Still waiting on proof of one's god.

[ronan]

Yes the lunatics are taking over the asylum.

Don you want to join the party?

Yes it is surprising how your managing that, with a straight jacket on.

Try it. It makes the things lot's easier

Or could it be you like to change the meaning of words to suit your current post.

No, the word "reality" has different meaning

The word real only has one proper meaning, physically existing not imaginary, authentic undisputed verifiable fact.

physically existing ?

do you want to refer to the physical theories that talk of physical object not perceivable?

do you want to talk of the physical reality behind our perception of which the brain is coomposed and generate our perception?

this is the meaning I was refering when I was talking abour the reality behind our perceptions. The physical reality is not composed of bananas

the other meaning is the one used in everydy language by the adjective "real":
this banana is real is to say that we can eat it and have the delicious taste of a real banana, as opposed to fake bananas.

But here we are not referring to something behind our perception, at least not to what the reality is composed of.

Absolute rubbish, in your imagination probably

.So this banana, that looks, taste, smells, feels, and even sounds like a banana is a what!. If it waddles like a duck, looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck, smells like duck and taste like duck, then it must be a fish.

a banana has menaing only to beings able to interact with it. thus without humans or monkeys or anything, banana as yellow and sweet would loose its existence.

The existence, the reality of banana is relative to us.

you can say that this banana is an ensemble of atom (from your physical perspective) but it is no more a banana as something sweet, yellow.
all these adjective have meaning because of the interaction of these atom to our retinas and our gustative organ.

No it's a construction made by your imagination, emphasis on your imagination.

No it is in fact the definition you use: physical reality

No they are facts, in this world they would be fact irregardless of us existing, there would still be bananas, oranges and apples etc...

no they would be only bananas in potentiality. (to use Simon Anders definition)

You do talk some utter and complete bollocks.

Please read Varela or Brian Smith, maybe you will listen to them.

These so called other meaning or should we put them in there proper position sub-meanings were covered here The main one being physically existing.

physically existing, please define it.
Ithink you mean: what the reality is compose dof independently of our observation. in otehr word what is behind our perception and generate them in the case of the brain.

If a person continues to be ignorant whilst all around him is trying to correct him, then he doesn't deserve anything other then ridicule, it's Compounded ignorance the Romans had a word for it "dulcis ignorantia".

I am not ignorant on the basic scientific assumption, I am proposing an justified alternative

Basicaly he is arguing that the working brain alone of an animal does not result in consciousness, for instance if you look at it on a computer wiring scale it comes to the same conclusion. A wired network and system can send and recieve information that is processed and checked as many ways as you like but it will not result in consciousness of the system.

Not really, I want to say that our perception are the result of consciousness alone.
no need for a physical reality that give birth to consciousness in a unknown or magical way.

I know he's making that baseless assumption, but it doesn't follow, it needs evidence, doesn't it...humans/animals aren't just functioning computers. they are a lot more.

You BELIEVE I make such assumption but I do not. You are the one who amke sthe assumption that brain causes consciousness! isn'it?

 

[Simon Anders]

Is a experience real?
Where is it physically?

 

[mustafhakofi]

Yes the lunatics are taking over the asylum.

Don you want to join the party?

Yes of course, if I believed god is consciousness, and we are mere perceptions.

Yes it is surprising how your managing that, with a straight jacket on.

Try it. It makes the things lot's easier

well concidering what you write it would seem so.

Or could it be you like to change the meaning of words to suit your current post.

No, the word "reality" has different meaning

However you said "Here the word real have many meaning" which I queried. however reality has only one meaning also it is being real. A real thing, the objective universe.

The word real only has one proper meaning, physically existing not imaginary, authentic undisputed verifiable fact.

”
physically existing ?

Pertaining to that which is material, actual being. IE: animate.
Also the properties of matter and energy other than those peculiar to living matter being real. IE: inanimate.

do you want to refer to the physical theories that talk of physical object not perceivable?

I'd like to see a link or to where this might be debated.

do you want to talk of the physical reality behind our perception of which the brain is coomposed and generate our perception?

No, thats already known. unless we delve into your imagined version that is.

this is the meaning I was refering when I was talking abour the reality behind our perceptions.

