Qualia Soup "Putting Faith In Its Place"

[Eudaimonia]

I've just subscribed to this channel.. Am I late? Has anyone else viewed their videos?

Putting Faith In Its Place


Open Mindedness

[Whirling Moat]

Peace...


This video, with the accent and all..is seriously flawed...

Here is a quote taken from 00:52 of the video "Without evidence from the cube itself, we can only ever make valid justifiable statements about what is not inside the cube"

He goes on to say at 01:12 "What if we were talking about a realm of existence independant of universe that like the cube is physically inaccesible to us, would things be different, would we be able to deduce precisely what occupies such a realm.."

According to his logic any statement about what the object must be is flawed since without looking into the cube the possiblities are endless. This is very ridiculous when you apply this reasoning to the being which created the universe. If we are asking "Who created the process by which everything comes into existence" the possibilities for what is inside the cube is limited not endless. There could be no wooden spoon or ant or egg or anything else in there...The only thing which could be in the cube would be something which is not a product of the physical creation process.

The question would be, "What created everything?" Are the possibilities endless? No....We would have to subtract from the possibilities everything which cannot be proven to exist independent of physical processes. That leaves us with one real thing-Consciousness. Consciousnesss must be in the box.....


Whirling Moat

[Eudaimonia]

Peace...


This video, with the accent and all..is seriously flawed...

Here is a quote taken from 00:52 of the video "Without evidence from the cube itself, we can only ever make valid justifiable statements about what is not inside the cube"

He goes on to say at 01:12 "What if we were talking about a realm of existence independant of universe that like the cube is physically inaccesible to us, would things be different, would we be able to deduce precisely what occupies such a realm.."

According to his logic any statement about what the object must be is flawed since without looking into the cube the possiblities are endless. This is very ridiculous when you apply this reasoning to the being which created the universe. If we are asking "Who created the process by which everything comes into existence" the possibilities for what is inside the cube is limited not endless. There could be no wooden spoon or ant or egg or anything else in there...The only thing which could be in the cube would be something which is not a product of the physical creation process.

The question would be, "What created everything?" Are the possibilities endless? No....We would have to subtract from the possibilities everything which cannot be proven to exist independent of physical processes. That leaves us with one real thing-Consciousness. Consciousnesss must be in the box.....


Whirling Moat

The question "would we be able to deduce precisely what occupies such a realm.." was followed by "such as a divine being.." and he stated that while we can list countless numbers of beings that could not exist.. We could not list those that do... I'm not sure if you followed what the person was saying.. The analogy stopped at "knowingness" and did not progress into comparing material items in this universe ..

As it stands consciousness is a property of matter..

Otherwise you would need to provide evidence that consciousness exists outside of being created by, supported by matter.. (You'd have to prove it exists in another realm and know its properties in that realm as well) AND that this consciousness is not inert... AND that this consciousness existed prior to material life.. AND describe the type of environment wherein this consciousness resides outside of the material universe.. AND that this consciousness has the ability to create material life from its non material existence... AND that this particular consciousness is the only of its kind.. AND that this particular non inert non created by or supported by consciousness created the laws of physics that make up the current universe as we know it..AND that periodically this consciousness becomes incarnate..

But that's your own separate belief system..

The video was simply saying that one does not have the ability to state conclusively anything about the realm outside of this one especially as it relates to the concept of "god"..

[Darth]

Check out theramintree's as well, he and qualiasoup have done a colab or two (betting on infinity)

According to his logic any statement about what the object must be is flawed since without looking into the cube the possiblities are endless. This is very ridiculous when you apply this reasoning to the being which created the universe. If we are asking "Who created the process by which everything comes into existence" the possibilities for what is inside the cube is limited not endless. There could be no wooden spoon or ant or egg or anything else in there...The only thing which could be in the cube would be something which is not a product of the physical creation process.

The question would be, "What created everything?" Are the possibilities endless? No....We would have to subtract from the possibilities everything which cannot be proven to exist independent of physical processes. That leaves us with one real thing-Consciousness. Consciousnesss must be in the box.....


