a LOT of white people that don't seem fit to reproduce. LOL! But we don't have the genetic sciences yet to predetermine what the best pairings would be if we as a society were to approach eugenics in a practical way. But I can defiantly see a future age when one would seek out a partner based on genetic compatibility for their children as an altruistic practice for the betterment of the world.




PAPER 51: Section 4. The Six Evolutionary Races
  • P584:3, 51:4.1The race of dominance during the early ages of the inhabited worlds is the red man, who ordinarily is the first to attain human levels of development. But while the red man is the senior race of the planets, the succeeding colored peoples begin to make their appearances very early in the age of mortal emergence.
  • P584:4, 51:4.2 The earlier races are somewhat superior to the later; the red man stands far above the indigo -- black -- race. The Life Carriers impart the full bestowal of the living energies to the initial or red race, and each succeeding evolutionary manifestation of a distinct group of mortals represents variation at the expense of the original endowment. Even mortal stature tends to decrease from the red man down to the indigo race, although on Urantia unexpected strains of giantism appeared among the green and orange peoples.
  • P584:5, 51:4.3 On those worlds having all six evolutionary races the superior peoples are the first, third, and fifth races -- the red, the yellow, and the blue. The evolutionary races thus alternate in capacity for intellectual growth and spiritual development, the second, fourth, and sixth being somewhat less endowed. These secondary races are the peoples that are missing on certain worlds; they are the ones that have been exterminated on many others. It is a misfortune on Urantia that you so largely lost your superior blue men, except as they persist in your amalgamated "white race." The loss of your orange and green stocks is not of such serious concern.


No, my characterization of the passage is correct. I haven't added anything that isn't already in there. Do you need me to point out the lines that show what I've said?

Here's a starting point....

"The earlier races are somewhat superior to the later; the red man stands far above the indigo -- black -- race. "

So right there, the UB establishes that there are "superior" and "inferior" races...and that blacks are one of the inferior races. Here it is again...

"On those worlds having all six evolutionary races the superior peoples are the first, third, and fifth races -- the red, the yellow, and the blue."

It's not too hard to imagine what is meant by "red" and "yellow" races...but blue is referring to the white race as I'll show in a moment. The "indigo" or black race isn't included on this list, so by implication they are inferior (though that assumption is already shown to be the case in the previous quote). Finally...

"Itis a misfortune on Urantia that you so largely lost your superior blue men, except as they persist in your amalgamated "white race.""

Here we have the white race being grouped in amongst the superior races, in case the full racism of this text wasn't apparent already.

We already know from science that these bigoted notions of racial superiority have long since been disproven...but they still manage to persist to this day in the realm of religious fantasy, such as the UB.

What I'm curious about now is, why are you in denial about this? You've got eyes, you can read, the UB is rather clear on its views of racial superiority. Why pretend that it's not?

After all, this is what you believe to be true...isn't it? You're not just picking the parts of the UB that you like and discarding the faulty science and racism...are you? I noticed you never quote these sections of the UB...is it because you're afraid they're unpopular?

That's one of many differences between you and I, Colt. I'm not afraid to share what I believe to be true...no matter how unpopular it may sound. Truth is what matters to me...regardless if speaking it lowers myself in the eyes of others.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,407
61
✟100,301.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
No, my characterization of the passage is correct. I haven't added anything that isn't already in there. Do you need me to point out the lines that show what I've said?

Here's a starting point....

"The earlier races are somewhat superior to the later; the red man stands far above the indigo -- black -- race. "

So right there, the UB establishes that there are "superior" and "inferior" races...and that blacks are one of the inferior races. Here it is again...

"On those worlds having all six evolutionary races the superior peoples are the first, third, and fifth races -- the red, the yellow, and the blue."

It's not too hard to imagine what is meant by "red" and "yellow" races...but blue is referring to the white race as I'll show in a moment. The "indigo" or black race isn't included on this list, so by implication they are inferior (though that assumption is already shown to be the case in the previous quote). Finally...

"Itis a misfortune on Urantia that you so largely lost your superior blue men, except as they persist in your amalgamated "white race.""

