Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,337 Year: 3,594/9,624 Month: 465/974 Week: 78/276 Day: 6/23 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What we must accept if we accept evolution
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5926 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 41 of 318 (280550)
01-21-2006 1:10 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by iano
01-21-2006 12:43 PM


Re: which ISM??
iano
The brain is simply a tool employed by the mind. And the mind, not being physical (material) is not forced to conform to the laws of nature which govern the behaviour of material things. And so we have choice.
Would you care to explain the physical mechanism by which the mind is able to manipulate the physical brain? In other wordswhat are the physics of the mind?
Also what is the reasoning behind the claim that the mind is not physical? Are you not aware of what makes you feel that the mind is a seperate entity from the brain?

But I realize now that these people were not in science; they didn’t understand it. They didn’t understand technology; they didn’t understand their time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by iano, posted 01-21-2006 12:43 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by iano, posted 01-21-2006 1:59 PM sidelined has replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5926 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 52 of 318 (280598)
01-21-2006 9:03 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by iano
01-21-2006 1:59 PM


Re: which ISM??
iano
I don't presume that there are any physics involved - in fact there cannot be if the mind isn't physical. If the location of the mind as part of the physical brain could be established (as opposed to the location of cognitive function - which are of the physical brain) then I would be inclined to believe other than I do.
But this is acontradiction of your previous post where you say :
Now, I don't believe the mind is physical unlike the brain which is. The brain is simply a tool employed by the mind
The brain is physical and if the mind uses this as a tool you fail to expplain how physical matter is manipulated by the mind if it is not itself physical.
The mind is an illusion presented by the lack of a nervous system within the brain. Since,unlike the body, there is no sensory information coming to the brain to indicate a physical awareness of itself the mind attributes this to a seperation between it and the brain. Also, if the mind is not physical then physical alterations of the brain, drugs concussions etc.. would not also affect the mind.

But I realize now that these people were not in science; they didn’t understand it. They didn’t understand technology; they didn’t understand their time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by iano, posted 01-21-2006 1:59 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by iano, posted 01-22-2006 8:07 AM sidelined has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5926 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 195 of 318 (281780)
01-26-2006 3:08 PM
Reply to: Message 192 by robinrohan
01-26-2006 1:56 PM


Re: one more baby step.
robinrohan
At one time in the history of earth, there were no "minds." Consciousness evolved. If minds are incorporeal, then one day in the history of evolution, corporeality produced incorporeality. That seems impossible.
Yet it is easily resolved if we assume that the premise "If minds are incorporeal" is not correct. If we simply assume its inverse "If minds are corporeal" then the issue resolves itself and the logic folows quite readily.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by robinrohan, posted 01-26-2006 1:56 PM robinrohan has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5926 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 209 of 318 (281916)
01-27-2006 2:20 AM
Reply to: Message 202 by Faith
01-26-2006 4:42 PM


Re: one more baby step.
Faith
But, to repeat, if it is corporeal it should be locatable and measurable and this it is not. You merely ASSUME it is corporeal because that is consistent with the biological processes you ASSUME it arose from. But there is no evidence anywhere of the corporeality of the mind.
Let us examine the evidence in favour of it being corporeal. Physical processes of many types can affect the operation of the mind. We can elicit various emotions and altered states by the application of drugs which are themselves the result of the physics of electromagnetism. We can elicit memories by touching areas of the brain which also falls under the the electromagnetic influence. We can induce coma in people wherein all sensation and memory are rendered inactive.The brain can be mapped to show that electrical activity of varying frequencies attends different states of awareness which also suggests that it is physical in nature.If you have some aspect of the mind that you feel I have overlooked then please tell me.
Since it seems also that as brains get more complex among the animal world there also attends with the complexity a greater level of interaction with the world.Thus we have remnants of brain such as the reptilian {the brain stem} that are common to many creatures and govern the operation of levels of awareness, such processes as breathing and heartbeat.Our reptilian brain gets its name from the fact that this portion of human brains resembles the entire brain of reptiles.
You can check out the differences and similarities in different animal brains{including humans} at this website. 410 error - Gone
I can go into much greater depth if you wish.

But I realize now that these people were not in science; they didn’t understand it. They didn’t understand technology; they didn’t understand their time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by Faith, posted 01-26-2006 4:42 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 215 by Faith, posted 01-27-2006 12:22 PM sidelined has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5926 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 278 of 318 (282355)
01-29-2006 5:47 PM
Reply to: Message 245 by robinrohan
01-29-2006 11:54 AM


Re: Just a little theory
robinrohan
But the Christian or whatever does not believe that. He believes that everyone is monitored by God. I suppose one might say that the Christian is conceited about the entire human race, but that's not egotism
So what does it mean that you are conceited about the human race? How does this affect how you interact with your fellow man? Terrorists who sacrifice themselves on the belief that they are to be rewarded for the death of those who do not believe as they do are included in that human race you speak of? Are Transexuals ?, child molesterers?
Is everyone in your view entitled to equality in all aspects of human relationship?
Now it is true that evolution tells us that we are no more significant than a snail. (Gastronomically speaking, we are inferior to the snail--if you care for escargot). What we do or don't do matters not in the least in the long run, in the objective run. It is of no more importance than any other natural event.
Evolution does not employ significance. Significance is a matter of human convention based on comparison of one or a few aspects of an animal with others of another species. Do you beleive humans to be superior RR?
But I do find it very strange that my great-to-the-nth grandfather was a lizard, large or small. That's the part I find mind-boggling.
So you have traced your family tree back far enough to conclude what your ultimate ancestor was?

But I realize now that these people were not in science; they didn’t understand it. They didn’t understand technology; they didn’t understand their time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by robinrohan, posted 01-29-2006 11:54 AM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by NosyNed, posted 01-29-2006 6:07 PM sidelined has replied
 Message 282 by robinrohan, posted 01-29-2006 8:19 PM sidelined has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5926 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 281 of 318 (282369)
01-29-2006 6:46 PM
Reply to: Message 279 by NosyNed
01-29-2006 6:07 PM


Re: Nth to the ... grandfathers
NosyNed
Sorry to upset you big guy, but it was a joke and not a personal jab. I should have placed a smiley face at the end of it I suppose but you need not take it as serious.
The image in my head I got from RR's post was opening a family album to reveal a very old graying picture of a lizard with a pitchfork in one hand with a farm in the background.
I blame a misspent youth for the terrible sense of humour.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by NosyNed, posted 01-29-2006 6:07 PM NosyNed has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024