No you were not, you were referring to your imagined version.

other meaning is the one used in everydy language by the adjective "real":

As I have shown in a above reply, reality is being real, and real is physicaly existing.none of your abstract ideas fit.

So this banana, that looks, taste, smells, feels, and even sounds like a banana is a what!. If it waddles like a duck, looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck, smells like duck and taste like duck, then it must be a fish.

a banana has menaing only to beings able to interact with it. thus without humans or monkeys or anything, banana as yellow and sweet would loose its existence.

no it would still exist, if humans no longer existed, bananas would not cease to exist, Only humans would. lets make it slightly easier for you if a man is dead he ceases to exist, and as such he has no consciousness, so the banana does not exist to him as he can no longer interact with his surroundings, but the banana hasn't ceased to exist simply because the man has.

No it's a construction made by your imagination, emphasis on your imagination.

No it is in fact the definition you use: physical reality

Not my definition, Have I written the word circle or the word square in the brackets (circle)? You can call a banana anything you like, but it will always be yellow and sweet irregardless of whether you or I exist.

No they are facts, in this world they would be fact irregardless of us existing, there would still be bananas, oranges and apples etc...

no they would be only bananas in potentiality. (to use Simon Anders definition)

How so, do bananas cease to exist simply because we do. And please don't trying to explain, you will only come back with the same irrational rubbish.

You do talk some utter and complete bollocks.

Please read Varela or Brian Smith, maybe you will listen to them.

Do you mean Francisco Varela the chilean biologist, a proponant of the Metaphysical embodiment BS.

These so called other meaning or should we put them in there proper position sub-meanings were covered here The main one being physically existing

physically existing, please define it.

See reply 4 above.

Ithink you mean: what the reality is compose dof independently of our observation. in otehr word what is behind our perception and generate them in the case of the brain.

if you mean the brains neuro-network then yes.

If a person continues to be ignorant whilst all around him is trying to correct him, then he doesn't deserve anything other then ridicule, it's Compounded ignorance the Romans had a word for it "dulcis ignorantia"

I am not ignorant on the basic scientific assumption, I am proposing an justified alternative

No your proposing your imagined alternative, Some way of verifing it would not go amis.

I know he's making that baseless assumption, but it doesn't follow, it needs evidence, doesn't it...humans/animals aren't just functioning computers. they are a lot more.

You BELIEVE I make such assumption but I do not.

have you got one ounce of evidence for verification.

You are the one who amke sthe assumption that brain causes consciousness! isn'it

How is the brain causing consciousness, an assumption, when your dead there is no brain function and therefore no consciousness, but when your alive there is brain function and low and behold consciousness, WOW would you wonder at it.

 

[mustafhakofi]

Is a experience real?

not as a memory engram for something gained from what one has observed. But at the time of the objective experience happening, yes it's real, it later becomes a subjective memory of an objective experience. Which is pertaining to something that can be known as real, as part of reality.

Where is it physically?

It was only an objective physical experience at the time of it's happening. after that it is merely a memory, explained above.

 

[EmptyForceOfChi]

mustafhakofi

Yes I gathered that, but it makes no sense, it is a poor analogy, a computer is a an inanimate object. Whereas mans/animals brains function, result in consciousness,

Only humans are conscious, not animals in general, and no the human brain is seen by science as just a very complex computer.

the only way the brain couldn't would be if the man/animal was comatose.

maybe so,

Do we, what like an outer body experience.

No like the fact that you can monitor all of your actions as you do them, while monitoring yourself monitoring yourself.

But so can I, but I'm not on the outside look in

.

You dont have to be on the outside, the point is the perception regardless.

I know he's making that baseless assumption, but it doesn't follow, it needs evidence, doesn't it

It's not a baseless assumption it is a thought out guess based on something that doesent make sense yet to science. It does follow but it doesent have evidence to support it.

...humans/animals aren't just functioning computers. they are a lot more

wat would you say the brain is then if not an organic computer?.


peace.

 

[EmptyForceOfChi]

If you have a computer that can asses itself, monitor itself, test itself and send data back and forth to all of its various parts what then would you need to add to the computer to make it conscious of its own self analisys?.



peace.

 

[mustafhakofi]

mustafhakofi
Only humans are conscious, not animals in general, and no the human brain is seen by science as just a very complex computer.

Sorry this is utter rubbish, see later statement.

