Author Topic: Natural Explanation Vs Magical  (Read 10126 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Dominic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • Darwins +6/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #725 on: May 09, 2014, 11:52:38 AM »
7 billion assumptions that matter produced consciousness.
And just you standing there saying it doesn't.

Kinda puts it into perspective, doesn't it?

jdawg and you are simply making the same assumption 7 billion times.  Assumption doesn't provide truth.
Quote

2.  We know that consciousness can produce an environment with apparent matter - because it happens to us all when we dream.
I have marked out the important word for you.

And the question that cannot simply be begged, Gb, is whether the matter encountered in what we call waking is real or apparent.

You are allowed to define it as real or assume it as real but your assumptions do not provide truth or permit you to 'stone' others for their alternative assumptions.


Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5039
  • Darwins +578/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #726 on: May 09, 2014, 12:14:33 PM »
I think you mean 'without the presence of a human brain' (ie physical matter) because a 'mind' is as close if not closer to a non physical consciousness than it is to a physical brain.
And how do you know this is true, as opposed to the mind being the electrical signals that exist within the brain?

Quote from: Dominic
My response is that your evidence then needs to show that matter can exist without a consciousness perceiving it.  It works both ways.
This is nothing but sophistry.  You are claiming that it needs evidence to support it, knowing full well that it is an axiom.  Axioms are not themselves supported by evidence.  For example, your own axiom - that consciousness can exist without matter - is also not supported by evidence, nor can it be.  Therefore, what matters is which of the two models makes less assumptions in order to provide the same amount of explanatory power.

Let's take the pincushion analogy you used a bit ago.  I will agree for the sake of argument that the pincushion is physical reality and the pins are individual consciousnesses.  The "matter model" proposes that consciousness is produced by physical reality.  It requires three assumptions; that the pincushion and pins are all there is, that the pins cannot be removed from the pincushion, and that the pins are an outgrowth of the pincushion.

Your "consciousness model" proposes that physical reality is produced by consciousness.  It requires five assumptions; that there is something more than the pincushion and pins, that the pins can be removed from the pincushion, that the pins can produce things outside of the pincushion, that something could produce the pincushion, and either that something could produce the pins or the pins always existed.

In short, even in a simplified analogy such as this, your "consciousness model" requires more assumptions than the "matter model".  Furthermore, there may be additional assumptions on top of those; I stopped at five because that was more than sufficient to prove my point.  This also presupposes that your "consciousness model" contains the same amount of explanatory power as the "matter model", which is not a given.

You have repeatedly claimed that your "consciousness model" requires less assumptions.  As I have now demonstrated that the opposite is true, you should now either rebut my position or recant your own

Offline Dominic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • Darwins +6/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #727 on: May 09, 2014, 12:15:20 PM »

I've asked this already several times and you've ignored it, as far as I can tell.  So we're brains in jars.  Now what?  How does that change anything?

You miss the bigger implications of consciousness argument.  If we are brains in jars (or I am, since the rest of you are likely just fantasms of my dreams), then no knowledge is possible and nothing matters.

'Brain in a jar' still assumes the material model.  It assumes that a brain is required before consciousness.  That is the main question being debated.

Now if OTOH consciousness creates material worlds (as we know it does in dreams) must we conclude that 'no knowledge is possible and that nothing matters' ?  I don't see why we would conclude that at all.

But what it does do is open up many greater possibilities than we have previously allowed within our limited materialist and reductionist mindsets.


Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5039
  • Darwins +578/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #728 on: May 09, 2014, 12:18:13 PM »
Now if OTOH consciousness creates material worlds (as we know it does in dreams)
We do not know this.  You are assuming it is true without evidence.

Offline Dominic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • Darwins +6/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #729 on: May 09, 2014, 12:21:49 PM »
Now if OTOH consciousness creates material worlds (as we know it does in dreams)
We do not know this.  You are assuming it is true without evidence.

Fair enough.

Now if OTOH consciousness creates apparent material worlds (as we know it does in dreams) must we conclude that 'no knowledge is possible and that nothing matters' ?  I don't see why we would conclude that at all.


Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5039
  • Darwins +578/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #730 on: May 09, 2014, 12:22:20 PM »
jdawg and you are simply making the same assumption 7 billion times.  Assumption doesn't provide truth.
I don't normally smite people while I'm talking with them, but I corrected this egregious misunderstanding of yours ten minutes before you posted.  If the assumption that matter can produce consciousness is true, then there are seven billion examples of matter producing consciousness; we do not need to make an additional assumption for each one.  You have no excuse to justify continue making statements based on that misunderstanding, so kindly stop doing so.

Offline Dominic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • Darwins +6/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #731 on: May 09, 2014, 12:28:35 PM »
jdawg and you are simply making the same assumption 7 billion times.  Assumption doesn't provide truth.
I don't normally smite people while I'm talking with them, but I corrected this egregious misunderstanding of yours ten minutes before you posted.  If the assumption that matter can produce consciousness is true, then there are seven billion examples of matter producing consciousness; we do not need to make an additional assumption for each one.  You have no excuse to justify continue making statements based on that misunderstanding, so kindly stop doing so.

'7 billion examples of matter producing consciousness' implied that the quantity strengthened the argument.

I simply refuted that implication.


Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5039
  • Darwins +578/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #732 on: May 09, 2014, 12:35:05 PM »
Now if OTOH consciousness creates apparent material worlds (as we know it does in dreams) must we conclude that 'no knowledge is possible and that nothing matters' ?  I don't see why we would conclude that at all.
We do not even know that they are "apparent" material worlds.  We do not know if they are material worlds at all.  I can write a computer program which creates a virtual environment that simulates material objects with which the user can interact, but that does not make it an actual material world, or even an apparent material world.  It is a simulated one, which means that it imitates a material world without actually being one.

Now, to address screwtape's actual point, let's take this virtual world.  Granted, it is possible to acquire knowledge about it, and it is possible to do things that matter in it.  However, the programmer can change the virtual world more or less at will, which can erase any and all knowledge acquired about it and make anything done in it irrelevant.  That is why no knowledge is possible and nothing matters in it, because it is completely subject to the whims of the programmer, who can decide to erase or change it at will.  Knowledge and meaningful actions are only possible if the programmer allows it.

If matter is produced by consciousness, then it is completely subject to the whims of the producing consciousness for the same reasons.

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5039
  • Darwins +578/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #733 on: May 09, 2014, 12:41:56 PM »
'7 billion examples of matter producing consciousness' implied that the quantity strengthened the argument.

I simply refuted that implication.
No, you didn't.  You made the fallacy of equivocation by stating that the examples of matter producing consciousness were only assumptions about matter producing consciousness.  They are not assumptions; they are examples used to support that assumption.  Furthermore, quantity can strengthen an argument.  That's how scientific theories work.  A hypothesis with ten thousand experiments supporting it is much stronger than a hypothesis with ten experiments supporting it.

In short, you were plainly wrong here.

Offline Dominic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • Darwins +6/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #734 on: May 09, 2014, 01:05:50 PM »
Now if OTOH consciousness creates apparent material worlds (as we know it does in dreams) must we conclude that 'no knowledge is possible and that nothing matters' ?  I don't see why we would conclude that at all.
We do not even know that they are "apparent" material worlds.  We do not know if they are material worlds at all.  I can write a computer program which creates a virtual environment that simulates material objects with which the user can interact, but that does not make it an actual material world, or even an apparent material world.  It is a simulated one, which means that it imitates a material world without actually being one.

Now, to address screwtape's actual point, let's take this virtual world.  Granted, it is possible to acquire knowledge about it, and it is possible to do things that matter in it.  However, the programmer can change the virtual world more or less at will, which can erase any and all knowledge acquired about it and make anything done in it irrelevant.  That is why no knowledge is possible and nothing matters in it, because it is completely subject to the whims of the programmer, who can decide to erase or change it at will.  Knowledge and meaningful actions are only possible if the programmer allows it.

If matter is produced by consciousness, then it is completely subject to the whims of the producing consciousness for the same reasons.

If you are saying that we have little knowledge about what is 'outside' the VR or dreamed world then I understand that point and agree on one level (the physical level).

But if we exist on a non physical level and manifest experiences which we sometimes call physical then I don't think this limits our knowledge.  I think it extends our knowledge - for one reason because it realises our more extensive power and potential.

