luvluv

I would love to hear you guy's responses to Hugh Ross's argument here, specifically about the mind.

Here's the link:

<a href="http://www.reasons.org/resources/faf/97q4faf/97q4reas.html" target="_blank">http://www.reasons.org/resources/faf/97q4faf/97q4reas.html</a>

99Percent

bleh, that idiot is taking the word "seeing" to its literal sense. For example he says abstract ideas, gravity or electromagnetism can't be "seen" so they would not exist.

Its amazing the level of stupidity these so called intellectuals achieve.

luvluv

Yeah there is a lot to be discounted in the article, obviously we can see the effects of magnetism and know it exists.

But his argument about the mind itself is pretty good. There is no instrument in the known universe which can record the specific content of your thoughts. If you were just thoughts, with no medium to express your thoughts (i.e. no body) how could you ever be detected? Consciousness, as it were, is not currently an observable phenomenon. So what if God is simply a massive mind? How could we ever detect it?

There is at least one thing that we know to exist which we cannot prove to exist.

[ April 02, 2002: Message edited by: luvluv ]

[ April 02, 2002: Message edited by: luvluv ]</p>

tronvillain

It's not much of an argument - he first attempts to attack basing belief on evidence, then attempts to provide evidence.

David Gould

Luvluv,

Things can only be detected by their effects.

If God cannot be detected, then he cannot affect the world.

If he does affect the world, he can be detected.

Thus, to posit god as being a gigantic undetectable mind kills god as a concept.

For god to be meaningful, he must be able to detect the universe (and thus be affected by it) and he must be able to act on the universe (and thus be detected by us).

Of course, he could simply choose not to do anything. But that simply means that he has chosen to hide from the universe.

If you take the Christian interpretation of the god concept, such hiding is bizarre in the context of the repeated miraculous interventions recorded in the Bible.

99Percent

luvluv: Consciousness, as it were, is not currently an observable phenomenon

Sure it is. If I bash your head you cease to be conscious. Please pray tell me - where can I bash God's head?

Pomp

luvluv,

If you were just thoughts, with no medium to express your thoughts (i.e. no body) how could you ever be detected?

You couldn't be detected because you wouldn't exist. To the best of our knowledge, thoughts are dependent upon the existence of a brain. No brain means no thoughts. Speculation about thoughts with no physical brain is just that: speculation.

Consciousness, as it were, is not currently an observable phenomenon.

Sure it is. It refers to entities that are capable of sophisticated self-referential thought. By your argument, a visiting alien, when presented with a rock, a sheep, and a human being, would not be able to figure out which was conscious by observing the three of them.

So what if God is simply a massive mind? How could we ever detect it?

By locating the physical substrate in which it operates. In iother words, by finding its brain.

Daydreamer

True, but we can easily measure simpler things like moods and state-of-consciousness. We're getting there.

Really? So correlations between brain waves, bio-chem levels, and thought done by scientists are just coincidence?

This is self contradictory, knowing implies certainty, while "cannot prove to exist" implies doubt.

Also, this is extremely vague, could you please tell us what you're referring to?

Vorkosigan

Hi! Luv, seen this on the rhesus monkey and the cursor it moved just by thinking about it? We're already using thoughts.....

<a href="http://www.bottomquark.com/print.php?sid=2366" target="_blank">http://www.bottomquark.com/print.php?sid=2366</a>

Michael

Automaton

Wow, and I thought Hugh Ross was a somewhat rational individual! Apparently he thinks poorly of sanity.