Help with debunking a creationist claim

[Kharakov]

People said unjustified comments

No, i think the comments are quite justified.

Don't snip off the pertinent qualifier of my comment in such a childish manner. I believe editing someone's post to alter the overall connotation and meaning is prohibited, but I may be incorrect.

People said unjustified comments that relate to what they believe...

You offer nothing more than 'maybe/what if' objections with no support beyond your feelings.
No reason to hold back on coming to a working conclusion on how the universe works.
Certainly no justification for calling anyone else's position unjustified.

First sentence above: false.
Second sentence: true.

Third sentence: both true and false. Theoretically, beings here could have absolute knowledge about the lack of consciousness of the universe. However, as you may simply be the same as me, human, and have to judge things by your experiences, then the position that there is no consciousness guiding things is completely unjustified. In fact, the position that energy itself is non-conscious is simply crazy- it reacts to itself constantly, interrelating and creating and participating in all things, including our specific consciousnesses. Saying it's not conscious is... not a very conscious behavior.

Still, you have yet to come up with 1 single justification for the thought of a non-conscious actor. And you're not going to either. As a conscious actor, you need to justify your belief that other actors are not consciously doing so. You have absolutely no evidence that other actors are not conscious.

 

[Kharakov]

The fact that you really, really, really KNOW you see the pattern still isn't evidence for the pattern, and hardly a refutation of my thinking you're projecting it.

True. In fact our conversation may simply be a hallucination you're having due to a stroke.

And your rationalization for why your life gets help, while other lives don't, isn't really a good reason for the universe to play favorites.

What was the rationalization?

You have to consider that I know this pattern exists-

I do. But i've seen you draw the connection between this thread and your fortune cookie, and i'm not impressed at your threshold for connections.

Yeah. If it was only one single event like that, it wouldn't mean that much. But these things happen very often, and sometimes are quite humorous, like the other day when I was pissed at God and I got post 7605666 back on the old board. hehehe... made me quite happy, as I'm into some basic masonic stuff like alphanumeric cyphers, of which 7605 is G- Foe, and 666 is, well, you know.

Ohh yeah, read that post .

And that doesn't even scratch the surface of all the coincidences in my life. Constant assurance that I am cared for. And I really should go to bed because I have a long day tomorrow.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Yeah. If it was only one single event like that, it wouldn't mean that much.

But it's one single person. How much can that mean?

 

[Keith&Co.]

People said unjustified comments

No, i think the comments are quite justified.

Don't snip off the pertinent qualifier of my comment in such a childish manner. I believe editing someone's post to alter the overall connotation and meaning is prohibited, but I may be incorrect.

But that's the part i wanted to respond to. You claim that the conclusion is unjustified, but offer nothing in the way of a counter beyond your personal credulity. They're not unjustified simply because you would wish them to be wrong, or because you feel really strongly about this pattern of only your life that only you can see.
It's about as useful as telling us that a magic 8 ball says that we're not justified in the opinions we hold.

 

[Kharakov]

Yeah. If it was only one single event like that, it wouldn't mean that much.

But it's one single person. How much can that mean?

No, it's not a single person. I've told some of my closer friends about it, and they've seen stuff in their life as well. There have been books about it.. Jung wrote about the experience of synchronicites, etc.

Even after going through a thought sieve of analysis for confirmation bias of various forms, the pattern remains.

 

[Kharakov]

People said unjustified comments <note: this comment was shortened by Keith which makes it appear different and carry a different tone>

No, i think the comments are quite justified.

Don't snip off the pertinent qualifier of my comment in such a childish manner. I believe editing someone's post to alter the overall connotation and meaning is prohibited, but I may be incorrect.

But that's the part i wanted to respond to.

You're smart enough to know that you can change the overall tone of someone's comment by removing a portion of what they say. The difference between "get me some paper towels" and "please get me some paper towels" is palpable, even in writing.

Just be careful with the snipping of another person's post.


Keep in mind, the lack of justification for the existence of a non-conscious actor reaches deep into materialism (mind as the substance of the universe), and any non-dualistic philosophy of the mind.

 

[Juma]

Keep in mind, the lack of justification for the existence of a non-conscious actor reaches deep into materialism (mind as the substance of the universe), and any non-dualistic philosophy of the mind.

This must clearly be a joke? Or are you willfully ignoring robotics?

 

[DBT]

All thoughts and actions start out in non conscious form; neural information processing precedes both conscious representation and motor action.

 

[Kharakov]

Keep in mind, the lack of justification for the existence of a non-conscious actor reaches deep into materialism (mind as the substance of the universe), and any non-dualistic philosophy of the mind.

This must clearly be a joke? Or are you willfully ignoring robotics?

Every time I take the sin of an integer * pi I arrive at the same result. Does this mean that I am not consciously arriving at this result? Repetitive behaviors of reality (exploited for robotics or love) do not indicate there is no consciousness behind them. It's very simple- unless you are proposing some magical transmorgification of your juju into something physical which then interacts with the rest of reality which is magically reacting without consciousness, which then causes something non conscious to happen to you that magically gets transformed to consciousness by your magical juju powers, reality is conscious, this is why it reacts. There is no mystical "non-conscious actor".

The whole "non-conscious actor" idea is so woo that the Wu Tang clan could legally be forced to give up the woo in their name to believers in these magical non-conscious actors.

 

[Kharakov]

All thoughts and actions start out in non conscious form; neural information processing precedes both conscious representation and motor action.

In a form that you are not conscious of- not a non- conscious form. There is a major difference.

Now there are cases in which a consciousness follows rules which are not conscious themselves.

The whole 2+2=4 thing is caused by conscious behaviors of a consciousness, but the mathematical behaviors are dictated by non-conscious rules that we decide to follow.

Now say that a consciousness finds a good set of rules to follow, learns them, and steadily adds to its repertoire of rule sets and interrelationships between the various rule sets, pursuing various ways of interrelating the rule sets and creating various beings by doing so. Are the beings the consciousness makes by following rule sets generated by the rule sets, or the consciousness?

 

[Juma]

Keep in mind, the lack of justification for the existence of a non-conscious actor reaches deep into materialism (mind as the substance of the universe), and any non-dualistic philosophy of the mind.

This must clearly be a joke? Or are you willfully ignoring robotics?

Every time I take the sin of an integer * pi I arrive at the same result. Does this mean that I am not consciously arriving at this result? Repetitive behaviors of reality (exploited for robotics or love) do not indicate there is no consciousness behind them. It's very simple- unless you are proposing some magical transmorgification of your juju into something physical which then interacts with the rest of reality which is magically reacting without consciousness, which then causes something non conscious to happen to you that magically gets transformed to consciousness by your magical juju powers, reality is conscious, this is why it reacts. There is no mystical "non-conscious actor".

The whole "non-conscious actor" idea is so woo that the Wu Tang clan could legally be forced to give up the woo in their name to believers in these magical non-conscious actors.

And there you go on the ignore list...