(February 20, 2015 at 9:35 am)robvalue Wrote: Right, in my opinion, life is nothing special. Some stuff moves around more than other stuff, but it's all just physics and chemistry. We're built from the same stuff as non-life, just in different configurations.

Hell, I wouldn't even call that an opinion; that's where all the available evidence points.

Thank you

Funnily enough, it's exactly the same thing I've been saying since I was around 13-14 years old. People laughed in my face, said I was stupid. Including most of my teachers.

The nail in the coffin for mind-brain duality in my opinion is the effects of brain damage and trauma to specific areas of the brain, which have a directly observable effect on the "mind", the "me" of a person. Yet people still think the mind is independent of the physical brain? Nada.

Love this Harris quote -

Quote:What we’re being asked to consider is that you damage one part of the brain, and something about the mind and subjectivity is lost, you damage another and yet more is lost, [but] you damage the whole thing at death, we can rise off the brain with all our faculties in tact, recognizing grandma and speaking English!

(February 20, 2015 at 9:43 am)FatAndFaithless Wrote: The nail in the coffin for mind-brain duality in my opinion is the effects of brain damage and trauma to specific areas of the brain, which have a directly observable effect on the "mind", the "me" of a person. Yet people still think the mind is independent of the physical brain? Nada.

Love this Harris quote -

Quote:What we’re being asked to consider is that you damage one part of the brain, and something about the mind and subjectivity is lost, you damage another and yet more is lost, [but] you damage the whole thing at death, we can rise off the brain with all our faculties in tact, recognizing grandma and speaking English!

Yes, yes, yes.
This is such a striking point that even many of us have brought it up here repeatedly. In other words, what good is an immortal soul if nothing useful is attached to it.

(February 20, 2015 at 8:54 am)Wychdoctyr Wrote: sure seems like those chemical process fight like hell to stay in that piece of dirt .... aware if they are trapped in a burning car ...
[...]

Yes. And your computer can be "aware" of and defend itself against a virus, even though it's all just 1s and 0s being coded in, transmitted by and decoded from electrical impulses. And our computers don't come even close to the complexity of our bodies and especially brains.

We evolved over billions of years from primitive, single-cell life-forms. Who knows where they came from and what made them "want" to survive, but since they did - that's a defining characteristic of all earthly life. Those early organisms and life-forms that were not aware of or "indifferent" to the end of their existence - stopped existing and are not here to testify about how they didn't care for their survival in certain circumstances (although we have plenty of data on what made more advanced organisms succeed, or not).

You are looking at this from the perspective of a lottery winner. Sure it seems unlikely, but if it happened - it happened, because here you are. Assuming design and/or designer/creator may be fun and games, but Occam's Razor makes short work of this proposition right now, because there's no evidence for it and evolution seems to explain everything pretty elegantly, while being a way simpler solution.

We know that it's possible (though very unlikely) to win the lottery, because of the mathematics. I don't have to win the lottery on demand, to prove that. Nor do I need to prove that one can - way more easily - lose at the lottery. But without some knowledge of math and probablities, someone who won at first try may find it difficult to imagine that countless others lost countless times. And someone who always lost may doubt the mere possibility of winning.

(February 20, 2015 at 9:35 am)robvalue Wrote: Right, in my opinion, life is nothing special. Some stuff moves around more than other stuff, but it's all just physics and chemistry. We're built from the same stuff as non-life, just in different configurations.

The mystery to me is consciousness, it seems paradoxical and impossible to get round because it seems to separate "me" (consciousness) from "my body" (brain). But scientifically I see no basis for them to be separate. It's some sort of product of the way the brain works, is my best guess. "Where" it is, is the question... but the question probably doesn't even make sense.

Right, life is not special. Bacteria and cockroaches have been around alot longer and way outnumber our species. But somehow theists think by accepting that, that we cannot find value in the finite time we have, which is really bullshit. Atheists can and do value life. We simply skip the superstition to explain anything.

