Archaeology of the New Testament

[Into the Night]

So, you have nothing to contribute as usual.

Inversion fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

the self is the whole body and the brain.

is that too hard for you to wrap immense intellect around?

Apparently, it is.

 

[Into the Night]

"Do" and "can" aren't the same thing.

Word games. That won't work, Void. Stay on topic. YOU brought the bit about a runaway tire for whatever reason.

 

[Into the Night]

If you want to call it consciousness, that's fine with me.

I don't know what consciousness really is, I don't know what causes it, I don't know if it's limited to human beings.

I would say not.

A dog, for example, is away of its surroundings, can react to them, and can change it's behavior responding to kindness or cruelty. It has all the indications of being conscious.

An ant is is mostly automaton. It defends it nest like an automaton, it tends to the tasks of maintaining it's nest like an automaton. However, it can independently scout out some food, identify it as food, figure out how to bring it back to the nest or get others to help, and respond to the changing seasons, and identify a threat. At a certain level, even an ant has consciousness. An ant's sensors are so radically different from a human, though, that it makes it hard to see just where the line occurs.

Since you deny God and the Bible, you will never know what causes it.

 

[Into the Night]

Science, philosophy, and logic all presume the necessity of cause and effect.

Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Science does not presume anything but the theory itself.
Philosophy has no cause, and is not an 'effect'. It simply exists.
Logic is a closed functional system based on axioms. It's only 'cause' is human beings that created it. It is not an 'effect'.

I think a rational universe requires a cause, and I don't think an irrational cause can result in a rational effect.

The Universe is not a cause.
The Universe is not an effect.
The Universe is not a division.

The Universe simply exists.
The Universe is unorganized.

Therefore, I think the best explanation for the universe is some kind of higher rational agency.

Man did not create physics. The four fundamental forces of physics existed before matter did. It seems that the Four forces were unified and existed from the very start of the universe, before electrons, protons, and neutrons.

Man created physics.
Man identified and named 'four fundamental forces'.
Physics is not a force.
You cannot create or destroy matter/energy.
4 != 1.
You are contradicting yourself. Earlier you said the Universe is an electron, a proton, and a neutron.
It isn't, of course.

The Universe is not physics.
The Universe is not a force.
The Universe is not an electon, proton, or neutron.
The Universe has no known origin.
The Universe has no known boundary.

The Universe is unorganized.

In other words, the fundamental forces of physics were real and existed billions of years before you or any other human was born.

They did not exist until Man came along, named them, and identified them as 'four fundamental forces'.

The Universe is not a force.
The Universe is not organized.

Yep, it is well known among cosmologists and students of cosmology that the four fundamental forces of physics existed at the very beginning of the universe 13.8 billion years ago. These forces manifest themselves as mathematical relationships. This is taught in the first semester of a college level cosmology course.

You don't know what happened 13.8 years ago. No one does.
The 'four fundamental forces' were identified by Man and named by Man. They did not exist before Man.
You don't get to quote every college.
No college knows what happened 13.8 years ago.
A force is not mathematics.
You don't get to speak for everyone. Omniscience fallacy.

The Universe is not a force.
The Universe has no known origin.
The Universe has no known boundary.

The Universe is unorganized.

 

[ZenMode]

Word games. That won't work, Void. Stay on topic. YOU brought the bit about a runaway tire for whatever reason.

The words can and do have meanings. While you have your own world of words and definitions, I don't live in that world.

Words and their meanings matter.

 

[Cypress]

Man created physics!
Man identified and named 'four fundamental forces'!

The universal vector field that manifests as an inverse square mathmatical relationship existed 13.8 billion years before English-speakers decided to call it gravity.

 

[ZenMode]

Denial of self fallacy.

It's not a fallacy because there is no self.

If you think I'm wrong, then show me where the self is in your body. Show me where is the thinker of thoughts, feeler of feelings, etc.

 

[ZenMode]

Science, philosophy, and logic all presume the necessity of cause and effect.

I think a rational universe requires a cause, and I don't think an irrational cause can result in a rational effect.

Therefore, I think the best explanation for the universe is some kind of higher rational agency.

Man did not create physics. The four fundamental forces of physics existed before matter did. It seems that the Four forces were unified and existed from the very start of the universe, before electrons, protons, and neutrons.

In other words, the fundamental forces of physics were real and existed billions of years before you or any other human was born.


Yep, it is well known among cosmologists and students of cosmology that the four fundamental forces of physics existed at the very beginning of the universe 13.8 billion years ago. These forces manifest themselves as mathematical relationships. This is taught in the first semester of a college level cosmology course.

You clearly have no desire to respond to simple questions and intentionally tap dance around them with word games.

You are making the same mistake as early man, which is filling in unknowns with imaginary beings. God of the Gaps.

I'm out.

View: https://youtu.be/ytaf30wuLbQ?si=ifg5KI-SUvMgtxm3

 

[Into the Night]

Physically, yes. But are you your skin?

Yes.

Are you your bones?

Yes.