Whirling Moat

Ok, so you're arguing for something that's independent of natural processes in that first paragraph, it's supernatural/magic, gotcha.

You argue that all things that can't be proven to exist in a state independent of physical processes, should be discounted, and then go on to argue for the existence of a consciousness. Am I to infer that consciousness HAS been proven to exist independent of physical processes (proof please)? So you're arguing for the existence of a consciousness, which isn't natural, but supernatural?

Also: Why are you discounting thing's that can't be proven (Especially when it can't be proven that this consciousness exists)? It can't be proven to exist, nor can it be proven to not exist, unless it is impossible (triangles with 7 sides and what-have-you).

[Eudaimonia]

Check out theramintree's as well, he and qualiasoup have done a colab or two (betting on infinity)

Will do.. Thank you..

So you're arguing for the existence of a consciousness, which isn't natural, but supernatural?

I love concision.. This is what I think his point is..

[Welsh cake]

Here is a quote taken from 00:52 of the video "Without evidence from the cube itself, we can only ever make valid justifiable statements about what is not inside the cube"

He goes on to say at 01:12 "What if we were talking about a realm of existence independant of universe that like the cube is physically inaccesible to us, would things be different, would we be able to deduce precisely what occupies such a realm.."

According to his logic any statement about what the object must be is flawed since without looking into the cube the possiblities are endless. This is very ridiculous when you apply this reasoning to the being which created the universe.

No, this simple trail of logic and deductive reasoning renders any presupposition of a magical being that created the universe without evidence as a groundless claim and ultimately unknowable.

Replace the cube analogy with say, my clenched fist and I ask you "What am I holding in my hand?", without any evidence you have no basis to assert anything, be it a shiny coin, or nothing at all, but you may infer logic to remove what is impossible for me to be carrying, for example it is impossible for the fictional monster Godzilla to be in my hand hidden from your view.

Like the cube, the point of the thought experiment was to show without evidence the only intellectually honest response you can give about what I am holding onto is "I don't know".

If we are asking "Who created the process by which everything comes into existence" the possibilities for what is inside the cube is limited not endless.

Why a who? Why do you ask "Who" created the process by which reality can come to be and not "What".

There could be no wooden spoon or ant or egg or anything else in there...

You are missing the point of the experiment, wooden spoons, ants or eggs are not logically impossible, they manifest in reality, they actually do exist, we gave them labels and definitions. You have no basis to remove these logically possible items from the list of what might be inside the cube without evidence first.

The question would be, "What created everything?" Are the possibilities endless? No....We would have to subtract from the possibilities everything which cannot be proven to exist independent of physical processes. That leaves us with one real thing-Consciousness. Consciousnesss must be in the box.....

Consciousness without a mind? Okaaay... ~.~

[tackattack]

---

Peace...


This video, with the accent and all..is seriously flawed...

Here is a quote taken from 00:52 of the video "Without evidence from the cube itself, we can only ever make valid justifiable statements about what is not inside the cube"

He goes on to say at 01:12 "What if we were talking about a realm of existence independant of universe that like the cube is physically inaccesible to us, would things be different, would we be able to deduce precisely what occupies such a realm.."

According to his logic any statement about what the object must be is flawed since without looking into the cube the possiblities are endless. This is very ridiculous when you apply this reasoning to the being which created the universe. If we are asking "Who created the process by which everything comes into existence" the possibilities for what is inside the cube is limited not endless. There could be no wooden spoon or ant or egg or anything else in there...The only thing which could be in the cube would be something which is not a product of the physical creation process.

The question would be, "What created everything?" Are the possibilities endless? No....We would have to subtract from the possibilities everything which cannot be proven to exist independent of physical processes. That leaves us with one real thing-Consciousness. Consciousnesss must be in the box.....


Whirling Moat

The question "would we be able to deduce precisely what occupies such a realm.." was followed by "such as a divine being.." and he stated that while we can list countless numbers of beings that could not exist.. We could not list those that do... I'm not sure if you followed what the person was saying.. The analogy stopped at "knowingness" and did not progress into comparing material items in this universe ..

