(February 9, 2016 at 7:28 pm)Rhythm Wrote:(February 9, 2016 at 6:36 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: And you have are empty boasts about observing consciousness in the brain.It's hardly boastful to claim to have observed a brain in action - and you know I don;t see any difference between that and consciousness-, lol...but this is irrelevant to any conversation I hoped to have.
I think you're on crack. If you don't see any difference between what we see in the brain and consciousness, then you're not looking very hard.
(February 9, 2016 at 7:28 pm)Rhythm Wrote:(February 9, 2016 at 6:36 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: They may speak to the OP but they don't correspond to the question which prompted the response, the request for an explanation of the claim that spirit was a discredited hypothesis, something you've still yet to establish. The meaning of spirit under discussion was made plain and all these attempts to draw the subject back to animism and vitalism are just so many more red herrings.I disagree, I think that the failure of spirit or soul to explain the animating force, and the success of what we call a metabolism..is thoroughly discrediting to that concept of spirit or soul, as a hypothetical created to explain the animating force. I invited you to contribute more, but if you want me to go through each and every mis-attribution man has ever made using those two terms....we'll be in for a long night.....don't you agree....?
You keep claiming that this metabolism is a better explanation, but I don't see any actual explaining. Just repetition of the same vapid claim. At present, both spirit and the brain explain consciousness equally well, which is to say poorly. Any supposed discrediting of the one hypothesis by the other is solely a product of your imagination. But enlighten me. How does the brain explain consciousness?