Its interesting how you can post walls upon walls of text without actually addressing most of the points. Then you go ahead and repost the points that were refuted in the previous post.
Can you please describe how consciousness can be anything other than phenomenological? With all your blabber about gaps in knowledge and your argument from imagination, you should be able to give a logically consistent view of how a phenomenon, the identifying features of which are its space-time bound actions, can be independent of space-time.
It is ruled out - again - because it is self-refuting. Look at the words you used to describe the concept - this thing is "using" and to "have". All active verbs which indicate that the decisions of this consciousness would be bound by space-time.
Try to explain the concept of independence of consciousness from spacetime without relying on concepts which couldn't possibly be.
That's a long way to go simply to change your tune. So now, instead of this spiritual reality being independent of space-time, it is simply dependent on a different kind of space-time?
I agree that within a context of space-time, albeit a different one from what we know, it is possible for consciousness to emerge. But it still wouldn't be inherent to that framework any more that consciousness of this framework is to this one.
(February 17, 2012 at 3:05 pm)Abracadabra Wrote: Apparently you're aware of your very own mistakes but can't see them.
"Our knowledge of Consciousness?"
What exactly does that entail? It necessarily entails our very limited experience and observation of a human brain and how we define 'consciousness' based on that very limited model.
For all we know that state of consciousness could be a very limited restricted type of consciousness with respect to what's actually possible in reality. Moreover, you can't even be sure if the physical brain itself is what is actually having this experience of consciousness. In fact, that's at the very heart of my questions. And it's a question that has not yet been answered, nor do I have any reason to believe that it ever could be answered scientifically. If that is indeed the case, then science could never rule out the possibility that something else is actually experiencing this phenomenon.
Can you please describe how consciousness can be anything other than phenomenological? With all your blabber about gaps in knowledge and your argument from imagination, you should be able to give a logically consistent view of how a phenomenon, the identifying features of which are its space-time bound actions, can be independent of space-time.
(February 17, 2012 at 3:05 pm)Abracadabra Wrote: In that, that's precisely the hypothesis being proposed by the Eastern Mystics. That something else is actually using this spatio-temporal framework to have this experience.
So you haven't ruled-out the Eastern Mystical view of spirit at all. All you've done is shown a complete ignorance of what the mystical philosophy is even suggesting.
It is ruled out - again - because it is self-refuting. Look at the words you used to describe the concept - this thing is "using" and to "have". All active verbs which indicate that the decisions of this consciousness would be bound by space-time.
Try to explain the concept of independence of consciousness from spacetime without relying on concepts which couldn't possibly be.
(February 17, 2012 at 3:05 pm)Abracadabra Wrote: Sure, I've already conceded to that as being reasonable.
What I am not accepting is your demand that the spacetime fabric in which we apparent live is the be-all and end-all of every possible spatio-temporal framework.
In fact, I have strong scientific reasons for believing that our physical universe may actually be a very limited and small part of a much larger framework that may have totally different spatio-temporal characteristics.
In our limited knowledge of spacetime we can't even be sure if 'time' exists as we perceive it to be. So to even speak of a temporal framework is to speak of something that we truly have no understanding of at all in terms of what's possible in reality. For all we know there could be no past and future at all but rather all that exists is some sort of incomprehensible "now" that is capable of generating an illusion of past and future.
This isn't just weird speculation. This actually falls out of General Relativity. General Relativity demands that there can be no absolute 'now' for all observers. From that it necessarily follows that everyone's 'relative now' must simultaneously exist in a sense. And this leads serious physicists to hypothesize that the "true nature of time" may be far different from how we perceive it and believe to experience it.
The same thing is true of the "fabric" of space itself. In the quantum world (the underlying substrate of spacetime) the very notion of space itself may be totally different.
In fact, I personally believe that in the quantum world concepts like "time" and "space" are totally separate and independent phenomenon. It is actually when they become dependent upon each other that this gives rise to a seeming 'fabric' of spacetime. A melding together of space and time in a way that is co-dependent.
And I'm not the only one who hypothesizes this. In fact, if I claimed to be the owner of this hypothesis I'm quite sure that people could readily point to books by other scientists who have already proposed the same idea.
In fact, Igor Novikov is certainly one high-profile physicists who does indeed propose these types of hypothesis. Not to imply that I agree with everything that Igor Novikov possesses. But I'm just saying that this is being entertained by various scientists and cosmologists.
So for you to say that you can 'rule-out' notions of spirit based on your very limited meaning of a spatio-temporal fabric is totally unwarranted because all you are doing is demanding that everyone accept your limited views of what spatio-temporal even means.
That's a long way to go simply to change your tune. So now, instead of this spiritual reality being independent of space-time, it is simply dependent on a different kind of space-time?
I agree that within a context of space-time, albeit a different one from what we know, it is possible for consciousness to emerge. But it still wouldn't be inherent to that framework any more that consciousness of this framework is to this one.
