Scientists declare consciousness not exclusive to humans

[Marblehead]

Marblehead said:

Well, the plantation owner and the slave who cuts the grass are of the same species; man and chimp are different species. Pretty big difference.

 

 

 

You said:

the specie difference you see is based on arbitrary, biased and unjust criteria. the establishment of this method of differentiation had no input from chimps. walking on two legs and use of language may be significant to you but not to chimps. are these capabilities not excuses for the practice of discrimination against chimps?

 

 

 

Marblehead responds:

You sidetracked the discussion. I am not descriminating, it is you who is trying to descriminate because you are of the belief that humans were created in the image of some mythological creature and the chimps are lesser living beings.

 

Again, language and upright walking is what allowed what are now humans to evolve from the ape to the human (amongst other factors such as eating meat).

[Marblehead]

Marblehead said:

That would play a part in it, yes, but it's not the only reason and difference.

 

 

 

You said:

are your reasons self-serving? just because there are reasons for the practice of racism don’t mean they are right. in this case, it is not another human that is being discriminated against. it is another animal.

 

 

 

Marblehead responds:

Nothing of this discussion or any of the concepts within are self-serving for me.

 

Why the fuck did you decide to talk about racism? It has absolutely nothing to do with this conversation and you will "NOT" put that label on me.

 

Apes and humans are not different races, they are different species. Where was your head during science and civics classes?

 

And BTW, it is you who is descriminating between ape and man, not I. I am pointing out the similarities.

[Marblehead]

Marblehead said:

Well, it seems that we two apes are already having a discussion. I tried the Christian Creation myth and it didn't work for me. And during my searching years I found none of the myths of all the various religions to hold any value.

 

 

 

You said:

but you found the myths of science and you embraced them hook, line and sinker.

 

 

 

Marblehead responds:

Your head is still in a dark place. Science is based on fact; religions are based on superstitions and myths. Don't get yourself confused because you will end up looking like a confused person.

[Marblehead]

Marblehead said:

But sure, I am always open for a discussion with another ape. We apes with the capacity for language do a pretty good job at discussion our thoughts and opinions with our fellow apes.

 

 

 

You said:

i am not another ape just as you are not another christian. what happened to freedom of religion? doesn’t each have the right to choose his faith? you choose to be an ape just as another choose to be a creature of god. proselytism, which is the act to convert others to your belief, serves to garner support for an ideology. truth requires no support.

 

 

 

Marblehead responds:

Silly. Making illogical associations.

 

Okay. You are not an ape. You are the creation of some omnipotent who does magic.

 

No, I am not a Christian. I thought you already knew that. It should have been a given.

 

Yes, we each have the right to believe anything we wish to believe.

 

But you are wrong: Truth does require support. Lies don't require support; only dogmatic reguritations.

 

Note: Too bad you decided that you needed to take this discussion into the religious field. I really do not enjoy speaking negatively about peoples' religion.

[Marblehead]

Marblehead said:

So sure, offer you theory but please!, please!, please! do not tell me that man was transported here from some other planet in a flying saucer.

 

 

 

You said:

the story of man as told by science is fantastic enough even if we remove that part about an alien with superpowers from planet krypton.

 

i can’t show you my theory until you can put yours aside, suspend your belief in science, and take an unbiased look at what i have to show you. there is no room for two theories in one mind. only one operating system can run a computer at a time.

 

get it?

 

 

 

Marblehead responds:

Indeed, there is no room for things in the mind of a person who has already discarded those things as being false.

 

So I guess you will have to wait until after hell has frozen over before you can present to me your myths and superstitions.

 

Yep, I got it.

[silent thunder]

Understanding and Awareness seem to relate as a direct proportional ratio.

If you have amoeba awareness, you will have an amoeba level understanding/experience of reality.

If you have a dog awareness...

Human...

Tree...

 

For me it comes down to fields of energy.

Fields of awareness.
Expand the field man.

 

(let me take a monster drag of some digital saturday morning sublimation..)

yea... you gotta expand your awareness....

 

ohm baby ohm

[narveen]

Your head is still in a dark place. Science is based on fact; religions are based on superstitions and myths. Don't get yourself confused because you will end up looking like a confused person.

 

there are two branches of science: one based on observation of phenomena and the other based on speculation of possibilities. both branches of science form conclusions about the nature of reality.

 

for example, newton observed a falling apple and concluded that it was due to gravity (two bodies attracting each other). you believe newton and accept his conclusion as a fact along with everybody else (except me). i don’t accept newton’s explanation at all because it is a ludricrous conclusion. apple attracted by the earth? give me a break.

 

my head would be in a very dark place if i swallowed all the myths in the science book. i had to say it was gravity just to pass the tests in school.

[Marblehead]

You have spoke of the Scientists and the Theorists.. Science is the study of what is; the Theorist studies what might be.

 

So you don't believe in gravity or that the Earth is round. That's okay.

[Apech]

there are two branches of science: one based on observation of phenomena and the other based on speculation of possibilities. both branches of science form conclusions about the nature of reality.

 

for example, newton observed a falling apple and concluded that it was due to gravity (two bodies attracting each other). you believe newton and accept his conclusion as a fact along with everybody else (except me). i don’t accept newton’s explanation at all because it is a ludricrous conclusion. apple attracted by the earth? give me a break.

 

my head would be in a very dark place if i swallowed all the myths in the science book. i had to say it was gravity just to pass the tests in school.

 

 

Why does the apple fall to the ground then?

[Stosh]

Heck! Why stop there ?

The earth is just as attracted to the apple,

so it tries to fall to the apple !

You can wobble the planet doing jumping jacks!

And when you get in your car to drive to work,

You distort spacetime and alter your mass!

Edited July 3, 2013 by Stosh

[narveen]

You have spoke of the Scientists and the Theorists.. Science is the study of what is; the Theorist studies what might be.

 

let me get us on the same page here.

 

the first kind of scientists form conclusions and use them to develop technology in the fields of applied science such as engineering and medicine. stuff you can sink your teeth in to build a better life.

 

then, there are the other kind of scientists (which you call theorists) who form conclusions and use them to shape the way we see ourselves and the world we live in . stuff you sink your mind into and get your head in a dark place. you don't think einstein, darwin and stephen hawkins qualify as scientists?

 

So you don't believe in gravity or that the Earth is round. That's okay.

 

i do believe in gravity when i need that concept to function as an engineer designing roads, bridges and rocket engines. but its not ok to harbor the myth that apples and people are actually attracted by the earth to prevent everything from floating away

 

i do believe in a round earth when i need to chart a course to sail or fly from miami to shanghai. but it is not ok to harbor the myth that i am living on a ball spinning in the universe.

Edited July 4, 2013 by narveen

[narveen]

Why does the apple fall to the ground then?

 

who knows? why fudge an answer? this is the same thing i tell to a jehovah witness when i am asked who created the universe. science or religion, it's the same stuff: different ways of spinning myths to keep our heads in a dark place.

[narveen]

Heck! Why stop there ?

The earth is just as attracted to the apple,

so it tries to fall to the apple !

You can wobble the planet doing jumping jacks!

And when you get in your car to drive to work,

You distort spacetime and alter your mass!

 

get serious, man. nothing is attracting anything.

 

life is amazing when you drop all beliefs scientific or spiritual.

other animals hold no beliefs and its not because they can't think and grasp concepts.

animals use concepts that naturally disappear when not needed.

 

for example, a cheetah lazes in a state of blissful nothingness on a bough of tree. it spots a deer and instantly the concept of space and timing materializes, like the radar screen of an F16 flashing on, as it dashes off to intercept its prey in the same fashion the fighter jet acquires its target.

 

for man, there is the greed of today and the fear of tomorrow that freeze the concept of time and space like a radar screen that cannot be turned off. it never goes away. and he incessantly fortifies his space-time prison with evermore myriad sub-concepts that he proudly wear as knowledge of his world. talk about a dark place.

Edited July 4, 2013 by narveen

[Marblehead]

you don't think einstein, darwin and stephen hawkins qualify as scientists?

Perfect example. Einstein and Darwin were scientists. Hawkins is a theorist.

 

i do believe in gravity when i need that concept to function as an engineer designing roads, bridges and rocket engines. but its not ok to harbor the myth that apples and people are actually attracted by the earth to prevent everything from floating away

 

i do believe in a round earth when i need to chart a course to sail or fly from miami to shanghai. but it is not ok to harbor the myth that i am living on a ball spinning in the universe.

Okay, so you don't spend your entire day thinking about gravity and the round earth. Neither do I. But they are facts. They must not be ignored in our planning of things that will be effected by them.

[Stosh]

get serious, man. nothing is attracting anything. life is amazing when you drop all beliefs scientific or spiritual.other animals hold no beliefs and its not because they can't think and grasp concepts.animals use concepts that naturally disappear when not needed. for example, a cheetah lazes in a state of blissful nothingness on a bough of tree. it spots a deer and instantly the concept of space and timing materializes, like the radar screen of an F16 flashing on, as it dashes off to intercept its prey in the same fashion the fighter jet acquires its target. for man, there is the greed of today and the fear of tomorrow that freeze the concept of time and space like a radar screen that cannot be turned off. it never goes away. and he incessantly fortifies his space-time prison with evermore myriad sub-concepts that he proudly wear as knowledge of his world. talk about a dark place.

yes life , the universe all is amazing .

[Stosh]

I was serious, even though I was playing too.

You seem to be making the argument that concepts which are not being entertained,, do no have reality and therefore the phenomenon itself isn't true.

Is that right?

[Marblehead]

Perfect example. Einstein and Darwin were scientists. Hawkins is a theorist.

Wait a minute! Let's look at this again.

 

Darwin was a Scientist and a Theorist. Hawkins is a Theorist, Einstein was a Theorists.

 

Yeah, I feel better with that.

[Stosh]

I would have described Darwin the complete package of Scientist, Einstein a mathematician and Hawkins an 'imagineer'. Does it make a difference? In the long run I figure it comes down to emphasis rather than mindset.

[narveen]

yes life , the universe all is amazing .

 

you're not getting it, man.

there is no universe.

dogfight's over. shut off that radar.

[narveen]

I was serious, even though I was playing too. You seem to be making the argument that concepts which are not being entertained,, do no have reality and therefore the phenomenon itself isn't true. Is that right?

 

that's right but let me qualify that.

let's say, in a fit of depression, you jump off a building and splatter on the sidewalk,

is that phenomenon true to you while you are falling?

is that phenomenon true to those on the sidewalk looking at your mess?

none of that is true but they are damn real.

 

now, we come to the question of what is truth and what is reality.

are you up to it? this level of inquiry, i mean.

no fudging.

[steve]

Some Science

I wonder how long it will take for an open acknowledgement that consciousness does not stop at individual bags of skin and exoskeleton? Consciousness, awareness, whatever you want to call it, is non local. There are levels of organization, communication, and perception that are too foreign and subtle to us to be recognizable at both larger and smaller scales (community, ecosystem, planet, cell, organ system), not just from one individual organism to the next. Our verbal and sensory sarcophagus are very difficult to transcend but it can be done.

[Stosh]

that's right but let me qualify that.let's say, in a fit of depression, you jump off a building and splatter on the sidewalk,is that phenomenon true to you while you are falling?is that phenomenon true to those on the sidewalk looking at your mess?none of that is true but they are damn real. now, we come to the question of what is truth and what is reality.are you up to it? this level of inquiry, i mean.no fudging.

I don't know if I am up to it, but I don't expect to have my head explode.

This portion of your elaboration, where there is reality , but we can't really know it, has already been considered a valid point. The thing is , that we extrapolate enough about the functions of reality (the stuff that relates to us) that the two parallel . If that wasn't the case, our existance would be rendered a nonsensical mess. Our unreal conceptry DOES in fact function, which is the proof and product of our mental gyrations.

[Stosh]

I wonder how long it will take for an open acknowledgement that consciousness does not stop at individual bags of skin and exoskeleton? Consciousness, awareness, whatever you want to call it, is non local. There are levels of organization, communication, and perception that are too foreign and subtle to us to be recognizable at both larger and smaller scales (community, ecosystem, planet, cell, organ system), not just from one individual organism to the next. Our verbal and sensory sarcophagus are very difficult to transcend but it can be done.

what is your proof of this common consciousness? The reason why folks consider themselves distinct , is threefold you can't operate my muscles, you can't read my mind, and you can't register my sensory input. The feeling of compassion folks may dwell on is not extended to the consciousness of another..nonshared experience is the proof of nonshared existance

[Marblehead]

I would have described Darwin the complete package of Scientist,

I was going to but then I remembered that after the Beagle trip he became an academic. This was mostly establishing findings based on his trip.

[narveen]

I wonder how long it will take for an open acknowledgement that consciousness does not stop at individual bags of skin and exoskeleton? Consciousness, awareness, whatever you want to call it, is non local. There are levels of organization, communication, and perception that are too foreign and subtle to us to be recognizable at both larger and smaller scales (community, ecosystem, planet, cell, organ system), not just from one individual organism to the next. Our verbal and sensory sarcophagus are very difficult to transcend but it can be done.

 

do you mean we have all already moved into the cloud?

 

forgive my mirth, but i am curious to learn from you how you figured that out. i hope it's not another darwinian imagination.