On the Subject of Subjectivity

_{Barry Arrington

October 26, 2013

Intelligent Design}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

“The reality of subjectivity* is [a] primordial datum – the primordial datum par excellence, in fact – that cannot be denied without a swift descent into nonsense.”

David Bentley Hart

*By “subjectivity,” Hart means a person’s subjective experience of phenomena as distinct from the phenomena themselves. The discussion of subjectivity is often tied to the concept of “qualia.” See, e.g., here.

Comments

So NL posts highly questionable, even fraudulent, claims and that is not spam by NL's self serving standards, but when he is corrected on his fraudulent claims then the posts countering his claims, in his eyes, are to be considered 'off topic, pseudo-faith propping spam'? Okie Dokie, nothing, testy, biased, or personal, there! I take it NL's “amoral Satan worshipping pantheists meeting” didn't go that well last night? :) along that line: The Journey Home - 2013-01-28 - Kelly Nieto - Former Atheist / New Age http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2N99Jn4fsH8bornagain77_{October 29, 2013
October
10
Oct
29
29
2013
08:12 AM
8
08
12
AM
PDT}

notice how NL’s arguments are getting more personal
If you weren't plastering and hijacking nearly every thread with such off topic, pseudo-faith propping spam, I wouldn't have had to mention it. You should at least change your nickname here so that this compulsion doesn't ring of irony as loudly.nightlight_{October 29, 2013
October
10
Oct
29
29
2013
07:52 AM
7
07
52
AM
PDT}

Axel, notice how NL's arguments are getting more personal, the more he is exposed as being fraudulent? ,,, Where have we seen that tactic before? Oh yeah, Darwinists use that tactic!bornagain77_{October 29, 2013
October
10
Oct
29
29
2013
07:27 AM
7
07
27
AM
PDT}

Yeah Axel, might as well throw all that 'favorite quantum magic' in the trash heap since it is so useless as a science:
10 Real-world Applications of Quantum Mechanics Excerpt: The study of quantum mechanics led to some truly astounding conclusions. For instance, scientists found that electrons behave both as waves and as particles, and the mere act of observing them changes the way they behave. Revelations like this one simply defied logic, prompting Einstein to declare "the more success the quantum theory has, the sillier it looks." Einstein's sentiments still resonate today, more than a century after humanity's first insights into the quantum world; quantum mechanics makes perfect sense mathematically but defies our intuition at every turn. So it might surprise you that, despite its strangeness, quantum mechanics has led to some revolutionary inventions over the past century and promises to lead to many more in the years to come. Read on to learn about 10 practical applications of quantum mechanics. 10. The Transistor 9. Energy Harvesters 8. Ultraprecise Clocks 7. Quantum Cryptography 6. Randomness Generator 5. Lasers 4. Ultraprecise Thermometers 3. Quantum Computers 2. Instantaneous Communication (highly debatable) 1. Teleportation (with huge caveats) Go here to read details of each http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-shows/curiosity/topics/10-real-world-applications-of-quantum-mechanics.htm
For some reason this quote comes to mind:
"The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated." - Mark Twain
bornagain77_{October 29, 2013
October
10
Oct
29
29
2013
07:08 AM
7
07
08
AM
PDT}

Ah, NL has refined his dismissal of QM. Presumably the parts that are paradoxical. Well filleted, Sir!Axel_{October 29, 2013
October
10
Oct
29
29
2013
07:07 AM
7
07
07
AM
PDT}

@ba77 #30 - For someone labeling himself "born again" you seem to need awfully many of crutches to prop your faith, from the most speculative branches of quantum physics and its pseudo-philosophies to the outermost meanderings of the Christian apologia, such as the above.nightlight_{October 29, 2013
October
10
Oct
29
29
2013
06:53 AM
6
06
53
AM
PDT}

nightlight #29 'your favorite quantum magic,..' There's a true scientist for you, Philip! Eat your HEART out!Axel_{October 29, 2013
October
10
Oct
29
29
2013
06:36 AM
6
06
36
AM
PDT}

nightlight, you are free to have your own opinions but you are not free to make up your own facts. The facts are that Christians were persecuted in ancient Israel until Jerusalem was laid waste by the Roman legions in 70AD
The Prophesied Second Destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1Yyhb0EH6KaMTeX5bYuLD2fRFgEYJC2RKsjiTcqgEbII
And Christianity certainly did not gain dominance in Rome before Rome's decline:
Christianity and the Roman Empire - By Dr Sophie Lunn-Rockliffe Excerpt: Indeed, when pagans blamed Christian impiety (meaning negligence of the old gods) for the barbarian sack of Rome in 410 AD, one of the foremost Christian intellectuals of the time, Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, regarded the charge as serious enough to warrant lengthy reply in his mammoth book 'The City of God'. Paganism may have been effectively eclipsed as an imperial religion, but it continued to pose a powerful political and religious challenge to the Christian church. http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/romans/christianityromanempire_article_01.shtml
Moreover,
The Byzantines were busy keeping Islam's scimitar off their necks (being incessantly invaded and slaughtered and conquered is not an enticement to science or to scholarship in general). Also, and quite importantly, the East had a great deal of trouble with Arianism, which it battled for centuries. The Arian heresy, which burst forth in Islam as well, seems to be a scientific dead end, because it puts God out of reach of man and leads to the denial of his rationality and predictability and a denial of the rationality and predictability of his creation. Arianism can be translated as "No Science Done Here." http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/10/did_christianit078281.html#sthash.7noPk1Fw.dpuf
Moreover;
Most of the world had no Christianity after the fall of Rome -- nearly all of East Asia, Africa and the Americas and unevangelized Europe were Christianity-free -- and remained Christianity-free -- for a thousand years. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/10/did_christianit078281.html#sthash.7noPk1Fw.dpuf
It is only after Christianity became the dominant culture of Europe, and stifling pagan influences were purged from the Church's teachings, that modern science finally had the proper metaphysical atmosphere in which to sprout and flourish:
The beginning of science as a fully fledged enterprise took place in relation to two important definitions of the Magisterium of the Church. The first was the definition at the Fourth Lateran Council in the year 1215, that the universe was created out of nothing at the beginning of time. The second magisterial statement was at the local level, enunciated by Bishop Stephen Tempier of Paris who, on March 7, 1277, condemned 219 Aristotelian propositions, so outlawing the deterministic and necessitarian views of creation. These statements of the teaching authority of the Church expressed an atmosphere in which faith in God had penetrated the medieval culture and given rise to philosophical consequences. The cosmos was seen as contingent in its existence and thus dependent on a divine choice which called it into being; the universe is also contingent in its nature and so God was free to create this particular form of world among an infinity of other possibilities. Thus the cosmos cannot be a necessary form of existence; and so it has to be approached by a posteriori investigation. The universe is also rational and so a coherent discourse can be made about it. Indeed the contingency and rationality of the cosmos are like two pillars supporting the Christian vision of the cosmos.
bornagain77_{October 29, 2013
October
10
Oct
29
29
2013
06:25 AM
6
06
25
AM
PDT}

Christianity arose in ancient Israel, but no science followed up there until recent times. Several centuries later, Romans took up Christianity which was promptly followed up by rapid decline and centuries of anti-scientific dark ages. The Europe didn't wake up to science until the major weakening of the religious stranglehold on though brought by trade, explorations and rise of utilitarian mindset free of dogmas of the age. To me all the facts say that modern science arose in Europe despite Christianity not because of it. As to the stagnation phase observed in previous instances of scientific thought, our western science is undergoing the same transition, too, in many fields. As any scientific discipline matures, opportunistic mercenary and parasitic layer inevitably takes over and turns it into a white coated money making scam. While there are still many live, thriving branches of western science, especially those related to computers, nano-technology and bio-technology, there are many that have become caricatures of the former sciences under same name, such as Darwinism, climate science, much of medical field (especially pharma & sickness industry sponsored variety), social sciences, your favorite quantum magic, much of economy, women and race studies... all parasites riddled dead sciences, rotten to the core.nightlight_{October 29, 2013
October
10
Oct
29
29
2013
05:49 AM
5
05
49
AM
PDT}

But alas for you Nightlight and your druthers for how wish science should have developed, the undeniable fact of history is:
"However we may interpret the fact (sustained) scientific development has only occurred in a Christian culture. The ancients had brains as good as ours. In all civilizations, Babylonia, Egypt, Greece, India, Rome, Persia, China and so on, science developed to a certain point and then stopped. It is easy to argue speculatively that science might have been able to develop in the absence of Christianity, but in fact, it never did." - Robert Clark The Christian Founders Of Science - Henry F. Schaefer III - video https://vimeo.com/16523153
Call it a "cheap, opportunistic apologia" if you must, but I call your feeble attempts at rationalizing it all away to be the truly "cheap, opportunistic apologia" wrought by a man who is either unwilling or unable to look at the evidence objectively and admit he is wrong!bornagain77_{October 29, 2013
October
10
Oct
29
29
2013
05:07 AM
5
05
07
AM
PDT}

@ba77 #25 Many of biological, geographical, historical, cultural... factors correlate with the rise of western science. Picking particular church or religion as the most causative one is a cheap, opportunistic apologia. From my experience and study, regarding scientific aptitudes the biology easily trumps all other factors.nightlight_{October 29, 2013
October
10
Oct
29
29
2013
04:42 AM
4
04
42
AM
PDT}

a view shared by the greatest minds in science in philosophy for thousands of years. I hold it not because of the weight of authority behind it, but because it is logically the most coherent position on the subject.
Me: (Do) you believe a rock is conscious!?! You: Yes, of course,, My pet rock vehemently disagrees with you! :) And actually science was born out of Christian metaphysics, not pantheistic/panpsychism metaphysics, but what is that minor detail anyways? Jerry Coyne on the Scientific Method and Religion - Michael Egnor - June 2011 Excerpt: Many cultures (e.g. China) have produced excellent technology and engineering, but only (the) Christian culture has given rise to a conceptual understanding of nature. (that allowed the breakthrough of modern science) http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/06/jerry_coyne_on_the_scientific_047431.html The Origin of Science Jaki writes: Herein lies the tremendous difference between Christian monotheism on the one hand and Jewish and Muslim monotheism on the other. This explains also the fact that it is almost natural for a Jewish or Muslim intellectual to become a pantheist. About the former Spinoza and Einstein are well-known examples. As to the Muslims, it should be enough to think of the Averroists. With this in mind one can also hope to understand why the Muslims, who for five hundred years had studied Aristotle's works and produced many commentaries on them failed to make a breakthrough. The latter came in medieval Christian context and just about within a hundred years from the availability of Aristotle's works in Latin.. As we will see below, the break-through that began science was a Christian commentary on Aristotle's De Caelo (On the Heavens).,, Modern experimental science was rendered possible, Jaki has shown, as a result of the Christian philosophical atmosphere of the Middle Ages. Although a talent for science was certainly present in the ancient world (for example in the design and construction of the Egyptian pyramids), nevertheless the philosophical and psychological climate was hostile to a self-sustaining scientific process. Thus science suffered still-births in the cultures of ancient China, India, Egypt and Babylonia. It also failed to come to fruition among the Maya, Incas and Aztecs of the Americas. Even though ancient Greece came closer to achieving a continuous scientific enterprise than any other ancient culture, science was not born there either. Science did not come to birth among the medieval Muslim heirs to Aristotle. …. The psychological climate of such ancient cultures, with their belief that the universe was infinite and time an endless repetition of historical cycles, was often either hopelessness or complacency (hardly what is needed to spur and sustain scientific progress); and in either case there was a failure to arrive at a belief in the existence of God the Creator and of creation itself as therefore rational and intelligible. Thus their inability to produce a self-sustaining scientific enterprise. If science suffered only stillbirths in ancient cultures, how did it come to its unique viable birth? The beginning of science as a fully fledged enterprise took place in relation to two important definitions of the Magisterium of the Church. The first was the definition at the Fourth Lateran Council in the year 1215, that the universe was created out of nothing at the beginning of time. The second magisterial statement was at the local level, enunciated by Bishop Stephen Tempier of Paris who, on March 7, 1277, condemned 219 Aristotelian propositions, so outlawing the deterministic and necessitarian views of creation. These statements of the teaching authority of the Church expressed an atmosphere in which faith in God had penetrated the medieval culture and given rise to philosophical consequences. The cosmos was seen as contingent in its existence and thus dependent on a divine choice which called it into being; the universe is also contingent in its nature and so God was free to create this particular form of world among an infinity of other possibilities. Thus the cosmos cannot be a necessary form of existence; and so it has to be approached by a posteriori investigation. The universe is also rational and so a coherent discourse can be made about it. Indeed the contingency and rationality of the cosmos are like two pillars supporting the Christian vision of the cosmos. http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/a/science_origin.html "Did Christianity (and Other Religions) Promote the Rise Of Science?" - Michael Egnor October 24, 2013 http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/10/did_christianit078281.html etc.. etc...bornagain77_{October 28, 2013
October
10
Oct
28
28
2013
06:40 PM
6
06
40
PM
PDT}

@BA77 #24 -- It is surprising to find someone actively debating the subject of consciousness who hasn't heard of panpsychism, a view shared by the greatest minds in science in philosophy for thousands of years. I hold it not because of the weight of authority behind it, but because it is logically the most coherent position on the subject.nightlight_{October 28, 2013
October
10
Oct
28
28
2013
06:21 PM
6
06
21
PM
PDT}

Me: (Do) you believe a rock is conscious!?! You: Yes, of course,, Well Okie Dokie Mr. NL, I guess that just about does it for me! Good luck with all that NL! (as I slowly back away from you keeping a firm eye on your hands and any sharp instruments that may be laying around) :)bornagain77_{October 28, 2013
October
10
Oct
28
28
2013
05:49 PM
5
05
49
PM
PDT}

@BA77 #20
So NL, I take it in your `panpsychism' that you believe a rock is conscious!?! Yes or no will tell me all I need to know, thank you!
Yes, of course it does have experience of the world around it. As explained in the posts linked earlier (post1 and post2), its experience of the world is hyper-real. While narrower, it is much sharper, faster, more vivid and more intense than what systems with more complex interactions, such as ourselves, experience. This is also consistent with NDE reports, in which elimination of the large scale functionality with reduction of sensory integration to nearly cellular level, is experienced as an awakening into much more real reality from which our daily consciousness appears as an ephemeral, slow paced dream. The posts above follow up further along this path.nightlight_{October 28, 2013
October
10
Oct
28
28
2013
05:37 PM
5
05
37
PM
PDT}

again to this comment:
,,,the association between arrangement of matter-field with your consciousness is neither 1 to 1 mapping nor causal relation i.e. neither side causes the other. Instead, both aspects are distinct manifestations of the underlying computational process unfolding from inside, at the Planck scale. Our physical space-time and matter-energy phenomena are merely some of the large scale, coarse grained properties of the resulting computational patterns.
Funny how this 'computational pattern' that manifested/mapped consciousness to the matter-field that is my material body, happened to 'map' the limit to human vision (conscious observation) right in the exponential middle of all possible sizes for space time. One would almost have to conclude that your 'computational process' had humans in "mind" all along! But with such planning and foresight how would your 'computational process' be any different from what Theists call God?
The Scale of The Universe - Part 2 - interactive graph (recently updated in 2012 with cool features) http://htwins.net/scale2/scale2.swf?bordercolor=white The preceding interactive graph points out that the smallest scale visible to the human eye (as well as a human egg) is at 10^-4 meters, which 'just so happens' to be directly in the exponential center of all possible sizes of our physical reality (not just ‘nearly’ in the exponential center!). i.e. 10^-4 is, exponentially, right in the middle of 10^-35 meters, which is the smallest possible unit of length, which is Planck length, and 10^27 meters, which is the largest possible unit of 'observable' length since space-time was created in the Big Bang, which is the diameter of the universe. This is very interesting for, as far as I can tell, the limits to human vision (as well as the size of the human egg) could have, theoretically, been at very different positions than directly in the exponential middle of our measure of space-time;
Here is another funny place that your supposed 'computational process' for non '1 to 1 mapping' of consciousness to the 'matter-field' unexpectedly correlates:
The Galileo Affair and Life/Consciousness as the true "Center of the Universe" Excerpt: I find it extremely interesting, and strange, that quantum mechanics tells us that instantaneous quantum wave collapse to its 'uncertain' 3D state is centered on each individual conscious observer in the universe, whereas, 4D space-time cosmology (General Relativity) tells us each 3D point in the universe is central to the expansion of the universe. These findings of modern science are pretty much exactly what we would expect to see if this universe were indeed created, and sustained, from a higher dimension by a omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, eternal Being who knows everything that is happening everywhere in the universe at the same time. These findings certainly seem to go to the very heart of the age old question asked of many parents by their children, “How can God hear everybody’s prayers at the same time?”,,, i.e. Why should the expansion of the universe, or the quantum wave collapse of the entire universe, even care that you or I, or anyone else, should exist? Only Theism, Christian Theism in particular, offers a rational explanation as to why you or I, or anyone else, should have such undeserved significance in such a vast universe. [15] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BHAcvrc913SgnPcDohwkPnN4kMJ9EDX-JJSkjc4AXmA/edit
Verse
Psalm 33:13-15 The LORD looks from heaven; He sees all the sons of men. From the place of His dwelling He looks on all the inhabitants of the earth; He fashions their hearts individually; He considers all their works.
With such astonishing '1 to 1' mapping of conscious observation with the matter field that is my body, with space time itself, it seems you are stuck arguing against the reliability of our senses in order to protect your absurd notions for ‘panpsychism’. But then you would undermine any warrant you have to empirical evidence! And thus undermine any claim as to being 'scientific'. Seems the more your worldview emerges from the intellectual fog you seem to like to wrap it up in the worse it becomes for you? ,,, You better turn the fog machine once again to cover it up so as to prevent the worldview situation from getting any more embarrassing for you than it already is! :) Well anyways, as I'm sure you may have already guessed, I'm off this evening to burn a few more witches with my Christian fundamentalist buddies (as we warm up for Halloween you know).,, Please let me know how your “amoral Satan worshipping pantheists meeting” goes tonight will you? :) Bet Halloween is big for you Satan types too! Music:
Skillet - Monster (Video) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mjlM_RnsVE
But seriously:
Where will you go when you die? - Bill Wiese - video testimony http://www.soulchoiceministries.com/where_will_you_go_flvod.html
bornagain77_{October 28, 2013
October
10
Oct
28
28
2013
04:39 PM
4
04
39
PM
PDT}

while I wait on a simple yes or no answer to whether you think a rock is conscious or not,,, to this claim:
Instead, both aspects are distinct manifestations of the underlying computational process unfolding from inside, at the Planck scale. Our physical space-time and matter-energy phenomena are merely some of the large scale, coarse grained properties of the resulting computational patterns.
I think this may be of interest,,,
Digital Physics Argument for God's Existence - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2Xsp4FRgas Digital Physics Argument Premise 1: Simulations can only exist is a computer or a mind. Premise 2: The universe is a simulation. Premise 3: A simulation on a computer still must be simulated in a mind. Premise 4: Therefore, the universe is a simulation in a mind (2,3). Premise 5: This mind is what we call God. Conclusion: Therefore, God exists.
Related notes:
Is God No Better Than A Special Computer? - William Lane Craig - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xinwkb_b4k4 Quantum Computing Promises New Insights, Not Just Supermachines - Scott Aaronson - December 2011 Excerpt: And yet, even though useful quantum computers might still be decades away, many of their payoffs are already arriving. For example, the mere possibility of quantum computers has all but overthrown a conception of the universe that scientists like Stephen Wolfram have championed. That conception holds that, as in the “Matrix” movies, the universe itself is basically a giant computer, twiddling an array of 1’s and 0’s in essentially the same way any desktop PC does. Quantum computing has challenged that vision by showing that if “the universe is a computer,” then even at a hard-nosed theoretical level, it’s a vastly more powerful kind of computer than any yet constructed by humankind. Indeed, the only ways to evade that conclusion seem even crazier than quantum computing itself: One would have to overturn quantum mechanics, or else find a fast way to simulate quantum mechanics using today’s computers. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/06/science/scott-aaronson-quantum-computing-promises-new-insights.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&ref=science
bornagain77_{October 28, 2013
October
10
Oct
28
28
2013
01:52 PM
1
01
52
PM
PDT}

So NL, I take it in your 'panpsychism' that you believe a rock is conscious!?! Yes or no will tell me all I need to know, thank you!bornagain77_{October 28, 2013
October
10
Oct
28
28
2013
01:27 PM
1
01
27
PM
PDT}

@BA77 #15
In case your particular arrangement of matter and fields (that make you up) does not know, That is a direct contradiction to what you originally claimed.
That's where you misunderstood it, or maybe I didn't express it unambiguously enough. I merely stated it in a way commonly used to explain "hard problem of consciousness" (i.e. as a question 'what is it like to be' particular arrangement of matter-energy). In the Planckian Network perspective (which is philosophically the ontological monism, a variant of Leibniz-Spinoza panpsychism), the association between arrangement of matter-field with your consciousness is neither 1 to 1 mapping nor causal relation i.e. neither side causes the other. Instead, both aspects are distinct manifestations of the underlying computational process unfolding from inside, at the Planck scale. Our physical space-time and matter-energy phenomena are merely some of the large scale, coarse grained properties of the resulting computational patterns. Other properties of these patterns include life and its forms of consciousness (see an earlier post for further details).nightlight_{October 28, 2013
October
10
Oct
28
28
2013
10:54 AM
10
10
54
AM
PDT}

Of note: Smart Neurons: Single Neuronal Dendrites Can Perform Computations - Oct. 27, 2013 Excerpt: When you look at the hands of a clock or the streets on a map, your brain is effortlessly performing computations that tell you about the orientation of these objects. New research,, has shown that these computations can be carried out by the microscopic branches of neurons known as dendrites, which are the receiving elements of neurons. The study,,, examined neurons in areas of the mouse brain which are responsible for processing visual input from the eyes. The scientists achieved an important breakthrough: they succeeded in making incredibly challenging electrical and optical recordings directly from the tiny dendrites of neurons in the intact brain while the brain was processing visual information. These recordings revealed that visual stimulation produces specific electrical signals in the dendrites -- bursts of spikes -- which are tuned to the properties of the visual stimulus. The results challenge the widely held view that this kind of computation is achieved only by large numbers of neurons working together, and demonstrate how the basic components of the brain are exceptionally powerful computing devices in their own right. Senior author Professor Michael Hausser commented: "This work shows that dendrites, long thought to simply 'funnel' incoming signals towards the soma, instead play a key role in sorting and interpreting the enormous barrage of inputs received by the neuron. Dendrites thus act as miniature computing devices for detecting and amplifying specific types of input. "This new property of dendrites adds an important new element to the "toolkit" for computation in the brain. This kind of dendritic processing is likely to be widespread across many brain areas and indeed many different animal species, including humans.",,, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131027140632.htm A please note, this newly found computational complexity is on top of what was already considered to be the 'beyond belief' computational complexity of the brain: Human brain has more switches than all computers on Earth – November 2010 Excerpt: They found that the brain’s complexity is beyond anything they’d imagined, almost to the point of being beyond belief, says Stephen Smith, a professor of molecular and cellular physiology and senior author of the paper describing the study: …One synapse, by itself, is more like a microprocessor–with both memory-storage and information-processing elements–than a mere on/off switch. In fact, one synapse may contain on the order of 1,000 molecular-scale switches. A single human brain has more switches than all the computers and routers and Internet connections on Earth. (and even this is an underestimation in terms of complexity according to Dr. VJ Torley) http://news.cnet.com/8301-27083_3-20023112-247.htmlbornagain77_{October 28, 2013
October
10
Oct
28
28
2013
07:42 AM
7
07
42
AM
PDT}

OT:
Book Review (of Darwin's Doubt): Intelligent Design or Unintelligent Design? by Terry Scambray // New Oxford Review, October 2013 Excerpt: As Meyer writes, the neo-Darwinism mechanism of mutation and natural selection, “does not account for either the origin of the genetic or the epigenetic information”,,, That is, developing complex bio-chemicals and then in the most exacting and intricate way, engineering their information processes to perform in unimaginably complex, coordinated and purposeful genetic and extra genetic ways would have to have taken place. As Meyer writes, “the probability of generating just one gene from all the bacteria (and other organisms) that have ever lived on earth is just 1 in 10 trillion, trillion, trillion. “ “Time & chance”, the makers of life according to Darwin, need not apply as credible candidates for such a task.,,, (Read more here) http://victorhanson.com/wordpress/?p=6666
This following peer-reviewed paper holds that there is a 'irreducible organizational complexity' between the genetic (digital) information and the epigenetic (analog/structural) information in life:
Refereed scientific article on DNA argues for irreducible complexity - October 2, 2013 Excerpt: This paper published online this summer is a true mind-blower showing the irreducible organizational complexity (author’s description) of DNA analog and digital information, that genes are not arbitrarily positioned on the chromosome etc.,, ,,,First, the digital information of individual genes (semantics) is dependent on the the intergenic regions (as we know) which is like analog information (syntax). Both types of information are co-dependent and self-referential but you can’t get syntax from semantics. As the authors state, “thus the holistic approach assumes self-referentiality (completeness of the contained information and full consistency of the different codes) as an irreducible organizational complexity of the genetic regulation system of any cell”. In short, the linear DNA sequence contains both types of information. Second, the paper links local DNA structure, to domains, to the overall chromosome configuration as a dynamic system keying off the metabolic signals of the cell. This implies that the position and organization of genes on the chromosome is not arbitrary,,, http://www.christianscientific.org/refereed-scientific-article-on-dna-argues-for-irreducibly-complexity/
Of note as to how many different codes have been discovered thus far in that "full consistency of the different codes":
"In the last ten years, at least 20 different natural information codes were discovered in life, each operating to arbitrary conventions (not determined by law or physicality). Examples include protein address codes [Ber08B], acetylation codes [Kni06], RNA codes [Fai07], metabolic codes [Bru07], cytoskeleton codes [Gim08], histone codes [Jen01], and alternative splicing codes [Bar10]. - Donald E. Johnson – Programming of Life – pg.51 - 2010
bornagain77_{October 28, 2013
October
10
Oct
28
28
2013
04:22 AM
4
04
22
AM
PDT}

Well NL at 14, forgive if I pegged you as a “amoral Satan worshipping atheist/materialist” (your words not mine) when you are instead a “amoral Satan worshipping pantheist" or some demonic belief of that sort :) You don't mind if I go off to burn a few witches and such as that whilst I wait for you to produce some clarity out of that fog you call a worldview do you? :) Shoe meet other foot!bornagain77_{October 27, 2013
October
10
Oct
27
27
2013
07:14 PM
7
07
14
PM
PDT}

Nightlight you state this in post 9:
4. Did the computer have a subjective experience of the redness of red, i.e., did it experience a qualia? Obviously no. The only obvious element is that the above is an opinion, not a statement of a fact. You can’t know what is it like to be a particular arrangement of atoms and fields making up computer, as it interacts with red light. You only know what is it like to be an arrangement of matter and fields that make up you.
I then point out that
what is obvious is that you have erroneously assumed that conscious(ness), the subjective experience of `I’, i.e. the `soul’, can be reduced to some particular arrangement of matter and fields.
You then claim in post 13
Not at all.,,,
In case your particular arrangement of matter and fields (that make you up) does not know, That is a direct contradiction to what you originally claimed. Perhaps it would be appropriate for you to define your personal conception consciousness a little more clearly? For instance, do you believe consciousness resides in a rock? A simple yes or no answer will tell me all I need to know.bornagain77_{October 27, 2013
October
10
Oct
27
27
2013
07:05 PM
7
07
05
PM
PDT}

@BA77 #12
Hey NL, since this man was born with no arms, does not that make him of less value in the materialistic mindset? If not why not?
Your scheme of the world is much too simple, with apparently only two pigeonholes available to fit everything into -- the "amoral Satan worshipping atheist/materialist" one and "saintly Jesus believer" one. As result of such model of reality, you have condemned yourself to remain perpetually puzzled as to what is going on and why.nightlight_{October 27, 2013
October
10
Oct
27
27
2013
06:52 PM
6
06
52
PM
PDT}

@BA77 #10
what is obvious is that you have erroneously assumed that conscious, the subjective experience of `I', i.e. the `soul', can be reduced to some particular arrangement of matter and fields.
Not at all. As explained in the earlier thread (including in several responses to your questions), in the Planckian Networks (PN) model the mind-stuff (consciousness) has to be postulated from the ground up and it is not reducible to laws of physics, chemistry, biology... it is a fundamental element of reality within that model. Similarly, the laws or patterns of biological systems are not reducible to the laws of physics and chemistry. The lower level laws such as those of physics are merely a coarse grained approximation of some aspects of much more subtle computations (i.e. transformations of the elemental mind-stuff at the PN level) which occur below (or rather, within or inside) our space-time and matter-energy level. You will find hyperlinked TOC for the above Planckian Networks perspective, covering also the issues raised above, in the second half of this post.nightlight_{October 27, 2013
October
10
Oct
27
27
2013
06:21 PM
6
06
21
PM
PDT}

Hey NL, since this man was born with no arms, does not that make him of less value in the materialistic mindset? If not why not? No Arms? No Problem! This Guitar Cover of Let It Be is a Jaw-Dropper - Inspirational Videos http://www.godtube.com/watch/?v=01J22JNUbornagain77_{October 27, 2013
October
10
Oct
27
27
2013
02:07 PM
2
02
07
PM
PDT}

Moreover, Landauer's principle implies that when a certain number of arithmetical operations per second have been exceeded, the computer will produce so much heat that the heat is impossible to dissipate.
Quantum knowledge cools computers - Published: 01.06.11 Excerpt: The fact that computers produce heat when they process data is a logistical challenge for computer manufacturers and supercomputer operators. In addition, this heat production also imposes a fundamental limit on their maximum possible performance. According to the so-called Landauer Principle formulated by the physicist Rolf Landauer in 1961, energy is always released as heat when data is deleted. Renner says, “According to Landauer’s Principle, if a certain number of computing operations per second is exceeded, the heat generated can no longer be dissipated.” Assuming that supercomputers develop at the same rate as in the past, this critical limit will probably be reached in the next 10 to 20 years. http://www.ethlife.ethz.ch/archive_articles/110601_Naturepaper_Renner_su/index_EN
Thus, the brain is either operating on reversible computation principles that no computer (or computer engineer) can come close to emulating (Charles Bennett; IBM), or, as is much more likely, the brain is not erasing information from its memory, as the material computer is required to do during arithmetical operations, because our memories are stored on the ‘spiritual’ level rather than on a material level,,, To support this view that ‘memory/information’ is not being stored in the brain, one of the most common features of extremely deep near death experiences is the 'life review' where every minute detail of a person’s life is reviewed in the presence of God:
Near Death Experience – The Tunnel, The Light, The Life Review – video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4200200/
Supplemental notes:
Algorithmic Information Theory, Free Will and the Turing Test - Douglas S. Robertson Excerpt: For example, the famous “Turing test” for artificial intelligence could be defeated by simply asking for a new axiom in mathematics. Human mathematicians are able to create axioms, but a computer program cannot do this without violating information conservation. Creating new axioms and free will are shown to be different aspects of the same phenomena: the creation of new information. http://cires.colorado.edu/~doug/philosophy/info8.pdf
Verse and Music:
Luke 10:27 He answered, "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'" Life Got You Down? Just Remember You Got Opposable Thumbs to give you value! - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_s8y9a12saU
bornagain77_{October 27, 2013
October
10
Oct
27
27
2013
01:24 PM
1
01
24
PM
PDT}

as to NL:
The only obvious element is that the above is an opinion, not a statement of a fact. You can’t know what is it like to be a particular arrangement of atoms and fields making up computer, as it interacts with red light. You only know what is it like to be an arrangement of matter and fields that make up you.
If Mr. Arrington doesn't "mind", I like to point something out,,, actually, what is obvious is that you have erroneously assumed that conscious, the subjective experience of 'I', i.e. the 'soul', can be reduced to some particular arrangement of matter and fields.
Case for the Existence of the Soul - (Argument from Divisibility at 38:20 minute mark) - JP Moreland - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWjkbNkMiMo&feature=player_detailpage#t=2299 Strange but True: When Half a Brain Is Better than a Whole One - May 2007 Excerpt: Most Hopkins hemispherectomy patients are five to 10 years old. Neurosurgeons have performed the operation on children as young as three months old. Astonishingly, memory and personality develop normally. ,,, Another study found that children that underwent hemispherectomies often improved academically once their seizures stopped. "One was champion bowler of her class, one was chess champion of his state, and others are in college doing very nicely," Freeman says. Of course, the operation has its downside: "You can walk, run—some dance or skip—but you lose use of the hand opposite of the hemisphere that was removed. You have little function in that arm and vision on that side is lost," Freeman says. Remarkably, few other impacts are seen. ,,, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=strange-but-true-when-half-brain-better-than-whole
A few more notes on why a computer can never truly be 'consciously intelligent': In contrast to DNA (and computers), no one has ever located exactly where information/memories are stored in the brain.
A Reply to Shermer Medical Evidence for NDEs (Near Death Experiences) – Pim van Lommel Excerpt: For decades, extensive research has been done to localize memories (information) inside the brain, so far without success.,,,,So we need a functioning brain to receive our consciousness into our waking consciousness. http://www.nderf.org/vonlommel_skeptic_response.htm
In fact, it appears to be a physical requirement that memories/information be stored 'non-physically', on a 'spiritual' basis, because of the following,,,
Human brain has more switches than all computers on Earth – November 2010 Excerpt: They found that the brain’s complexity is beyond anything they’d imagined, almost to the point of being beyond belief, says Stephen Smith, a professor of molecular and cellular physiology and senior author of the paper describing the study: …One synapse, by itself, is more like a microprocessor–with both memory-storage and information-processing elements–than a mere on/off switch. In fact, one synapse may contain on the order of 1,000 molecular-scale switches. A single human brain has more switches than all the computers and routers and Internet connections on Earth. (and this is an underestimation in terms of complexity according to Dr. Torley) http://news.cnet.com/8301-27083_3-20023112-247.html
And yet computers with many switches have a huge problem with heat,,,
Supercomputer architecture Excerpt: Throughout the decades, the management of heat density has remained a key issue for most centralized supercomputers.[4][5][6] The large amount of heat generated by a system may also have other effects, such as reducing the lifetime of other system components.[7] There have been diverse approaches to heat management, from pumping Fluorinert through the system, to a hybrid liquid-air cooling system or air cooling with normal air conditioning temperatures. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercomputer_architecture
Yet the brain, though having as many switches as all the computers, routers, and internet connections on earth, does not have such a problem with heat,,,
Appraising the brain’s energy budget: Excerpt: In the average adult human, the brain represents about 2% of the body weight. Remarkably, despite its relatively small size, the brain accounts for about 20% of the oxygen and, hence, calories consumed by the body. This high rate of metabolism is remarkably constant despite widely varying mental and motoric activity. The metabolic activity of the brain is remarkably constant over time. http://www.pnas.org/content/99/16/10237.full THE EFFECT OF MENTAL ARITHMETIC ON CEREBRAL CIRCULATION AND METABOLISM Excerpt: Although Lennox considered the performance of mental arithmetic as “mental work”, it is not immediately apparent what the nature of that work in the physical sense might be if, indeed, there be any. If no work or energy transformation is involved in the process of thought, then it is not surprising that cerebral oxygen consumption is unaltered during mental arithmetic. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC438861/pdf/jcinvest00624-0127.pdf Does Thinking Really Hard Burn More Calories? – By Ferris Jabr – July 2012 Excerpt: So a typical adult human brain runs on around 12 watts—a fifth of the power required by a standard 60 watt lightbulb. Compared with most other organs, the brain is greedy; pitted against man-made electronics, it is astoundingly efficient. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=thinking-hard-calories
Moreover, a certain percentage of the heat generated by computers is because of something known as Landauer's principle.
Landauer’s principle Of Note: “any logically irreversible manipulation of information, such as the erasure of a bit or the merging of two computation paths, must be accompanied by a corresponding entropy increase ,,, Specifically, each bit of lost information will lead to the release of an (specific) amount (at least kT ln 2) of heat.,,, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landauer%27s_principle
bornagain77_{October 27, 2013
October
10
Oct
27
27
2013
01:23 PM
1
01
23
PM
PDT}

