Atheistic Dogma- Scientific Fundamentalism

[sswhateverlove]

Well for starters I think you need to learn how to post links, because that one doesn't work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYH_nFwMXRM

As stated there are strong overtones of Deepak Chopra which is an immediate warning klaxon.

Chopra is not in my source material. I have never read, watched or listened to anything by Chopra, because I do not see him as a respected scientist. If the information is similar, there are probably other reasons for that, such as he is following the same scientific sources and making similar connections.

[Mister Agenda]

I challenge that we could pile all of those computer parts on the floor (matter) and nothing interesting would happen. However, putting the pieces together in a particular order and loading a program that gives it rules to go by, allows it to do amazing things. How is this not relevant to our existence? How is this not relevant to intelligent design?

Because nothing else in the universe that we've detected so far is made the way humans make things. How we make things is not generalizable to everything else.

[JesusHChrist]

sswhateverlove -- Speaking of Chopra, I wonder what you think of the following quote:

"The invisible belongs to the barrier of fulfillment"

[Surgenator]

Pretty much all I know about dark matter and dark energy, I've learned from watching Neil Degrasse Tyson documentaries. The Ted Talk I posted had a piece at the end where the speaker was talking about researching patterned microwaves (actually sound waves)

No they are microwaves not sound waves, it's called the cosmic [b]microwave[\b] background for a reason. The sound waves they were talking about occured when the universe was still hot and dense that you get sound waves (coherent vibrations of matter).

were detected on earth, and were assessed to be related to dark matter creating a invisible web-like scaffolding throughout the universe that has shaped all matter.

No it hasn't shaped all matter. It just shape the arrangements of galaxies with respect with each other. It DOES NOT shape electrons, molecules, cells, organs, planets, nor stars.

She explores how dark matter would effect the way that normal matter evolves over time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYH_nFwMXRM

I don't think I can explain my opinion on the term of "consciousness" any better than the way I did in my last post. Is there something in particular you do not understand?

That is unfortunate because your last post was you picking different mutually-exclusive views of QM. And some clear misunderstanding of the science.

[Mister Agenda]

How about that there is no possibility there is intelligence to the design of reality?

Or that there is no possibility there is an intelligent influence interacting with our reality?

Seems pretty dogmatic to me.

Again, for the umpteenth time, why don't you go find those people and argue with them? We are not those people.

Amendment: I see this thread was started several days ago and I missed it. I presume the bit about the dogmatism of our position has been resolved by now.

[The Grand Nudger]

In my mind, simply from a "biological" perspective, the consciousness involves a dynamic dance between the sense receptors, the CNS, endocrine system, immune system, cardiovascular system the cells within the body that have my DNA, as well as the cells that don't (they say those 'other' cells outnumber mine 10to1 by the way).

I can isolate a couple of those variables, if by "the cells that don't" you're referencing bacteria- if they were contributing to your consciousness in the manner you seem to be suggesting we ought to be able to detect some effect on consciousness everytime a person takes antibiotics. Similarly, malfunctioning immune systems ought to express themselves as malfunctioning consciousness. In the hardest possible interpretation, a reduction of either your bacterial colonization or immune system would lead directly (no intermediary steps or systems required) to a reduction in consciousness. I'm not sure that any of these possibilities are a very accurate description of observations that we have made regarding consciousness.

Further, I see the dynamic dance including the genome and changes in gene expression which is also engaged in a dynamic dance with the vibrational frequencies of everything in my environment.

Define "vibrational frequencies" and precisely how they interact with your genome?

Though these processes are not normally considered "conscious" activities (they are obviously mostly done "unconsciously"), they are representative of the operational processes that are required to keep the organism functioning with our level of conscious awareness (hence, being "alive"=having conscious personal awareness).

Then plants, fungi, and bacteria aren't alive? Also, I think that the at least -some- service and support systems underlying consciousness or it's apparatus (or whatever) can probably be removed for the purposes of discussion. If I cut off your arm (which, in it's way, supports your meatcase and shovels the food into your gob that fuels your brain) you're still going to be capable of consciousness, right?

Is the lighter conscious? In the sense that it has a personal awareness reality tunnel? I don't know (I honestly don't know for sure if you have one either), but I would speculate no (regarding the lighter).

So, why not, do you reckon? Particularly why is the lighter not conscious while "everything" as some categorical whole -is-?

Is it still a part of the larger consciousness story (the first perspective as I discussed)? I would speculate yes. In the sense that it is one of the influential environmental feedback responses that results in adjustments to the dynamic dance of your personal awareness producing "biological systems", it is as intrinsically part of your personal awareness experience as your neurons or the bacteria in your gut. Additionally, I venture to guess that every action you engage in that influences your environment is also providing feedback responses that are shaping all else that is to be experienced within your reality tunnel by you or other personal awarenesses sharing it.

Part of a story (that I may be telling myself) -about- consciousness and part of consciousness probably aren't precisely the same things, eh? As in, while I may be having a conscious experience regarding a lighter, the lighter is not in any way producing that experience. But I think I'll be able to address this better after a couple of the questions above have been hashed out.

Unique experiences are had, but, from this perspective, everything is just a small piece of a larger consciousnesses picture that I assume to be much bigger than the restrictive labels and boundaries that have been put on it with our current language.

You know what they say about assumptions?

[Mister Agenda]

All of this I personally deem worthy of considering it a variable.

