If you reject the existence of the soul then you are an Animist?

by Seraphim23 149 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Apognophos

  I can see where having your poorly thought through arguments destroyed would be tiresome. As it stands, all evidence point to consciousness being a result of a physical brain.

  You're starting to make a more meta-physical argument in the realm of "does free will exist", which is far outside the scope of this conversation.

  Viviane, the above two statements demonstrate that you don't even understand what I'm arguing, so I don't see the point in continuing this conversation. I can't repeat myself anymore. See ya later.
• 

  Viviane

  Viviane, the above two statements demonstrate that you don't even understand what I'm arguing, so I don't see the point in continuing this conversation. I can't repeat myself anymore. See ya later.

  It demonstrates no such thing. Rather, this entire conversation is a clear example of not having a cogent thought out argument. For instance:

  1. Arguing that definitions are precise enough and the claiming to not have ever cared about definitions

  2. Attempting to suggest that because physical things are physical, a definition of life is hard

  3. Arguing that plants don't move (they do)

  4. Conflaction of chemical processes with physical

  5. Conflation of agency and free will with the existence of consciousness

  6. Attempting to claim what others believe

  7. Complaining when you got what you asked for

  Your argument was Jello, shaping itself to whatever it needed to be as you went. There was no rationally thought out position or support. It's actually not a common skill to build a premise, supporting connective arguments with conclusions.
• 

  Finkelstein

  Consciousness stops when biology stops.

  Animism means the belief that all plants, animals, and objects have spirits.

  Since the belief that humans have a soul is based in spiritualism,

  most atheists such as myself reject the belief in either idealogical concepts.
• 

  LisaRose

  Thank you Finklestein, you nailed it.
• 

  scotoma

  Ag:

  This is no different than a rock which responds to outside forces and stores information about them (after all, scientists are able to date rocks based upon things like the effect of the planet's magnetic inversions and the heat they've been subjected to).

  Rocks react - For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

  Organisms - Respond

  History of rocks are written by humans.

  You are making a very big mistake. Just because two things might be the same in some ways they are not necessarily the same in all ways.

  Normally this analogical problem needs to be pointed out because two things are often similar in MANY ways. In your case the only similarity between a rock and an organism is they are both material. That is not sufficient basis for asserting that SINCE rocks and organisms are both material THEREFORE rocks possess mental characteristics. If rocks were placed on the "mind" continuum they would represent zero which is complete opposite. Anything that is zero doesn't belong on the continuum.

  I believe you have confused rocks with brains. You do have a brain in your skull right? Or is it just one big chunk of bone?

  This isn't meant as an insult. I wouldn't be having this discussion with a inorganic chucnk of rock. This is reducing your line of reason to the absurd.

  Thinking is not magical. It is a material process and depends on material. However it is of a different order because it processes information.

  Tie a knot in a rope. By tying the knot you have informed the rope. Is the knot the same as the rope? Now slowly slide the knot along the rope. Notice that the knot maintains its structure even though different sections of rope are used. Eventually, the knot reaches the end of the rope and it disappears. That's the death of the knot. The rope remains. Does the rope weigh less with the knot gone? The knot was information. The brain manages huge amounts of information - beyond a simple knot. Information is not material.
• 

  Seraphim23

  Computers send information but have no awareness of anything, least of all the information they process. This suggests that thinking is more than information because thinking includes awareness of information. Consciousness/awareness is something more than information itself I would say. A major issue is, if consciousness is real and all physical objects from the universe itself, to the smallest electron that computers carry through their wires, can be defined as information, it would seem there is a logical impasse in the idea that physical objects can produce consciousness! What really is comprehension and can it be defined so as to be understood, thus allowing one to say: comprehension understands comprehension, or comprehension itself has been comprehended?
• 

  snare&racket

  " Consciousness/awareness is something more than information itself I would say"

  Based on what? Gut feeling?

  How is it more than the sum of input and the processing of the input?
• 

  Seraphim23

  Based on the fact that computers have no consciousness.
• 

  snare&racket

  But we have designed computers to send emails and watch porn, not replicate consciousness. Of course your dell is not 'conscious'.

  Consciousness is a self awareness and awareness of beyond the self.

  We could build a computer and give it input and ouput, such as cameras for visual input and speakers, robotic limbs for output. We could program it to process all the input, we could program it to mimic, we could program it for reward and punishments, just as we do with hormones, with reward being offered for,behaviour that promotes survival and punishment for anti social behaviour. We could program it to seek patterns and we could program it to seek acceptance from peers, which it could learn from facial expressions etc, etc, etc, etc, etc......

  Once we turned it on..... it would function as we would.

  To be conscious is to be nothing more than switched on, to be functioning.

  What exactly would be missing from such a computer, that you would call consciousness?

  We are nothing more than that computer as far as I can see. There is nothing missing between the hardware and software and to what you call consciousness.
• 

  zed is dead

  Oh Jesus Christ, it does not mean you are an animist. It just doesn't mean you are a dumbass.

  zed