I acknowledge it is certainly very different from the material mindset that we are used to and is therefore at first perhaps scary and uncontrolled - but it is like getting used to anything new - it takes some time and practice.

And as for what is 'outside' the VR,  I think we will start to answer that by examining our own consciousness which is analogous to the container in which various physical and non physical possibilities can manifest, be experienced and be examined.

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5039
  • Darwins +578/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #735 on: May 09, 2014, 01:35:57 PM »
If you are saying that we have little knowledge about what is 'outside' the VR or dreamed world then I understand that point and agree on one level (the physical level).
No, I'm not.  I'm saying that knowledge and actions within the VR (or dream world) can be erased more or less at will, thus making both ultimately futile.

Quote from: Dominic
But if we exist on a non physical level and manifest experiences which we sometimes call physical then I don't think this limits our knowledge.  I think it extends our knowledge - for one reason because it realises our more extensive power and potential.
That is an extremely big 'if'.  Why should we base our actions on your presumption that we somehow exist on a non-physical level when you can't show any evidence that we do?  You've built a house of cards out of your assumptions, and if they happen to be true, fine and dandy.  But you have no answer whatsoever for if they aren't true.  And your 'explanation' doesn't actually explain anything anything, either.  It's simply a statement of what you hope and want to be true, but it provides no way to actually find out if it is true.  So what's the use of it?

Quote from: Dominic
I acknowledge it is certainly very different from the material mindset that we are used to and is therefore at first perhaps scary and uncontrolled - but it is like getting used to anything new - it takes some time and practice.
Why do you keep making assumptions like this?  I am not rejecting your assertions because they seem scary and uncontrolled, or because I don't want to try something new; I am rejecting your assertions because you have no evidence to support them, and no way to show that they aren't delusions instead.

Quote from: Dominic
And as for what is 'outside' the VR,  I think we will start to answer that by examining our own consciousness which is analogous to the container in which various physical and non physical possibilities can manifest, be experienced and be examined.
You need to show actual evidence that there is an outside.  Thought experiments - which is what you're doing, whether you realize it or not - are of very limited utility.  It is very, very easy to get trapped in the equivalent of a house of mirrors, where your own expectations distort what you perceive until it has nothing to do with anything outside your own mind.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12534
  • Darwins +700/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #736 on: May 09, 2014, 01:43:32 PM »

I've asked this already several times and you've ignored it, as far as I can tell.  So we're brains in jars.  Now what?  How does that change anything?

You miss the bigger implications of consciousness argument.  If we are brains in jars (or I am, since the rest of you are likely just fantasms of my dreams), then no knowledge is possible and nothing matters.

'Brain in a jar' still assumes the material model.  It assumes that a brain is required before consciousness.  That is the main question being debated.

You are being pedantic. 

Now if OTOH consciousness creates material worlds (as we know it does in dreams)

Oh?  Dreams create material worlds?  Funny.  I thought they just created imaginary worlds.  What is this dream material of which you speak?

must we conclude that 'no knowledge is possible and that nothing matters' ?  I don't see why we would conclude that at all.

You've denied it but given no explanation.  If our world in which we now think we live is just a dream of a consciousness, then jumping off a cliff is as irrelevant as it is in our dreams.  So how does that matter?  And if we are consciousnesses, what is our medium and how can we know anything of it? 

You say things, but then you fail to back them up.


But what it does do is open up many greater possibilities than we have previously allowed within our limited materialist and reductionist mindsets.

Such as...?  Should not be able to change the environment exclusively by mental means?

You talk big, but so far fail to deliver.
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Graybeard

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6768
  • Darwins +541/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #737 on: May 09, 2014, 01:50:35 PM »

And the question that cannot simply be begged, Gb, is whether the matter encountered in what we call waking is real or apparent.

You are allowed to define it as real or assume it as real but your assumptions do not provide truth or permit you to 'stone' others for their alternative assumptions.
Oh yes they do. Your assumptions have long since been dismissed as the rambling of someone who has too much free time and not enough intelligence to investigate. Have you even bothered to look for any peer-reviewed papers on sleep? No... of course you haven't. Why should you waste your time learning something when you can pull it out of your arse?

