Human nature is not perfectly good. You can find evil people as well, such as sadists, rapists, etc.Humans do evil things, such as murder other humans and other organisms. If human nature is good, why do they do evil things? — Truth Seeker
Einstein said that there is no end to human stupidity! I hope he is wrong.People absolutely have to provoke one another to see if nuclear warheads will show up. They can't just sit there and act like they have some sense. — frank
I have the same feeling. China may eventually produce more GDP than the USA since it has a larger population. China, however, suffers from problems such as corruption, no freedom of speech, etc., so it will produce less GDP per capita.It seems quite possible to me that China will eclipse the USA as the dominant world hegemon in the near future but that gives me no joy. — Wayfarer
Mental phenomena, to me, are divided into strong and weak emergence as well. The example of weak emergence is perception, and the example of strong emergence is creating an idea.This argument works from the perspective of Physics. But, in Aristotle's Meta-Physics, he introduces the non-physical notions of Potentiality & Actuality*1, Form & Matter, Essence & Substance. Hence, the Function of a System is non-physical, even though the parts are material items. It's a mathematical input/output relationship that you can't see, but can infer as purpose or meaning. — Gnomon
I already defined good in my post. Evil is the opposite.How do you define good and evil? — Truth Seeker
It is very sad to see that you leave your thread. I have to say that you are a very patient philosopher and scientist. Oh, man, this thread is so long! Thanks for your contribution.I want to thank everyone who responded to this thread. It lasted 8 years, and this is my last post. Thanks again. — Sam26
Where did you take that from?Because non-physical entities do not have spatial locations... — Srap Tasmaner
When it comes to the conscious mind, preconsciousness is a term that refers to the accumulation of data in the conscious mind. If the data is proper, then a chain of thought is generated by the conscious mind. The conscious mind has an important duty: processing the delivered data very fast. The conscious mind has a very limited memory; this memory is registered for important topics only. But if you read what I wrote once more carefully, you will then realize that the conscious mind cannot do its job without a perfect intervention of the subconscious mind. You work on a topic given the limited related data, finish the job by creating a new idea, and then the conscious mind is done and stays silent. That is what you are, the conscious mind. Like it or not, without the subconscious mind, you can do very limiting things. There would be no long stream of thoughts, no long stream of words, no communication, etc. The subconscious mind is huge. It has access to all the ideas generated by the conscious mind. It also knows what kind of data might be relevant when it comes to processing the data, which might lead to the creation of a new idea. I think you at least face the subconscious mind when you are on the drug! What do you expect to find? Wonder!That does not seem possible. The subconscious is not thought to be accessible. The pre-conscious, however, is. If that's all you meant, then I agree, but the chances that you can access anything you've not, at some stage, consciously come into contact with, is next to zero. I'm open, but no one's ever been able to show that they've gained information they couldn't have had previously on psychedelics. Despite claims of such. — AmadeusD
That is a tricky business since you are doomed if you don't believe in the correct God!Obviously, I am sure that many people in philosophy circles would scorn the process superstition. For those who pray, it is to whichever God one believes in but prayer is central to the Judaeo-Christian tradition. — Jack Cummins
Consciousness, to me, is the ability of the mind to experience, so we cannot measure it. We cannot measure consciousness if it is used as a synonym of experience as well.I think we know consciousness is there for a similar reason. — Patterner
Sure. It is the basic assumption of physicalism that an electron, for example, doesn't experience.Consciousness isn't explained by the physical properties of the universe. — Patterner
The mind, although it is present, is a light substance, so we cannot detect it, at least at the current stage of scientific development.Something we can't detect with all our sciences is there. — Patterner
And to which God should one pray?This is so different from the idea of a personal relationship with God which is held by many religious believers. The idea of prayer only makes sense from that perspective. — Jack Cummins
We are dealing with an anomaly, so-called experience, within physicalism. I agree that we need to discard physicalism/materialism. We at least need two different substances, the so-called experiencer and the object of experience, if you want to describe the phenomenon of experience coherently.I'm suggesting we need a new version of science. All our sciences use the physical to explore the physical. — Patterner
I don't understand why they are incompatible. I can choose to always do right, given the fact that there are at least two right options available to choose from; otherwise, no decision is involved, since I have only one choice. At the same time, I can choose to do wrong. I am a free agent in the end.Freedom of indifference and freedom for excellence are incompatible theories. — Bob Ross
That is a very odd position, but granting it, then why did God create creatures with the ability to do contrary?whereas if one accepts freedom of indifference, then God is and is the only possibly perfectly unfree being because He cannot will what is bad (or, depending on the view, He may not be able to do otherwise whatsoever). — Bob Ross
You are introducing unnecessary substances.Yes, but the goal is to explain the relevant data without multiplying entities without necessity; not come up with the simplest answer. — Bob Ross
No, God can be simple and yet experience everything. He just needs to be omnipresent.A conscious being, as I understand it, has a qualitative experience—qualia--such that there is something to be them experiencing the world. In a literal sense, this would require a being with complexity: with parts to facilitate a mediated interpretation of reality. — Bob Ross
We perceive a substance when we experience something. The same applies to God, so no regress is involved.Because His experience of His experience is an experience. So if He has to experience His experiences, then He would also have to experience His experience of His experience and so on. — Bob Ross
Really? And you think that Jesus is made in your mind, too?I could tlel you that Jesus spoke to me in a dream and told me 9/11 would happen a week before it did. Big whoopee. — AmadeusD
I would say that you get access to the content of the subconscious mind when you are on a drug.You do have answers to your questions. That's logically deducible from the facts at hand: You are the only person around. You answer your own questions. Presto! — AmadeusD
Thinking is about working with ideas to create new ideas. Thinking, therefore, is a conscious activity. Therefore, the subconscious mind is conscious as well if it can create a new idea since it has to think.So, since the subconscious mind is not conscious (by definition) consciousness is not required for the creation of ideas? — wonderer1