Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Your opinion of UFOs, ESP, poltergeists, etc?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Sanoy" data-source="post: 72636996" data-attributes="member: 397693"><p>There are conditions and 'ad absurdums' that suggests missing pieces. When a wall has holes in it you hypothesize missing stones. In this case there are no physical stones that will fit the wall without making the absurd. </p><p></p><p>If biochemistry is what allows for life we should be able to create life right? Science is all about the experiments and repeatability. </p><p></p><p>I said that the spirit nudges through <u><em>some</em></u> of our intuitions. I also think there are bodily intuitions.</p><p></p><p>Patterns are abstract objects. Can you identify a part of the Brain or Brain states in which everything that is true of my mind is also true of my Brain/ Brain states?</p><p></p><p>Ok that makes more sense, we merely have the experience of being an individual person. </p><p></p><p>I didn't say <em>you</em> have an experience of a thousand years. I said that the <em>experience of being an individual</em> has included having a soul for thousands of years. That is the natural experience, before it became unlearned.</p><p></p><p>Semantic debate is important. A TV is the device, so no it's not less when it's turned off, the station is never turned off by the TV being turned off so the station persists. You actually just used a dualism model like the piano. </p><p></p><p>Well you defined the mind, which is the individual, as the brain states. So I'm at a loss in how we should start looking a people from now on. Should we consider sleeping people "potential individuals", or those with brain injuries less of an individual? In general we call unconscious people fully people because we are using my world view. That people are indivisible, and have a complete transcendent value and instance no matter their ostensible condition. </p><p></p><p>There are many definitions of knowledge, but I gave you a generalized definition. Skillful means one is capable of a task. Thinking that you are a mechanic doesn't make you a mechanic. Deterministic systems learn, but that doesn't make it knowledge because there is no skill involved in that learning...it is deterministic. AI systems are also determined, what they learn is based on their programing. If the program is bad they will learn just as much as if the program was good. The AI doesn't know if it's right. Only a non deterministic person can qualify whether or not the AI has learned something that is true about the world. </p><p></p><p>Your definition of knowledge does not require any justification to believe it is true. A kid writing with a crayon could define his imagination as knowledge under this definition. You basically just defined "assertion" as knowledge. </p><p></p><p>Here is the essential problem derived by your determinism. If I asked you if aliens existed and you said "no" I would ask you <em>"why do you believe aliens do not exist?" </em>You would then give me "reasons" why aliens don't exist, but that is not that actual answer to the question. The real reason why you don't believe aliens existed is because the material you are composed of determined your belief that aliens do not exist. I have no reason to believe the material in your body is capable of determining truths about the world. You might say, "oh because science", but everything you say is determined by the material in your body...which I have no reason to believe is capable of determining truths about the world. Why should I believe water and carbon and some other things when properly combined can determine if aliens exists? </p><p></p><p>You say that if determinism is true I would also be determined and so my points are wrong. But your belief in determinism is self defeating, you can't tell me you're right! You mention this bit about free will not being a choice. I assume you do believe we have the perception at least of free will? Here is the irony of such an absurdly demeaning world view, under determinism, you can't even know if it's true that you <em>don't</em> have free will!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sanoy, post: 72636996, member: 397693"] There are conditions and 'ad absurdums' that suggests missing pieces. When a wall has holes in it you hypothesize missing stones. In this case there are no physical stones that will fit the wall without making the absurd. If biochemistry is what allows for life we should be able to create life right? Science is all about the experiments and repeatability. I said that the spirit nudges through [U][I]some[/I][/U] of our intuitions. I also think there are bodily intuitions. Patterns are abstract objects. Can you identify a part of the Brain or Brain states in which everything that is true of my mind is also true of my Brain/ Brain states? Ok that makes more sense, we merely have the experience of being an individual person. I didn't say [I]you[/I] have an experience of a thousand years. I said that the [I]experience of being an individual[/I] has included having a soul for thousands of years. That is the natural experience, before it became unlearned. Semantic debate is important. A TV is the device, so no it's not less when it's turned off, the station is never turned off by the TV being turned off so the station persists. You actually just used a dualism model like the piano. Well you defined the mind, which is the individual, as the brain states. So I'm at a loss in how we should start looking a people from now on. Should we consider sleeping people "potential individuals", or those with brain injuries less of an individual? In general we call unconscious people fully people because we are using my world view. That people are indivisible, and have a complete transcendent value and instance no matter their ostensible condition. There are many definitions of knowledge, but I gave you a generalized definition. Skillful means one is capable of a task. Thinking that you are a mechanic doesn't make you a mechanic. Deterministic systems learn, but that doesn't make it knowledge because there is no skill involved in that learning...it is deterministic. AI systems are also determined, what they learn is based on their programing. If the program is bad they will learn just as much as if the program was good. The AI doesn't know if it's right. Only a non deterministic person can qualify whether or not the AI has learned something that is true about the world. Your definition of knowledge does not require any justification to believe it is true. A kid writing with a crayon could define his imagination as knowledge under this definition. You basically just defined "assertion" as knowledge. Here is the essential problem derived by your determinism. If I asked you if aliens existed and you said "no" I would ask you [I]"why do you believe aliens do not exist?" [/I]You would then give me "reasons" why aliens don't exist, but that is not that actual answer to the question. The real reason why you don't believe aliens existed is because the material you are composed of determined your belief that aliens do not exist. I have no reason to believe the material in your body is capable of determining truths about the world. You might say, "oh because science", but everything you say is determined by the material in your body...which I have no reason to believe is capable of determining truths about the world. Why should I believe water and carbon and some other things when properly combined can determine if aliens exists? You say that if determinism is true I would also be determined and so my points are wrong. But your belief in determinism is self defeating, you can't tell me you're right! You mention this bit about free will not being a choice. I assume you do believe we have the perception at least of free will? Here is the irony of such an absurdly demeaning world view, under determinism, you can't even know if it's true that you [I]don't[/I] have free will! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Your opinion of UFOs, ESP, poltergeists, etc?
Top
Bottom