Here we have the white race being grouped in amongst the superior races, in case the full racism of this text wasn't apparent already.

We already know from science that these bigoted notions of racial superiority have long since been disproven...but they still manage to persist to this day in the realm of religious fantasy, such as the UB.

What I'm curious about now is, why are you in denial about this? You've got eyes, you can read, the UB is rather clear on its views of racial superiority. Why pretend that it's not?

After all, this is what you believe to be true...isn't it? You're not just picking the parts of the UB that you like and discarding the faulty science and racism...are you? I noticed you never quote these sections of the UB...is it because you're afraid they're unpopular?

That's one of many differences between you and I, Colt. I'm not afraid to share what I believe to be true...no matter how unpopular it may sound. Truth is what matters to me...regardless if speaking it lowers myself in the eyes of others.

I'm not disgaurding anything in the UB, it defiantly uses the term eugenics (1) time and discuses the 9 races to appear on earth. Some of those races were superior to others, that's just evolution and a term used to designate inherent capacity for intelligence. The Indigo race completely decimated the green race in Africa looooong ago. The Indigo was superior to the Green. It's just a term.

Adam and Eve introduced the 9 th race to appear 39,000 years ago. They were Violet. If it weren't for their default they would have been able to sort out and eliminate inferior genetic lines in all the races as well as disease traits. Today the world would be a homogenized somewhat tan group of humans without much of the disease and ailments.


Also, the eugenic science hasn't been disproven at all, it's just that it became politically incorrect to discuss and pursue.

My younger sister is a rocket scientist, quite bright. She is superior to me in intelligence. It's just a fact, it doesn't hurt my feelings.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I'm not disgaurding anything in the UB, it defiantly uses the term eugenics (1) time and discuses the 9 races to appear on earth. Some of those races were superior to others, that's just evolution and a term used to designate inherent capacity for intelligence. The Indigo race completely decimated the green race in Africa looooong ago. The Indigo was superior to the Green. It's just a term.

Adam and Eve introduced the 9 th race to appear 39,000 years ago. They were Violet. If it weren't for their default they would have been able to sort out and eliminate inferior genetic lines in all the races as well as disease traits. Today the world would be a homogenized somewhat tan group of humans without much of the disease and ailments.


Also, the eugenic science hasn't been disproven at all, it's just that it became politically incorrect to discuss and pursue.

My younger sister is a rocket scientist, quite bright. She is superior to me in intelligence. It's just a fact, it doesn't hurt my feelings.

It would be easier to list what's correct with this post than what's wrong....

Yes, science did disprove a lot of eugenics' awful ideas. For example, you can't breed intelligence in humans. Genius-level IQ parents can have a dunce for a child and vice versa. Intelligence is affected by a complex and changing set of environmental factors....not just genetics. Ironically, you point out that your sister is a lot smarter than yourself....do you have the same parents?

No race is genetically "superior" to any other. I don't know what part of evolutionary theory you think says otherwise...but I'd love to see some quotes/links/anything that you believe supports this nonsense.

Is there anything that leads you to believe this? (Other than the UB of course). Is there some science article that led you to think some races are superior to others?

Also, the fact that scientists don't really pursue eugenics has nothing to do with political correctness...it has to do with the theories of eugenics being disproven and ethics in the field of genetics.
 
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,407
61
✟100,301.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
It would be easier to list what's correct with this post than what's wrong....

Yes, science did disprove a lot of eugenics' awful ideas. For example, you can't breed intelligence in humans. Genius-level IQ parents can have a dunce for a child and vice versa. Intelligence is affected by a complex and changing set of environmental factors....not just genetics. Ironically, you point out that your sister is a lot smarter than yourself....do you have the same parents?

No race is genetically "superior" to any other. I don't know what part of evolutionary theory you think says otherwise...but I'd love to see some quotes/links/anything that you believe supports this nonsense.

Is there anything that leads you to believe this? (Other than the UB of course). Is there some science article that led you to think some races are superior to others?