There is no sane person on this planet who thinks that life and our environment could be real only in dreams. In dreams we neither eat, drink,nor reproduce. In dreams there is no organisation - all is random musing of a brain that is filing the events of the day.

There is no sane person on this planet who thinks that consciousness, of itself, could float around producing elemental particles that coalesce into matter - were that the case we would be knee-deep in matter.

We know a lot about sleep and dreams - and their images are not real. You can take that from me.

Consciousness is a state that living, sentient beings experience - the dead and non-sentient beings do not. It is ethereal, it has no physical existence. It is no different from the sensations you get from your ears, eyes, or fingers. Because you cannot understand[1] how this is done, does not allow you to invent fairytales and present them to reasonable people as "great insights and philosophical paradoxes into the mysteries of the universe."

I suppose people wonder why it is that you say these things as a means of attracting attention to yourself, whereas normal people do not need to espouse such dross and yet receive attention.

However, you are probably harmless to yourself and others.
 1. or pretend not to know.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2014, 01:54:40 PM by Graybeard »
Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6864
  • Darwins +925/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #738 on: May 09, 2014, 04:10:41 PM »
Sooo, how about it, Dominic? What "possibilities" await people who are able to dream matter into reality. I would like to dream an endless non-polluting energy source into reality. Please share so we can get started.
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline Dominic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • Darwins +6/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #739 on: May 09, 2014, 10:10:43 PM »
Sooo, how about it, Dominic? What "possibilities" await people who are able to dream matter into reality. I would like to dream an endless non-polluting energy source into reality. Please share so we can get started.

Firstly we need to clarify that in the consciousness model, consciousness is reality and matter is a subset of that reality. 

Secondly don't we already have what you are seeking ? - eg solar, wind power, hydro-electric, tidal energy.  And then for energy storage there is flywheel storage (using angular momentum) and gravitational potential energy storage just to name two.

And no doubt people are 'dreaming up' new and improved methods all the time.  The next part of 'the dream' may involve removing the vested interests who are preventing the fuller development and utilisation of these technologies.

Thirdly, I think you are implying that in order to accept that 'consciousness is primary and matter is an experience of consciousness' that matter creation should therefore be immediately unlimited and unrestricted for all of us.  If that is your implication then it does not follow from the premise.   I'll give one reason for that [and there are most likely other reasons] -

In our current frame of reference we still see ourselves as separate individuals.  That has many implications.  1. We cannot easily impinge on the free will of others who also see themselves as separate individuals.  2. Some kind of consensus is therefore required before major changes can take place.  3. Alternatively an individual may choose to try to merge with the universal consciousness (meditation, drugs, prayer, fasting and a lot of other methods) but what then happens is his previous individual wants then dissolve.


Online eh!

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1913
  • Darwins +82/-35
  • Gender: Male
  • jimmy hendrix is jesus
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #740 on: May 09, 2014, 10:17:17 PM »
Dom that is back to narcissism .


does the deepest ocean floor exist..... there are no minds there.
Signature goes here...

Offline Dominic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • Darwins +6/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #741 on: May 09, 2014, 10:27:11 PM »

And the question that cannot simply be begged, Gb, is whether the matter encountered in what we call waking is real or apparent.

You are allowed to define it as real or assume it as real but your assumptions do not provide truth or permit you to 'stone' others for their alternative assumptions.
Oh yes they do. Your assumptions have long since been dismissed as the rambling of someone who has too much free time and not enough intelligence to investigate. Have you even bothered to look for any peer-reviewed papers on sleep? No... of course you haven't. Why should you waste your time learning something when you can pull it out of your arse?

There is no sane person on this planet who thinks that life and our environment could be real only in dreams. In dreams we neither eat, drink,nor reproduce. In dreams there is no organisation - all is random musing of a brain that is filing the events of the day.

There is no sane person on this planet who thinks that consciousness, of itself, could float around producing elemental particles that coalesce into matter - were that the case we would be knee-deep in matter.

We know a lot about sleep and dreams - and their images are not real. You can take that from me.

