Total posts: 470
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Is there anywhere on the salt lake flats where there is an unobstructed view of the horizon?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Here is a simple way to prove the earth is not flat. Watch a sunset on a day when there are clouds overhead or behind you and you have a clear line of sight to the horizon. When the sun disappears over the horizon look up at the clouds and you will see they are still being hit by sunlight even though you can't see the sun. You don't really even need to do this because you have probably already seen it.
Here is a typical flat earth model:
If this was the way things are clouds would be dark while a person on the ground was still illuminated.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
For you to prove to a flat earth proponent that the earth is round you would have to take him up in a spaceship high enough to see the entire planet. The same is true for him to prove to you that the earth is flat. He is as without proof as you are. One thing he does not have that you do have is the preponderance of evidence.
Here is another problem with the flat earth argument. The tops of both tables in this picture are exactly the same size.
Thing are not always the way they appear to be.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
To say it’s flat because it looks flat is a logical fallacy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
The word possible is also a problem.
Definition of possible
1a : being within the limits of ability, capacity, or realization
b : being what may be conceived, be done, or occur according to nature, custom, or manners
2a : being something that may or may not occur
b : being something that may or may not be true or actual
3 : having an indicated potential
Another way to say would be:
1. It may or may not be true that a maximally great being exists.
Like this it may not be true that a maximally great being exists.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
“God exists” is a synthetic proposition.
Synthetic propositions are described in logical terms and substantiated by empirical evidence.
You can propose “God exists”, but it is an unsubstantiated synthetic proposition.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
The logic itself is not empirical evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
The Analytic/Synthetic Distinction
Analytic propositions – propositions that describe the interplay between ideas and definitions.
Synthetic proposition – a model statement about the external world.
Synthetic propositions are described in logical terms and substantiated by empirical evidence.
“God exists” is a synthetic proposition.
Logic alone is not proof, you still need evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
The same is true for flat earth. Just because it looks flat does notmean it is.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
The problem with the Ontological Argument is it produces no evidence or verifiable predictions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Wow four words, your moving up in the world.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
You could do it the way Eratosthenes did it back in 5th century BC.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
That's quite comprehensive Dr.OneWord.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Religion is based on faith, it is something that is meant to be believed. Science is not meant to be believed it is meant to be understood. If you don't understand science it's not science that you believe in, it's an anecdote you believe in. As far as someone asking you to prove the earth is round unless it's a science class assignment I recommend beating a hasty retreat.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
The answer is anthropomorphism! Put a human face on it so you can believe that you understand it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgmi
where did the big bang come from?
Nobody knows, anything you have heard from a scientist at this point is speculation. There is no way to know what happened before the big bang, no tests, no observations, no way to reveal what happened before the big bang. You may have heard scientists talking about the multiverse or string theory as well. These things are also speculative, there is currently no way to prove them. If you were talking about something like physics, then you would be talking about proven science.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Philosophy? Okay, lets talk about the philosophy of personhood. Who do you find agreeable, Plato, Descartes, John Locke, Eric Olson, Paul Snowdon?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
You are just repeating yourself so I see no point in continuing.
Nobody really understands everything about the brain and consciousness so I don't disagree that we don't know how everything works, we may never know.
The problem I have with what you are saying is that I've never seen or read about people being people without a brain. If it were possible to be a person without a brain I think all of us would know about it. You just keep stating that people can be people without a brain, but you aren't providing any explanations, demonstrations or argument you just keep saying it over and over again. If it's possible to be a person without a brain then please tell us how.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
So until a physical reality such as a bunch of divots on a DVD or magnetized spots on a disk or the charged state of a bunch of gates exist, there is no program?
The program is in your head then you type it in to the computer. You first have to learn what to do and that is stored in your brain in the neurons, dendrites and synapses.
Where was it before it was in your brain?
In your teacher's brain then you downloaded it into your brain.
Untrue. A hard drive retains programs stored on it even without power.
Yes you are right,but it is possible to type a string of code directly into memory and run it without saving it to storage. That is what I thought you meant the first time, but this is not important to our discussion.
But this doesn't matter to my point that personhood is not a function of physical brain structure.
Show me a person without a brain who does not act like a dead body and I'll think about changing my mind.
By whom? You certainly cannot be saying that "nothing" programmed software complex enough for sentience, or the equally absurd, that the brain programmed itself. Have I misunderstood you?
The brain cannot program itself, you have to program it by going to coding class.
personhood is not a function of physical brain structure.
What is it a function of?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Where is it before you type it in?
In the physical structure of your brain.
