Life From Dirt?

[SkepticThinker]

No, the account states that the Creator, an eternal Self-existent Being, spoke life into existence.

How is that different than being poofed into existence by magic? Sounds like the same thing to me.
How does one "speak life into existence," exactly, and how would you demonstrate that such a thing occurred?

 

[RestlessSoul]

Starting point? Thanks for acknowledging my progress however modest. We materialists are always thrilled when you who see further using your special ways of knowing throw us a bone like this. I actually got an inkling of an insight that brain and mind might be different when I noticed that it's possible to possess only one of them.

He's the guy who writes things like this to promote idealism over alternate formulations: "Is it not an issue in quantum mechanics, that the object, the act of observation, and the observer cannot be separated without affecting the result of an observation? Causing theoretical physicists such as David Bohm and Roger Penrose, to speculate that no description of a physical system can ever be complete without giving a full account of the consciousness of the observer." His agenda is the promotion of his religious belief that the fundamental reality is the mind of God. Empiricism and its methodological materialism have been wildly successful as epistemological tools, and so, he feels the need to attempt to undermine its authority.

I rebutted this once already, but you didn't see fit to address that rebuttal. Not surprisingly, that argument stands unchanged.

Your rebuttal amounts merely to an affirmation of faith; but you won’t see it as such, because to do so would require you to acknowledge that your axioms - the rock upon which you build your church - are a matter of personal conviction, as much as those underpinning any other world view.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I'm not a scientismist.



Not necessarily.
Believing something does not exist because we cannot see it is unreasonable.



No it does not mean that, it means that you have decided to not believe in god/s and think that is a rational path to follow.



I guess someone has told you that and you believe it.

How many times does it need to be explained to you that there's a difference between not believing in a thing and claiming that thing doesn't exist?

Please take in this information and retain it. It would make discussions with you a whole lot easier.

 

[SkepticThinker]

No it just means that we cannot detect it. Maybe it can communicate with us.

So you can't detect it in any way, but you know it's there??

Please explain that.

 

[PureX]

If it mimics my personality sufficiently well, it would certainly be conscious.

I don't think so. A clever pretense of consciousness is not consciousness.

Whether it is 'another me' is a more philosophical question. Would a clone be 'another me'?

There is no "other you". Only you can occupy your place in space and time. Everything everywhere else is something other than you.

What is it that makes something conscious? And why is it impossible for a machine to meet those requirements?

There is the original and there is the artificial.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I am beginning to think as @Brian2 describes, some people just like to throw their words around. What you are saying doesn't make sense, but then -- that's the way it goes with some. Hey. Have a good one, hope whatever happens is good. I'm not the judge that I (not you, of course), believe in, but I know what I think. Fortunately that is given.

The poster said:

"No. It means existence is defined by detectability. Communication would confer detectability, therefore, existence."

What about that doesn't make sense? You didn't actually say.

 

[Polymath257]

I don't think so. A clever pretense of consciousness is not consciousness.

Then how do you know that humans are conscious? How do you know any other person is conscious? Maybe they only have a 'clever pretense'.

There is no "other you". Only you can occupy your place in space and time. Everything everywhere else is something other than you.

Well, then, I guess that answers your question, doesn't it?

There is the original and there is the artificial.

OK, so it is original because it is produced biologically? Why that artificial restriction?

 

[Polymath257]

Your rebuttal amounts merely to an affirmation of faith; but you won’t see it as such, because to do so would require you to acknowledge that your axioms - the rock upon which you build your church - are a matter of personal conviction, as much as those underpinning any other world view.

But it isn't just as much of a personal conviction as religious beliefs. The difference is that even religious people agree that an external universe exists (well, most do) but they then add on to that and say a supernatural exists as well. The external universe is a good, working model that explains our sensory inputs. A supernatural has no real consequences (otherwise it would be detectable)

 

[Aupmanyav]

Does that mean that beauty, love and consciousness are physical things or that they don't really exist?
Well we know a concept is not a physical thing so I guess you must be saying that they don't exist.
But you just described them as if they really exist.

Well, to us, they exist. Otherwise, it is a very old question persisting through many millenniums as to what exists and what not.
But talking of absolute truth, nothing exists other than the basic building block of the universe, 'physical energy' aka Brahman.
Our books say, "Eko sad, dwiteeyo nasti" (What exists is one, there is no second).

 

[RestlessSoul]

But it isn't just as much of a personal conviction as religious beliefs. The difference is that even religious people agree that an external universe exists (well, most do) but they then add on to that and say a supernatural exists as well. The external universe is a good, working model that explains our sensory inputs. A supernatural has no real consequences (otherwise it would be detectable)

But all faith has real world consequences, because it affects the way we live in the world, how we see our place in it, and how we relate to the world and it’s people.