What is the "you" that is thinking thoughts?

Myself.

Feeling feelings, etc?

Myself.

 

[Into the Night]

No, I don't think that . A 'being' refers to a living person. That's ridiculous. And you cannot precisely scientifically explain what consciousness is or what causes it, so I'm not going to use sloppy, vague language to describe something that might exist at a higher level of reality than matter and energy.

Reality does not have a rank or altitude.

Instead of trying to get me to use your words, you are going to have to accept my words. I think the best current explanation for the cause of a lawful and rational universe is some kind of higher rational agency or organizing principle. Common sense and logic tell me that the rational never comes from the inanimate and irrational.

The Universe is not a cause.
The Universe is not a law.
The Universe is not a division.
The Universe is not sentient.
The Universe is not 'common sense'.
The Universe is not logic.
Buzzword fallacies.

The Universe is unogranized.

 

[Cypress]

You clearly have no desire to respond to simple questions and intentionally tap dance around them with word games!

You don't get the answer you want and you get upset?

It is you playing word games. Consciousness is not the same thing as rational. I am not required to adopt your mistaken understanding of English words.

Artificial intelligence and machine learning are rational - but they are not conscious.

If there is a higher rational agency which caused the universe it is undoubtedly beyond subjective human categories of intellect and intelligence.

 

[Into the Night]

First, you didn't explain anything. Science describes, it doesn't explain.

Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
A theory is an explanatory argument.

Nobody has an explanation for why human-invented mathematics of motion, gravity, electromagnetism so perfectly describes and reflects the physical universe.

A theory is an explanatory argument.

That is totally unexpected and hints at a rational fabric underlying all reality which our rational minds can access.

There is no 'absolute reality'.
A mind is not a division.
A mind is not a fabric.
A fabric is not a division.

Second, the physics of mechanics are not an 'after the fact' method of analysis. We can and do use the laws of motion to accurately predict the past. Give n enough information, that is precisely why we know when Halleys comet made a pass around the sun five thousand years ago.

Every theory of science is created by Man.
Science is not a 'method' or 'analysis'.
It is not possible to predict the past. The past has already happened.
You don't know what happened five thousand years ago.

The mathematical laws of physics seem to have an existence independent of spacetime and seem to exist in some kind of higher platonic realm. That is what the esteemed theoretical physicists Aleksandr Valenkin and Alan Guth say. I think that makes sense.

Most of the theories of Plato have been falsified.
Plato is not a realm.
Mathematics was created by Man.
Every theory of physics was created by Man.

Correct.
The mathematical laws of physics seem to have an existence independent of spacetime and seem to exist in some kind of higher platonic realm. That is what the esteemed theoretical physicists Aleksandr Valenkin and Alan Guth say.

Every theory of science was created by Man.
Mathematics was created by Man.
Plato is not a realm.
All theories of physics are theories.

The Universe is not mathematics.
The Universe is not a law.
The Universe is not a realm.
The Universe is not a theory.

The Universe is unorganized.

 

[ZenMode]

Yes.

Yes.

Myself.

Myself.

Where is your "self" that is doing those things? Bones and skin can't do them.

 

[Into the Night]

Neuroscience does not have a universally accepted definition for consciousness, nor can neuroscience scientifically explain what causes our subjective conscious experience

There is no such thing as 'Neuroscience'.
Science does not attempt to explain consciousness.

Science has no religion.

The Universe is not sentient.
The Universe is not a buzzword.
The Universe is unorganized.

 

[Into the Night]

In general, atheists hate the idea of free will

I don't know any atheist that hates the idea of free will.

because it contradicts the notion of a pure materialistic determinism, where all human activities can be explained by inanimate atomic particles 'bumping' into each other, aka the laws of physics and chemistry.

The atheist doesn't try to argue there is no god.
That's a reglion.

 

[Into the Night]

"Quantum electrodynamics has not only survived but prospered after more than 50 years it has become the prototype against which every other quantum field theory is measured, and its status as the most successful theory we have ever had in physics remains unchallenged."

~ CERN (European Organization for Nuclear Research)​

​

​

https://cerncourier.com/a/qed-surviving-the-bad-press/​

There is no such thing as 'quantum electrodynamics'.
There is no such thing as a 'quantum field'.
There is no such theory in science.
Science is not a government agency.

 

[Into the Night]

Like MAGAts, I thought they believed that way so they couldn't be held accountable for their thoughts and actions.

MAGAts is not a word, Sybil.

 

[Into the Night]

I hadn't thought of that, but it makes sense for those who want to escape accountability.

You are describing Democrats.

 

[ZenMode]

You don't get the answer you want and you get upset?

Nope. You are avoiding answering and I'm not interested in going round and round with someone being intentionally evasive.

It is you playing word games. Consciousness is not the same thing as rational. I am not required to adopt your mistaken understanding of English words.

You are saying that "something" created the universe and that something intentionally designed the universe with an uncountable number of laws, and equations to explain those laws, woven into the very fabric of that universe.

Explain how that something can do those things without consciousness.