Posts by Viviane

405

Origin of Life

by cofty in

in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?

as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.

there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.

Viviane

It also says that scientists may succeed in creating life at some point in the future.
Their argument is that this would only go to prove that intelligent life is required to make life. Life can't arise spontaneously.
The WT does not teach there is a "theological barrier" to scientists creating life as Cofty claimed. In fact it says the opposite, that scientists may succeed some day.

*sigh*... I know logic is hard, but try.

First, they don't say that scientist may succeed one day. They say "Similarly, if scientists ever did construct a cell, they would accomplish something truly amazing—but would they prove that the cell could be made by accident?"

That does not in any way say "may", it says "if". It's similar to saying "Humans will never be able to shoot laser beams from their eyes, but if they could, that would be terrible." The latter hypothetical doesn't negate the former.

How do we know that "if" and "may" are different? Try replacing them in a sentence. "If you go outside, then you will be cold" doesn't make sense as "May you go outside, then you will be cold". Similarly, "you can go to the movies if you finish your homework" doesn't make sense as "you can go to the movies may you finish your homework".

The hypothetical "if" (not may) does not negate their teaching that God is the only source of life.

Evidence is so inconvenient.

LIFE COMES ONLY FROM LIFE. “With you [God] is the source of life.”—Psalm 36:9.

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/g201501/origin-of-life/

PROTIP: If you are going to link to a doc to prove your point, actually know what it says and what the words mean.

405

Origin of Life

by cofty in

in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?

as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.

there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.

Viviane

viv I'm actually quite pleased that you don't think I can construct an argument. who would want to listen to your advice anyway?

Smart people. In point of fact, I get paid quite handsomely for my advice on how to think about things, solve complex problems, come up with creative solutions to big problems and do it ensuring that we're not creating more problems. It involves math, science, philosophy, politics, knowledge of various regulatory agencies, understanding politics and human interactions and constantly updating education and knowledge on all of those topics.

In terms of hobbies, I enjoy astronomy, physics, cosmology and geology as the subjects I read up on daily or weekly.Wrong in saying JWs have a "theological barrier" to scientists ever creating life. Because their own literature says scientists may succeed at some point in the future. If Cofty can't admit a factual mistake as simple as that, what hope is there for more complex ideas?

Evidence is so inconvenient.

LIFE COMES ONLY FROM LIFE. “With you [God] is the source of life.”—Psalm 36:9.

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/g201501/origin-of-life/

If Cofty can't admit a factual mistake as simple as that, what hope is there for more complex ideas?

Well, there is the hope that you could address your dishonesty or demonstrable misunderstanding of philosophy, science and logic.

405

Origin of Life

by cofty in

in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?

as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.

there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.

Viviane

Viv, I used "computation" in the context of human thought. It was you who applied it to computers.

Ah, so I what I wrote was correct in any context.

If a soul is a thing, it does not need to be a physical thing, in order to be a thing

I never claimed otherwise. Please stop making strawman arguments.

Please see https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/279886/what-spirit-exactly for a long discussion on what this "thing" is which no one can explain.

You are presupposing reductionist materialism, and therefore begging the question. (Yeah, yeah, you will say I'm wrong, I don't know what begging the question is, and I'm dishonest. There I'll save you the bother. Predictably what you won't do is supply any argument or evidence for any assertion you make)

No, I asked what this thing is with some helpful investigative questions. The questions did not dictate the answer. And no need to save me time, it's always a pleasure to help people see where they don't understand what "begging the question" means or are being dishonest.

It's nice that you're admitting it now, though.

Non-physical things do exist, such as numbers and thoughts. The question is not whether non-material things can exist, the question is whether a "soul" is among them or not.

Explain now "34" is a non-physical thing. The concept of 34 exists in our brains, a physical thing, and if you refer to 34 physical things, there are 34 physical things, with the number 34 being mathematical shorthand (that again, exists in our brains, in books, papers, computers, etc.) for reality, a physical thing.

My suspicion is that the view held by viv and cofty is that the whole argument re origin of life stands or falls if there is one small mistake somewhere in argument.

I can't speak for Cofty, but wrong again regarding me. OTOH, you would have to construct an argument to test that. I await the day you do so.

It's refreshing to see you admit your dishonesty. Shame to see you won't step up and deal with it.

609

What is spirit, exactly?

by Viviane in

i've always wondered that.

recently i asked that question on another thread and didn't really get ananswer.

cofty made an excellent point that we often hear what it isn't, but that really isn't useful.. so, what is it?

Viviane

Looks like it's time to see if there is an answer to this question again.

Summary so far:

it's a metaphor for breath, emotions, imagination, energy, air, water, power, force, memory, photosynthesis, attitude, consciousness
We can't explain it
Beyond our ability to understand it
Human magnetic attraction (undefined)
Different levels of vibratory energy (undefined)
Force of life (undefined)
A word with multiple meanings

I bring this back up because it was recently suggested that at some point in the past, humanoids were given a soul or spirit by some creature to make them human and they are the MRCA of all living humans.

So, what is a soul? What is spirit? Anyone?

405

Origin of Life

by cofty in

in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?

as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.

there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.

Viviane

Whilst I'd place myself in the same camp as Cofty and Viv' I think it would be a tragedy for you or anyone else to skip that 'minimal effort' and simply accept what they say on authority.
Make that effort, I'm certain Cofty and Viv would agree.

