|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
 Posted - 05/10/2005 : 11:48:50 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Storm
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
quote:
You did post this in pseudoscience. This is where we investigate claims or look for confirmation/refutation
Oh please don't make excuses for your peers or yourself!!! No matter what folder I put this in it still would have been ripped apart!!!
Excuses? For what? bloody peasant points out that we do engage in philosophy in the thread determinism and others. I do it every time I talk about my religion.
quote:
Just wanted to discuss not argue... Discuss the very words and phrase.. the Brain is messenger to consciousnes... i have done and have been doing much research on consciousness..whether you believe it or not.. i do not know everything and do not claim to... I thought that without immediate critisicm and having to know the immediate source someone on here could just contemplate.. maybe it is you all who are not knowledgable in the subjects I discuss...
In a discussion, is it not valid to ask someone where they read a particular item or who people whom they quote are? Why would we want to contemplate a subject of dubious authorship? If I posted stuff from Fred Phelps or Matthew Hale, would you just contemplate it or would you want to know more about the people who said it if it went against everything you've researched in the past or agreed with a position you long ago discarded as invalid?
quote:
originally posted by Valiant Dancer
quote:
You did post this in pseudoscience. This is where we investigate claims or look for confirmation/refutation of questionable science.
Perhaps General Discussion or Religion would have been a more appropriate place for the discussion.
So move it... see if the attitudes change
Since we have hashed out what you mean here, I see no reason to move it. The suggestion was for the next thread of this nature that you start. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
 |
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2005 : 12:04:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
quote:
Is it not fair to ask who these guys are, what is meant by “Brain specialists”, what research lead them to their “opinion” that [the brain is] “a more complicated organism to register and channel consciousness rather than produce it”?
Very fair...
originally posted by Kil
quote:
This is, or at least appears to be a paranormal claim.
Why does it have to be a paranormal claim? When you give it that name it is immedietly debunked by the hard nose skeptics
Originally posted by Kil
quote:
Give us reasons why you believe that this is not a wild goose chase. So far, you have said nothing on the subject beyond your original post. Are we expected to ponder any an all ideas as though all ideas have equal validity? How are we to decide what is worth our time and what isn't? What method do you use to evaluate such things?
What is wrong with a wild goose chase? Are you not up for the chase Kil? A good chase has a purpose a goal... A good chase makes you feel alive, inspired? I love a good chase... I definetly expect you to ponder... Do you not expect that of yourself? What would we be without pondering? Nothing.. like the Naturalists.. oh right you can not even be nothing... because nothing is something... isn't that the way it goes Only you Kil can decide what is worth your time... you do have Free Will..
What method do I use to evaluate... My knowledge, my insight, my experiences, others knowledge, others insight.. the universe around me... Don't you?
Originally posted by Kil
quote:
Storm, you have started many threads that became educational,
Really? Where? That is not the way in which I have felt... The way I have felt some of you made me feel...
Originally posted by Cune
quote:
Can you think of an analogy? (I tend to think better by using analogies.)
radio waves to a radio....
what is... consciousness... Cune? this is what I am contemplating myself...
If the brain is merely the messenger where do the messages come from? How can this then tie into Tyrell thoughts on the human personality and it's survival of death?
Here is a good start Cune on Consciousnes... plus I am sure being a student of ancient cultures you will gain knowledge into some of their thoughts on the matter
http://www.williamjames.com/Intro/CONTENTS.htm |
| Edited by - Storm on 05/10/2005 12:29:36 |
|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2005 : 12:22:48 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
quote:
what qualifies a mathemetician/engineer to speculate about human consciousness? What studies did he publish, and in what journals?
What qualifies anyone Dude? what qualifies or disqualifies you and I to speculate? but in this case I would say a... Mathemetician.... Engineer.. Scientist... helped produce the radio.... The studies he published on his thoughts...
1)The Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research
2)Science and Psychical Phenomenon
3)Apparitions... publications of his lecture at The Society for Psychical Research...
