Even rats express regret so human consciousness is not unique among animals. Do you think that rats "sin" because they express regret? Do they have a rat savior that died for their sins?

(June 9, 2014 at 7:23 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: Even rats express regret so human consciousness is not unique among animals. Do you think that rats "sin" because they express regret? Do they have a rat savior that died for their sins?

Animals are not conscious, they are instinctly aware.

---

(June 9, 2014 at 7:06 pm)Napoléon Wrote:

(June 9, 2014 at 6:56 pm)Eye of God Wrote: You sound like one of those mislead deists. That's a shame. The one TRUE God is not someone to take litely. You should get your heart right as quickly as you can. The Lord Jesus Christ will discard you as quickly as he does the atheists who deny him.

OOOooooohhhh. This might get interesting guys...

Dumb has challenged dumber! Let the duel commence!

I am honorable enough not to call you out of you're name.

(June 8, 2014 at 8:58 pm)mickiel Wrote: I am content with reading Julian Jaynes work on consciousness; I learn a lot from him.

If your views cannot withstand testing, they're probably not worth holding. And if you test your views and find them wanting, you have the opportunity to refine them in accordance with a tighter model of reality.

Being satisfied with any one source in such a complex and uncertain quesiton as conscousness is not the brightest thing I could think of doing. Of course, I don't have a dogma to which I must adhere, either. I'm sure that could have an effect on one's willingness to explore new avenues of knowledge, don't you agree?

---

(June 8, 2014 at 9:11 pm)mickiel Wrote: Why would god want any wherelse inhabitable, when his focus is on us here on earth?

What makes you think you know the mind of your putative god?

But, to answer your question: Assuming for the sake of discussion your god's existence, you clearly haven't considered the possibility that he might love living things so much that humankind is not his only creation.

(June 8, 2014 at 9:11 pm)mickiel Wrote: You miss another evidence of him right there. If life is random chance, how come no other area in this vastness got so lucky?

Since life is not due to random chance, I will disregard this question, for having a flawed premise.

But, what makes you think that there are no other sentient life-forms on other planets?

(June 9, 2014 at 7:28 pm)mickiel Wrote: Animals are not conscious, they are instinctly aware.

Really? ? ?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xp8Yp89aF...ata_player


http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/octo...claration/

Elephants cooperate to solve problems. Chimpanzees teach youngsters to make tools. Even octopuses seem to be able to plan. So should we humans really be surprised that “consciousness” probably does not only exist in us.

This privileged state of subjective awareness in fact goes well beyond Homo sapiens, according to the new Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness (pdf), which was signed last month by a group of cognitive neuroscientists, computational neuroscientists, neuroanatomists, neuropharmacologists, neurophysiologists who attended the Francis Crick Memorial Conference on Consciousness in Human and non-Human Animals at Cambridge University in the U.K.

(June 9, 2014 at 7:28 pm)mickiel Wrote: Animals are not conscious, they are instinctly aware.

You have a lot to learn.

Thankfully, teaching you is not my job.

(June 9, 2014 at 7:28 pm)mickiel Wrote:

(June 9, 2014 at 7:23 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: Even rats express regret so human consciousness is not unique among animals. Do you think that rats "sin" because they express regret? Do they have a rat savior that died for their sins?

Animals are not conscious, they are instinctly aware.

Is this one of your "facts" or "evidence"? What's your source for this "fact"?

How are you defining consciousness? Self-awareness? The ability to empathize? Reason?

(June 9, 2014 at 7:56 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(June 8, 2014 at 8:58 pm)mickiel Wrote: I am content with reading Julian Jaynes work on consciousness; I learn a lot from him.

If your views cannot withstand testing, they're probably not worth holding. And if you test your views and find them wanting, you have the opportunity to refine them in accordance with a tighter model of reality.

Being satisfied with any one source in such a complex and uncertain quesiton as conscousness is not the brightest thing I could think of doing. Of course, I don't have a dogma to which I must adhere, either. I'm sure that could have an effect on one's willingness to explore new avenues of knowledge, don't you agree?

---

Sure I agree, Jaynes work on consciousness is my favorite; its a hard read because he is an intellectual and writes like one. But its the only work I would recommend. Not the only I have studied.