The difference between the atheist and the believer is we accept our modern knowledge and don't cling to old explanations that were never true in the first place. It was understandable that people made bad guesses when they didn't know any better, but we know better now.

Brian I agree, and let me add this:

(February 20, 2015 at 10:15 am)Dystopia Wrote: Brian I agree, and let me add this:

Whats worse is that theists think his bluntness was a form of bigotry when it really was his love for humanity that he knew humans were much more capable than the bad logic they employ to justify such absurdities.

Sometimes there really is no polite way to tell someone else they got it wrong. Hitchens, if theists and even PC atheists would study his history and views it was hate of bad logic, not hate of his fellow human beings. He was merely cold water on the face of bad logic. Nothing more than "HEY WAKE UP".

He had a long history of travel and friends in all religions worldwide, but the one thing he insisted on from his believing friends is not for anyone to expect him to sugar coat what he thought of their claims.

He is a boon to the value of reason, a very Jeffersonian view in lack of fear of questioning anything and everything.

(February 20, 2015 at 7:46 am)Wychdoctyr Wrote: Feel the need to go a bit further,

I AM, in point of fact a non-theist, in that, I hold a complete disbelief and contempt for every theory of deity posited by humans thus far !!

I'd characterize your stated position as more anti- than non-.

(February 20, 2015 at 7:46 am)Wychdoctyr Wrote: you DO realize that your body is made of the exact same thing as your front yard right? and that when we go to your funeral and cry , we say "Oh no he's gone" ... no he's not ! there's the body laying right there ..... so I ask you ..... whats "gone"???

What has been animating that body for decades and typing and debating all these deep philosophical concepts?

What is gone is the organic functioning of the creature which made all those witty responses, facial expressions and physical habits possible.

(February 20, 2015 at 7:46 am)Wychdoctyr Wrote: answer ... I don't know .... and neither do you !

Doc

I know quite a bit about what has been animating that body for decades, whether you do or not. Life sustaining sustenance, liquid and air in sufficient quantities keeps the creature alive so that it can manifest all its higher order, emergent features. Unplug the beast and all the good stuff stops. Unless you want to posit a secret ingredient.

ChadW thinks the body is like a radio receiver that tunes in consciousness. Mr 'Rationality' thinks consciousness is primary and the physical world needs arguing for.

Me, I don't claim to know with certainty that there is no special ingredient involved, but that certainly is my belief. It is the belief reflected in all my practical doings over the course of a day. Believing isn't knowing, it is simply the non-academic threshold for acting.

(February 20, 2015 at 8:47 am)Wychdoctyr Wrote: what does an atheist believe animates the body .... until it doesn't ?

Firstly, as others have said, there's no 'atheist' position on this. There are no doctrinal tenets that describe what we have to believe or what we should accept to be true. Consequently, atheists can hold a wide variety of beliefs, some containing supernatural components. This variety is well represented on this board e.g. by our deist, spiritualistic or pagan (and more) members. You'll find impressive & highly informed discussions on the nature of consciousness elsewhere on the board, evidencing the variety of positions on this subject.

Personally, I don't consider this to be a matter of belief, I consider it to be a matter of my acceptance of scientific facts. All the evidence which exists demonstrates that the simple answer is 'biology, chemistry & physics', no supernatural components required. More specifically:

1. Food, water & air. These are the fuels that drive the chemical processes in our bodies. Remove any one of them and the body stops working; degrade their quality and the body performs sub-optimally and can suffer failure.
2. Neurology. Brains and nervous systems allow autonomic & motor control alongside the decision-making which gives purpose to those functions.
3. Cellular proliferation. Autonomous functions provided by the variety of cell types not only form the body but allow it to maintain itself (more or less).
4. Symbiotic relationships. Bacteria etc. without which our bodies wouldn't function properly, potentially leading to total failure.

Other atheists may disagree with me. On this board, you'll find that many people share my view but a good proportion think there's more to it than just the material.