Roger Penrose is a hack

[Deesse23]

Word games, just like WLC. You gotta look behind this smoke and mirrors. There isnt much, if anything.

[brokenreflector]

"New members must make 30 posts and be a member for 30 days before they are allowed to post external content, such as links, images, or videos.

Note: An exception to the 30/30 requirements is when external content is used within a discussion or with the intention of discussion. For example, a member who has not yet met the 30/30 requirements is allowed to post external content if they are using it as evidence in a discussion, or if it is relevant to the ongoing discussion."

https://atheistforums.org/rules.php

Evidently, BrianSoddingBoru4 https://atheistforums.org/user-4903.html doesn't completely understand the rules that he's been given the privilege of enforcing.

To anyone who is intellectually honest and in possession of a normal level of reading comprehension, the Roger Penrose video was posted with the intention to create a discussion. I was interested in how a group of pseudo-intellectual Internet atheists would respond to an actual genius and scientist who believes there is more than matter and energy. In fact, he's way past that notion. Now, he's pondering how these three aspects of reality interact with each other. One poster has already tried to misrepresent things by saying Penrose must believe the abstract and mental are physically located in the brain. That's not what he believes. Go watch the video. Learn something for once in your life.

The video has been uploaded on YouTube and it's titled "Sir Roger Penrose & William Lane Craig • The Universe: How did it get here & why are we part of it?" At 13:30 the moderator begins to ask Penrose a question and he responds by saying there are three aspects of reality: physical, mind, and abstract. He then begins to describe the mysteries of these three aspects and their relationship with each other. This idea of there being more than matter and energy flies in the face of what many atheists believe, so I expect there to be much butthurtness, lying, and misrepresentation of Penrose's ideas.

Let the games commence.

[Rhizomorph13]

Quite simply we probably wouldn't watch the video unless you pointed out a good reason to and then we would most likely just talk about whatever point you brought up.

So, to your point about there being three aspects I would say, that abstract is neither mind, nor physical but I wouldn't equate it with astral or supernatural.

[brokenreflector]

Quite simply we probably wouldn't watch the video unless you pointed out a good reason to and then we would most likely just talk about whatever point you brought up.

So, to your point about there being three aspects I would say, that abstract is neither mind, nor physical but I wouldn't equate it with astral or supernatural.

You didn't watch the video, did you?

It's like you guys are allergic to learning.

It's not my point. It's Roger Penrose's point.

If there are three aspects: physical, mental, and abstract, then the mental and abstract would be by definition SUPER-natural or transcendental in the sense that they're not of physical reality. Now go watch the video.

[arewethereyet]

"New members must make 30 posts and be a member for 30 days before they are allowed to post external content, such as links, images, or videos.

Note: An exception to the 30/30 requirements is when external content is used within a discussion or with the intention of discussion. For example, a member who has not yet met the 30/30 requirements is allowed to post external content if they are using it as evidence in a discussion, or if it is relevant to the ongoing discussion."

https://atheistforums.org/rules.php

Evidently, BrianSoddingBoru4 https://atheistforums.org/user-4903.html doesn't completely understand the rules that he's been given the privilege of enforcing.

To anyone who is intellectually honest and in possession of a normal level of reading comprehension, the Roger Penrose video was posted with the intention to create a discussion. I was interested in how a group of pseudo-intellectual Internet atheists would respond to an actual genius and scientist who believes there is more than matter and energy. In fact, he's way past that notion. Now, he's pondering how these three aspects of reality interact with each other. One poster has already tried to misrepresent things by saying Penrose must believe the abstract and mental are physically located in the brain. That's not what he believes. Go watch the video. Learn something for once in your life.

The video has been uploaded on YouTube and it's titled "Sir Roger Penrose & William Lane Craig • The Universe: How did it get here & why are we part of it?" At 13:30 the moderator begins to ask Penrose a question and he responds by saying there are three aspects of reality: physical, mind, and abstract. He then begins to describe the mysteries of these three aspects and their relationship with each other. This idea of there being more than matter and energy flies in the face of what many atheists believe, so I expect there to be much butthurtness, lying, and misrepresentation of Penrose's ideas.

Let the games commence.

You are new here.  Mind your manners.

[brokenreflector]

Evidently, BrianSoddingBoru4 https://atheistforums.org/user-4903.html doesn't completely understand the rules that he's been given the privilege of enforcing.

To anyone who is intellectually honest and in possession of a normal level of reading comprehension, the Roger Penrose video was posted with the intention to create a discussion. I was interested in how a group of pseudo-intellectual Internet atheists would respond to an actual genius and scientist who believes there is more than matter and energy. In fact, he's way past that notion. Now, he's pondering how these three aspects of reality interact with each other. One poster has already tried to misrepresent things by saying Penrose must believe the abstract and mental are physically located in the brain. That's not what he believes. Go watch the video. Learn something for once in your life.

The video has been uploaded on YouTube and it's titled "Sir Roger Penrose & William Lane Craig • The Universe: How did it get here & why are we part of it?" At 13:30 the moderator begins to ask Penrose a question and he responds by saying there are three aspects of reality: physical, mind, and abstract. He then begins to describe the mysteries of these three aspects and their relationship with each other. This idea of there being more than matter and energy flies in the face of what many atheists believe, so I expect there to be much butthurtness, lying, and misrepresentation of Penrose's ideas.

Let the games commence.

You are new here.  Mind your manners.

I'm too alpha for that.

[Abaddon_ire]

"New members must make 30 posts and be a member for 30 days before they are allowed to post external content, such as links, images, or videos.

Note: An exception to the 30/30 requirements is when external content is used within a discussion or with the intention of discussion. For example, a member who has not yet met the 30/30 requirements is allowed to post external content if they are using it as evidence in a discussion, or if it is relevant to the ongoing discussion."

https://atheistforums.org/rules.php

Evidently, BrianSoddingBoru4 https://atheistforums.org/user-4903.html doesn't completely understand the rules that he's been given the privilege of enforcing.

To anyone who is intellectually honest and in possession of a normal level of reading comprehension, the Roger Penrose video was posted with the intention to create a discussion. I was interested in how a group of pseudo-intellectual Internet atheists would respond to an actual genius and scientist who believes there is more than matter and energy. In fact, he's way past that notion. Now, he's pondering how these three aspects of reality interact with each other. One poster has already tried to misrepresent things by saying Penrose must believe the abstract and mental are physically located in the brain. That's not what he believes. Go watch the video. Learn something for once in your life.

The video has been uploaded on YouTube and it's titled "Sir Roger Penrose & William Lane Craig • The Universe: How did it get here & why are we part of it?" At 13:30 the moderator begins to ask Penrose a question and he responds by saying there are three aspects of reality: physical, mind, and abstract. He then begins to describe the mysteries of these three aspects and their relationship with each other. This idea of there being more than matter and energy flies in the face of what many atheists believe, so I expect there to be much butthurtness, lying, and misrepresentation of Penrose's ideas.

Let the games commence.

Sigh.

OK kid, I have been around these houses so many times that you would faint in a fit of the vapours.

I am getting on in years, so my patience is wearing thin at this point.

I could not give a flying fuck about the stupid notions that any random tweenie rocks up with as though nobody has seen them before.

Guess what? I have. Everyone here has and we are all of us heartily sick of this BS.

You are claiming a god. Fine. Pony up the evidence for this strange god and I guarantee that everyone here would believe in it. Worship the cunt? Nope.

But somehow, you are unable to do that. Why?

And you can fuck right off with the WLC BS.  Nobody is really that gullible. You are flogging a dead unicorn there. WLC foists horseshit and expects everyone to eat it.

If you have some deity that you can demonstrate, great, bring it. We can discuss that.  If you do not, fuck off. Stop wasting your time and ours.

---

You are new here.  Mind your manners.

I'm too alpha for that.

Sweet FSM. You are an incel.

[brokenreflector]

Evidently, BrianSoddingBoru4 https://atheistforums.org/user-4903.html doesn't completely understand the rules that he's been given the privilege of enforcing.

To anyone who is intellectually honest and in possession of a normal level of reading comprehension, the Roger Penrose video was posted with the intention to create a discussion. I was interested in how a group of pseudo-intellectual Internet atheists would respond to an actual genius and scientist who believes there is more than matter and energy. In fact, he's way past that notion. Now, he's pondering how these three aspects of reality interact with each other. One poster has already tried to misrepresent things by saying Penrose must believe the abstract and mental are physically located in the brain. That's not what he believes. Go watch the video. Learn something for once in your life.

The video has been uploaded on YouTube and it's titled "Sir Roger Penrose & William Lane Craig • The Universe: How did it get here & why are we part of it?" At 13:30 the moderator begins to ask Penrose a question and he responds by saying there are three aspects of reality: physical, mind, and abstract. He then begins to describe the mysteries of these three aspects and their relationship with each other. This idea of there being more than matter and energy flies in the face of what many atheists believe, so I expect there to be much butthurtness, lying, and misrepresentation of Penrose's ideas.

Let the games commence.

Sigh.

OK kid, I have been around these houses so many times that you would faint in a fit of the vapours.

I am getting on in years, so my patience is wearing thin at this point.

I could not give a flying fuck about the stupid notions that any random tweenie rocks up with as though nobody has seen them before.

Guess what? I have. Everyone here has and we are all of us heartily sick of this BS.

You are claiming a god. Fine. Pony up the evidence for this strange god and I guarantee that everyone here would believe in it. Worship the cunt? Nope.

But somehow, you are unable to do that. Why?

And you can fuck right off with the WLC BS.  Nobody is really that gullible. You are flogging a dead unicorn there. WLC foists horseshit and expects everyone to eat it.

If you have some deity that you can demonstrate, great, bring it. We can discuss that.  If you do not, fuck off. Stop wasting your time and ours.

Why are you bringing up WLC and God? I'm talking about Roger Penrose's ideas with regard to the mind, abstract, and physical.

Like I said previously, it's as though you guys are allergic to learning. You have quite the cult going on here and it's a little weird and disturbing.

---

Sweet FSM. You are an incel.

That's something an incel would say.

That's rich though. "Abaddon ire" with 4 Weeks, 2 Days, 23 Hours, 56 Minutes, 15 Seconds of time spent on a dead atheist forum crying about a being that he thinks is imaginary is calling somebody else an incel. Lololo.

[Belacqua]

then the mental and abstract would be by definition SUPER-natural or transcendental in the sense that they're not of physical reality. Now go watch the video.

I don't know about Craig, but as Penrose formulates the Three Worlds (following Popper) the world of commonly held intellect isn't what I'd call supernatural. Maybe transcendental, depending on how you're using it.

So as I understand it, World 1 is the concrete, tangible world. World 2 is mental phenomena, which is largely the internal representation of World 1, plus our personal experiences of emotion, thought, etc. 

World 3 is where it gets tricky. This includes things that are made up by people but exist in some way independent of particular minds. One example Popper gives is that of a symphony. The symphony was written by someone. It is sometimes performed by people or printed on paper. But it has an independent existence in a sort of non-particular mental realm. It continues to exist even if it isn't being played. It isn't equivalent to the scores it's written on. I suppose that as long as there is someone in the world who remembers it, or some creature in the world capable of recreating it from the score or the CD, it continues to exist.

A lot of things are like this. For example Sherlock Holmes. And one of the main points about objects in this world is that while they can't be quantified or measured by science-type objective methods, nonetheless we can say things about them which are true or false. For example, if I said that Sherlock Holmes lives in Peru and drives a taxi, this would be incorrect for the Sherlock Holmes that we know. We know what the "real" Sherlock Holmes is like, so we can recognize a parody or a "reboot," even though he never had a physical existence. Likewise we are able to say objective statements about a symphony, including whether a particular performance is good or bad, although the issue is not a scientific one.

Numbers are also in this category, which is what Penrose is most interested in. 

As far as I can tell, this is Popper's attempt to deal with numbers and other non-physical objects which are perhaps eternal but not limited to individual minds. It is a way to adapt Plato to a non-supernatural view. 

But I may be wrong. And as I say, I don't know Craig's take on all this.

[arewethereyet]

You are new here.  Mind your manners.

I'm too alpha for that.

Oh goody.  An Internet badass.

Show us what you've got big boy.