Does it make sense to speak of "Universal Consciousness" or "Universal Intell...
May 20, 2014 at 10:55 pm
(This post was last modified: May 20, 2014 at 11:07 pm by Rampant.A.I..)
(May 20, 2014 at 11:32 am)Chas Wrote:(May 20, 2014 at 11:12 am)ChadWooters Wrote: "I agree that by the standards of any other area of science, psi - that is ESP, remote viewing, all those things - is proven. That begs the question, do we need higher standards of evidence when we study the paranormal?" Dr. Richard Wiseman, noted skeptic.
In other words, no matter how solid the proof, he will demand more because it challenges his belief about how the world should work. It just goes to show, Chas, that your commitment to science is just an argument of convenience. You're antiscience when it suits you.
You did not source your quote. You're not very good at this, are you.
He follows that statement, according to this blog, with:
Quote:According to this dailymail article, skeptic Richard Wiseman argues:
"I agree that by the standards of any other area of science that remote viewing is proven,
but begs the question: do we need higher standards of evidence when we study the paranormal? I think we do.
If I said that there is a red car outside my house, you would probably believe me.
But if I said that a UFO had just landed, you'd probably want a lot more evidence.
Because remote viewing is such an outlandish claim that will revolutionise the world,
we need overwhelming evidence before we draw any conclusions. Right now we don't have that evidence."
So, his opinion is not based on evidence. He has no proof, he cites no proof. THAT IS NOT SCIENCE.
Chad, stop being such a such a Chad.
(May 20, 2014 at 9:43 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: The one question materialists never answer is this: "What does consciousness actually do?"
Probably because your question makes no sense.
Consciousness is an evolved mechanism of problem solving for survival.
Contrary to your holy book, it is shown to exist in animals, possibly to a greater extent than previously thought.
Or in your case, the ability to Google and demand other people "prove the worldview" you've decided they have, when the most accurate term for the worldview of most here would be "abullshitist," because there's simply no way to prove the wild metaphysical claims about the world you keep repeating without evidence, while demanding proof from everyone else for their worldview, while bouncing back and forth between monism, dualism and pluralism whenever it supports whatever crap you're spouting at a given time.
