Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 89

Thread: A God without compelling evidence?

  1. Top | #41
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    852
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,738
    Rep Power
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Observers are composed of matter. Matter perceiving matter.
    But if we are in a simulation it is actually just information....

  2. Top | #42
    Elder Contributor DBT's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
    Posts
    10,401
    Archived
    17,906
    Total Posts
    28,307
    Rep Power
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by T.G.G. Moogly View Post
    In his video he never seems to realize that to get any of his evidence for phenomena that are "non-material" he has to have something that is clearly material. As a matter of fact, all the evidence they claim as non-material is clearly material.

    How is it that dualists do not recognize this obvious contradiction in their arguments? They are saying, "Non-materialism is real. Here, let me show you something material to prove it."

    What am I missing? Is the video a joke, something from the Onion?
    It's probably a case of compartmentalized thinking - being so focused on one aspect or aim with the result of becoming blind to other possibilities.

  3. Top | #43
    Elder Contributor DBT's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
    Posts
    10,401
    Archived
    17,906
    Total Posts
    28,307
    Rep Power
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Observers are composed of matter. Matter perceiving matter.
    But if we are in a simulation it is actually just information....

    Then information is the 'matter/energy,' where there is no dualism, no essential separation between observer and observed, only the superficial form and shape differs.

  4. Top | #44
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    852
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,738
    Rep Power
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Observers are composed of matter. Matter perceiving matter.
    Actually that makes the simulation hypothesis make far more sense. So if artificial neural networks in a simulation function in an equivalent way to our brains then they could be conscious... otherwise the simulation might have philosophical zombies.

    I had believed in physicalism for many years but lately due to videos from Quantum Gravity Research, etc, I started to think that consciousness was a fundamental part of reality. I've also heard that scientists haven't really made any progress with the "hard problem". Also recently I was wondering to myself how I can have the sensation of awareness if I am just matter. I was thinking that maybe Penrose was right that there are tiny structures in our brains that can interact in a quantum physical way.

    I get the impression that many scientists don't think that consciousness has a physical basis... many say that the basis of the universe is information - there is conservation of information, etc.

  5. Top | #45
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Between two cities
    Posts
    2,542
    Archived
    56
    Total Posts
    2,598
    Rep Power
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by T.G.G. Moogly View Post
    In his video he never seems to realize that to get any of his evidence for phenomena that are "non-material" he has to have something that is clearly material. As a matter of fact, all the evidence they claim as non-material is clearly material.

    How is it that dualists do not recognize this obvious contradiction in their arguments? They are saying, "Non-materialism is real. Here, let me show you something material to prove it."

    What am I missing? Is the video a joke, something from the Onion?
    Probably not taking serious the bits about serious scientific experiments.

  6. Top | #46
    Elder Contributor DBT's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
    Posts
    10,401
    Archived
    17,906
    Total Posts
    28,307
    Rep Power
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Observers are composed of matter. Matter perceiving matter.
    Actually that makes the simulation hypothesis make far more sense. So if artificial neural networks in a simulation function in an equivalent way to our brains then they could be conscious... otherwise the simulation might have philosophical zombies.

    I had believed in physicalism for many years but lately due to videos from Quantum Gravity Research, etc, I started to think that consciousness was a fundamental part of reality. I've also heard that scientists haven't really made any progress with the "hard problem". Also recently I was wondering to myself how I can have the sensation of awareness if I am just matter. I was thinking that maybe Penrose was right that there are tiny structures in our brains that can interact in a quantum physical way.

    I get the impression that many scientists don't think that consciousness has a physical basis... many say that the basis of the universe is information - there is conservation of information, etc.
    Consciousness is a physical process. It can be altered through chemical or electrical means. Love or hate generated by stimulating the associated neural structures and regions, perceptions of movement where no movement occurred, etc. The failure of memory function, being the very foundation of consciousness, results in the breakdown of mind and consciousness: an inability to recognize, think or reason.

  7. Top | #47
    Formerly Joedad
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    PA USA
    Posts
    6,486
    Archived
    5,039
    Total Posts
    11,525
    Rep Power
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Learner View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by T.G.G. Moogly View Post
    In his video he never seems to realize that to get any of his evidence for phenomena that are "non-material" he has to have something that is clearly material. As a matter of fact, all the evidence they claim as non-material is clearly material.

    How is it that dualists do not recognize this obvious contradiction in their arguments? They are saying, "Non-materialism is real. Here, let me show you something material to prove it."

    What am I missing? Is the video a joke, something from the Onion?
    Probably not taking serious the bits about serious scientific experiments.
    Would you mind expanding on that point?

    Just as an aside our brains are quite complex organs obviously. People who's eyes see but who are blind, who's vision centers do not connect to the parts of the eye that sees, are known to avoid objects just as if their vision was as normal as yours and mine. What happens is that their brains are doing the act unconsciously and not using those same conscious vision centers. There isn't anything spooky going on, nothing non-material (whatever that is). Unless told about their behavior in avoiding objects they don't even remember doing it, but the proof is on camera.

    So what am I not taking seriously in the video? Honestly this "non-materialism" argument just sounds like more spooky religious talk.

    But please help me understand.

  8. Top | #48
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    852
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,738
    Rep Power
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Consciousness is a physical process. It can be altered through chemical or electrical means. Love or hate generated by stimulating the associated neural structures and regions, perceptions of movement where no movement occurred, etc. The failure of memory function, being the very foundation of consciousness, results in the breakdown of mind and consciousness: an inability to recognize, think or reason.
    Lately I've been watching heaps of Donald Hoffman videos on YouTube... maybe I want to be the devil's advocate....
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_D._Hoffman
    ....Professor in the Department of Cognitive Sciences..... Hoffman studies consciousness, visual perception and evolutionary psychology using mathematical models and psychophysical experiments

    ....Hoffman notes that the commonly held view that brain activity causes conscious experience has, so far, proved to be intractable in terms of scientific explanation. Hoffman proposes a solution to the hard problem of consciousness by adopting the converse view that consciousness causes brain activity and, in fact, creates all objects and properties of the physical world. To this end, Hoffman developed and combined two theories - "multimodal user interface" (MUI) theory of perception and "conscious realism".
    He seemed so knowledgeable and authoritative.... but now I've been reading his critics... anyway I'd prefer that physicalism is true since it makes simulations pretty straight-forward.

    An interesting part in some of his YouTube interviews is about the split brain experiment - that is related to his "conscious agents" theory. He says split brain patients can play 20 questions with themselves and sometimes they lose... and sometimes one hemisphere is an atheist while another is a believer... etc...

    He also talks about synesthesia....

    Though those things are compatible with physicalism....

  9. Top | #49
    Elder Contributor DBT's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
    Posts
    10,401
    Archived
    17,906
    Total Posts
    28,307
    Rep Power
    75
    Non physical mind makes no sense. What is non physical? How would it work? How would non material/physical mind interact with the physical brain?

  10. Top | #50
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    852
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,738
    Rep Power
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Non physical mind makes no sense. What is non physical? How would it work? How would non material/physical mind interact with the physical brain?

    Well apparently Donald Hoffman has described it using precise mathematics...

    https://www.researchgate.net/publica..._consciousness



    The following equations are in the same paper are about "microphysical objects"




    He sometimes says he's "probably wrong" but says he defines things precisely so that people can check it (something like that). He even discusses qualia (the hard problem) in the paper....

    As far as your questions go he probably explains it all in his book....

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •