• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Recent content by A. T. Henderson

  1. A. T. Henderson

    is being in this forum on the sabbath a violation?

    Well, obviously not. It's discussing what you've been reading about. It's better than just reading on your own.
  2. A. T. Henderson

    is being in this forum on the sabbath a violation?

    Isn't the Sabbath intended to be used for contemplation of God?
  3. A. T. Henderson

    Do any of the atheists here believe in an afterlife?

    Are atheists not permitted to have wants? I was under the impression that was more of a Buddhist thing.
  4. A. T. Henderson

    Artificial Intelligence and Budhism

    Computers communicate only because humans direct them to do so. They would not and could not do so independently. You might as well say that a signal fire is communicating. It isn't: a human is using it to communicate.
  5. A. T. Henderson

    Artificial Intelligence and Budhism

    True, but for the purposes of this conversation I believe they are sufficiently closely related, and sufficiently reliant on the same prerequisites, that they can be effectively used as synonyms. I would say that the concept of "now" requires a concept of "then": there has to be a continuity...
  6. A. T. Henderson

    Artificial Intelligence and Budhism

    As Polyhedral said, the distinction is one, essentially, of memory, or more generally of continuity. In order for us to be able to say it has awareness, an entity has to be able to determine that a stimulus is happening now, that there was a point in time when the stimulus was not happening, and...
  7. A. T. Henderson

    Artificial Intelligence and Budhism

    Your comprehension of what constitutes a signal appears to be the actual problem. That nd what constitutes perception. I notice you didn't even try to respond to the fact that I was using the definition you cited to refute your absurd claims. And again, you haven't made even the least effort to...
  8. A. T. Henderson

    My Theory of Everything.

    In some cases, and especially when writing about scientific subjects, there is only one appropriate definition for any given word. In the context in which you've written many of the ones you've used, you have used either an inappropriate definition, or one you've made up yourself. This...
  9. A. T. Henderson

    Artificial Intelligence and Budhism

    Stop trying to hide behind pedantry, It won't defend you. A photon has neither senses nor a mind. A photon, any other sub-atomic particle, or any inanimate object is therefore incapable of perception. This by your own definition of the term. And you still have not supported your claim that...
  10. A. T. Henderson

    Artificial Intelligence and Budhism

    Which is my exact point. Did you miss that? But it isn't perceiving. It's just reacting: it's a reflex, no different to that in a venus fly trap or mimosa pudica leaf. Untrue. Particles cannot "sense". They have no awareness. Utter nonsense. A reaction between particles is not in any sense...
  11. A. T. Henderson

    Ants and leaves - the Gift

    No, it's even more ridiculous. The only lifeform capable of disrupting the order of nature is homo sapiens. We don't take care of the planet, we take care of ourselves. If your "force" wanted the planet taken care of, it should have been making sure that lifeforms capable of altering the...
  12. A. T. Henderson

    Christian Paganism vs their belief to the contrary

    Lol. You're really bad at this. NAMBLA = Non-Believer of God, eh?
  13. A. T. Henderson

    Ants and leaves - the Gift

    Utterly untrue, as can be seen by simply looking at them. The only mammals which even vaguely resemble us are the primates, and that's because, as I believe I've mentioned, we share direct ancestry. There are no even vaguely humanoid insects. The mere fact of them having six legs attached at...
  14. A. T. Henderson

    Ants and leaves - the Gift

    The claims, running throughout this thread, that all animals in some way physically resemble humans, wish to become humans, and that humans are the objective of evolution.
  15. A. T. Henderson

    Artificial Intelligence and Budhism

    And no perception either, in point of fact. The clam simply reacts to a stimulus, in the same way as mimosa pudica leaves do: it's an autonomous reaction which does not require any perception, in the proper sense of the word. That seems to be a problem here, I think you're misusing words like...
See more
Top