Consciousness question

[Iacchus]

Holy false analogy, Batman!

We were discussing what happens to consciousness when someone dies. Unless the person on the other end of the phone dropped dead and hung up the phone as their dying act, your statement is a total non sequitur.

The fact is, there is no evidence of consciousness in either case. The body, like the phone, is merely a means by which consciousness is expressed.

Oh, and I'm still waiting for you to come back to the "Who (or what) created the creator?" thread and explain why you felt the need to ask me if I'm a fascist. . .

Look up the words fascim and oppression.

 

[Tricky]

The body is a means by which to express consciousness which, happens to reside in the brain. When the brain dies, there is no more consciousness ... within the body. This is all you can hope to claim.

It is all I do claim, and it is based on the evidence that the properties we call consciousness only have ever been observed in living, corporeal beings. I point out that there is no evidence for a consciousness that survives the body, but I do not claim it is impossible. It is your claim that consciousness does survive the death of the body. What evidence do you have for this claim?

 

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

Thank you.

I've come to realize discussing anything with Iacchus is merely an exercise in mental masochism.

LOL! Yes. Im always amazed.

 

[SuperCoolGuy]

What evidence do you have for this claim.

Here comes an analogy . . .

 

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

The body is a means by which to express consciousness which, happens to reside in the brain. When the brain dies, there is no more consciousness ... within the body. This is all you can hope to claim.

Sure, and all you have to do is demonstrate that there is this "signal" called consciousness WITHOUT A BRAIN. How? its easy, just tell us how else we can "tune" it!

 

[Genesius]

The fact is, there is no evidence of consciousness in either case. The body, like the phone, is merely a means by which consciousness is expressed.

Proof?

Oh, and I'm still waiting for you to come back to the "Who (or what) created the creator?" thread and explain why you felt the need to ask me if I'm a fascist. . .

Look up the words fascim and oppression.

1. Fascism
   1. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
   2. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.

Main Entry: op·pres·sion
Pronunciation: &-'pre-sh&n
Function: noun
: an unjust or excessive exercise of power: as a : unlawful, wrongful, or corrupt exercise of authority by a public official acting under color of authority that causes a person harm b : dishonest, unfair, wrongful, or burdensome conduct by corporate directors or majority shareholders that entitles minority shareholders to compel involuntary dissolution of the corporation c : inequality of bargaining power resulting in one party's lack of ability to negotiate or exercise meaningful choice

OK, so what's any of that got to do with me?

 

[SuperCoolGuy]

The body, like the phone, is merely a means by which consciousness is expressed.

The subtle DNA frequencies would be an expression of that consciousness as something that is channled from a dream realm where consciousness can exist free on any need for a body.

Don't you guys get it!

 

[Genesius]

The subtle DNA frequencies would be an expression of that consciousness as something that is channled from a dream realm where consciousness can exist free on any need for a body.

Don't you guys get it!

You're treading dangerous ground! Iacchus is incapable of detecting parody or satire.

 

[SuperCoolGuy]

You're treading dangerous ground! Iacchus is incapable of detecting parody or satire.

I'm sorry. It was way too much fun for me to pass up. Okay, I'll try to stop. Sorry.

 

[Iacchus]

Sure, and all you have to do is demonstrate that there is this "signal" called consciousness WITHOUT A BRAIN. How? its easy, just tell us how else we can "tune" it!

Look at someone who is in a coma. Where does this mysterious thing called consciousness go at that time? And then, only to have that person who, was "no longer home," return (sometimes, not always) with some remarkable religious experience to speak of. This is in fact evidence in favor "a soul."

 

[Tricky]

OK, so what's any of that got to do with me?

This one

Main Entry: op·pres·sion

c : inequality of bargaining power resulting in one party's lack of ability to negotiate or exercise meaningful choice.

He is oppressed because he lacks the ability to negotiate or excercise meaningful choice. And it's your fault, you big bully.

 

[Tricky]

Look at someone who is in a coma. Where does this mysterious thing called consciousness go at that time? Then only to have that person who, was "no longer home," return (sometimes, not always) with some remarkable religious experience to speak of. This is in fact evidence in favor "a soul."

It's evidence that when they're in a coma (or in deep sleep) the parts of the brain that generate what we call consciousness are not working. In fact, doctors often induce a coma. It's a physical thing, not spiritual, Iacchus.

 

[Genesius]

Look at someone who is in a coma. Where does this mysterious thing called consciousness go at that time? And then, only to have that person who, was "no longer home," return (sometimes, not always) with some remarkable religious experience to speak of. This is in fact evidence in favor "a soul."

Since consciousness is a product of the electrochemical activity of the brain, when said activity is supressed while in a coma so is the consciousness. When the patient's condition improves and the activity of the brain increases, so does the level of consciousness.

Since not everyone who recovers from a coma has a "remarkable religious experience" I'd say that's pretty weak evidence for a soul. Could just as well be explained as a dream or hallucination.

But of course the logical explanation is the most boring, which I suppose is why you can't be bothered with it.

 

[Genesius]

He is oppressed because he lacks the ability to negotiate or excercise meaningful choice. And it's your fault, you big bully.

And since I'm 6'6" and built like a retired NFL lineman there's not a heck of a lot he can do about it, is there?

 

[Iacchus]

OK, so what's any of that got to do with me?

I don't know, I'm not the one who goes around calling folks vacuous twits just because I don't agree with and/or find the need to oppress someone else's view.

 

[Iacchus]

And since I'm 6'6" and built like a retired NFL lineman there's not a heck of a lot he can do about it, is there?

Pride goeth before the fall.

 

[Genesius]

I don't know, I'm not the one who goes around calling folks vacuous twits just because I don't agree with and/or find the need to oppress someone else's view.

I'm not oppressing anyone's point of view. I call you a vacuous twit because you use lousy analogies and word games to justify your beliefs instead of using more pedantic tools like "logic" and "evidence".

And I at least have the courage to call you a vacuous twit to your face, instead of making vague comments about fascism.

 

[Iacchus]

It's evidence that when they're in a coma (or in deep sleep) the parts of the brain that generate what we call consciousness are not working. In fact, doctors often induce a coma. It's a physical thing, not spiritual, Iacchus.

Which of course only illustrates that the body is vessel which houses consciousness.

 

[SuperCoolGuy]

Since consciousness is a product of the electrochemical activity of the brain, when said activity is supressed while in a coma so is the consciousness. When the patient's condition improves and the activity of the brain increases, so does the level of consciousness.

Since not everyone who recovers from a coma has a "remarkable religious experience" I'd say that's pretty weak evidence for a soul. Could just as well be explained as a dream or hallucination.

But of course the logical explanation is the most boring, which I suppose is why you can't be bothered with it.

In case you missed it.

 

[Iacchus]

I'm not oppressing anyone's point of view. I call you a vacuous twit because you use lousy analogies and word games to justify your beliefs instead of using more pedantic tools like "logic" and "evidence".

I suppose I could register a complaint with moderators and see what they have to say about it.

And I at least have the courage to call you a vacuous twit to your face, instead of making vague comments about fascism.

"Live long and prosper."