Consciousness is a state that living, sentient beings experience - the dead and non-sentient beings do not. It is ethereal, it has no physical existence. It is no different from the sensations you get from your ears, eyes, or fingers. Because you cannot understand[1] how this is done, does not allow you to invent fairytales and present them to reasonable people as "great insights and philosophical paradoxes into the mysteries of the universe."

I suppose people wonder why it is that you say these things as a means of attracting attention to yourself, whereas normal people do not need to espouse such dross and yet receive attention.

However, you are probably harmless to yourself and others.
 1. or pretend not to know.

The only evidence you offered in that diatribe is 'peer reviewed papers on sleep'.  All the rest was your own chosen dogma which you demand that others accept and abuse them if they don't.  That doesn't make you respectable.

As for 'peer reviewed papers on sleep' - in the consciousness model all those papers were effectively produced in a dream by dreamers discussing the dream (or in a virtual reality if you prefer that term).  That is how much use they are in determining the nature of reality.


Offline Dominic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • Darwins +6/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #742 on: May 09, 2014, 10:38:09 PM »
Dom that is back to narcissism .


does the deepest ocean floor exist..... there are no minds there.

You are simply assuming the matter model.  You are not presenting an argument - just an opinion.  Not that there is anything wrong with opinion.

In the consciousness model OTOH, consciousness is the whole (everything) - within that consciousness there are phenomenon - experiences which consciousness can then name, distinguish and categorise.  Consciousness names parts of its experience as mind, time, space, matter, oceans, floors etc.

Online eh!

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1913
  • Darwins +82/-35
  • Gender: Male
  • jimmy hendrix is jesus
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #743 on: May 09, 2014, 10:43:26 PM »
No i deduce an ocean floor exists.


you assume your own argument otherwise you would not discuss it. if you really believed your own ideas then you would KNOW you are just talking to yourself in your own mind.
Signature goes here...

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5039
  • Darwins +578/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #744 on: May 09, 2014, 10:44:26 PM »
^^^^And this is why the "consciousness model" is pretty much nonsensical.  What Dominic is promoting is nothing more than the current model of reality, except with several added assumptions.  His model doesn't actually change anything as far as reality goes; it's just intended to change the way people think about reality, with the promise that if enough people buy into it, they might be able to change reality with just their minds at some unknown point in the future, except that they won't want to once their consciousness evolves enough.

And he wonders why he's not making any headway here?  Empty promises based on mysticism got old thousands of years ago.

If he wants to convince people, he needs to show evidence that reality is actually a dream, or the Matrix, and that there is an 'outside' to it.  Without that, it's just another of the belief systems that humans produce so profligately, asserted not because he knows it exists, but because he really truly believes that the world works that way.

Offline Dominic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • Darwins +6/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #745 on: May 09, 2014, 10:59:24 PM »

Oh?  Dreams create material worlds?  Funny.  I thought they just created imaginary worlds.  What is this dream material of which you speak?

Have you never picked up or touched something in a dream ?  Did you know that it was not matter ?  After waking you have made an assessment.  So to fairly assess this current experience we will probably need to first wake up from it.

Furthermore NDEs have described precisely that waking experience.
Quote

must we conclude that 'no knowledge is possible and that nothing matters' ?  I don't see why we would conclude that at all.

You've denied it but given no explanation.  If our world in which we now think we live is just a dream of a consciousness, then jumping off a cliff is as irrelevant as it is in our dreams.  So how does that matter?  And if we are consciousnesses, what is our medium and how can we know anything of it? 

You say things, but then you fail to back them up.

I do not jump off cliffs in my dreams.  I try to take care if near the edge of a cliff in my dream.  But if we do fall off a cliff in our dreams we are relieved if we wake up safe in a bed.  Now if we were to fall off a cliff in our 'normal' life, 'where' we might or might not wake up is one of the big questions.

And NDEs suggest that we can even get some inside information about that before our own time comes.


Online eh!

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1913
  • Darwins +82/-35
  • Gender: Male
  • jimmy hendrix is jesus
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #746 on: May 09, 2014, 11:21:54 PM »
Dom;

Do you believe in the xtian god

Do you believe you exist as a unique physical entity


do you believe the external world exists even if you don't



do you think the universe would exist even if humans didn't
Signature goes here...

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5039
  • Darwins +578/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #747 on: May 10, 2014, 12:02:51 AM »
Have you never picked up or touched something in a dream ?  Did you know that it was not matter ?  After waking you have made an assessment.  So to fairly assess this current experience we will probably need to first wake up from it.
How do you know that we can "wake up" from it in the first place?  You are only assuming that we can without the slightest piece of evidence to support it.  Furthermore, you are only assuming that because you already believe that it's the case, a classic example of circular reasoning; you're using things like "near-death experiences" and "out-of-body experiences" to attempt to justify your preexisting belief without recognizing that we've pretty well shown that those experiences are directly related to physiological conditions in the brain.

Quote from: Dominic
Furthermore NDEs have described precisely that waking experience.
No, they've described a purely subjective 'experience' which has never been validated.  If a person near death can "wake up", then a person not near death should be able to as well.  Yet we never, ever see that in a way that can be scientifically validated.  And that's what you just don't seem to get; if near-death experiences are real, then we should be able to perform experiments which confirm that the consciousness is indeed separating itself from matter and going somewhere else, instead of simply being affected by changes in the brain.  Yet, nobody has ever managed to do that.  Instead, scientists who have investigated these experiences have determined that making physical changes to the brain directly affects a person's consciousness in ways which are effectively identical to those experiences when they happen naturally.  That's a pretty good indication that consciousness is affected by matter, contrary to what you keep asserting.

Quote from: Dominic
I do not jump off cliffs in my dreams.  I try to take care if near the edge of a cliff in my dream.  But if we do fall off a cliff in our dreams we are relieved if we wake up safe in a bed.  Now if we were to fall off a cliff in our 'normal' life, 'where' we might or might not wake up is one of the big questions.
Why don't you jump off cliffs in your dreams?  Why do you bother to take care if you're near the edge of a cliff in your dreams?  I mean, why not just materialize a pillow at the bottom of the cliff and have fun jumping onto it?  Or, for that matter, why don't you just harden the air so you can walk over the edge of the cliff without falling?

And I guess you've never heard of lucid dreaming, people who are consciously aware that they're dreaming.  Yet their dreams are almost always described as being vivid and realistic; they come much closer to matching reality than ordinary dreams.  And furthermore, they can do things with their bodies while they're dreaming, which very strongly indicates that regardless of what the dream might indicate, their consciousness is still contained within the physical structure of the brain.

Quote from: Dominic
And NDEs suggest that we can even get some inside information about that before our own time comes.
No, they don't.  They suggest that the brain acts in weird ways when it starts getting starved of oxygen, which alters one's consciousness.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12534
  • Darwins +700/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #748 on: May 10, 2014, 09:48:07 AM »
Have you never picked up or touched something in a dream ?  Did you know that it was not matter ?  After waking you have made an assessment.  So to fairly assess this current experience we will probably need to first wake up from it.

No, I never picked up or touched anything in a dream.  I only dreamed that I did.  It was not matter.  It was my brain remembering the sensations associated with actual matter.  Just like right now I am imagining my hands around your neck, squeezing...yet, nothing is actually happening.  Thank goodness.

One thing I notice is that dreams do not introduce anything new.  Just combinations of what I have experienced awake.  I am never an octopus in my dreams, neither do I perceive completely new light spectrums.  Everything is just a weird version of being awake.  Why is that?  And what does that imply about your hypothesis?

Furthermore NDEs have described precisely that waking experience.

Well, that's not what I've read about ndes.  You would need to provide some credible support to convince me.



I do not jump off cliffs in my dreams.  I try to take care if near the edge of a cliff in my dream.  But if we do fall off a cliff in our dreams we are relieved if we wake up safe in a bed.  Now if we were to fall off a cliff in our 'normal' life, 'where' we might or might not wake up is one of the big questions.

And NDEs suggest that we can even get some inside information about that before our own time comes.

This does not come close to answering  my question.