Are you a member of these organizations? I am.. So read the damm articles!!!!!
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
quote:
In a discussion, is it not valid to ask someone where they read a particular item or who people whom they quote are? Why would we want to contemplate a subject of dubious authorship? If I posted stuff from Fred Phelps or Matthew Hale, would you just contemplate it or would you want to know more about the people who said it if it went against everything you've researched in the past or agreed with a position you long ago discarded as invalid?
Yes it is valid... I tend to contemplate first... then ask questions... if it went against everything I researched in the past or disagreed with I would contemplate it even more...
|
|
|
|
bloody_peasant
Skeptic Friend
USA
139 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2005 : 12:30:00 [Permalink]
|
Storm,
My thoughts,
I currently tentatively think we do not have true free will, as our "minds" and our conscious are bounded by the biological brain and thus are predetermined by the complete collection of events and conditions leading up to any "decision".
I also tentatively accept that when the brain dies, the "mind" or the conscious goes with it. There is no after death mind.
I would say the brain is not a messenger, but a biological organ under the laws of chemistry and physics and that is the extent of it.
I would also add that the brain is highly complex, so much so, that it gives to us the illusion of Free Will and even of a separate conscious. Also the huge number of factors that effect all neurological reactions are so large as to add to this illusion.
To me these are all there is evidence for and to suppose otherwise violates Occam's Razor. New evidence could change my mind.
Thus I would say consciousness is a combination of our senses with our own biological brains and stored memories. |
|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2005 : 12:43:46 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bloody Peasant
quote:
I currently tentatively think we do not have true free will, as our "minds" and our conscious are bounded by the biological brain and thus are predetermined by the complete collection of events and conditions leading up to any "decision".
is this what you call a Naturalist?
Originally posted by Bloody Peasant
quote:
I also tentatively accept that when the brain dies, the "mind" or the conscious goes with it. There is no after death mind.
but could you consider what Tyrell suggested ... that the Human Personality or Consciousness takes time to disintegrate after death...... being a biological organ governed by chemistry and physics... thus at times leadng to the phenomenon called... Ghosts...
orginally posted by bloody peasant
quote:
Thus I would say consciousness is a combination of our senses with our own biological brains and stored memories.
I understand but disagree... |
|
|
|
bloody_peasant
Skeptic Friend
USA
139 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2005 : 13:55:18 [Permalink]
|
Storm
quote:
is this what you call a Naturalist?
Its what I would call my personal speculations and opinions on the matter. However I would add that for the empirical evidence we have at hand, including what we undertand about the biological world and how it works, it fits the data we have. In other words I don't see any inconsistencies with the explanation/definition and I see it as the most parsimonious explanation as well.
quote:
but could you consider what Tyrell suggested ... that the Human Personality or Consciousness takes time to disintegrate after death...... being a biological organ governed by chemistry and physics... thus at times leadng to the phenomenon called... Ghosts...
Sure I can consider such things, but I know of no evidence for the brain being able to affect anything outside of the skull in such a way nor do I know of any known mechanism for such a phenomena. I would need to see empircal evidence to take Tyrell's suggestion more seriously. |
|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2005 : 14:29:18 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bloody peasant
quote:
Sure I can consider such things, but I know of no evidence for the brain being able to affect anything outside of the skull in such a way nor do I know of any known mechanism for such a phenomena. I would need to see empircal evidence to take Tyrell's suggestion more seriously
Have you explored any other possibilities other than what you know? But how much do we really know about how the biological world really works? Are we done now then with exploration and understanding? or is there more to know, to discover? What of the millions of ghostly phenomenon reported each year? How does that fit into your predetermination? |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2005 : 15:10:47 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Storm
Have you explored any other possibilities other than what you know?
How is that even possible? How can a person explore a possibility of which they are unaware? Have you ever examined a possibility you didn't know existed, Storm?quote:
But how much do we really know about how the biological world really works? Are we done now then with exploration and understanding? or is there more to know, to discover?