Agreed 100%.

Which previous unfinished business do you refer to?

In which SBF chooses to pretend he wasn't incredibly dishonest.

Be an adult, deal with it, then you'll be able to move on.

Yes well that's what materialists claim, of course, that thoughts are identical to the chemical reactions of the brain. There is little doubt that consciousness arises largely from the brain, but that is different than saying a thought is identical to those physical mechanisms. There are more possibilities to explain the complex nature of reality, including consciousness, than materialism or dualism. Materialism is one way of understanding the world, it is not the only way, and it has its problems.

Stop being dishonest, no one said "identical". I have serious doubts that you are capable of presenting a coherent argument and sticking to it and arguing it without being dishonest about what other people say.

You do it Every. Single. Time.

So, of course every idea about the nature of reality has it's problems, no one is claiming otherwise (strawman by you). The search is on for a better answer (reality). However, pursuing both materialistic and naturalistic solutions (two things you confused and conflated previously) has, so far, produced the only usable results to describe and investigate reality.

Other forms of thought and ways of thinking are worthwhile pursuits. That requires understanding those things (you clearly don't from making so many simple errors in describing certain lines of thinking in philosophy, category errors, making so many logical fallacies, etc.) and the abilities and limitations of them.

The mistakes happen when someone says things like computations don't happen in a physical place. It betrays either a severe lack of understanding of reality, dishonesty, or trolling. I'm personally going to go with trolling.

Anyway, claims of a soul treat it as a thing. Unless you've something or some reason to show it should be treated differently, your trolling is of no value.

Besides, you're still got your previous dishonesty to deal with before you can move on.

Also, looks like it's time for a revival of this thread... https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/279886/what-spirit-exactly

7

3-2-1 You're Back in The Room

by Simon in

whoops, forum update went wrong, normally no big deal and fixable in seconds but then my internet connection cut out on me so it took a while before i could push the fix.. computers know.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_az2bdng97a.

Viviane

Simon, the problem is that you are thinking of "forum", "update", "wrong" and "internet connection" as things, rather than concepts and insisting they fit within a frame of reference, when you realize that this materialistic thinking is flawed, then you can see the world is flat and the site was always working conceptually and that the observable reality of the site being down with a 500 error message was merely one facet of the site's functionality.

Also, the world is flat.

405

Origin of Life

by cofty in

in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?

as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.

there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.

Viviane

Do you seriously think Deepak Chopra is the main intellectual challenge to materialism today?

Oh, heavens no. That's the level of challenge YOU present to any argument on this forum.

For instance, in your attempt to say something about a soul, you wrote "There are clearly some things without a physical location that do exist, such as the number 34, and human thoughts: dreams, realisations, computations, disappointments."

Even a cursory examination of your list exposes all of the flaws with your comparisons. Thoughts, dreams, realisations and disappointements exist physically within your body, they are chemical changes that can be watched and measured. Computations? Seriously? They happen in a computer, using well known physics. It's literally the reason you are typing on the internet, because it's real and exists in a place.

As far as the number 34, it's math, which is a shorthand way to describe a quantity of items that is a specific amount. For instance, I can't give you "34" and leave it at that. I have to give you 34 of something, or I give something the name 34, like "Rule 34" indicating it is a specific place in a list of items.

So, if some being gave a human a soul and it's in them, where is it?

Feel free to answer once you've addressed your previous dishonesty (really, shame on you for lying so much) and finish your "My First Book of Deepitys" by Chopra. In between those two, take a course in philosophy.

Why "must"? You are apparently so committed to materialism you cannot possibly conceive of an answer outside its frame of reference. And once again, you finding something "ridiculous" does not constitute an argument.

Well.... the concept of 34 exists in our minds. The objects that number 34 are the same quanity whether we know it or not, call it that or not, of even know it exists.

And again, the frame of reference is that something was given, added, to humans, a physical thing. Where is it, then?

Once you've dealt with your dishonesty, please answer.

405

Origin of Life

by cofty in

in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?

as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.

there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.

Viviane

These questions suppose that only things with a physical location and a material composition exist.

Of course not. Don't be ridiculous. If it's in a human, it must be somewhere.

Besides, you're still stuck on your dishonesty from previous comments. Deal with that and then we can move on to your latest nonsense.

Asking where the soul is and what it is made of are rather stupid questions. One might even say obtuse or pseudo intellectual.

A convenient excuse for those that claim it exists in a specific place (in a human) and want to run away when the going gets tough.

Anyway, please resolve your previous dishonest before you attempt to deflect on this subject.

It always amuses me when people who have taken "Intro to Deepak Chopra's Deepitys 101" think they have an "a ha!" or gotcha moment that, with minimal effort, education and critical thinking can be resolved.

405

Origin of Life

by cofty in

in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?

as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.

there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.

Viviane

I believe in some point the Creator of the universe gave a soul to a couple of humanoids.

What is this "soul"? Where does it reside in the human body? Can we find it? What is it made of? Can it be surgically removed?

as explained by "the most recent ancestor" evolutionary concept

My most recent ancestors are my mother and father. How does that explain a soul?

405

Origin of Life

by cofty in

in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?

as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.

there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.

Viviane

Ok, we've reach the point where SBF doesn't know what "only" means. I think we're done here.