Edit. - fixed quote
« Last Edit: May 10, 2014, 04:22:38 PM by screwtape »
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1848
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #749 on: May 10, 2014, 10:33:36 AM »
Dominic, why do you persist in this childish game of repeating yourself with arguments that have already been rebutted? Do you think it's really getting you anywhere? Jaime and I, and others, have rebutted your assertions regarding the matter model and we've rebutted your assertions about who makes more assumptions. Yet, instead of actually dealing with those you've chosen to just repeat yourself ad nauseum. Why? Do you really enjoy wasting everyone's time? Perhaps it is because you are insecure with these claims to the supernatural and "dream world" you keep merely asserting. Regardless, why not actually deal with the rebuttals before you instead of just regurgitating?

"That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." Christopher Hitchens
« Last Edit: May 10, 2014, 10:35:08 AM by median »
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3948
  • Darwins +265/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #750 on: May 10, 2014, 10:51:33 AM »

  Now if we were to fall off a cliff in our 'normal' life, 'where' we might or might not wake up is one of the big questions.


Perhaps if you ignore everything it is. However to those who pay attention to evidence..it isn't a question at all
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Anfauglir

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6198
  • Darwins +408/-5
  • Gender: Male
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #751 on: May 13, 2014, 10:01:54 AM »
1) If consciousness comes from matter, then changes to the matter would lead to direct and generally predictable changes to the consciousness.  In other words, damage or affect my brain, and my consciousness will be altered.

2) If matter comes from consciousness, then changes to the consciousness would lead to direct and generally predictable changes to the matter.  In other words, alter my consciousness - my way of thinking - and the matter it creates will be altered.

(1) has been observed and documented many, many times.  Indeed, it is directly testable by drinking a litre of vodka - and can be observed by umpteen other people.

(2), to my knowledge, is NOT demonstrable.  No matter how I change the way I think, nobody will see that pencil turn into a hippopotamus.

So for anyone that asserts (2) over (1), there needs to (a) be an explanation as to why the repeatable and observable effects that (1) predicts still happen, and (b) an explanation as to why the effects of (2) are apparently NOT repeatable.
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6864
  • Darwins +925/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #752 on: May 13, 2014, 04:48:01 PM »
So, according to Dominic's [non]response to my question about "dreaming" an eternal non-polluting energy source into reality (remember how we can create all this matter in our dreams, which are the true reality) we have to do all the heavy lifting right here in this non-dream world.

Because, nothing actually happens in the dream world, no matter [heh] how much you meditate, pray or get high on drugs to "expand your consciousness". As people found out back in the 60's, when you wake up from the dream, the dishes still need to be washed, the crying baby still needs to be fed, the broken down car still needs repair and the bills still need to be paid.  We have to build the things we want to exist out of real matter in the real world, because this is the only world we know for sure exists. Not because we were "taught about the wrong states of consciousness when were children". &)

Sigh. I have to say, in spite of knowing in advance that this is where we would end up, I am actually a bit disappointed. I had some slight hope that Dominic had something to offer. But if he had anything other than hippie-talk and Chopra-silliness, he would have produced it, and not still be jerking us around after all these pages.

Thanks, Dominic, for wasting everyone's time. It's been fun, but I'm done here.  :P
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline wheels5894

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2677
  • Darwins +114/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: Natural Explanation Vs Magical
« Reply #753 on: May 14, 2014, 03:24:00 AM »
So, according to Dominic's [non]response to my question about "dreaming" an eternal non-polluting energy source into reality (remember how we can create all this matter in our dreams, which are the true reality) we have to do all the heavy lifting right here in this non-dream world.

Because, nothing actually happens in the dream world, no matter [heh] how much you meditate, pray or get high on drugs to "expand your consciousness". As people found out back in the 60's, when you wake up from the dream, the dishes still need to be washed, the crying baby still needs to be fed, the broken down car still needs repair and the bills still need to be paid.  We have to build the things we want to exist out of real matter in the real world, because this is the only world we know for sure exists. Not because we were "taught about the wrong states of consciousness when were children". &)

Sigh. I have to say, in spite of knowing in advance that this is where we would end up, I am actually a bit disappointed. I had some slight hope that Dominic had something to offer. But if he had anything other than hippie-talk and Chopra-silliness, he would have produced it, and not still be jerking us around after all these pages.

Thanks, Dominic, for wasting everyone's time. It's been fun, but I'm done here.  :P

Me too! I can't manage to type consciousness many more times before it is a completely changed spelling!
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)