-->
@3RU7AL
because their family and ancestors fought and sacrificed so much for you to be born and enjoy life.
What I realized
Posts
Total:
449
-->
@Dr.Franklin
because their family and ancestors fought and sacrificed so much for you to be born and enjoy life.
Wouldn't that perhaps make you "proud of your ancestors"?
I still don't see how you could possibly give yourself any "credit" for being born.
-->
@3RU7AL
The human mind is merely apparent.
Demonstrate that assertion.
-->
@Tarik
The human mind is merely apparent.Demonstrate that assertion.
Have you ever heard of the Turing Test?
-->
@3RU7AL
Nope
-->
@Tarik
A Turing Test is a method of inquiry in artificial intelligence (AI) for determining whether or not a computer is capable of thinking like a human being. The test is named after Alan Turing, the founder of the Turing Test and an English computer scientist, cryptanalyst, mathematician and theoretical biologist.
Turing proposed that a computer can be said to possess (artificial) intelligence if it can mimic human responses under specific conditions. The original Turing Test requires three terminals, each of which is physically separated from the other two. One terminal is operated by a computer, while the other two are operated by humans.
During the test, one of the humans functions as the questioner, while the second human and the computer function as respondents. The questioner interrogates the respondents within a specific subject area, using a specified format and context. After a preset length of time or number of questions, the questioner is then asked to decide which respondent was human and which was a computer. [**]
-->
@3RU7AL
it means you have pride of your ancestors
-->
@3RU7AL
Every single choice you make is motivated by your e-motion.
Do you segregate the concepts of emotion and reasoning? I disagree that we are exclusively emotional creatures.
-->
@3RU7AL
The human mind is an ABSTRACT CONCEPT.
If a thought process is measurable, how abstract can it be? True, we have not yet developed the tech to measure what a person is thinking, but in very broad stroakes, but, according to MIT, that the person is actively thinking at all is measurable. https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask-an-engineer/how-are-thoughts-measured/
-->
@fauxlaw
Do you segregate the concepts of emotion and reasoning? I disagree that we are exclusively emotional creatures.
Reason is a slave to e-motion.
-->
@fauxlaw
If a thought process is measurable, how abstract can it be? True, we have not yet developed the tech to measure what a person is thinking, but in very broad stroakes, but, according to MIT, that the person is actively thinking at all is measurable.
Brain activity is not an OBJECT.
Brain activity is a process.
-->
@Dr.Franklin
it means you have pride of your ancestors
Well, you didn't make them either, so I'm not sure how much "credit" you can claim.
-->
@3RU7AL
Not if it is willed otherwise. Mind over not just matter, but feelings, as will. In fact, the response to any feeling is: "The secret is not minding." Thus, the ability of some to walk over burning coals.
-->
@fauxlaw
Not if it is willed otherwise. Mind over not just matter, but feelings, as will. In fact, the response to any feeling is: "The secret is not minding." Thus, the ability of some to walk over burning coals.
You're forgetting to ask, WHY WOULD ANYONE "RATIONALLY" "CHOOSE" TO WALK OVER BURNING COALS?
Hmmmmm, perhaps for SOCIAL STATUS?
Or, perhaps to BUILD SELF-CONFIDENCE?
Or, perhaps just for the ADRENALINE RUSH?
-->
@3RU7AL
you dont take credit, you take pride
-->
@3RU7AL
By rationally thinking that, given that conditions are not likely to cause a life-ending experience, the risk of smaller-scale injury may be exceeded by the thrill of accomplishment, even for selfish motivation. one may be motivated by something that appears irrational, but there is rational thinking in comparing risk/reward.
-->
@Tarik
@3RU7AL
Your OP makes a good point about choice concerning morality Tarik.
-->@3RU7AL
Abstract concepts are not "objective".
Depends on how "objective" is being used. When it is defined as the opposite of "subjective", it can be objective. Concepts themselves are never concrete.
Logical tautologies (FACTS) do not "exist" in the same way that concrete OBJECTS "exist".
And he did not say or imply that they did. He said, "Facts can be objective". This is true given his d(and the orthodox) definition of "objective". He was not speaking to existence/non-existence, he was referring to objective/subjective. And facts, whether theoretical or concrete, are never subjective.
-->
@3RU7AL
I don’t see how you can conflate apparent with abstract, the existence of human beings is apparent but it’s not abstract.