As it stands consciousness is a property of matter..

Otherwise you would need to provide evidence that consciousness exists outside of being created by, supported by matter.. (You'd have to prove it exists in another realm and know its properties in that realm as well) AND that this consciousness is not inert... AND that this consciousness existed prior to material life.. AND describe the type of environment wherein this consciousness resides outside of the material universe.. AND that this consciousness has the ability to create material life from its non material existence... AND that this particular consciousness is the only of its kind.. AND that this particular non inert non created by or supported by consciousness created the laws of physics that make up the current universe as we know it..AND that periodically this consciousness becomes incarnate..

But that's your own separate belief system..

The video was simply saying that one does not have the ability to state conclusively anything about the realm outside of this one especially as it relates to the concept of "god"..

---

I'm not sure your statement is specific enough for my tastes. As it stands consciousness is predominantly a property of matter, but not entirely. It's not nearly as conclusive as you're making it out to seem. There was a very long and recent thread about that.
I think the video was simply saying that one does not have the ability to use logic of evidence conclusively about the realm outside of this one, which is flawed. You can have logical or illogical things outside of this universe, but the author obviously had no interest in the logically possible, yet emperically unevidenced.

[Whirling Moat]

Peace....

The question "would we be able to deduce precisely what occupies such a realm.." was followed by "such as a divine being.." and he stated that while we can list countless numbers of beings that could not exist.. We could not list those that do... I'm not sure if you followed what the person was saying.. The analogy stopped at "knowingness" and did not progress into comparing material items in this universe ..

I followed quite well. The Logic when applied to a Creator would be "What was in the box prior to anything being created?"

You cannot say that the possibilities are endless unless you are speaking of uncreated possibilities. Any object which requires a material process for its make would be excluded. So the objects which would not be excluded are objects which exist independent of material functions.

As it stands consciousness is a property of matter..

No it isn't. Consciousness is said to supervene from the Brain but it is not a material aspect of the Brain, and based on previous discussions you and others have conceded that consciousness clearly survives any detectable activity of the brain.

Otherwise you would need to provide evidence that consciousness exists outside of being created by, supported by matter.. (You'd have to prove it exists in another realm and know its properties in that realm as well) AND that this consciousness is not inert... AND that this consciousness existed prior to material life.. AND describe the type of environment wherein this consciousness resides outside of the material universe.. AND that this consciousness has the ability to create material life from its non material existence... AND that this particular consciousness is the only of its kind.. AND that this particular non inert non created by or supported by consciousness created the laws of physics that make up the current universe as we know it..AND that periodically this consciousness becomes incarnate..

But that's your own separate belief system..

Your argument is comparable to someone suggesting that 100-99=x cannot demonstrate what the value of x is without proof. If the question is what exists when all the things which were created is subtracted from the equaltion? What else would you have? If someone says you would have nothing because everything which exists was created as a result of the creation of the Universe, I would disagree and so would most Cosmologists.. Even if the Creation happened as a result of an unrational event there would still be something to credit. Now if you ask the question "are there things within our experience which seem to exist independent of the material aspects of creation?", the answer would be..Yes...The Mind, meaning, Qualia, aesthetics, all of which are products of Consciousness.

Perhaps this will help...

If there were 200 assorted marbles in a box 50 red, 50 blue, 50 green and 50 black, and 199 of the marbles were removed, all of the red marbles were accounted for, all of the blue and the green, however only 49 of the black marbles were accounted for outside of the box..How many marbles are in the box and what color is it?

If you find yourself asking "Well how do you know what a marble really is? What if one of the marbles wasn't really a marble at all but some alien construct which dissapeared while in the box, What if the Box has the ability to spontaneously generate new marbles??

If you do this..You are having a problem understanding how logic works.


Whirling Moat

[Welsh cake]

I followed quite well. The Logic when applied to a Creator would be "What was in the box prior to anything being created?"

You cannot say that the possibilities are endless unless you are speaking of uncreated possibilities. Any object which requires a material process for its make would be excluded. So the objects which would not be excluded are objects which exist independent of material functions.

