Bernie Gunther
Fundamentalist Druid
Oddly enough ...Crispy said:
If you want to read up some more on that stuff, the key names for a search are probably Susan Oyama, Griffiths (author of pre-print above), Jablonka and Laland.
Darwinists Running Scared
- Thread starter phildwyer
- Start date
If you want to read up some more on that stuff, the key names for a search are probably Susan Oyama, Griffiths (author of pre-print above), Jablonka and Laland.
TeeJay said:
Teilhard de Chardin springs to mind, not that he actually used the phrase. Also, an obscure Belgian sci-fi author wrote a fairly good book about a similar idea - didn't find it convincing though... he was just trying to reconcile his religious beliefs with the apparence of a purposeless universe.
I do find it a mighty coincedence that even the laws of physics themselves are fine tuned for the development of life.
Personally I find that anyone who believes in nothing more than matter live very hollow lives, for what is the point even in their own emotions? Who would want to exist as a slave to chemical reactions?....which then raises the question of what is liberty? surely even the concept of being free comes from a chain of reactions blah blah blah
Congratulations materialists you`ve successfully broken life down into......jack sh*t. What a gift to mankind.
Personally I find that anyone who believes in nothing more than matter live very hollow lives, for what is the point even in their own emotions? Who would want to exist as a slave to chemical reactions?....which then raises the question of what is liberty? surely even the concept of being free comes from a chain of reactions blah blah blah
Congratulations materialists you`ve successfully broken life down into......jack sh*t. What a gift to mankind.
revol68
what, fucking what?
ah so wishful thinking becomes your defence.
Why does materialism reduce life to jackshit, im a materialist and think life can be very meaningful, because we make it. I think the fact that life has came about in such improbable ways means it should be valued even more, not bought off with the promise of a soul.
Why does materialism reduce life to jackshit, im a materialist and think life can be very meaningful, because we make it. I think the fact that life has came about in such improbable ways means it should be valued even more, not bought off with the promise of a soul.
The fact that straight away you`ve said that belief in a higher self is some kind of intellectual cop out shows exactly what your problem is. Its not an INTELLECTUAL cop out, I don`t THINK I have a soul. I FEEL it.
Have you never sat and just been?
BTW this is not a war, I have no defence, no tactic
Have you never sat and just been?
BTW this is not a war, I have no defence, no tactic
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
(Ah, a chance to deploy my second -favourite insult!!)gurrier said:
An Oxbridge university, you say?
Brookes, perchance?
revol68 said:
The act of being requires prior processes?
What like creation/birth? congratulations.
I do think a new born baby sits and feels its being yes.
So your dictating as to what I feel now? Your arrogance seems to know no bounds. Yes its completely detached from any concept of matter, it goes deeper than any emotion and stems not from inside/outside/just behind that lampost, but from everywhere. Perhaps you cannot understand such a concept who knows?
I`m not sure what the cock size has to do with anything, some kind of childhood trauma perhaps?
As for the multiple universes thing, well I find it VERY unscientific to incorporate concepts that have never been observed into a theory in order to substantiate it/challenge an opposing view. I find it funny how the rules seem to change in that the paradigm slaves can twist a concept as much as they like to enforce the status quo yet every idea put forward by those not enslaved by paradigm is torn apart looking for a way to even slightly debunk it. Its quite shameful considering the whole point of science is to expand the tree of knowledge rather than butcher it.
revol68
what, fucking what?
Azrael23 said:The act of being requires prior processes?
What like creation/birth? congratulations.
I do think a new born baby sits and feels its being yes.
So your dictating as to what I feel now? Your arrogance seems to know no bounds. Yes its completely detached from any concept of matter, it goes deeper than any emotion and stems not from inside/outside/just behind that lampost, but from everywhere. Perhaps you cannot understand such a concept who knows?
I`m not sure what the cock size has to do with anything, some kind of childhood trauma perhaps?
As for the multiple universes thing, well I find it VERY unscientific to incorporate concepts that have never been observed into a theory in order to substantiate it/challenge an opposing view. I find it funny how the rules seem to change in that the paradigm slaves can twist a concept as much as they like to enforce the status quo yet every idea put forward by those not enslaved by paradigm is torn apart looking for a way to even slightly debunk it. Its quite shameful considering the whole point of science is to expand the tree of knowledge rather than butcher it.
oh rigth so because you have some deep feeling we are all suppoused to bow down and accept a load of ole idealist wank?
The point is that just cos *you* have an incomprehensiveable feeling doesn't negate materialism. Perhaps you've just got wind?
Did i say that?, I was merely giving my view on the subject. If your not willing to listen let alone accept other points of view perhaps you`d be better off talking about concepts with yourself rather than on a DISCUSSION board. 
Also remember that I`m not the only one to have this "feeling" its been quite well documented throughout history and you yourself are more than capable of realising its existence. The only reason you see this as tripe is because you subscribe to a view whereby what you can touch and see is far more important than what you actually feel. Shame that.
Also remember that I`m not the only one to have this "feeling" its been quite well documented throughout history and you yourself are more than capable of realising its existence. The only reason you see this as tripe is because you subscribe to a view whereby what you can touch and see is far more important than what you actually feel. Shame that.
revol68
what, fucking what?
no im merely stating that what you feel is of absolutely no import to a discussion on nature of the mind.
Many people feel that if they fuck a virgin they will be cured of aids ffs. Many people feel they have a direct contact with god, and many feel that going to Lourdes will cure their cancer. It is of course all a pile of balls.
So if i feel that there is no gravity, does it mean anyone who tells me otherwise is arrogant?
Many people feel that if they fuck a virgin they will be cured of aids ffs. Many people feel they have a direct contact with god, and many feel that going to Lourdes will cure their cancer. It is of course all a pile of balls.
So if i feel that there is no gravity, does it mean anyone who tells me otherwise is arrogant?
Since when was this a discussion on the nature of mind? This is about the human experience. You must remember that to some people the mind is only a temporary tool in the service of the spirit.
Don`t try and draw comparisons between my views and other views that are plainly mad. The fact is its easy to disprove what people feel on those issues whereas what I am suggesting cannot be disproven. Neither can it be proven through anything else other than personal experience, does mean it isn`t true?
Once again we get back to love and the fact that you cannot conceptualise nor rationalise it, you can only experience it. According to your logic...it doesn`t exist, which is obviously wrong.
Don`t try and draw comparisons between my views and other views that are plainly mad. The fact is its easy to disprove what people feel on those issues whereas what I am suggesting cannot be disproven. Neither can it be proven through anything else other than personal experience, does mean it isn`t true?
Once again we get back to love and the fact that you cannot conceptualise nor rationalise it, you can only experience it. According to your logic...it doesn`t exist, which is obviously wrong.
revol68
what, fucking what?
this is retarded. The topic was about Darwinism and materialism, we then moved on to dualism ie spirit and matter.
Some people might hold that the mind is only temprorary service of the spirit but they would be by all rational standards WRONG.
If you wish to enter into debate about dualism you can't retreat to subjective emotions to back up your thesis, it is absurd.
Some people might hold that the mind is only temprorary service of the spirit but they would be by all rational standards WRONG.
If you wish to enter into debate about dualism you can't retreat to subjective emotions to back up your thesis, it is absurd.
I`m sorry am I not playing by the rules?
Yes this is about materialism....and how its tripe because it fails to explain the majority of human experience, i.e. emotional and spiritual experience.
Surely a POV which claims to have all bases covered should have more to offer in its explaination of the human experience?
Why is emotion absurd, yes its subjective but so is the entirety of your life, surely more progress comes from finding the common denominators in subjective emotional experience rather than ignoring the vast majority of human experience.
Face it, your mindset will NEVER fully explain the human condition. Do the world a favour and evolve.
Yes this is about materialism....and how its tripe because it fails to explain the majority of human experience, i.e. emotional and spiritual experience.
Surely a POV which claims to have all bases covered should have more to offer in its explaination of the human experience?
Why is emotion absurd, yes its subjective but so is the entirety of your life, surely more progress comes from finding the common denominators in subjective emotional experience rather than ignoring the vast majority of human experience.
Face it, your mindset will NEVER fully explain the human condition. Do the world a favour and evolve.
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
Of course materialism has explanations for human experience, as much as any theory does. There is no contradiction. Merely stating that there is does not cut it.
Science dictates that all chemical, biological and cerebral processes consist only in successions of basic physical processes, determined in their turn only by the laws of quantum mechanics.
Such a view of biological processes does not allow matter to account for the existence of consciousness as conciousness does not adhere to strict rules nor does there exist any kind of hardware within the brain which could be responsible for the "manufacture" of conciousness from matter. Therefore the existence of conciousness itself implies the presence within man of a spiritual element.
This in itself disproves materialism.
Such a view of biological processes does not allow matter to account for the existence of consciousness as conciousness does not adhere to strict rules nor does there exist any kind of hardware within the brain which could be responsible for the "manufacture" of conciousness from matter. Therefore the existence of conciousness itself implies the presence within man of a spiritual element.
This in itself disproves materialism.
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
That doesn't mean anything. "Consciousness does not adhere to strict rules"? What? "any kind of hardware within the brain which could be responsible for the "manufacture" of conciousness from matter"? What? Indicate anything whatsoever that would back any of that up. Manufacture of consciousness? Do you think it's some sort of pie?
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
And now comes the bit where you demonstrate how consciousness defies physical laws..
Another point to consider is purely logical. Concepts only exist by virtue of their relation to other concepts. When we form the concept of "matter," we simultaneously form the concept of "spirit." Neither pole of the opposition can exist without the other. All monism, whether materialist or idealist, is illogical. That is why Georg Lukacs described materialism as "inverted Platonism."
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
Is this the same argument that you were propounding before, in relation to souls?
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
Your particular argument isn't relevant to my particular problem with Azrael23's position, so I feel I will wait, if that's okay with you.
This isn't what I understand by science. I don't think there has ever been anything experiment that proves wat you just said. How could any experiemne t or observation make a sweeping statement about *all* past and future states of affairs? How could it prove that something *never* happens?Azrael23 said:
It may be that science as a system of thought or a model only allows certain things as building blocks, only admits ceratin lines of thinking, etc - but does it really make such sweeping claims to absilute truth as you imply? I think that this is false - it cannot and does not. It proposes theories and models - best guesses, things "as far as we can see and fit with observed, available and measurable information". At its best science is agnostic about things that are currently beyond its reach or which are philosophically beyond its discourse or outside its terms of reference.
revol68
what, fucking what?
what is unscientific though is to take these gaps in knowledge and invent some happy clap bullshit.
We are along way off fully understanding consciousness but it doesn't validate putting forward theories that there is absolutely no proof for to fill the void.
It's like me not knowing whats in the room next to me, so instead of just shrugging my shoulders I decide that there is a unicorn in it. And of course when anyone suggest unicorns don't exist you can hit them with the marvellous logic of "well you can't prove it, there might be one in that room".
We are along way off fully understanding consciousness but it doesn't validate putting forward theories that there is absolutely no proof for to fill the void.
It's like me not knowing whats in the room next to me, so instead of just shrugging my shoulders I decide that there is a unicorn in it. And of course when anyone suggest unicorns don't exist you can hit them with the marvellous logic of "well you can't prove it, there might be one in that room".