Your brain is different from a computer, it doesn't store software the same way a computer does. The operating system and software in the brain is all hard-wired. We could make computers with the operating system and software hard-wired in, but it would be very expensive to do that. Every mistake in the software would require a new die be fabricated to correct it. Your brain being hard-wired is also difficult to change for the same reason, that's why it's so hard to change someones mind.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
If you can cite lobotomies performed after 1967 in the US I'd be interested in seeing that.
A lobotomy is a terrible thing to do to a person and a terrible solution. “As early as the 1950s, some nations, including Germany and Japan, had outlawed lobotomies. The Soviet Union prohibited the procedure in 1950, stating that it was contrary to the principles of humanity.” The fact that new treatments arrived was simply fortunate.
When you type the program in it goes into memory and is held there by electrically charged gates. If you turn off the power the program goes away, if you turn the power back on you have to type it in again.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
People with lobotomies aren't the same person they were before, they are only a shadow of their former selves. A lobotomy has a negative effect on a persons personality, initiative, inhibitions, empathy and ability to function on their own. They become complete basket cases, that's why no lobotomies have been performed in the US since 1967.
A program or software has a physical reality as a bunch of divots on a DVD or magnetized spots on a disk or the charged state of a bunch of gates. It's not non detectable it has a definite existence, even the program when it's running has a definite existence that can be observed, measured and manipulated. If you just remove the processor Windows 10 is still going to be on the drive and you don't need to remove the processor anyway, just unplugging it does the same thing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Earlier you were talking about people with a lobotomy maintaining there personhood, but people who have had a lobotomy still have a brain. A lobotomy is a surgical procedure where nerve pathways in a lobe or lobes of the brain are cut, they don’t remove any of the brain.
If you completely removed someones brain they would have no personhood.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
I suppose so, but I really don’t know if there is a god or not.
Why does that matter?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
When I click the link it says:
This video is no longer available because the YouTube account associated with this video has been terminated.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
The answer to your question is, I don’t know. I haven’t read enough about it to give you a detailed, well informed answer.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
You said, “personhood may not be only in the physical structure ofthe brain.”
So I’m wonderingwhere you believe it resides and what it is?
So I’m wonderingwhere you believe it resides and what it is?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
I get what you are saying, you have to be stupid to be a liberal because the liberal philosophy is stupid. The problem is there are plenty of really intelligent people that are liberals just like there are plenty of really intelligent people that are religious.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
The question you are really asking is, what directs the growth of the brain? The short answer to that question is DNA.
I agree with some of what you say, there is a great deal we do not know about the brain and the nature of person hood. However, I am not willing to ascribe some kind of magical unseen force to it just yet. Mostly because if we were satisfied by that kind of an answer we would still be living in medieval times. The age of enlightenment and resulting scientific revolution were the direct result of the rejection of that kind of religious thinking. I happen to like my computer, cell phone and my super cushy modern lifestyle all of which were all brought to me by the scientific revolution.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Sure, of course, you’re completely justified in every stupid thingyou do. LOL!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Here is your statement with the word “religion” in place of political party:
“You claimed that calling half the population stupid, - because they belong to a religion is bigotry or prejudice, insinuating I did so.
I told you it was the other way around. They are stupid, that's why they belong to that religion.
I do NOT call them stupid because they belong to a religion, I call them stupid because they are stupid, and were stupid before they joined that religion.”
Would you call this bigotry or prejudice?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
It doesn't matter how you try to rationalize it, it's still bigotry.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
What directs the growth of dendrites?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
The first one is the wrong one try this one:
Wow this one is wrong as well.
I cant figure out where that original article went. Every time I try to go to it I get a different article!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
The answer to your question is so long nobody is going to type an answer for you so I gave you the link. While it could be an unsolved problem we do know a lot about what goes on. I seriously doubt you have solved the problem, but go ahead and tell us what you have in mind.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Severing the connection between the two hemispheres of the brain is called a corpus calloscotomy, a lobotomy is something else entirely.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WaterPhoenix
If I remember correctly it was called Travelers, I think it's on Netflix.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
What directs the growth of dendrites?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
When you call half the population stupid because they belong to aparticular political party that's bigotry or prejudice.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Very well understood actually. Much more understood than activity in the brain and neurons firing.
Can you show me information on this understanding of consciousness? I'd like to read about it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
I meant anyone that claims to have a scientific understanding of the mind is a crackpot.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Consciousness, the mind, the ghost in the machine is not well understood. There is no established theory of consciousness or mind and it remains elusive so there is still a good bit of mystery surrounding it. No one in the scientific community claims to understand it, the only people that do are crackpots.
Since we started talking I have read about many people who seek spirituality without religion so I don't think confining spirituality strictly to one religion is necessary.
Created: