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: 72664473" data-attributes="member: 397693"><p>A program just is a descriptive form of the causal condition that results in computation. That can be instantiated via the program externally or the conditional state externally. Higher level processes can emerge from the combination of internal systems and external interaction but it is the internal system that is the supervening system. The differences in higher level processing are acquired from their intrinsic systems not the external input which is identical between two systems. The very system itself supervenes upon the data flow.</p><p></p><p>Intentionality is aboutness. There is no 'aboutness' under determinism only causal orientation.</p><p></p><p>Data is apprehended. It is not observed by the empirical senses because it is conceptual. Data can exist conceptually apart from the big bang ever banging. Namely the catalogue of universes being 0. Data is independent of matter and simply refers to objective truth. Data just is information by definition.</p><p></p><p>Real being used in abstract objects to refer to occurring in fact.</p><p></p><p>There is no computer out there that can beat a chess player on it's own. Their 'thinking' is merely a reflection of a person or a team of person's refined thoughts.</p><p></p><p>Computers can't interpret data because they don't apprehend anything.</p><p></p><p>Just saying 'evolution' doesn't explain how matter without consciousness can result in matter with with intentional states like goals. Evolution merely explains it's refinement not it's ontological origin.</p><p></p><p>Evolution simply orients our behavior. The statement<em> 'Evolution Programs us'</em> is not an appropriate description.</p><p></p><p>You use the prison system of Norway to show how determinism might be beneficial but the article you cite attributes it's success to the concept of rehabilitation which assumes they are not determined criminals and are provided knives and bar-less windows. Under determinism we should more likely see repeat offenders executed rather than rehabilitated.</p><p></p><p>The lack of reports of consciousness is no indication of a loss of consciousness given that we can have consciousness without a corresponding memory of it. There are no scientifically '<em>accepted</em>' reports of conscious experience during ostensible unconsciousness because that conclusion is not the purview of scientific investigation.</p><p></p><p>Which parts of the wiki article on personhood correlates with your state of orientation on personhood?</p><p></p><p>No under naturalistic evolutionary determinism, the models, or 'belief content' don't correlate with states of the world, they correlate with survival alone. That is all that they correlate to, not truth about the world. So there is no justification at all for your world view. That you are alive simply means the content of your belief correlates with survival, not that it's true. It is infact more likely not true.</p><p></p><p>The improbability of the content of your belief being true is not a map terrain issue. It is a justification and paradox issue. The only thing non sequitur is this statement. <em>"If my belief about how the world works is true, then it's clear that the contents of my belief have utility"</em> False beliefs can have more utility than true beliefs, for example if nihilism were true, it's denial would have more utility than it's belief. The error here is thinking that a true belief correlates with utility. It may or it may not.</p><p></p><p>The reason I bring up the belief of determinism and utility is because I keep asking you for justification for your belief and you keep telling me because it correlates with survival which is not a justification. So can you give me any logical or coherent justification for your state of orientation that determinism is true? So the reply should be 'Determinism is true because X'.</p><p></p><p>You say you are not concerned with a system of justification, and yet claim to to think one thing is plausible over another. I am asking you why you find determinism plausible.</p><p></p><p>If mind and brain are the same you could complete the law of identity. Since you cannot they are, according to logic, not the same thing. If you want to make the statement they are the same, then complete the law of identity.</p><p></p><p>As far as I can tell everything you say is under naturalistic duress. So here are a couple of quick questions to answer so that I can figure out what I should do with your previous statements.</p><p>Do you have any epistemological justification for the claim that we are determined.</p><p>Do you have any epistemological justification that dualism is false.</p><p>Do you have any epistemological justification that the experience of aliens is a hallucination or identification.</p><p>Do you have any epistemological justification that Elisha's experience of angels are an hallucination.</p><p>Additionally please identify and describe that system of epistemological justification.</p><p></p><p>Also will you meet the challenge I gave you to act like you are determined for a month?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sanoy, post: 72664473, member: 397693"] A program just is a descriptive form of the causal condition that results in computation. That can be instantiated via the program externally or the conditional state externally. Higher level processes can emerge from the combination of internal systems and external interaction but it is the internal system that is the supervening system. The differences in higher level processing are acquired from their intrinsic systems not the external input which is identical between two systems. The very system itself supervenes upon the data flow. Intentionality is aboutness. There is no 'aboutness' under determinism only causal orientation. Data is apprehended. It is not observed by the empirical senses because it is conceptual. Data can exist conceptually apart from the big bang ever banging. Namely the catalogue of universes being 0. Data is independent of matter and simply refers to objective truth. Data just is information by definition. Real being used in abstract objects to refer to occurring in fact. There is no computer out there that can beat a chess player on it's own. Their 'thinking' is merely a reflection of a person or a team of person's refined thoughts. Computers can't interpret data because they don't apprehend anything. Just saying 'evolution' doesn't explain how matter without consciousness can result in matter with with intentional states like goals. Evolution merely explains it's refinement not it's ontological origin. Evolution simply orients our behavior. The statement[I] 'Evolution Programs us'[/I] is not an appropriate description. You use the prison system of Norway to show how determinism might be beneficial but the article you cite attributes it's success to the concept of rehabilitation which assumes they are not determined criminals and are provided knives and bar-less windows. Under determinism we should more likely see repeat offenders executed rather than rehabilitated. The lack of reports of consciousness is no indication of a loss of consciousness given that we can have consciousness without a corresponding memory of it. There are no scientifically '[I]accepted[/I]' reports of conscious experience during ostensible unconsciousness because that conclusion is not the purview of scientific investigation. Which parts of the wiki article on personhood correlates with your state of orientation on personhood? No under naturalistic evolutionary determinism, the models, or 'belief content' don't correlate with states of the world, they correlate with survival alone. That is all that they correlate to, not truth about the world. So there is no justification at all for your world view. That you are alive simply means the content of your belief correlates with survival, not that it's true. It is infact more likely not true. The improbability of the content of your belief being true is not a map terrain issue. It is a justification and paradox issue. The only thing non sequitur is this statement. [I]"If my belief about how the world works is true, then it's clear that the contents of my belief have utility"[/I] False beliefs can have more utility than true beliefs, for example if nihilism were true, it's denial would have more utility than it's belief. The error here is thinking that a true belief correlates with utility. It may or it may not. The reason I bring up the belief of determinism and utility is because I keep asking you for justification for your belief and you keep telling me because it correlates with survival which is not a justification. So can you give me any logical or coherent justification for your state of orientation that determinism is true? So the reply should be 'Determinism is true because X'. You say you are not concerned with a system of justification, and yet claim to to think one thing is plausible over another. I am asking you why you find determinism plausible. If mind and brain are the same you could complete the law of identity. Since you cannot they are, according to logic, not the same thing. If you want to make the statement they are the same, then complete the law of identity. As far as I can tell everything you say is under naturalistic duress. So here are a couple of quick questions to answer so that I can figure out what I should do with your previous statements. Do you have any epistemological justification for the claim that we are determined. Do you have any epistemological justification that dualism is false. Do you have any epistemological justification that the experience of aliens is a hallucination or identification. Do you have any epistemological justification that Elisha's experience of angels are an hallucination. Additionally please identify and describe that system of epistemological justification. Also will you meet the challenge I gave you to act like you are determined for a month? [/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