I'm convinced that you've learned absolutely nothing here, Storm. Science is the process by which we learn new things. Biology is an active and vibrant science in that it is constantly exploring and creating new knowledge of the world.
However, implying that the "answers" to your questions might lie in what science does not yet know serves no purpose other than as mental "comfort food." bloody_peasant offered you his understanding of things based upon what he knows. Neither he nor anyone else can offer reasoned conclusions about what is not known.quote:
What of the millions of ghostly phenomenon reported each year? How does that fit into your predetermination?
Now this is rock-solid evidence that you haven't been paying attention to what people have laid out for you in detail over the months. Yet, you have the nerve to complain that people aren't "researching" what you say. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2005 : 15:40:58 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by me.. Storm...
Have you explored possibilities other than what you know... I should have said...other than what you have knowledge of... because one can be aware of other possibilities... theories... but have no knowledge of them...
originally posted by Dave .
quote:
Neither he nor anyone else can offer reasoned conclusions about what is not known.
I disagree... If that were the case we would never have evolved into what we are now... It is the quest of the unknown that gives us the awnsers... Just use technology for example... what we know today is very different from what we knew even yesterday , let alone 20, 40,100, 10,000 years ago... but yet here we are today Dave talking across computers... across states.... yet this technology was unknown at one time... offering reasonable conclusion to what is unknown is the first step in discovery...
Now all you have to do is apply this to human personality and it's survival of bodily death... Now of course this sounds fantastical in fact it sounds down right un fuckin believable... but hey we once thought that we could not space travel... I am just debating on a touchy subject... a question that is on the minds of almost every human being...
I would say I have learned much...
originally posted by Dave
quote:
Now this is rock-solid evidence that you haven't been paying attention to what people have laid out for you in detail over the months. Yet, you have the nerve to complain that people aren't "researching" what you say.
Elaborate more here is a very good article on Frederick Myers
http://www.williamjames.com/Folklore/SURVIVAL.htm |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2005 : 15:45:36 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Me:
This is, or at least appears to be a paranormal claim.
Storm:
Why does it have to be a paranormal claim? When you give it that name it is immedietly debunked by the hard nose skeptics
First off, I said it appears to be a paranormal claim. Next, a skeptic does not simply dismiss a claim that is supported by evidence. Even a hardnosed skeptic must consider the possibility that a paranormal claim may indeed be valid if the evidence says so. Debunking is not just saying nope to everything we doubt. We are skeptics, not cynics. It takes an investigation to debunk of a claim. Having said this, there has to be a reason to do an investigation in the first place. New evidence is always nice. I am a hardnosed skeptic, and I would welcome any real supporting evidence for anything that we now call paranormal.
quote:
Me:
Give us reasons why you believe that this is not a wild goose chase. So far, you have said nothing on the subject beyond your original post. Are we expected to ponder any an all ideas as though all ideas have equal validity? How are we to decide what is worth our time and what isn't? What method do you use to evaluate such things?
quote:
Storm:
What is wrong with a wild goose chase? Are you not up for the chase Kil? A good chase has a purpose a goal... A good chase makes you feel alive, inspired? I love a good chase...
I am doing research almost constantly. I have run down many dead ends. I don't have the time to check out every person's speculations. Do you? Do all ideas have equal value?
quote:
Storm:
I definetly expect you to ponder... Do you not expect that of yourself? What would we be without pondering? Nothing.. like the Naturalists.. oh right you can not even be nothing... because nothing is something... isn't that the way it goes Only you Kil can decide what is worth your time... you do have Free Will..
What method do I use to evaluate... My knowledge, my insight, my experiences, others knowledge, others insight.. the universe around me... Don't you?
My question was: “Are we expected to ponder any and all ideas as though all ideas have equal validity?” Where in that question do I suggest that I don't find value in thinking about things or that nothing is worth pondering? Again, I must ask you, are all ideas equal? If they are, we can throw away the scientific method, critical thinking and every other method we use to evaluate claims of fact. To quote Carl Sagan, “If all ideas have equal validity then you are lost, because then, it seems to me, no ideas have any validity at all.”
quote:
Me:
Storm, you have started many threads that became educational, [/quote]
quote:
Storm:
Really? Where? That is not the way in which I have felt... The way I have felt some of you made me feel... [/quote]
Oh please. As I said, those thr |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2005 : 16:06:08 [Permalink]
|
quote:
What qualifies anyone Dude?
To speculate? No qualification needed.
To propose a valid hypothesis for the explanation of human consciousness? How about a degree in neuroscience for starters.
To propose a valid hypothesis that claims that human consciousness "slowly dissipates"? 1. A way to actualy measure and quantify human consciousness. 2. Verification by independent researchers of #1. 3. Verfiable and repeatable evidence of human consciousness as it dissipates, obtained via the methods used in #1.
quote:
but in this case I would say a... Mathemetician.... Engineer.. Scientist... helped produce the radio.... The studies he published on his thoughts...
So, in your world a mathematician is qualified to form a valid hypothesis on the origin and fate of human consciousness? Would you let him operate on you if you needed surgury also? Would you let him take over as your vet for your pets? Would you let him pull a tooth if you needed one out? Would you let him defend you in a court of law if you needed defending? Would you.... I hope you get the point.
And you don't publish studies on your "thoughts". That is more like a speculative essay. And, if you have links to this stuff, you need to POST them, to the specific articles you are saying this math-guy published concerning human consciousness.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2005 : 16:41:37 [Permalink]
|
originally posted by Kil
The Burden of Skepticism
quoted by Carl Sagan
quote:
Speaking personally, I would be delighted if reincarnation were real. I lost my parents, both of them, in the past few years, and I would love to have a little conversation with them, to tell them what the kids are doing, make sure everything is all right wherever it is they are. That touches something very deep. But at the same time, precisely for that reason, I know that there are people who will try to take advantage of the vulnerabilities of the bereaved. The spiritualists and the channelers better have a compelling case.
Unfortunetly people get caught up in the Fraudlant history of Spiritualism... The very word brought up... makes one immedietly think of fraud especially concerning communication with the deceased... but as scientists we must reach beyond that... hence the releasing the ball and chain of Spiritualism... survival of human personality must be looked at in a different light... one that is natural.. normal.. not supernatural or paranormal... I believe that science will realize that as Tyrell, Myers, Gurney, once thought... Human personality disintegrates over time after the death of the body... the brain... and it is in this disintegration that ghostly phenomenon arise... so not the actual communication with the conscious deceased occurs... but merely the biological natural disintegration of its former personality...
Not only that but how can reincaration and communication with loved ones be paired up in the same thought... Reinicarnation is a completely different philospy then communication with deceased loved ones... Carl Sagan what were you thinking?
Originally posted by Kil
quote:
I am doing research almost constantly. I have run down many dead ends. I don't have the time to check out every person's speculations. Do you? Do all ideas have equal value?
so am I Kil... I am not every person... just a pier debating on this site.... no all ideas do not have equal value.. you must decide ... you and that free will you possess |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2005 : 17:09:37 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Storm
I disagree... If that were the case we would never have evolved into what we are now... It is the quest of the unknown that gives us the awnsers... Just use technology for example... what we know today is very different from what we knew even yesterday , let alone 20, 40,100, 10,000 years ago... but yet here we are today Dave talking across computers... across states.... yet this technology was unknown at one time... offering reasonable conclusion to what is unknown is the first step in discovery...
Now all you have to do is apply this to human personality and it's survival of bodily death... Now of course this sounds fantastical in fact it sounds down right un fuckin believable... but hey we once thought that we could not space travel... I am just debating on a touchy subject... a question that is on the minds of almost every human being...
I would say I have learned much...
You've learned wrong.
Science begins with observations. From those, we can make speculations about the unknown, test those speculations against reality, and thereby learn about what we don't know. When we know it, only then can we reach conclusions.
