Searching for GOD...

[bluehillside Retd.]

Alan,

It is the movement of electrons through the neural network of our brains which defines brain activity.  But does this really constitute "Me"?

Actually it isn't but - even if it was - what defines "you" is the much more complex and nuanced phenomenon of your conscious self, expressed as your personality. However incredulous you may be at the reasoning and science that undoes you, your incredulity has nothing whatever to say to whatever un-argued and un-evidenced explanation you feel like dropping in to fill the gap. Sorry.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Blue,

Conscious self, sub conscious self, unconscious self, what constitutes Alan is his mind.

Gonnagle.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Hi Gonners,

Conscious self, sub conscious self, unconscious self, what constitutes Alan is his mind.

1. Sarcastic reply: be nice then if he tried using it then.

2. Non-sarcastic reply: quite so, and all the evidence suggests that "mind" is an emergent property of the brain.

[Maeght]

Alan,

The first one (but not just electrons).

+1

[Walt Zingmatilder]

It's called logic, Vlad - perhaps you should look it up...?

Since yours is extra-rectal, I shan't be looking up anything, thank you.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Hi Gonners,

1. Sarcastic reply: be nice then if he tried using it then.

2. Non-sarcastic reply: quite so, and all the evidence suggests that "mind" is an emergent property of the brain.

Yes, but the problem for a reductionist, substratist, materialist is the actual term ''emergence''

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Die Blau Meister, who is consistently a model of cogency and clarity (thank goodness his ongoing connection problems haven't driven him off the forum altogether - we can't afford to lose one of the best posters we have).

If he is Die Blau Meister that must make you Die Braun Noser.

Since Die Meister just posts variations on 3 or 4 basic posts WE would have a problem if his cosmic conclusion was not clear.......and that conclusion is.................Vlad is a troll.

[Sebastian Toe]

Vlad is a troll.

Ah, one of the fundamental laws of the  of the universe.
Glad to see that you are keeping up to date in the sciencey world.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Ah, one of the fundamental laws of the  of the universe.
Glad to see that you are keeping up to date in the sciencey world.

Hmmm......not up to your usual standard of comedy Seb.........are you feeling a little funny?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad is a troll.

Blimey, after all those thousands of efforts Trollboy has finally got something right.

Have the clocks struck 13?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Blimey, after all those thousands of efforts Trollboy has finally got something right.

Have the clocks struck 13?

See what I mean? His posts are just variations on his Vlad Obsession.

[Shaker]

Blimey, after all those thousands of efforts Trollboy has finally got something right.

Have the clocks struck 13?

Well, it's a bright, cold day in April ...*

* Virtual tube of Smarties for the first person to get the reference there

[Nearly Sane]

Well, it's a bright, cold day in April ...*

* Virtual tube of Smarties for the first person to get the reference there

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IJdGMNY_MDQ

[bluehillside Retd.]

Shakes,

Well, it's a bright, cold day in April ...*

* Virtual tube of Smarties for the first person to get the reference there

Ooh ooh, pick me pick me!

I see that Trollboy is bleating on about repetition. Weirdly he's right to a degree, though not for the reason he thinks. As he endlessly runs away from providing a method to distinguish his claims from just guessing about stuff there's not much moving on from that. Either we just pretend it hasn't happened, accept whatever has popped into his head as an objective truth for the rest of us and talk about whatever that might be (god help us), or we leave the ball firmly in his court until he finally feels like trying at least to hit it back. As he also refuses even to tell us why he won't answer that though, there's not much prospect of it ever happening.

I'm engaged in a bit of a B F Skinner-style experiment with him just now - I'll "reward" him with a reply whenever he feels like responding to me without lying about what I've said. So far though, he's shown no sign of biting.

Oh well.

[floo]

It is the movement of electrons through the neural network of our brains which defines brain activity.  But does this really constitute "Me"?

Yes.

[Alan Burns]

....  and all the evidence suggests that "mind" is an emergent property of the brain.

But nothing actually emerges.

Emergent properties are merely perceived patterns of complexity - as seen by an outside observer.  But material science dictates that there are just endless series of chain reactions with nothing in control but the laws of nature.

So what can possible dictate my state of personal incredulity other than these inevitable chain reactions which trace back to the beginning of time?

[Dicky Underpants]

John Shelby Spong I think still adheres to an objectively real God (or at least did the last I heard - he may have changed his mind) but is a non-realist about pretty much everything else.

That's the impression I get, Shakes. However, his enthusiasm for the 'realist' God sounds a bit like cheer-leading, as do his implications about a 'metaphorical' resurrection of Jesus. All the attempts of these critical thinkers are no doubt worthy and sincerely offered, but so much of their thinking seems like 'demolition jobs' that one wonders what viable form of Christianity could survive them.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Alan,

But nothing actually emerges.

Yes it does - it's called "mind" or "consciousness". Why not try reading about it before posting the same mistake again?

Emergent properties are merely perceived patterns of complexity - as seen by an outside observer.  But material science dictates that there are just endless series of chain reactions with nothing in control but the laws of nature.

That's just a(nother) non sequitur: emergent properties are the complexity, and the fact that they are the outcomes of entirely natural events doesn't change that.

It's simple enough at least conceptually - why then are you finding it so difficult to grasp?

So what can possible dictate my state of personal incredulity other than these inevitable chain reactions which trace back to the beginning of time?

Nothing, because nothing needs to "dictate" that. Could you at least try to read a book on the subject before crashing off the rails yet again?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Shakes,

Ooh ooh, pick me pick me!

I see that Trollboy is bleating on about repetition. Weirdly he's right to a degree,

I'm engaged in a bit of a B F Skinner-style experiment with him just now - I'll "reward" him with a reply whenever he feels like responding to me without lying about what I've said. So far though, he's shown no sign of biting.

Skinner? Your behaviour never gets above Pavlovian.......lets try.

Stimulus is the word VLAD.

[Stranger]

So what can possible dictate my state of personal incredulity other than these inevitable chain reactions which trace back to the beginning of time?

You continue to mistake logic for physics. You don't understand how your will and consciousness can come about from deterministic processes (possibly with some randomness) - but that isn't a problem with the physical world, it's logical problem. One that applies just as much to your "spiritual" thingamajig as it does to the physical universe.

You can't escape logic by postulating something that is not bound by the laws of physics.

[Alan Burns]

You continue to mistake logic for physics. You don't understand how your will and consciousness can come about from deterministic processes (possibly with some randomness) - but that isn't a problem with the physical world, it's logical problem. One that applies just as much to your "spiritual" thingamajig as it does to the physical universe.

You can't escape logic by postulating something that is not bound by the laws of physics.

Yes I can
Because (according to you) the laws of physics makes me do so.   

[torridon]

Yes I can
Because (according to you) the laws of physics makes me do so.   

ooh you little tinker 

[Alan Burns]

It's simple enough at least conceptually - why then are you finding it so difficult to grasp?

Because it is too simple to explain the complexity of human nature, particularly mine.
 

[Shaker]

Because it is too simple to explain the complexity of human nature, particularly mine.
 

Humble as ever, Alan ...

[newnature]

You continue to mistake logic for physics. You don't understand how your will and consciousness can come about from deterministic processes (possibly with some randomness) - but that isn't a problem with the physical world, it's logical problem. One that applies just as much to your "spiritual" thingamajig as it does to the physical universe.

You can't escape logic by postulating something that is not bound by the laws of physics.

What about strongholds?