Also, the fact that scientists don't really pursue eugenics has nothing to do with political correctness...it has to do with the theories of eugenics being disproven and ethics in the field of genetics.
This area of genetics, intelligence and race isn't something I've spent a lot of time on. Remember, this is about you trying to pick a flaw with the UB so you can disqualify the entire book and move on. That's the Atheist technique that keeps them in perpetual ignorance of spiritual matters.

I have read some on heritability studies. While you are correct that two high IQ parents could produce a low IQ child, the average is that, as a group they are more likely to have offspring on the extreme of either spectrum compared to people of average IQ.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
This area of genetics, intelligence and race isn't something I've spent a lot of time on. Remember, this is about you trying to pick a flaw with the UB so you can disqualify the entire book and move on. That's the Atheist technique that keeps them in perpetual ignorance of spiritual matters.

I have read some on heritability studies. While you are correct that two high IQ parents could produce a low IQ child, the average is that, as a group they are more likely to have offspring on the extreme of either spectrum compared to people of average IQ.

Wonderful, now what about the fact that no race is superior to any other...in spite of what the UB says?
 
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,407
61
✟100,301.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Wonderful, now what about the fact that no race is superior to any other...in spite of what the UB says?

You haven't read what the UB says about the long evolution of the races of earth, so there is no real foundation to your question other than the argumentative gymnastics of an atheist heckler.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
You haven't read what the UB says about the long evolution of the races of earth, so there is no real foundation to your question other than the argumentative gymnastics of an atheist heckler.

I don't need to read the "long evolution of the races of earth" in order to read the conclusions the UB has made. The UB clearly states that some races are superior to others...a claim that you haven't denied.

I've gone on to explain how science has shown that racial superiority is a myth and has no scientific basis.

I've concluded that the UB is incorrect on this point...something that you avoid by complaining that I haven't read the entire book (which is completely irrelevant). If anyone's doing metal gymnastics...it's you. The only problem with that is...you should be doing those mental gymnastics for the special olympics team, not competing against the professional athletes.
 
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,407
61
✟100,301.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
I don't need to read the "long evolution of the races of earth" in order to read the conclusions the UB has made. The UB clearly states that some races are superior to others...a claim that you haven't denied.

I've gone on to explain how science has shown that racial superiority is a myth and has no scientific basis.

I've concluded that the UB is incorrect on this point...something that you avoid by complaining that I haven't read the entire book (which is completely irrelevant). If anyone's doing metal gymnastics...it's you. The only problem with that is...you should be doing those mental gymnastics for the special olympics team, not competing against the professional athletes.
HAHAHAHAHA! The guy so concerned with equality makes fun of Special Olympics people! HAHAHAA! OMGosh! that's priceless! "Ana the antagonist" I recall Obama doing the same thing on the Tonight Show:

 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
HAHAHAHAHA! The guy so concerned with equality makes fun of Special Olympics people! HAHAHAA! OMGosh! that's priceless! "Ana the antagonist" I recall Obama doing the same thing on the Tonight Show:


I wasn't making fun of the special olympics. I was using an analogy to show how inept you've been at avoiding the obvious.
 
Upvote 0

Breckmin

Junior Member
Sep 23, 2008
1,305
53
Gresham, OR USA
✟25,383.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
What design?

there are specific features which we "first" identify as coming from Intelligence.
Theism may be a later conclusion.

DNA/RNA are irreducibly complex...but they are also very complex information.
Schematic in nature and specified information based on which instructions they code for.
the covalent bonds do not determine the arrangement of the bases. It is important
to understand such point. Chemistry does NOT determine arrangement.

there are molecular and protein machines. The assembly instructions are required for these machines.

the whole process of the living cell is a micro nano factory involving protein synthesis.

there is also IF-THEN algorithmic programming we could talk about. All of these features
are features which based on our uniform and repeated experience with such features...they always come from Intelligence. Intelligence is the best/obvious explanation. Candidates for the Intelligence (such as theistic implication) are a distinct argument later.

The above is therefore NOT an appeal to ignorance or incredulity...but to deny the uniform
and repeated experience with such features WOULD be. We are not claiming not to know...

we DO know.

