--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@> > > > wrote: > (snip) > > > > > > > > > > Yup, and it's perfectly natural to find something > > > > > > > > > > complex and assume that it must have been created > > > > > > > > > > by something more complex. This was Darwins genius > > > > > > > > > > as he showed it isn't the case where biology is > > > > > > > > > > concerned. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But not where human consciousness is concerned. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's a belief. And a strange one. > > > > > > It's also just a belief that biology is responsible for human > > > consciousness. > > > > ? > > Which words did you not understand?
I guess it's just a belief that biology is responsible for my heartbeat. You mystical types start from the wrong place. You claim to understand evolution but have you considered how an alternative might fit in? I mean does the brain have to evolve all its motor functions and sensory apparatus and then, to get conscious, does it go in search of some quantum things that defy the laws of physics to bridge the huge gaps in neurons or what happens instead of what seems to happen? If consciousness isn't part of the brain was it hanging around waiting for us to evolve to be able to use it? Or maybe it directed us in an SCI fashion to become all it can be? Either belief is in direct contradiction of how we understand evolution. So what is this extra thing you think you need? Whatever it is I don't need it, thinking is what brains do, seeing and hearing and feeling is what they do, it's all they've ever done. Keep watching the brain magnet guys. When you know what part does what you'll know how it works, making sense of it in a "how does it feel to be a whatever..." will be your own problem to work out as the most complex object in the known universe is probably beyond its own ability to fathom subjectively,but all that energy it sucks up must be doing something. > There is indubitably an "extra thing," a thing science has not > been able to account for. Well give them a chance! They've only had the gear to look for a few years and it's getting better all the time, it's the most complex object in the known universe! > > But I'm not "blaming 'other' stuff" or proposing mystical or > quantum explanations. I'm not proposing anything in particular > other than that neuroscience hasn't told us (and may well never > tell us) whether the brain causes consciousness, or given us a > solution to the "hard problem." Many neuroscientists and > philosophers (and most laypeople) don't recognize that there > *is* a "hard problem"--even though it's right under their noses > every minute of the day. (Or, more likely, *because* it's right > under their noses every minute of the day.) Well why didn't you say earlier it might have saved me a lot of typing. > > > Ever read any David Chalmers? > > Guess not, huh? Why?
