The mind is obsolete
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 2 votes and with 7 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Number of rounds
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
Pros burden of proof: Science has made the mind obsolete and is able to provide a replacement
Cons burden of proof: The scientific replacement for a mind is either nonexistent, far worse or self-contradictory
Only 10 000 characters - no more
Assumptions and rules:
- Science has not disproven or favoured pure atheism or theism
- Concepts exist only within a mind or the replacement
- Both Pro and Con has a mind or something similar
- Science has not and cannot prove the mind to be nonexistent
-Otr means "or the alternative" and refers to what will be inserted instead of the mind
- Mind = What makes a living human different from a zombie copy.
- Brain = what zombies like to eat, and what my opponent does not have.
- Apologies for the joke
- Concept = an abstract idea that is not physical
- Experience = how the mind (otr) perceives reality
- Concepts exist only within the mind
- Our mind experiences both itself and the surroundings
- Consciousness provides the mind with information about the surroundings
- The mind is what makes us observe things
- Whatever the mind observes, we call a fact (for example, we have a body)
- The mind is the only thing we have full insight into.
- The mind is me
- If me is material, it cannot support concepts.
- If concepts do not exist, humans cannot think.
- If humans cannot think, they cannot think that me is material.