As for what we agree exists, an act of faith is necessarily required as a starting point to believe in anything at all. And everyone, it seems to me, needs something to believe in.

Even for scientific materialists, belief in the existence of the natural world is generally supplemented by belief in human capacity to know and understand it, and to unravel some of it’s mysteries; to recognise order in nature is surely to search for some meaning and purpose in the laws which appear to govern it.

 

[InChrist]

How is that different than being poofed into existence by magic? Sounds like the same thing to me.
How does one "speak life into existence," exactly, and how would you demonstrate that such a thing occurred?

It’s different obviously, since magic is fake; illusion. Creation is real and observable.
Finite human beings do not, nor can “demonstrate” the creative power and ability of an Infinite Creator. You either take His word or reject it.


…because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse…
Romans 1:19-20

 

[InChrist]

Did he say "abracadabra"?

No…


Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind”; and it was so. 25 And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it wasgood.

26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over [g]all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” 27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. Genesis 1:24-27

 

[Polymath257]

But all faith has real world consequences, because it affects the way we live in the world, how we see our place in it, and how we relate to the world and it’s people.

As for what we agree exists, an act of faith is necessarily required as a starting point to believe anything at all. And everyone, it seems to me, needs something to believe in.

Yes, belief systems affect how we live. The belief that morals come from some deity often leads to hateful behaviors towards those who don't follow that belief system. The belief in things without evidence leads to superstition and credulity.

In fact, it was the growth of skepticism that lead to many moral improvements, including better conditions for women, minorities, and those who don't subscribe to the strict morals of the religion.

Even for scientific materialists, belief in the existence of the natural world is generally supplemented by belief in human capacity to know and understand it, and to unravel some of it’s mysteries; to recognise order in nature is surely to search for some meaning and purpose in the laws which appear to govern it.

That we can understand is shown by the fact that things we make actually work. So once again, that is based on hard evidence, not religious faith. They are not the same at all.

 

[Polymath257]

It’s different obviously, since magic is fake; illusion. Creation is real and observable.
Finite human beings do not, nor can “demonstrate” the creative power and ability of an Infinite Creator. You either take His word or reject it.

Oh it is worse than that. You have to take the word of those that collected the texts in your Bible. You have to trust those who translated the texts. You have to trust that the words others told you are from a deity actually are. You have to trust that you are not subject to confirmation bias.

Unless you test your ideas with a skeptical mind, you have to trust someone else's interpretation of the words you read.

…because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse…
Romans 1:19-20

Nice claims. Any proof?

 

[InChrist]

Oh it is worse than that. You have to take the word of those that collected the texts in your Bible. You have to trust those who translated the texts. You have to trust that the words others told you are from a deity actually are. You have to trust that you are not subject to confirmation bias.

Unless you test your ideas with a skeptical mind, you have to trust someone else's interpretation of the words you read.

Nice claims. Any proof?

I do have a skeptical mind, yet I consider the Creator of heaven and earth to have the ability to orchestrate the writing of His Words. The human writers were the vessels used, but God is the Author and inspiration. I trust God’s Word to interpret itself.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I do have a skeptical mind, yet I consider the Creator of heaven and earth to have the ability to orchestrate the writing of His Words. The human writers were the vessels used, but God is the Author and inspiration. I trust God’s Word to interpret itself.

No. You have a believing mind. A skeptic follows the evidence. There is evidence for abiogenesis. Bible believers cannot seem to find any evidence for their beliefs. Most believers will refuse to even learn what is and what is not evidence.

 

[YoursTrue]

I had a similar thing happen to me when I had fallen away from faith. God is faithful for a seeker. We might not be able to see how God has done it but He does allow those who are seeking to find.

Luke 11:9 - So I say to you, keep on asking, and it will be given you; keep on seeking, and you will find; keep on knocking, and it will be opened to you.+

 

[Polymath257]

I do have a skeptical mind, yet I consider the Creator of heaven and earth to have the ability to orchestrate the writing of His Words. The human writers were the vessels used, but God is the Author and inspiration. I trust God’s Word to interpret itself.

Many assumptions, little evidence.

 

[Polymath257]

Luke 11:9 - So I say to you, keep on asking, and it will be given you; keep on seeking, and you will find; keep on knocking, and it will be opened to you.+

I searched and found that religion isn't a positive thing.

 

[YoursTrue]

Oh it is worse than that. You have to take the word of those that collected the texts in your Bible. You have to trust those who translated the texts. You have to trust that the words others told you are from a deity actually are. You have to trust that you are not subject to confirmation bias.

Unless you test your ideas with a skeptical mind, you have to trust someone else's interpretation of the words you read.
Nice claims. Any proof?

Here's the thing - you accept the deniers of the accounts as if they're telling the truth, including made up stories about how you think things grew (I mean evolved) from a couple of cells, maybe in different directions or breaking off at a certain point..