I suppose it's worthy of wondering whether it's a variable. Without some evidence that it has any effect at all on our genomes, considering it a variable is premature.

---

Thought experiment- We're in the "Matrix". We're doing experiments and forming opinions based on the outcomes. Would our conclusions be considered observations of subjective or objective reality?

If we're in a Matrix, it is objectively real. It is a thing, both to us and the programmer.

Is the fact that it supposedly makes up a majority of all that is (96%) not enough to assume that is should be considered a variable?

Only if it can directly affect our genomess.

Seems sort of naive.

Seems like the null hypothesis still holds.

---

"Objective reality is how things really are."

So, you think that while in the Matrix we are capable of perceiving things as they "really are"?

Montague defined objective reality as that which does not require our participation for its existence

---

I apologize if you feel I was misrepresenting you. Because I said you seem like you want to hate me for presenting that question? Is that misrepresenting? When I first mentioned it, you responded it's

"making me not want to be nice to you"

and twice you said you would end the conversation if I wanted to discuss in that direction.

There's a bit of a gap between someone not wanting to engage with you because they don't think it's productive, and hating you. Stimbo doesn't even hate the people he bans.

Maybe assuming hatred based on you stating you don't want to be nice to me was a stretch, but really was it? It confused me, that's all... Like Whaaa... What did I say?

I can't speak for Stimbo, but my guess would be the hatred thing. I would certainly be offended if you accused me of hating you.

---

I do not agree, however that it's pointless to wonder.

Of course it isn't pointless to wonder. It's pointless to assert, though. Wondering could lead you to an idea of how DM could interact with genomes, and that could lead to an experiment that might falsify or support it. Wondering is fine. Concluding is a bit premature, in principle, the null hypothesis should hold until it is overcome by evidence.

---

Possibly. Like I said, I recognize my personal experiences (through "spiritual-type practices") have played a part in my pursuits. I'm not going to deny that.

But I don't think that negates what I see. My assumption would be that if life operates in such a way that it is similar to something that (in it's simplest forms) intelligent life (humans) has created here, than "intelligence" (or consciousness, I tend to think of it) could be actively involved with the design and operations of life as we know it.

As far as my statement that I could not describe what the intelligence or consciousness is, that would be just guessing. Perhaps some sort of group/shared consciousness, or I don't know... I can't even say I can speculate because I think it's so beyond current understanding or words to describe. Maybe someday.

Would it be accurate to describe your position as a strong suspicion that we're in a simulated reality?

[Mister Agenda]

I ran across these recently, and I think they may be helpful, since most of the atheists around here are rationalists:

http://lesswrong.com/lw/3k/how_to_not_lose_an_argument/

http://yudkowsky.net/rational/virtues

[Chas]

So cutting through the gish-gallop we can see you don't have the foggiest idea what is meant by the term 'Dark Matter' and freely admit you have no education in physics that would give you the framework to put the concepts of 'Dark Matter' or 'Dark Energy' into their proper positions.
You then launch into an aimless ramble on the subject of 'consciousness' with strong overtones of Deepak Chopra...
I don't suppose you can actually describe what you understand by the term 'consciousness' and get the strong impression that you've gotten involved in some 'New-Age' group that has essentially bamboozled you.

Pretty much all I know about dark matter and dark energy, I've learned from watching Neil Degrasse Tyson documentaries. The Ted Talk I posted had a piece at the end where the speaker was talking about researching patterned microwaves (actually sound waves) were detected on earth, and were assessed to be related to dark matter creating a invisible web-like scaffolding throughout the universe that has shaped all matter. She explores how dark matter would effect the way that normal matter evolves over time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYH_nFwMXRM

I don't think I can explain my opinion on the term of "consciousness" any better than the way I did in my last post. Is there something in particular you do not understand?

I'm have not been bamboozled. I've been studying consciousness from every angle I possibly could for quite a many years. This is what I've gathered from my personal observations, experience and research. You can take it or leave it.

In all honesty, this thread was about trying to get you all to share with me about what in science sways your opinion. I want to know about your perspectives on consciousness and the nature of existence. If you're not totally convinced (as I've been assured over and over is a strawman assumption) please share with me, what are you thoughts on the science of consciousness, astrophysics, quantum physics, epigenetics? Do you find it as fascinating as I do? What does it make you think about the nature of reality?

I shared. Now it's your turn.

You have demonstrated a lack of understanding of physics, evolution, astronomy, and genetics while claiming some connection among things that you can't explain.

It appears to be based on your feelings and thus bears an uncanny resemblance to new-age woo.

[Simon Moon]

In all honesty, this thread was about trying to get you all to share with me about what in science sways your opinion. I want to know about your perspectives on consciousness and the nature of existence. If you're not totally convinced (as I've been assured over and over is a strawman assumption) please share with me, what are you thoughts on the science of consciousness, astrophysics, quantum physics, epigenetics? Do you find it as fascinating as I do? What does it make you think about the nature of reality?

I shared. Now it's your turn.

What has swayed me in the sciences of consciousness, astrophysics, quantum physics, epigenetics is that none of these fields have uncovered any evidence that would point to the existence of a deity (higher power, God, gods, etc). And therefore, I have no justification to believe one exists.

All the stuff you have brought up, while interesting to conjecture, is nothing more than that, conjecture. Until there is some demonstrable evidence to back it up, what is the justification to believe it is true?