|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
18th June 2011, 12:11 PM | #641 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: I live in a swamp
Posts: 27,710
|
Look if this stuff worked it would have by now. Nothing succeeds like success.
|
21st June 2011, 01:18 AM | #642 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,295
|
So you have reduced the mind to the brain, fine I agree. does this mean that the Dali painting is computation or inspiration?
What is intuition?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Are they living in a delusion? Can this be tested for in a chemistry lab?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
21st June 2011, 01:58 AM | #643 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
|
The fact that the mind is the brain doesn't mean we can't be inspired by our experiences and our imaginations.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
21st June 2011, 08:39 AM | #644 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,295
|
Yes, I am happy with this interpretation as the foundation and material basis upon which the intellect dwells.
Again the conceptual world is negated, other than in principle. Perhaps there is a duality coming in through the back door here. Or are we still that ape with the stick banging it against the door of universal principles, unaware of what they might represent.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Presumably this chimpanzee can craft its stick into a spear or a conductors wand. Does science predict which of these nearly identical brains is going to perform which or what task. If we only had the evidence of what the chimp can do, we would be entirely unaware of the conductors wand or the monolith.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Encircling everything we have discerned with our intellect is the unknown.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
21st June 2011, 09:55 AM | #645 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
|
Your hiking holiday didn't do you any good then. The door of universal principles. Encircling everything we have discerned with our intellect is the unknown. The parameters of our biological form. And this 'Including the conceptual meaning of the monolith in the film, with the attendant questions it begs.' It was a film,fiction,just like your ideas. Proof by Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clark,that's a new one.
|
21st June 2011, 10:13 AM | #646 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,295
|
|
21st June 2011, 10:37 AM | #647 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
|
|
21st June 2011, 11:35 AM | #648 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
|
But the conceptual world is a world within the real world. We're biased because we have evolved a brain that can conceive. Must like we saw ourselves at the center of the universe, we see conception and imagination or consciousness as precious.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
23rd June 2011, 12:20 AM | #649 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,295
|
Yes, my point was that biology only describes the mechanism, not the concepts being entertained by the mechanism. Rather like with a tv, the cathode ray tube can be described as an instrument. What you see on the screen is that other world within a world.
Materialism only describes mechanisms.
Quote:
Materialism is a discussion of particles.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The Tao is an interesting consideration of the known and the unknown. The real Tao that is.
Quote:
Quote:
|
23rd June 2011, 01:24 AM | #650 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
|
No, what you see on the tv screen and think and feel is inside of the great material world.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Cheers |
23rd June 2011, 07:48 AM | #651 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
|
Eskimos,or Inuit do not have many words for snow but no actual word or snow,that is an urban myth.
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/langu...es/004003.html 'The idea that Eskimos have many more words for snow than English speakers is a myth. All eight Eskimo languages have extraordinarily rich possibilities for deriving new words on the fly from established bases. So where English uses separate words to make up descriptive phrases like "early snow falling in autumn" or "snow with a herring-scale pattern etched into it by rainfall", Eskimo languages have an astonishing propensity for being able to express such concepts (about anything, not just snow) with a single derived word. To the extent that counting basic snow words makes any real sense (it is often difficult to decide whether a word really names a snow phenomenon), Eskimo languages do not appear to have more than English has (think of snow, slush, sleet, blizzard, drift, white-out, flurry, powder, dusting, and so on).' |
27th June 2011, 07:18 AM | #652 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,295
|
|
27th June 2011, 07:37 AM | #653 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,295
|
I don't regard pi as special its just a good example of a relation which would manifest in any universe in which there are particles or circular forms. Its value appears to be universal.
Quote:
Quote:
We cannot know what the method or purpose of an intelligent manipulator might be, hence their IQ etc.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
It was worth it though |
27th June 2011, 08:52 AM | #654 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
|
|
28th June 2011, 06:51 PM | #655 |
Jedi Consular
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,077
|
Well, then your lame camel has a weak back. AAAS Symposium on Quantum Retrocausation Predicting the Unpredictable: 75 Years of Experimental Evidence Abstract From time immemorial, people have reported foreknowledge of future events. To determine whether such experiences are best understood via conventional explanations, or whether a retrocausal phenomenon might be involved in some instances, researchers have conducted hundreds of controlled laboratory experiments over the past 75 years. These studies fall into four general classes, and each class has generated repeatable evidence consistent with retrocausation. The statistical results for a class of forced-choice studies is associated with odds against chance of about 1E24; for a class of free-response studies, odds about 1E20; for psychophysiological-based studies, odds about 1E17; and for implicit decision studies, odds about 1E10. Effect sizes observed in the latter three classes are nearly identical, indicating replication of similar underlying effects. These effects are also in close agreement with the average effect size observed across thousands of conventional psychological experiments, suggesting that retrocausal phenomena may not be especially unique, at least not in terms of commonly observed psychological phenomena. Bayesian analyses of the most recent classes of experiments confirm that the evidence is strongly in favor of a genuine effect, with Bayes Factors ranging from 13,669 to 1 for implicit decision experiments, to 2.9 x 1013 to 1 for psychophysiological designs. For the two most recent classes of studies examining retrocausal effects via unconscious physiological or behavioral measures, 73 of 82 studies (89%) reported by 23 different laboratories from the United States, Italy, Spain, Holland, Austria, Sweden, England, Scotland, Iran, Japan, and Australia, have produced results in the direction predicted by a retrocausal effect (odds against chance = 1.5 x 1013, via a sign test). Assessment of the methodologies used in these studies has not identified plausible conventional alternatives for the observed outcomes, suggesting the existence of a genuine retrocausal phenomenon. Ladewig, I've said it before and I'll say it again. Stop wasting your time on internet forums like this one and read some books. These pathological pseudo-skeptic activists don't know squat. Here are a few good books I've read and recommend. Extraordinary Knowing Parapsychology and the Skeptics Randi's Prize Introduction to Parapsychology Varieties of Anomalous Experience The Parapsychology Revolution The Intention Experiment Outside the Gates of Science |
__________________
"Faith in what?" he asked himself, adrift in limbo. "Faith in faith," he replied. "It isn't necessary to have something to believe in. It's only necessary to believe that somewhere there's something worthy of belief." |
|
28th June 2011, 08:20 PM | #656 |
Lost in translation
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,964
|
|
__________________
"There is a plenty of proof, but unfortunately it is entirely unprovable." - Punshhh "There’s a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an idiot." – Stephen Wright |
|
28th June 2011, 08:31 PM | #657 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 36,113
|
|
__________________
Like many humorless and indignant people, he is hard on everybody but himself, and does not perceive it when he fails his own ideal (Molière) A pedant is a man who studies a vacuum through instruments that allow him to draw cross-sections of the details (John Ciardi) |
|
1st July 2011, 08:23 AM | #658 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
|
How can you be sure of this? You can't be!
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|