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.
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.
Good morning.
I can only surmise that the pictures didn't upload on my first visit to the link.
Still not impressed.
Very well,
Biology.
Two classifications come to mind.
The plant and animal kingdom have very different cell biology.
With comparative anatomy science has observed that that the animal kingdom is similar in having neurological systems interact and communicate.
If this is the sole basis for a persons conclusion of consciousness they have ignored the whole of scientific evidence found in a myriad of living organisms.
I though the plant kingdom also employed complex functions of interaction that could be described as conscience. Or at least a purpose composed on a scale that is not seen unless looked for.
I can only surmise that the pictures didn't upload on my first visit to the link.
Still not impressed.
Very well,
Biology.
Two classifications come to mind.
The plant and animal kingdom have very different cell biology.
With comparative anatomy science has observed that that the animal kingdom is similar in having neurological systems interact and communicate.
If this is the sole basis for a persons conclusion of consciousness they have ignored the whole of scientific evidence found in a myriad of living organisms.
I though the plant kingdom also employed complex functions of interaction that could be described as conscience. Or at least a purpose composed on a scale that is not seen unless looked for.
If the article 'uploaded' I don't see why the pictures didn't. Nor why it would make you unable to get what it said even without. However, given that you can't be bothered to evaluate the scientific work on the brain, nor indeed that you don't refute that the brain can be affected by illness or injury, can we assume that the hypothesis that the mind is something more than a product of the brain is unsupported by evidence?
I can give you another classification. Insects. They (on fossil evidence) were the direction that animal cells took while plant cells moved towards plants. In the pre - Cambrian, plants and animals were very much alike, as is the case today where a lot of people are surprised to learn that sea 'flowers' are in fact animals. And in the Silurian age, the line that led to fish, reptiles and mammals diverged with a backbone rather than an exoskeleton. And those lines continued three separate developments. No mystery.
It is not unsurprising that the insect nervous system and the animal one is based on a nerve cord with input analyser atone end and activator at the other. I have never heard that plants have that, but presumably the same system of neural signals passed along to pursue prey or escape it (animals) also controls the reactions of plants to the sun or to trapping hapenstance prey. Evolved instinct toenable survival.
'consciousness here is little more than Reaction and action, activated by neural signals as it was from the first cells. Or that is the explanation that fits the evidence. From then it evolved, or no, as in plants, no further than trapping prey. in Insects, the complex society of bees or ants. In animals tribal society and pack - individuality, probably, in raptors, reputedly the most intelligent of the dinosaurs and, after their extinction (aside from the bird-brained dinosaurs),mammals had to evolve that all over again, to pack and tribal instinct and problem solving that we get in the higher animals. That is getting close to feelings of identity and though. We are looking at consciousness evolving along with more complex life.
There is also fossil evidence of how humans developed more complext problem -solving and feelings of tribal identity, along with increased tool -making and adaptability (walking upright). Thusbecoming the most powerful adapter of nature to its' own purposes that has ever evolved.
There's a lot to find out and prove, but this is the way it looks and there is not real need to appeal to any entity outside that to account for it. Nor does it serve as evidence for an outside entity.
'Consciousness' as a gap for God argument is on the way out, even faster than the other two.
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.
"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.
Oh SuzyQ, you have bought the entire atheist/materialist mythology. That's why you never understand anything I say.
You also never read most of what I write. I already explained that consciousness is expressed through the physical brain and body. If a person's brain isn't functioning, they can't communicate and interact, so they don't seem conscious. So you, of course, assume they have no consciousness. That is an assumption, NOT a scientific observation.
And you think complex natural systems are being understood, more every day. And very soon ... any day ... they will understand ... just be patient and wait .. they promise ...
That has been going on for many decades. But as I already said, which of course you ignored -- as they learn more about each complex natural system (the brain, DNA, subatomic particles, etc.) it becomes ever more mysterious.
There's a lot to find out and prove, but this is the way it looks and there is not real need to appeal to any entity outside that to account for it. Nor does it serve as evidence for an outside entity.
'Consciousness' as a gap for God argument is on the way out, even faster than the other two.
I don't think anyone is appealing to an outside entity. That is your naive concept of what people refer to as "god."
Oh SuzyQ, you have bought the entire atheist/materialist mythology. That's why you never understand anything I say.
Oh Good4Nothin, you have bought the entire Mystic methodology, that is why you do not understand the science you claim we do not have (before demonstrating that we do have this evidence in your next paragraph).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin
You also never read most of what I write. I already explained that consciousness is expressed through the physical brain and body. If a person's brain isn't functioning, they can't communicate and interact, so they don't seem conscious. So you, of course, assume they have no consciousness. That is an assumption, NOT a scientific observation.
No, it IS a scientific observation that if a persons brain is not functioning, then they have no consciousness. You can scientifically observe this in any morgue or graveyard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin
And you think complex natural systems are being understood, more every day. And very soon ... any day ... they will understand ... just be patient and wait .. they promise ...
A much larger failing for a god, ersatz or otherwise. Mind the gap.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin
That has been going on for many decades. But as I already said, which of course you ignored -- as they learn more about each complex natural system (the brain, DNA, subatomic particles, etc.) it becomes ever more mysterious.
Lol, refuting your previous paragraph. Yes, it has been going on for decades, and we know much more about it than when we started. And still it does not point to a universal consciousness.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin
You really have not noticed this??
No, we have not noticed this. We have noticed you need to ignore science and that you never back any of your claims, though.
You are completely convinced of the truth of your dogmatic beliefs. No one will ever get through your armor.
Christian straw man argument 683, from the chapter 'How to project your delusion on to your opponent'. Hint, I am not saying you are a Christian, I am just saying you argue like one.
Another hint, evidence would, and has, changed my mind. We are still waiting for you to stop attacking atheism in lieu of you having no evidence for your claims.
We have been there before. This is irrelevant. This is (a) meaningless waffle (1), and (2) Chophra -waffle. This is not 'consciousness' in the sense that everyone understands the term. This just what matter-energy does, even in a state of noth appearing to be anything there. If this is a consciousness that is anything like up to dog or dolphin level, never mind human intelligence, please provide some substantiation of it. Otherwise this is no more than the sort of 'information' that you get when you crack open a rock.
(1) unless you claim that it is Intelligent consciousness in which case - prove it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin
Oh SuzyQ, you have bought the entire atheist/materialist mythology. That's why you never understand anything I say.
You also never read most of what I write. I already explained that consciousness is expressed through the physical brain and body. If a person's brain isn't functioning, they can't communicate and interact, so they don't seem conscious. So you, of course, assume they have no consciousness. That is an assumption, NOT a scientific observation.
And you think complex natural systems are being understood, more every day. And very soon ... any day ... they will understand ... just be patient and wait .. they promise ...
That has been going on for many decades. But as I already said, which of course you ignored -- as they learn more about each complex natural system (the brain, DNA, subatomic particles, etc.) it becomes ever more mysterious.
You really have not noticed this??
You haven't listened to anything that has been posted. If there was no evidence as to whether the brain is conscious if all activity seems to have ceased, then the burden of proof would be on you to show that it continued, not for anyone to prove that it didn't. But even though there is some evidence that brain activity continues even if the brain gives the appearance ofno longer functioning (after all keratin keeps growing even after a person is dead) that does not do a thing to substantiate ...whatever it is you are trying to argue. Whioch is probably a god -claim, or ought to be as otherwise it would be off -topic.
And that really deals with you other point, except that it has already been refuted and you don't listen. Unknown prove nothing about a god, and incresaed information, complexity, new avenues of research and more mysteries do nothing to validate whatever argument you are making. Which is surely that there is a 'god' of some 'cosmic intelligence' kind that is the Only explanation.
All we are getting is 'ah -hah! Science is at a loss. Cue God as the only explanation". Come off it. That was never a good apologetic and still isn't.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 10-22-2018 at 10:39 AM..
Oh Good4Nothin, you have bought the entire Mystic methodology, that is why you do not understand the science you claim we do not have (before demonstrating that we do have this evidence in your next paragraph).
No, it IS a scientific observation that if a persons brain is not functioning, then they have no consciousness. You can scientifically observe this in any morgue or graveyard.
A much larger failing for a god, ersatz or otherwise. Mind the gap.
Lol, refuting your previous paragraph. Yes, it has been going on for decades, and we know much more about it than when we started. And still it does not point to a universal consciousness.
No, we have not noticed this. We have noticed you need to ignore science and that you never back any of your claims, though.
You noticed that? Yes, it is uncannily like Mystic's "Intelligent Nature" Belief - even mimics the same arguments and sources. Which is why I found it a hoot to see the two of them falling out over doctrine
Unless it's a copyright issue.
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.
You noticed that? Yes, it is uncannily like Mystic's "Intelligent Nature" Belief - even mimics the same arguments and sources. Which is why I found it a hoot to see the two of them falling out over doctrine 
