Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-21-2018, 08:20 PM
 
8,669 posts, read 4,810,961 times
Reputation: 408

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains View Post
Except that we have never seen, experienced or interacted with consciousness without a brain being the seat of that consciousness. We know that if we do things to a brain, like electroshock therapy or a lobotomy, we can alter that consciousness. Using various medical devices and techniques we can track brain activity, and see how it is related to thoughts and emotions.

Every piece of evidence we have indicates that brains and consciousness are irrevocably linked. On the other hand, we have no evidence that consciousness exists independent of a brain. If you know of any evidence to the contrary, I invite you to present it.



Sure, if you decline to use medical advances like electroencephalograms. Admittedly we do not have a fine and precise understanding as to exactly when consciousness fades from a brain, but a large part of this is because consciousness is a continuum, where on can have diminished capacity through trauma, without losing all consciousness and self-awareness.

However, nothing in that supports your thoughts. Nothing at all.


How can you say this, and contradict yourself with the rest of your statements. This is a superb case of cognitive dissonance.




Please bring some of this evidence to the discussion.



Can you show that the universe is conscious? Even mystic admits that he cannot, and assumes that based upon personal experience and faith that he cannot demonstrate.
How so?
Was this evidence gathered while experimenting on animals from the scale of mice to primates.

If any actual Experimental medical procedures such as what you are insinuating ever occurred the scientific and whole of humanity should be appalled at such a thing.

 
Old 10-21-2018, 08:23 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
37,110 posts, read 41,292,919 times
Reputation: 45175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
Complex natural systems are ultimately beyond human comprehension.
Humans have learned to understand complex natural systems already. That does not mean that everything is known about everything. New comprehension of complex systems occurs on a daily basis, and the ability to comprehend is heavily dependent on previous understanding and the evolution of new tools to allow new information to be gathered.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
We have no reason to think conscious awareness is produced by the brain. And there is evidence against that idea. No evidence for it.
When someone gets bonked on the head and his brain is injured he may lose consciousness.

Are you familiar with general anesthesia? Have you ever personally experienced general anesthesia? Ever had propofol? The mechanism by which it produces unconsciousness is due to effects on the brain.

https://www.openanesthesia.org/propo...ism_of_action/

And here, a discussion of how anesthetics work on the brain:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4066704/

"An emerging body of evidence suggests that both consciousness (in the experiential sense of the word) and anesthetic-induced unconsciousness are mediated by higher-order processes in the brain."

We know that conscious awareness is produced by the brain because we can turn off conscious awareness with chemicals that are active in the brain.

What evidence do you have against the idea that conscious awareness is produced by the brain?

Quote:
Originally Posted by pinacled View Post
How so?
Was this evidence gathered while experimenting on animals from the scale of mice to primates.

If any actual Experimental medical procedures such as what you are insinuating ever occurred the scientific and whole of humanity should be appalled at such a thing.
See the previous link.
 
Old 10-21-2018, 08:40 PM
 
8,669 posts, read 4,810,961 times
Reputation: 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
Humans have learned to understand complex natural systems already. That does not mean that everything is known about everything. New comprehension of complex systems occurs on a daily basis, and the ability to comprehend is heavily dependent on previous understanding and the evolution of new tools to allow new information to be gathered.



When someone gets bonked on the head and his brain is injured he may lose consciousness.

Are you familiar with general anesthesia? Have you ever personally experienced general anesthesia? Ever had propofol? The mechanism by which it produces unconsciousness is due to effects on the brain.

https://www.openanesthesia.org/propo...ism_of_action/

And here, a discussion of how anesthetics work on the brain:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4066704/

"An emerging body of evidence suggests that both consciousness (in the experiential sense of the word) and anesthetic-induced unconsciousness are mediated by higher-order processes in the brain."

We know that conscious awareness is produced by the brain because we can turn off conscious awareness with chemicals that are active in the brain.

What evidence do you have against the idea that conscious awareness is produced by the brain?



See the previous link.
Yawn, read the article.
Sorry,
I've read better books on neurobiology.
The library is your friend. The internet, not so much so.


Oh,
And there were no pictures.
 
Old 10-21-2018, 11:27 PM
 
Location: USA
4,747 posts, read 2,351,362 times
Reputation: 1293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
Yes of course you can find causal connections between events. It is possible to have a limited understanding of some aspects of complex systems. Your mistake is not knowing how limited your understanding is.

And then of course you say it's limited now but understanding is always increasing, and eventually all will understood. That is based entirely on faith. We have no reason to think complex natural systems can ultimately be understood.

Genetics is one example, the brain is another, subatomic physics is another. Science keeps on running into the same kind of problem -- as more is learned about a complex system, it becomes harder to understand, not easier.
Certainly, it's much easier to simply declare that "God did it!"



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXiC_rvgiqU
 
Old 10-21-2018, 11:33 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
37,110 posts, read 41,292,919 times
Reputation: 45175
Quote:
Originally Posted by pinacled View Post
Yawn, read the article.
Sorry,
I've read better books on neurobiology.
The library is your friend. The internet, not so much so.


Oh,
And there were no pictures.
Do you have any criticisms of the article you would like to share?
 
Old 10-21-2018, 11:55 PM
 
Location: S. Wales.
50,088 posts, read 20,744,698 times
Reputation: 5930
Quote:
Originally Posted by pinacled View Post
How so?
Was this evidence gathered while experimenting on animals from the scale of mice to primates.

If any actual Experimental medical procedures such as what you are insinuating ever occurred the scientific and whole of humanity should be appalled at such a thing.
We are appalled at animal experiments, too, but I have never heard of people denying the results on that basis, nor for that matter refusing to use the medicines at need (unless they belong to some looney cult).

But nature through disease, or accidents, regrettable though they are - but nobody is going to be so appalled that they give up the family car - arranges its' own experiments about what happens to the mind when the brain gets damaged.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pinacled View Post
Yawn, read the article.
Sorry,
I've read better books on neurobiology.
The library is your friend. The internet, not so much so.


Oh,
And there were no pictures.
You''l probably find more on papers on mental research online that you will in your library. And reluctant though I am to tell you to do our research for us, you really ought to learn something about recent research on the brain before you dismiss it.

But if you have read 'better books' on neurobiology, you must know that what Suzy was saying was valid, no? So just what are you arguing about?

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 10-22-2018 at 12:05 AM..
 
Old 10-22-2018, 03:50 AM
 
Location: Germany
16,786 posts, read 4,992,682 times
Reputation: 2121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
That makes no sense. Materialists claim to know the nature of life, and of matter. The fact that you don't know the nature of life and of matter IS relevant.
Life is an exergonic chemical reaction.

Most 'materialists' do not claim to know the nature of matter.
 
Old 10-22-2018, 03:57 AM
 
Location: Germany
16,786 posts, read 4,992,682 times
Reputation: 2121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin View Post
Physical brains receive information from the physical senses about our 3D environment, and they output muscle movement. Our interaction with the 3D world (4D including time) depends on a physical brain, and body.

We have no reason to think conscious awareness is produced by the brain. And there is evidence against that idea. No evidence for it.
Apart from ALL the evidence for it. The latest research you claim does not exist suggests consciousness is a product of the whole brain working together.

The fact that we can effect consciousness physically, electrically and chemically is evidence conscious awareness is a product of our brains.

The fact that we can model aspects of consciousness tells us it is physical. I know, it is how I earn a good part of my money.

So once again your for no evidence is 100% wrong.
 
Old 10-22-2018, 04:01 AM
 
Location: Germany
16,786 posts, read 4,992,682 times
Reputation: 2121
Quote:
Originally Posted by pinacled View Post
Yawn, read the article.
Sorry,
I've read better books on neurobiology.
The library is your friend. The internet, not so much so.
So you do not like science papers, but prefer books and libraries?

Quote:
Originally Posted by pinacled View Post
Oh,
And there were no pictures.
I saw pictures. So how did you miss them if you had read the article?
 
Old 10-22-2018, 07:05 AM
 
Location: S. Wales.
50,088 posts, read 20,744,698 times
Reputation: 5930
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes View Post
So you do not like science papers, but prefer books and libraries?



I saw pictures. So how did you miss them if you had read the article?
Yes. There were a couple of diagrams at the bottom. Thanks for picking that up. I suspect what we had from Pinnacled was the not unfamiliar disregarding and pushing away of any unwelcome evidence.
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:51 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top