The consciousness IS testable and measurable.
So, what is this "thing" you call that some can observe while others cannot? Explain.
I'm sorry, but there is no god.
- Thread starter Micholi
- Start date
The consciousness IS testable and measurable.
So, what is this "thing" you call that some can observe while others cannot? Explain.
That's the point - you're not supposed to "believe" in anything on the basis of someone's sayso. Use reason, logic and evidence to arrive at a conclusion. I presume you're capable of that?
Rather pathetic - especially since you miss the point entirely.
An IQ test is merely one method of measuring and testing.
But, the question asked is what is this phenomenon you claim where some observe god while others cannot. Please explain.
By universal, I mean it's something that both theists and atheists experience, and lets just say, not everyone is a theist after the experience. The very first page of the God Delusion describes this experience, then Dawkins adds that this very experience is one that both he and his childhood priest had... and then explains that it moved the priest towards religion, and Dawkins towards science. So it just goes to show that it's not a religious experience.
I mean, people believe in god without this experience, so it's little wonder that a sudden awareness of nature will more so make people believe in god (wrongly of course).
grover said:
Consciousness and intelligence are measured in brain complexity. Just look at the animal kingdom and go from simplest form of intelligence/consciousness and work your way up to the most advanced in these regards. What's the difference? Brain size and complexity.
The reputation of a Buddhist is far overrated. I've seen those guys interviewed with rational questions and ultimately, they give the same answers that resemble a nut job christian. Certainly, no answers that compare with the quality of an educated scientist.
Absolutely agree. In fact most people who have it I would say become more atheistic in their views.
It all depends on what one means by the term religous. I just read the first page of the God Delusion. I found this part interesting: "All Sagan's books touch the nerve-endings of transcendent wonder that religion monopolized in past centuries. My own books have the same aspiration. Consequently I hear myself often described as a deeply religious man. An American student wrote to me that she had asked her professor whether he had a view about me. 'Sure,' he replied. 'He's positive science is incompatible with religion, but he waxes ecstatic about nature and the universe. To me, that is religion!"
Last edited:
THe complete context as a rhetorical statement:
With the actual assertion:
So my assertions of your inability to read or comprehend stand.
Rather silly since I'm the one advocating evidence and reason...
anyway, it doesn't make much difference, because it amounts to the same thing ....."I know that you cannot know god" .....which begs the question, how the hell do you know that?
Again O reading challenged one, where did I say that? I insist that you can absolutely NOT prove to me that a god exists, not that you could not "know god". I am certain also that what you or other theists claim to currently "know" about god is utterly unsubstantiated and subjective bullshit.
Every single one of our investigations into nature point to nothing more than a set of astoundingly simple physical laws. And there is zero evidence to suggest that those laws are anything other than simply the way the universe is.
Your primitive need to have some "answer" for the universe is quaint and amusing. Unfortunately, in the hands of unscrupulous charlatans (priests, shamans, popes, etc...) the idea that you somehow have the ULTIMATE ANSWER can sway millions of weak-minded individuals to incredibly morally depraved actions, the least of which is abject slavery to what is clearly a manufactured mythology.
Supe
Are we not both fools?
”
no
lol
you are a greater fool.
here is why
:shrug:
the evidence for this, as with all tentative claims, is that the premises you draw on are very flexible and can easily be swung around to lend equal credibility to the opposite view point
“
anyway, it doesn't make much difference, because it amounts to the same thing ....."I know that you cannot know god" .....which begs the question, how the hell do you know that?
”
and the actual response to your assertion that we are both fools is
Are we not both fools?
”
no
lol
you are a greater fool.
here is why
:shrug:
actually you are advocating tentative claims
the evidence for this, as with all tentative claims, is that the premises you draw on are very flexible and can easily be swung around to lend equal credibility to the opposite view point
“
anyway, it doesn't make much difference, because it amounts to the same thing ....."I know that you cannot know god" .....which begs the question, how the hell do you know that?
”
you said it in your post, and you say it again in this paragraph
so you know that theists do not know god - glad we cleared that up - now can you tell us how you know that?
so all you need now is a single astoundingly simple law that integrates all the other astoundingly simple laws - good luck
needless to say, if newton had thought along the same lines when an apple fell on his head, history would be different
then why do you insist tangling one's tonsil's with your "answer" to the universe, ie "I know you can't know"
kind of similar to unscrupulous charlatans in the guise of scientists too (as well as politicians, talk back show hosts, boy scout leaders or any one else in some position of influence)- I think we are on to something here .....
LG, did god make your computer?
A simple yes or no please.
A simple yes or no please.
no
(just because I am a theist you are not going to argue that I am wrong are you)
Not at all.
2nd question:
Can yo explain to me, at as deep a level as you feel comfortable with, how your computer works?
I thought as much. Can you describe, with some detail, how an electric motor works? AC or DC? Your choice.I press a button and get a response I anticipate (well - most of the time)
Would intelligence require consciousness or not?
Supe's Thread
Where its going, god knows .... but anyway to save what appears like to be a host of unrelated posts from around #140 onwards, lets take it here to stop cluttering up other threads
Supe - LG, did god make your computer?
A simple yes or no please.
”
Me - no
(just because I am a theist you are not going to argue that I am wrong are you)
Supe - Not at all.
2nd question:
Can yo explain to me, at as deep a level as you feel comfortable with, how your computer works?
Me - I press a button and get a response I anticipate (well - most of the time)
Supe - I thought as much. Can you describe, with some detail, how an electric motor works? AC or DC? Your choice.
Me - in light of your reaction to my response about my computer, probably not
Next Q?
(have I won a prize yet?)
Where its going, god knows .... but anyway to save what appears like to be a host of unrelated posts from around #140 onwards, lets take it here to stop cluttering up other threads
Supe - LG, did god make your computer?
A simple yes or no please.
”
Me - no
(just because I am a theist you are not going to argue that I am wrong are you)
Supe - Not at all.
2nd question:
Can yo explain to me, at as deep a level as you feel comfortable with, how your computer works?
Me - I press a button and get a response I anticipate (well - most of the time)
Supe - I thought as much. Can you describe, with some detail, how an electric motor works? AC or DC? Your choice.
Me - in light of your reaction to my response about my computer, probably not
Next Q?
(have I won a prize yet?)
actually I would say that computers are just inert lumps of plastic metal - when they are utilized by consciousness however, they have an astounding capability for processing data
Q
certainly - but the degree of intelligence does not say anything about the degree of consciousness
.... that said a dead person has quite a low IQ
Supe
let's take it here buddy - you're famous