@BA, article linked:
4. Did the computer have a subjective experience of the redness of red, i.e., did it experience a qualia? Obviously no.
The only obvious element is that the above is an opinion, not a statement of a fact. You can't know what is it like to be a particular arrangement of atoms and fields making up computer, as it interacts with red light. You only know what is it like to be an arrangement of matter and fields that make up you. In the above example of the computer seeing red, I consider it more coherent to assume that for any interaction there is something that it is like to be such an interaction, rather than imagine that there is some complex, indescribable border delimiting two fundamentally different schemes by which universe operates.nightlight_{October 27, 2013
October
10
Oct
27
27
2013
11:47 AM
11
11
47
AM
PDT}

Moreover, in a truly successful reconciliation of the 'objective' world General Relativity and the 'subjective' world of Quantum Mechanics, we would expect the entropy inherent within the space time of General Relativity to be successfully dealt with. And this is exactly what we have evidence of in the Shroud Of Turin with the resurrection event of Christ:
A Particle Physicist Looks At The Turin Shroud - Video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbl4EmoH_jg THE EVENT HORIZON (Space-Time Singularity) OF THE SHROUD OF TURIN. - Isabel Piczek - Particle Physicist Excerpt: We have stated before that the images on the Shroud firmly indicate the total absence of Gravity. Yet they also firmly indicate the presence of the Event Horizon. These two seemingly contradict each other and they necessitate the past presence of something more powerful than Gravity that had the capacity to solve the above paradox. http://shroud3d.com/findings/isabel-piczek-image-formation A Quantum Hologram of Christ's Resurrection? by Chuck Missler Excerpt: “You can read the science of the Shroud, such as total lack of gravity, lack of entropy (without gravitational collapse), no time, no space—it conforms to no known law of physics.” The phenomenon of the image brings us to a true event horizon, a moment when all of the laws of physics change drastically. Dame Piczek created a one-fourth size sculpture of the man in the Shroud. When viewed from the side, it appears as if the man is suspended in mid air (see graphic, below), indicating that the image defies previously accepted science. The phenomenon of the image brings us to a true event horizon, a moment when all of the laws of physics change drastically. http://www.khouse.org/articles/2008/847 Particle Radiation from the Body - July 2012 - M. Antonacci, A. C. Lind Excerpt: The Shroud’s frontal and dorsal body images are encoded with the same amount of intensity, independent of any pressure or weight from the body. The bottom part of the cloth (containing the dorsal image) would have born all the weight of the man’s supine body, yet the dorsal image is not encoded with a greater amount of intensity than the frontal image. Radiation coming from the body would not only explain this feature, but also the left/right and light/dark reversals found on the cloth’s frontal and dorsal body images. http://www.academicjournals.org/sre/PDF/pdf2012/30JulSpeIss/Antonacci.pdf
Of related note, the mechanism by which the image formed on the Shroud belongs to the 'subjective world' of Quantum Mechanics and does not belong to the 'entropic world' of Classical Physics (i.e. to General Relativity)
The absorbed energy in the Shroud body image formation appears as contributed by discrete values - Giovanni Fazio, Giuseppe Mandaglio - 2008 Excerpt: This result means that the optical density distribution,, can not be attributed at the absorbed energy described in the framework of the classical physics model. It is, in fact, necessary to hypothesize a absorption by discrete values of the energy where the 'quantum' is equal to the one necessary to yellow one fibril. http://cab.unime.it/journals/index.php/AAPP/article/view/C1A0802004/271 Scientific hypotheses on the origin of the body image of the Shroud - 2010 Excerpt: for example, if we consider the density of radiation that we used to color a single square centimeter of linen, to reproduce the entire image of the Shroud with a single flash of light would require fourteen thousand lasers firing simultaneously each on a different area of linen. In other words, it would take a laser light source the size of an entire building. (of note: even that amount of power is now found to be an underestimation) http://www.30giorni.it/articoli_id_22597_l3.htm
Verse and Music:
Colossians 1:15-20 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross. Matt Redman - Your Grace Finds Me - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mqd8MoiCbcI
bornagain77_{October 27, 2013
October
10
Oct
27
27
2013
07:47 AM
7
07
47
AM
PDT}

1 2 Next

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply