Ontological Disproof of God

[emjay]

Well done negatio, looks like you've got it For what it's worth I do understand how hard it is for you, or for anyone who is not computer literate, to not only do this stuff but also comprehend and retain it. It's the same with some of my family members, where it's completely understandable but still frustrating to teach because since they do not use computers enough for any rules of thumb or core principles to be learned, each time they use it it's like using it anew for the first time. But that's the same for anybody in a field they're not immersed in. Anyway, you seem to be getting immersed, so hopefully some of this stuff will stick long term and you'll start to learn context and rules of thumb to rely on. You've already done much better than some of my family... of similar age... would have done in the same space of time; who probably would not have got as far as joining (or wanting to join) a forum, let alone regularly posting on one, so well done

Yes, emjay, thank you !  I was thinking about you and I am really impressed with the facts that you are massively computer code literate and kind and energetic enough to write extensive explanation of =.
Further very impressive is, for a person who has never set foot in a college, you speak like a PhD physiologist regarding the function of cerebrocellular structures and brain neurochemical processes which theoretically underlie consciousness !  Damn.

No worries... I like explaining things but I perhaps suffer from similar problems as you in keeping those explanations concise. Ie I can be quite verbose too but the aim is always to be concise, but it's a hard aim to reach much of the time...so I have my fair share of walls of text on this site as well For instance in a forum game I play, Mafia, I once had the signal... er... 'honour' of creating 'the longest Mafia OP in history'... that is the post explaining the rules of the game. It read as much, or even more, like a legal contract, than your OP And it suffered from the same tl;dr problem for some people, and thus rules were still not understood. So exhaustiveness is no guarantee of understanding. And now I'm due to run another game soon and am struggling writing the OP... wanting it to be concise rather than exhaustive but having trouble working that out... working out the right level of density as it were, that only tells people what they need to know and no more. The rest they can just ask or trust the mod but it is hard to fight the urge to explain it all. Anyway, as to the equals post, I think that was pretty concise... cos I did leave stuff out that you don't need to know right now.

As to neuroscience, that, and psychology, is just my long term interest but I have no formal education in it (well, a little, in psychology). Basically I have a UK college education (college and university seem to be pretty much synonymous in the USA, but in the UK, college is much lower than university... so I have set foot in a college, but not a university ), mainly in computing.