These are features which clearly come from Intelligence. Question everything....especially
hasty generalizations about mere "design" which don't address the exact nature of information,
engineering, coding, or programming mathematical algorithms.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Colter
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,407
61
✟100,301.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
there are specific features which we "first" identify as coming from Intelligence.
Theism may be a later conclusion.

DNA/RNA are irreducibly complex...but they are also very complex information.
Schematic in nature and specified information based on which instructions they code for.
the covalent bonds do not determine the arrangement of the bases. It is important
to understand such point. Chemistry does NOT determine arrangement.

there are molecular and protein machines. The assembly instructions are required for these machines.

the whole process of the living cell is a micro nano factory involving protein synthesis.

there is also IF-THEN algorithmic programming we could talk about. All of these features
are features which based on our uniform and repeated experience with such features...they always come from Intelligence. Intelligence is the best/obvious explanation. Candidates for the Intelligence (such as theistic implication) are a distinct argument later.

The above is therefore NOT an appeal to ignorance or incredulity...but to deny the uniform
and repeated experience with such features WOULD be. We are not claiming not to know...

we DO know.

These are features which clearly come from Intelligence. Question everything....especially
hasty generalizations about mere "design" which don't address the exact nature of information,
engineering, coding, or programming mathematical algorithms.
Good post! The closer we get to creating artificial intelligence the closer we get to demonstrating that mind was created by mind.
 
Upvote 0

The Cadet

SO COOL
Apr 29, 2010
6,290
4,743
Munich
✟53,117.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
All of these features
are features which based on our uniform and repeated experience with such features...they always come from Intelligence.
...But isn't that begging the question somewhat? So you can draw an analogy to natural constructs and say, "these look like <insert thing produced by human intelligence here>", but to claim that they are exclusively caused by intelligence implies that these variants could not have come about by nature. And of course, the analogy doesn't work very well - there may be "information" in the DNA, but that's for the same reason as there is information in a rock: we can read information into literally anything.
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
Good post! The closer we get to creating artificial intelligence the closer we get to demonstrating that mind was created by mind.
How so? The human-created AI process would still reside on some sort of (silicon) substrate - a "brain". What does your "God" use for a brain?
 
Upvote 0

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟78,240.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
there are specific features which we "first" identify as coming from Intelligence.
Theism may be a later conclusion.

DNA/RNA are irreducibly complex...but they are also very complex information.
Schematic in nature and specified information based on which instructions they code for.
the covalent bonds do not determine the arrangement of the bases. It is important
to understand such point. Chemistry does NOT determine arrangement.

there are molecular and protein machines. The assembly instructions are required for these machines.

the whole process of the living cell is a micro nano factory involving protein synthesis.

there is also IF-THEN algorithmic programming we could talk about. All of these features
are features which based on our uniform and repeated experience with such features...they always come from Intelligence. Intelligence is the best/obvious explanation. Candidates for the Intelligence (such as theistic implication) are a distinct argument later.

The above is therefore NOT an appeal to ignorance or incredulity...but to deny the uniform
and repeated experience with such features WOULD be. We are not claiming not to know...

we DO know.

These are features which clearly come from Intelligence. Question everything....especially
hasty generalizations about mere "design" which don't address the exact nature of information,
engineering, coding, or programming mathematical algorithms.
Complex structures can arise through natural processes without the direction of a supervisory intelligence. So if you're going to argue for intelligent design, I think you will have to move beyond merely pointing to biological complexity. Besides which, if complexity points to a designer, then presuming that the intelligence responsible for biological design is also complex, wouldn't the designer need to have been designed as well?
 
Upvote 0

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟78,240.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Good post! The closer we get to creating artificial intelligence the closer we get to demonstrating that mind was created by mind.
Hmmm... and yet it also seems that it would take us ever further away from the dualist notion that the mind exists as some sort of immaterial stuff, independent of the functioning brain.
 
Upvote 0

The Cadet

SO COOL
Apr 29, 2010
6,290
4,743
Munich
✟53,117.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
Good post! The closer we get to creating artificial intelligence the closer we get to demonstrating that mind was created by mind.
Question - how would demonstrating that some minds were created by minds demonstrate that all minds were created by minds?
 
Upvote 0