Making conclusions about unknown things is what the woo-woos do, Storm. They speculate about survival on consciousness, and conclude that it happens. Scientists may speculate about such a subject, but they don't make any conclusions about it without hard data well in hand.
And since there is no hard data about that subject, all is necessarily speculation.quote:
originally posted by Davequote:
Now this is rock-solid evidence that you haven't been paying attention to what people have laid out for you in detail over the months. Yet, you have the nerve to complain that people aren't "researching" what you say.
Elaborate more...
Gladly. You complained that people here are "true believers" and unwilling to examine your ideas. But you asked about how "the millions of ghostly phenomena" fit into predetermination. Your hypocrisy is thus readily apparent, to me at least, because you either didn't read the Determinism thread bloody_peasant linked for you (which should have given you the answer before you asked), and/or you haven't been paying attention to the stuff almost everyone here has been saying about "ghostly phenomena" in general over the months.
For you to complain about others here not taking your ideas seriously, while displaying such a lack of consideration yourself, takes a hell of a lot of nerve.quote:
...here is a very good article on Frederick Myers
http://www.williamjames.com/Folklore/SURVIVAL.htm
What, precisely, would you have me take away from that article, besides the incompetence of its author to maintain a position of open and honest inquiry when he/she claims that "automatic writing, multiple personalities, dreams, and hypnosis" constitute "evidence" for a dualist interpretation of consciousness which I'm sure many psychologists would see as unworkable? Heck, it's not even really an article about Myers, but more of an examination of some of his work, but the majority of the text doesn't mention his name. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2005 : 17:28:09 [Permalink]
|
quote:
survival of human personality must be looked at in a different light... one that is natural.. normal.. not supernatural or paranormal... I believe that science will realize that as Tyrell, Myers, Gurney, once thought... Human personality disintegrates over time after the death of the body... the brain... and it is in this disintegration that ghostly phenomenon arise...
Well, we'll all believe it when you can provide real evidence.
Speculation, annecdotes, and other such are not evidence.
It doesn't matter how many essays a mathematician writes about what he believes to be true, unless there is real, repeatable and verifiable evidence... all you are left with is speculation.
I'm sure we have been over this ground before in other threads.... so seriously, what are you trying to do? Get us to accept random speculations as real evidence?
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2005 : 17:28:15 [Permalink]
|
orginally posted by Dave
quote:
Gladly. You complained that people here are "true believers" and unwilling to examine your ideas. But you asked about how "the millions of ghostly phenomena" fit into predetermination. Your hypocrisy is thus readily apparent, to me at least, because you either didn't read the Determinism thread bloody_peasant linked for you (which should have given you the answer before you asked), and/or you haven't been paying attention to the stuff almost everyone here has been saying about "ghostly phenomena" in general over the months.
Actually Dave I spent a good portion of the day reading that thread... but forgive me if I do not undestand everything.... I merely would like to know how predetermination interputs or defines the phenomenon of ghosts... Well Dave many people have said many things pertaining to ghostly phenomenon for and against it... What you mean is what you have said about the existence or should I say the non existence of the phenomenon...
o.k.o.k. so I switch conclusion to speculation... you going to take my thoughts, debates, seriously now? Doubt it? It is like Valiant Dancer telling me maybe I should have put the post in General Discussion... yeah right that would of changed a whole hell of alot!!
Originally posted by Dave
quote:
What, precisely, would you have me take away from that article, besides the incompetence of its author to maintain a position of open and honest inquiry when he/she claims that "automatic writing, multiple personalities, dreams, and hypnosis" constitute "evidence" for a dualist interpretation of consciousness which I'm sure many psychologists would see as unworkable? Heck, it's not even really an article about Myers, but more of an examination of some of his work, but the majority of the text doesn't mention his name.
Just what I expected you to .... nothing... hey is that part of that predetermined... thingy you were talking about...  actually Myers is written and mentioned extensivelly... Did you look at where it said the Society for Psychical Reaearch?
I wouldn't say I learned wrong... just different... but just as Kil said not every idea has equal value.. yours as well as mine... |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
