Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
if you don't know what they are, and you can't verify or prove what they are, then according to your own views (frequently expressed, across many threads), they don't exist.
None of what you wrote follows in any way from what you quoted.
Complete non sequitur.
Also it has nothing to do with my views I ever expressed across many threads.
Of course you can think otherwise. It is perfectly fine with me.
But if you do, and you want to let the world know about it, it would be very helpful if you could start making some kind of coherent arguments explaining your reasons for disagreement and not just spit out short sentences which are mostly indicative of the frustration you experience and not much more.
Without it there is no and cannot be a meaningful discussion, which is what I am after.
Otherwise, I'm not interested and will just ignore your frustrated comments and you are welcome to ignore what I have to say to anyone.
You seem to have difficulty distinguishing between an explanation and a rationalization. Emergence is NOT an explanation. It is a euphemistic rationalization, period. For all intents and purposes, "emergence" is useless BS, NOT a scientific explanation.
Lol, another 'Harry is stupid, now for the MysticPhD false excuse' post. Emergence IS an explanation (also known as a rationalization ) and an observation.
You really should stop trying to pretend to educate those who know better than you do, it can not be good for your mental health.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
Which of the 'unaware" physical laws and processes lead to "awareness"????
In the brain, it is bio-electrical selective overloading of synapses causing them to fire. In neural networks, it is electricity running a process that mimics how the brain works.
Whichever are involved in a process of emergence of the awareness. Exactly which ones may not be known yet and it is not important in a context of this conversation.
What is important, is that none of them, whatever they are, needs itself to be "aware" in order for awareness to emerge.
The same way as neither individual atoms of hydrogen and oxygen nor individual H2O molecule needs to be wet (in fact they are completely dry) in order, under certain conditions (namely number of H2O molecules lumped together), for phenomena of "wetness" to emerge.
Yes, which of the 'not-salty" physical laws and processes lead to "Natrium and Chloride being salt"????!!! !!!!!??? !!!!????
if you don't know what they are, and you can't verify or prove what they are, then according to your own views (frequently expressed, across many threads), they don't exist.
No one is making that claim. You are misunderstanding what people are saying, so it may be a good idea to stop repeating your error in understanding.
None of what you wrote follows in any way from what you quoted.
Complete non sequitur.
Also it has nothing to do with my views I ever expressed across many threads.
Of course you can think otherwise. It is perfectly fine with me.
But if you do, and you want to let the world know about it, it would be very helpful if you could start making some kind of coherent arguments explaining your reasons for disagreement and not just spit out short sentences which are mostly indicative of the frustration you experience and not much more.
Without it there is no and cannot be a meaningful discussion, which is what I am after.
Otherwise, I'm not interested and will just ignore your frustrated comments and you are welcome to ignore what I have to say to anyone.
That says better than I could, why I have had that poster and a couple of others on ignore for some months now. Well, one of those couple others for years, going back to before my hiatus from this site.
After you have read about 10 of their posts, there is nothing new said, and they literally never engage on substance. That's quite an accomplishment; to me, it seems like it would be more work than actually conversing in a genuine fashion, and the latter would be way more interesting and useful as well. But when you have made your mind up in advance and want to be faithfully married to your preconceptions, I suppose you have to do something to protect that.
Whichever are involved in a process of emergence of the awareness. Exactly which ones may not be known yet and it is not important in a context of this conversation. What is important, is that none of them, whatever they are, needs itself to be "aware" in order for awareness to emerge.
The same way as neither individual atoms of hydrogen and oxygen nor individual H2O molecule needs to be wet (in fact they are completely dry) in order, under certain conditions (namely number of H2O molecules lumped together), for phenomena of "wetness" to emerge.
the view in post above claims that something exists which they have no proof, no evidence, no validation for. and they admit to having no knowledge even of what it is. but they believe in it anyway. and they claim it is responsible for awareness. post above expresses their faith and belief in the unknown. and that out of this unknown unproven unvalidated which they have expressed their faith in, awareness emerges.
also, H20 is not always "wet." ice is hard and dry. it is not wet. fog in the air is not "wet" either. it can't even be felt.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 11-21-2022 at 07:22 AM..
the view in post above claims that something exists which they have no proof, no evidence, no validation for. and they admit to having no knowledge even of what it is. but they believe in it anyway. and they claim it is responsible for awareness. post above expresses their faith and belief in the unknown. and that out of this unknown unproven unvalidated which they have expressed their faith in, awareness emerges.
The original question was
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD Which of the 'unaware" physical laws and processes lead to "awareness"????
to which I replied
Quote:
Whichever are involved in a process of emergence of the awareness. Exactly which ones may not be known yet and it is not important in a context of this conversation.
So the question was about physical laws.
We know a lot of physical laws and we know great deal about them.
What may or may not be unknown is an exact combination of very well known laws of nature involved in a particular process.
This is what was clearly and unambiguously established in "the view in post above" as you put it.
So my questions to you is How did you get from
"may or may not be known combination of very well known laws of nature"
to
"something exists which they have no proof, no evidence, no validation for. and they admit to having no knowledge even of what it is."?
What was your thought process? Help me, please.
On my own, as much as I try to be charitable to your interpretation, all I see is a huge strawman.
Quote:
also, H20 is not always "wet." ice is hard and dry. it is not wet. fog in the air is not "wet" either. it can't even be felt.
Again, by what reasoning have you arrived at any kind of relevance between this remark and emergent processes which is the subject of the conversation?
What were you thinking?
the view in post above claims that something exists which they have no proof, no evidence, no validation for. and they admit to having no knowledge even of what it is. but they believe in it anyway. and they claim it is responsible for awareness. post above expresses their faith and belief in the unknown. and that out of this unknown unproven unvalidated which they have expressed their faith in, awareness emerges.
also, H20 is not always "wet." ice is hard and dry. it is not wet. fog in the air is not "wet" either. it can't even be felt.
that's not really true...as are many of your analogies often off base
The original question was to which I replied So the question was about physical laws.We know a lot of physical laws and we know great deal about them.What may or may not be unknown is an exact combination of very well known laws of nature involved in a particular process.This is what was clearly and unambiguously established in "the view in post above" as you put it.So my questions to you isHow did you get from "may or may not be known combination of very well known laws of nature" to"something exists which they have no proof, no evidence, no validation for. and they admit to having no knowledge even of what it is."? What was your thought process? Help me, please.
so post above is saying that "physical laws" give rise to awareness.
which physical laws specifically? and how do they give rise to awareness?
if they are known, then list them please for readers.
if they are not known, then they are unknown.
and you have faith and belief in that which is unknown and there is no proof evidence or validation for.
it is a very simple straightforward question. thus far your posts indicate unknown. but if indeed it is known to you, please list the physical laws of nature that give rise to awareness.
there is nothing "clear and unambiguously established at all" in the post above (or the earlier post shown below), which use phrases such as "what may or may not be unknown is an exact combination of very well known laws of nature involved in a particular process" "may or may not be known combination of very well known laws of nature" and "exactly which ones may not be known yet." The only thing clear and repeated, is the emphasis that it is not known.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonof
Whichever are involved in a process of emergence of the awareness. Exactly which ones may not be known yet and it is not important in a context of this conversation.What is important, is that none of them, whatever they are, needs itself to be "aware" in order for awareness to emerge. The same way as neither individual atoms of hydrogen and oxygen nor individual H2O molecule needs to be wet (in fact they are completely dry) in order, under certain conditions (namely number of H2O molecules lumped together), for phenomena of "wetness" to emerge.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 11-21-2022 at 08:43 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) and an observation.
!!!!!??? !!!!???? 