...what?

As it stands consciousness is a property of matter..

No it isn't. Consciousness is said to supervene from the Brain but it is not a material aspect of the Brain, and based on previous discussions you and others have conceded that consciousness clearly survives any detectable activity of the brain.

Yes it is. If it weren't, then how would we explain disorders of consciousness? Go read a book on cognitive psychology and cognitive neuroscience sometime.

Even if the Creation happened as a result of an unrational event there would still be something to credit.

Do you mean irrational event? And if so, what the hell are you even talking about?

If there were 200 assorted marbles in a box 50 red, 50 blue, 50 green and 50 black, and 199 of the marbles were removed, all of the red marbles were accounted for, all of the blue and the green, however only 49 of the black marbles were accounted for outside of the box..How many marbles are in the box and what color is it?

If I say 1 black marble is left inside the box do I win? Where are you going with this? >.>

If you find yourself asking "Well how do you know what a marble really is?

A marble (toy); a small spherical toy that varies in size, usually made from glass, clay, steel, or agate.

What if one of the marbles wasn't really a marble at all but some alien construct which dissapeared while in the box, What if the Box has the ability to spontaneously generate new marbles?? If you do this..You are having a problem understanding how logic works.

No, if you start raving like this it demonstrates you don't know what a marble (toy) is, but the thought experiment doesn't hold water because nobody is that fucking stupid to not know what a freaking marble is.

What has ANY of this rambling of yours got to do with logic?

[Darth]

---

Peace....

The question "would we be able to deduce precisely what occupies such a realm.." was followed by "such as a divine being.." and he stated that while we can list countless numbers of beings that could not exist.. We could not list those that do... I'm not sure if you followed what the person was saying.. The analogy stopped at "knowingness" and did not progress into comparing material items in this universe ..

I followed quite well. The Logic when applied to a Creator would be "What was in the box prior to anything being created?"

You cannot say that the possibilities are endless unless you are speaking of uncreated possibilities. Any object which requires a material process for its make would be excluded. So the objects which would not be excluded are objects which exist independent of material functions.

As it stands consciousness is a property of matter..

No it isn't. Consciousness is said to supervene from the Brain but it is not a material aspect of the Brain, and based on previous discussions you and others have conceded that consciousness clearly survives any detectable activity of the brain.

Otherwise you would need to provide evidence that consciousness exists outside of being created by, supported by matter.. (You'd have to prove it exists in another realm and know its properties in that realm as well) AND that this consciousness is not inert... AND that this consciousness existed prior to material life.. AND describe the type of environment wherein this consciousness resides outside of the material universe.. AND that this consciousness has the ability to create material life from its non material existence... AND that this particular consciousness is the only of its kind.. AND that this particular non inert non created by or supported by consciousness created the laws of physics that make up the current universe as we know it..AND that periodically this consciousness becomes incarnate..

But that's your own separate belief system..

Your argument is comparable to someone suggesting that 100-99=x cannot demonstrate what the value of x is without proof. If the question is what exists when all the things which were created is subtracted from the equaltion? What else would you have? If someone says you would have nothing because everything which exists was created as a result of the creation of the Universe, I would disagree and so would most Cosmologists.. Even if the Creation happened as a result of an unrational event there would still be something to credit. Now if you ask the question "are there things within our experience which seem to exist independent of the material aspects of creation?", the answer would be..Yes...The Mind, meaning, Qualia, aesthetics, all of which are products of Consciousness.

---

Prove it. I don't care what a bunch of others have conceded on an internet forum. You, prove it. After that, prove that there is an additional consciousness, one that ISN'T part of a brain. Seems to doesn't cut it. The world seemed flat to many. Quantum mechanics doesn't seem to make any sense. How things seem to a person has no bearing on how things actually are.

Asking a simple mathematical question arbout marbles isn't a good analogy. The box is unseen, we don't even know if it exists, In it, there is one flarble.

You know that, according to me, there is a flarble in this box. But you would be right to ask me, how i know of the existance of the box, how I know of its contents, what the hell a is a flarble?