Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Consciousness Continued: A fresh start
Chronos
Member (Idle past 6225 days)
Posts: 102
From: Macomb, Mi, USA
Joined: 10-23-2005


Message 16 of 84 (312639)
05-16-2006 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Christian7
05-16-2006 7:45 PM


I do not believe that perceptions are inputed into the soul neither do I believe that decisions are outputed into the brain. I believe that the souls affects and corresponds to the electrical and chemical activity in the brain. It is the combination of the soul and the brain that create free will and conscious thought, perception, and sensatioanl experience.
Are you just making a statement of faith, or are you going to tell us why you believe such things?
You said the soul and brain do not communicate. How, then, does it effect the brain?
How does the soul/brain combo give rise to consciousness?
Do pretty much all animals with brains have souls?
Do drugs have an effect on the soul? (Alcohol is known to affect judgement)
Just a few questions to keep this train chug-a-luggin' along.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Christian7, posted 05-16-2006 7:45 PM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Christian7, posted 05-17-2006 8:02 AM Chronos has replied

  
Christian7
Member (Idle past 248 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 17 of 84 (312720)
05-17-2006 7:59 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Chronos
05-16-2006 11:39 PM


quote:
It's unreasonable to admit that we do not understand how consciousness arises? By your reasoning, wouldn't any alternative explanation be equally valid to the soul hypothesis?
No because I explained that consciousness can't arise from physical matter alone. All physical interactions are just changes in position in energy.
quote:
I don't think immeasurable substances exist in any useful sense. There could be an infinite amount of undetectable spew all over the place, no reason to posit that any of it exists until we have some evidence for it.
It wouldn't be all over the place. It wouldn't be there, but it would exist.
quote:
Where is outside of space?
I don't even know that spacetime "exists," from my understanding (and I'm probably wrong, physics is not my fort) it's just a description of gravitational forces.
When I used outside I meant, not within space. I didn't actually mean outside of it. Another words, I am saying that physical things must be in space. If they are not in space, they don't exist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Chronos, posted 05-16-2006 11:39 PM Chronos has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Chronos, posted 05-17-2006 5:56 PM Christian7 has replied

  
Christian7
Member (Idle past 248 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 18 of 84 (312724)
05-17-2006 8:02 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Chronos
05-16-2006 11:48 PM


quote:
Are you just making a statement of faith, or are you going to tell us why you believe such things?
You said the soul and brain do not communicate. How, then, does it effect the brain?
How does the soul/brain combo give rise to consciousness?
Do pretty much all animals with brains have souls?
Do drugs have an effect on the soul? (Alcohol is known to affect judgement)
Just a few questions to keep this train chug-a-luggin' along.
For example, it has been shown that a high concentration of electrical activity in the brain is related to the level of consciousness in those areas (correct me if I am wrong.)
So, the soul, would correspond with the electrical activity in the brain by being conscious of those areas. There need no be any communication. There is no SABCP (Soul and Brain Communication Protocol).
And, the soul could alter the electrical activity of the brain to affect it based on your decisions. But those decisions would be aided by the activity in your brain. The union of the brain and soul makeup the mind.
Just because you have a brain though, doesn't mean you have a soul. Without the soul you lose to things: free will, and consciousness.
I cannot say weather animals have a soul or not.
Now, drugs to not effect the soul but the mind, which is the result of the interaction between the soul and the brain.
Edited by Guidosoft, : No reason given.
Edited by Guidosoft, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Chronos, posted 05-16-2006 11:48 PM Chronos has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by sidelined, posted 05-17-2006 10:54 AM Christian7 has replied
 Message 24 by nwr, posted 05-17-2006 1:48 PM Christian7 has not replied
 Message 41 by Chronos, posted 05-17-2006 5:52 PM Christian7 has replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 19 of 84 (312783)
05-17-2006 10:54 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Christian7
05-17-2006 8:02 AM


Guidosoft
For example, it has been shown that a high concentration of electrical activity in the brain is responsible for consciousness in those areas (correct me if I am wrong.)
So, the soul, would correspond with the electrical activity in the brain by being conscious of those areas.
Since electrical activity is responsible for consciousness how does a soul manage to be conscious if it does not partake of electrical activity that we have established to be necessary for consciousness?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Christian7, posted 05-17-2006 8:02 AM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Christian7, posted 05-17-2006 2:49 PM sidelined has not replied
 Message 33 by Christian7, posted 05-17-2006 4:31 PM sidelined has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 84 (312784)
05-17-2006 10:55 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Parasomnium
05-16-2006 5:40 PM


Re: My questions on your opinions
Although I don't believe a soul exists, could you nevertheless tell me what the soul is exactly, according to you?
Exactly!? Sheesh . .I dunno. The soul is the immortal component of your existence that moves on to the afterlife after you die. Its what makes you, You. Its the ”image of god’ that makes us his children.
And why do the soul and the brain need to communicate?
So the soul can receive input from the physical world. So that two souls can interact, through two people. I think of this life as a proving ground for the afterlife. Kindof a place for your soul to develop in preparation for the afterlife. It allows you to figure out what it is to exist and what you need to be happy, in this life and the next.
What do they communicate about?
The physical world is source of our experiences. The brain receives the experiences and communicates them to the soul. I think the consciousness is the medium through which this communication takes place. They communicate about what it is to exist and what makes your existence ”worth it’. What makes you happy and fulfilled, and what doesn’t. [/qs] What reason do you have to pose the existence of the soul?[/qs]
Jesus’ teachings. To me, it seems like I have a soul. I was raised believing that it exists. Most people throughout the ages posed its existence.
Isn't consciousness alone enough of a conundrum?
For me, adding a soul to the equation makes consciousness less of a conundrum. There’s no reason for me to be conscious, or exists, in a godless/souless universe. For some people, a reason for existence isn’t necessary. Of course we still have that age old questions of why are we here. What’s the meaning of life. It seems that most people think there is a reason and that includes me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Parasomnium, posted 05-16-2006 5:40 PM Parasomnium has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by nwr, posted 05-17-2006 1:46 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 31 by Parasomnium, posted 05-17-2006 3:30 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 84 (312786)
05-17-2006 10:59 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by Christian7
05-16-2006 6:15 PM


Re: my opinions on your opinions
There is most likley an highly complex pattern that humans are not yet able to fathem as to the actions of quantam particles. I do not believe they are just random. Eienstien said that God does not play dice. Of course, that is if you believe in God. lol.
Liek I said, if I believed this I would be a determinist and believe that free will doesn't exist.
You actually being present in the physical world is just an illusion.
I don't think the physical world is an illusion. This is probably where our opinions begin to differ. At least you know where I stand on the situation now. Our opinions on the soul aren't too far apart.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Christian7, posted 05-16-2006 6:15 PM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Christian7, posted 05-17-2006 5:46 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
ohnhai
Member (Idle past 5162 days)
Posts: 649
From: Melbourne, Australia
Joined: 11-17-2004


Message 22 of 84 (312791)
05-17-2006 11:08 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Christian7
05-16-2006 1:12 PM


May I ask is a persons 'personality' part of their soul/conciousness?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Christian7, posted 05-16-2006 1:12 PM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Christian7, posted 05-18-2006 4:32 PM ohnhai has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 23 of 84 (312873)
05-17-2006 1:46 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by New Cat's Eye
05-17-2006 10:55 AM


Re: My questions on your opinions
For me, adding a soul to the equation makes consciousness less of a conundrum.
Whereas I don't think it does anything of the kind. Perhaps it gives you an excuse to wear blinders, and stop looking to understand consciousness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-17-2006 10:55 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by robinrohan, posted 05-17-2006 1:50 PM nwr has not replied
 Message 26 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-17-2006 2:02 PM nwr has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 24 of 84 (312875)
05-17-2006 1:48 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Christian7
05-17-2006 8:02 AM


For example, it has been shown that a high concentration of electrical activity in the brain is responsible for consciousness in those areas (correct me if I am wrong.)
I don't think that has been shown. A correlation has been shown, but establishing a correlation falls short of demonstrating "is responsible for".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Christian7, posted 05-17-2006 8:02 AM Christian7 has not replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 84 (312877)
05-17-2006 1:50 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by nwr
05-17-2006 1:46 PM


Re: My questions on your opinions
Whereas I don't think it does anything of the kind. Perhaps it gives you an excuse to wear blinders, and stop looking to understand consciousness.
I don't see why an additional category is needed. Why not call it "mind" or "consciousness"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by nwr, posted 05-17-2006 1:46 PM nwr has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 84 (312882)
05-17-2006 2:02 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by nwr
05-17-2006 1:46 PM


no blinders needed
For me, adding a soul to the equation makes consciousness less of a conundrum.
Whereas I don't think it does anything of the kind. Perhaps it gives you an excuse to wear blinders, and stop looking to understand consciousness.
If I wanted to wear blinders I wouldn't need an excuse. If I want to look to understand consciousness scientifically, I would do it assuming the soul did not exist. Parsimony gives you an excuse to wear blinders, and stop looking to understand spirituality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by nwr, posted 05-17-2006 1:46 PM nwr has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Ben!, posted 05-17-2006 2:12 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Ben!
Member (Idle past 1398 days)
Posts: 1161
From: Hayward, CA
Joined: 10-14-2004


Message 27 of 84 (312885)
05-17-2006 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by New Cat's Eye
05-17-2006 2:02 PM


Re: no blinders needed
Parsimony gives you an excuse to wear blinders, and stop looking to understand spirituality.
I agree with both you and nwr.
In my eyes, the moral of the story is, the scientific study of consciousness and the uscientific development of a sense of self and spirituality do relate to each other, but neither is a subset of the other.
As usual, it's important to be involved in both. When you fail to be aware of one, you'll make simple, amateurish mistakes in the other.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-17-2006 2:02 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-17-2006 2:39 PM Ben! has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 28 of 84 (312890)
05-17-2006 2:39 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Ben!
05-17-2006 2:12 PM


Re: no blinders needed
the scientific study of consciousness and the uscientific development of a sense of self and spirituality do relate to each other, but neither is a subset of the other.
That's what I'm talkin' 'bout.
Just because I believe in the soul and think our consciousness is tied to it doesn't mean I'm incapable of critically analyzing or scientifically investigating that which is the consciousness. That charge that it gives me an excuse to wear blinders is insulting, but from someone who doesn't know me, I don't take offense.
As usual, it's important to be involved in both. When you fail to be aware of one, you'll make simple, amateurish mistakes in the other.
I think its important to be involved in both too. Leaving one out removes such a large aspect of our existence. Did I make a simple amateurish mistake or were you just making a, notably good, point?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Ben!, posted 05-17-2006 2:12 PM Ben! has not replied

  
Christian7
Member (Idle past 248 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 29 of 84 (312892)
05-17-2006 2:49 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by sidelined
05-17-2006 10:54 AM


It is not directly responsible for consciosness. The soul is. So there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by sidelined, posted 05-17-2006 10:54 AM sidelined has not replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2224
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 30 of 84 (312899)
05-17-2006 3:06 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Christian7
05-16-2006 6:05 PM


Re: Some weaknesses in your theory
Guidosoft writes:
As I debate, my views will change as your logic and mine clash. So expect me to revise my original statements in my old post.
Perfect.
Guidosoft writes:
I did say that everything that happens in the physical world is the result of physical interaction. I've made a mistake when I say that. Perhaps I should revise the statement to say that everything that happens naturally in the physical world is the result of physical interaction. This will resolve the problem.
Perhaps you should define 'natural', because it isn't clear what you mean by it. What other ways are there, besides natural, for things to happen in the physical world? Is consciousness, in your view, a non-natural phenomenon?
For example, I might look through documents. I might write on those documents and read from those documents, but I am not communicating with those documents in order to interact with them.
So the soul 'reads' and 'writes' the brain? How does it do that? There must be some form of physical interaction. How does the non-physical soul accomplish that?
And what is the meaning of the status of the brain that the soul 'reads'? Suppose the soul reads: "I want to debate with Guido", then where does that desire come from? Who is this 'I'? And how does the brain know about the existence of Guido?
Communication is not required because the soul is responsible for both input and output, thus forming a union between the brain and the soul where only one end activly affects and recieves to and from the other.
Then what does the brain do exactly? What is the nature of the input? And of the output? If the brain simply processes the input and produces output, and if the brain is just a physical 'machine', then isn't the soul dependent on an automaton, and hence, by extension, itself an automaton? If not, then what does the soul need the brain for?

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.
Did you know that most of the time your computer is doing nothing? What if you could make it do something really useful? Like helping scientists understand diseases? Your computer could even be instrumental in finding a cure for HIV/AIDS. Wouldn't that be something? If you agree, then join World Community Grid now and download a simple, free tool that lets you and your computer do your share in helping humanity. After all, you are part of it, so why not take part in it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Christian7, posted 05-16-2006 6:05 PM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Christian7, posted 05-17-2006 4:43 PM Parasomnium has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024