-->
@3RU7AL
The human brain is empirically demonstrable.The human mind is merely apparent.
Hate to steal your line, but that was well stated
-->
@Tarik
My database contains very similar information to yours.
Though how we might utilise data obviously varies, relative to how we might be conditioned differently because of "accidents of birth".
I personally have no data organised in the form of traditional or popular deistic/theistic belief.
I accept the basic principles of creation and evolution and assume there is a purpose, though whether it is an intentional or unintentional purpose it is impossible to say.
I find the notion that everything is explained in relatively recent Middle Eastern folklore, somewhat ridiculous....But that's how my database is programmed.
-->
@zedvictor4
Though how we might utilise data obviously varies, relative to how we might be conditioned differently because of "accidents of birth".
You’re using circular logic, I asked you earlier how you interpret that quote and you responded with your database and when I asked you what that was you respond with the initial subject at hand.
I personally have no data organised in the form of traditional or popular deistic/theistic belief.
But when 3RU7AL said “accident of birth” he was talking specifically about religion, so when you say your database is different from mine I took it to mean your religion is different from mine, but since I was wrong feel free to clarify what you meant.
I accept the basic principles of creation and evolution and assume there is a purpose, though whether it is an intentional or unintentional purpose it is impossible to say.
What is our purpose? If the answer is you don’t know then what made you come to the conclusion that there is such thing?
I find the notion that everything is explained in relatively recent Middle Eastern folklore, somewhat ridiculous....But that's how my database is programmed.
... So your database is ridiculous? 🤔
-->
@Tarik
There is either purpose or not....Take your pick.
And as I said, purpose could just as likely be unintentional as it could be intentional.
And you're the King of circular logic.
And 3RU7AL wasn't talking specifically about religion, they simply were using a well known turn of phrase to explain differences between people.
And you are the one that is seemingly, obsessively conditioned with religious data.....Assuming that I was similarly conditioned was your misunderstanding not mine.
And I will ignore the last remark.
-->
@Dr.Franklin
you dont take credit, you take pride
Are you proud of all the great things you didn't do?
-->
@fauxlaw
By rationally thinking that, given that conditions are not likely to cause a life-ending experience, the risk of smaller-scale injury may be exceeded by the thrill of accomplishment, even for selfish motivation. one may be motivated by something that appears irrational, but there is rational thinking in comparing risk/reward.
the thrill of accomplishment = E-MOTION
You do use "rational thinking" in order to SATISFY YOUR E-MOTION.
Your "rational thinking" is a SLAVE TO YOUR E-MOTION.
You only "figure stuff out" in order to FEEL GOOD.
-->
@zedvictor4
There is either purpose or not....Take your pick.
That’s originally what I was asking you.
And as I said, purpose could just as likely be unintentional as it could be intentional.
I don’t know why you continue to repeat this, it doesn’t answer my question.
And you're the King of circular logic.
How so? Because the difference between my claim and yours it at least I explained how.
And 3RU7AL wasn't talking specifically about religion, they simply were using a well known turn of phrase to explain differences between people.
What’s the point of that? Unless I implied people are all the same which I didn’t.
And you are the one that is seemingly, obsessively conditioned with religious data.....Assuming that I was similarly conditioned was your misunderstanding not mine.
But I already admitted to that and moved on, like I said before feel free to clarify what you meant.
-->
@3RU7AL
yes because now its your turn to conti nue the great things
-->
@ethang5
When it is defined as the opposite of "subjective", it can be objective.
Every thought and action a human being is capable of is FUNDAMENTALY SUBJECTIVE (SAMPLE BIASED).
NOTHING YOU CAN SAY OR DO IS "UNBIASED".
-->
@Dr.Franklin
yes because now its your turn to conti nue the great things
Try to "be proud" of the great things YOU actually accomplished YOURSELF.
-->
@3RU7AL
ok sure, you should also be proud of where you came from
-->
@Tarik
And 3RU7AL wasn't talking specifically about religion, they simply were using a well known turn of phrase to explain differences between people.What’s the point of that? Unless I implied people are all the same which I didn’t.
You linked religious belief with moral belief.
I linked religious belief with birthplace (and birthtime).
For example, if you were born in ancient China, you probably wouldn't hear very much about "Jesus".