(June 8, 2014 at 9:11 pm)mickiel Wrote: Why would god want any wherelse inhabitable, when his focus is on us here on earth?

What makes you think you know the mind of your putative god?

But, to answer your question: Assuming for the sake of discussion your god's existence, you clearly haven't considered the possibility that he might love living things so much that humankind is not his only creation.


Humanity is not his only creation, just the only in this reality that lives in flesh , besides animals

(June 8, 2014 at 9:11 pm)mickiel Wrote: You miss another evidence of him right there. If life is random chance, how come no other area in this vastness got so lucky?

Since life is not due to random chance, I will disregard this question, for having a flawed premise.

But, what makes you think that there are no other sentient life-forms on other planets?

Because the universe is a prototype of what is being prepared for us; for all the humans who have ever lived. god will revamp the entire universe and beyond into a spiritual universe, even larger than its physical prototype. Creating dazzling planets and multi universes , all for us; and the trillions of beings he has already created.

---

(June 9, 2014 at 8:59 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:

(June 9, 2014 at 7:28 pm)mickiel Wrote: Animals are not conscious, they are instinctly aware.

Is this one of your "facts" or "evidence"? What's your source for this "fact"?

How are you defining consciousness? Self-awareness? The ability to empathize? Reason?

My source is the animals themselves, I have NEVER seen an animal in 59 years of living that can reason with me, talk to me, tell me how to get to Texas, or explain to me why I am black.

(June 9, 2014 at 7:28 pm)mickiel Wrote:

(June 9, 2014 at 7:23 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: Even rats express regret so human consciousness is not unique among animals. Do you think that rats "sin" because they express regret? Do they have a rat savior that died for their sins?

Animals are not conscious, they are instinctly aware.

That's an antiquated Cartesian view. Modern science disagrees with you.

I've pointed this out multiple times in this thread, which you have promptly ignored. Perhaps a video would help:





In September of 2012, a panel of leading Neuroscientists convened in Cambridge to announce scientific consensus that non-human animals are indeed conscious:





The Psychology Today article outlining the consensus:

http://m.psychologytoday.com/blog/animal...ous-beings

I expect this will also be ignored as one of many examples where you are shown concrete evidence an assertion you've made is mistaken.

(June 9, 2014 at 8:39 pm)Luckie Wrote:

(June 9, 2014 at 7:28 pm)mickiel Wrote: Animals are not conscious, they are instinctly aware.

Really? ? ?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xp8Yp89aF...ata_player


http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/octo...claration/

Elephants cooperate to solve problems. Chimpanzees teach youngsters to make tools. Even octopuses seem to be able to plan. So should we humans really be surprised that “consciousness” probably does not only exist in us.

This privileged state of subjective awareness in fact goes well beyond Homo sapiens, according to the new Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness (pdf), which was signed last month by a group of cognitive neuroscientists, computational neuroscientists, neuroanatomists, neuropharmacologists, neurophysiologists who attended the Francis Crick Memorial Conference on Consciousness in Human and non-Human Animals at Cambridge University in the U.K.

I totally disagree with ever last one of those who signed that declaration, they are an embarrassment to realist; elephants, chimps and octo's are not conscious beings. Their animals, beasts; nothing more.

---

(June 9, 2014 at 9:09 pm)Rampant.A.I. Wrote:

(June 9, 2014 at 7:28 pm)mickiel Wrote: Animals are not conscious, they are instinctly aware.

That's an antiquated Cartesian view. Modern science disagrees with you.

I've pointed this out multiple times in this thread, which you have promptly ignored. Perhaps a video would help:





In September of 2012, a panel of leading Neuroscientists convened in Cambridge to announce scientific consensus that non-human animals are indeed conscious:





The Psychology Today article outlining the consensus:

http://m.psychologytoday.com/blog/animal...ous-beings

I totally disagree with this shameful deception of professionals who signed that, they KNOW animals are not conscious.

(June 9, 2014 at 9:04 pm)mickiel Wrote: My source is the animals themselves

Yet more evidence! I'm struggling to keep up, you've really upped your game mickiel.