No like the fact that you can monitor all of your actions as you do them, while monitoring yourself monitoring yourself.

Rubbish again, how do I monitor any one of the 3 trillion atoms in one blood cell traveling around my body, how do I tag it so I can watch it.

It's not a baseless assumption it is a thought out guess based on something that doesent make sense yet to science. It does follow but it doesent have evidence to support it.

lol. So it's a Guess that makes no Sense and has no Evidence, Right! a Baseless Assumption.

wat would you say the brain is then if not an organic computer?.

Computers were not designed to be models of the human brain.
The human brain is stimulated by chemicals, Which are only understood at a basic level. the two are mutually exclusive.

If you have a computer that can asses itself, monitor itself, test itself and send data back and forth to all of its various parts what then would you need to add to the computer to make it conscious of its own self analisys?.peace.

You tell me!, when does something become Sentient then Sapient.
Animals qualify as a sentient beings, Computers don't. Because we know Computers can only make intelligent decisions or communicate, if it is programmed by an external source. But a sentient being has self will. A sentient being, can express itself without words by body/eye language and personal space.
So then it is a pretty damn impossible question to answer, which will probably be debated and tested for eons.
To be sentient all we know is, they must have these things, will, desire, self awareness, ethics, personality, intelligence, insight, fear of death, and so on.

But to become sapient they must have Human or higher level intelligence.
from the Latin Sentire "to feel" Sapere "to know"

 

[ain]

prooving God

medicine woman says she want to see, toutch, or feel God.
I want to say that we can't see material things that we use and control.
like atom electrones..etc.
it's only logical that the creator is noting like creation.
tell me who is controling your heart beat second by second and providing you the power to breath.
don't tell me nature cause you are a part of nature, and you use it.
nature has no mind this real merical that humans have, not monkeys!!!!!
God is this power that keeps every thing in order.
you can't see the power of electricity and magnatesm?
they are powers of nature.
who take our life in a certin time.
why the healthy sometimes die and the sick stays for a long time.
think about all that and you will see God in your heart so clear.
God is not a body of flesh and blood, he is not jesus, but jesus is just a messenger of God.
God is the only truth in this world, and from him and by him every thing is existing.
set alone, jsut you and go deep in your innerself and ask who are you, and who is holding you together, as the died become dust and dirt?????
ain.....

 

[ain]

medicine woman says she want to see, toutch, or feel God.
I want to say that we can't see material things that we use and control.
like atom electrones..etc.
it's only logical that the creator is noting like creation.
tell me who is controling your heart beat second by second and providing you the power to breath.
don't tell me nature cause you are a part of nature, and you use it.
nature has no mind this real merical that humans have, not monkeys!!!!!
God is this power that keeps every thing in order.
you can't see the power of electricity and magnatesm?
they are powers of nature.
who take our life in a certin time.
why the healthy sometimes die and the sick stays for a long time.
think about all that and you will see God in your heart so clear.
God is not a body of flesh and blood, he is not jesus, but jesus is just a messenger of God.
God is the only truth in this world, and from him and by him every thing is existing.
set alone, jsut you and go deep in your innerself and ask who are you, and who is holding you together, as the died become dust and dirt?????
ain.....

 

[Yorda]

Where's the proof guys?

here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEXGKzH0F9c

 

[Pinocchio's Hoof]

here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEXGKzH0F9c

lol:blbl:

 

[Myles]

medicine woman says she want to see, toutch, or feel God.
I want to say that we can't see material things that we use and control.
like atom electrones..etc.
it's only logical that the creator is noting like creation.
tell me who is controling your heart beat second by second and providing you the power to breath.
don't tell me nature cause you are a part of nature, and you use it.
nature has no mind this real merical that humans have, not monkeys!!!!!
God is this power that keeps every thing in order.
you can't see the power of electricity and magnatesm?
they are powers of nature.
who take our life in a certin time.
why the healthy sometimes die and the sick stays for a long time.
think about all that and you will see God in your heart so clear.
God is not a body of flesh and blood, he is not jesus, but jesus is just a messenger of God.
God is the only truth in this world, and from him and by him every thing is existing.
set alone, jsut you and go deep in your innerself and ask who are you, and who is holding you together, as the died become dust and dirt?????
ain.....

Do you wear a red nose when you recite that ? I bet you're a wow at parties.