We are just biological machines!

[Farmer77]

4 hours ago, Mr. Argon said:

Are we just biological machines without a soul?

Please share your thoughts

In those terms I guess I would say we are biological machines that attract a soul. 

[XenoFish]

Just now, Will Due said:

 

What about the superconscious?

It's were things are felt, which leads to understanding thoughts.

 

 

Emotions are another program. Its what creates motivation. Strong emotions attached to ideas create background programs in your subconscious. 

Its why you might not like certain foods, etc.

[simplybill]

3 hours ago, quiXilver said:

If I take my dog, canary, spouse, neighbor apart and lay their parts out on the floor, reassemble them, they will not work.

Just so I can sleep tonight, please tell us you didn't try this experiment on your wife.....

[Will Due]

1 hour ago, Rlyeh said:

Intelligence is the ability to learn knowledge and skills. Where does feeling come in?

 

Where it becomes desirable to gain an understanding of the knowledge that's been learned.

 

 

[Illyrius]

10 minutes ago, simplybill said:

Just so I can sleep tonight, please tell us you didn't try this experiment on your wife.....

My wife is like Frankenstein.. all i have to do after i disassebmle her is to glue her and put her into a source of electricity and i have a lunch tomorrow.

[+Liquid Gardens]

1 hour ago, Mr. Argon said:

They lack a sense of meaning and emotions and won't ever be able to translate this things

Define 'sense of meaning'.  What do you think is happening in your brain that gives you a sense of meaning that computers will always lack?  Emotion doesn't have to have anything to do with 'intelligence', especially for topics related to science.

49 minutes ago, Mr. Argon said:

Computers just process DATA...

So do we, it's just not all digital data.  The input from our senses, our emotions, our thoughts, appear to be based, very generally, on electro-chemical reactions in the brain.

[White Unicorn]

4 hours ago, Mr. Argon said:

Are we just biological machines without a soul?

Please share your thoughts

Biological beings beings naturely evolve to a higher conscious awareness. 

In my opinion, when a biological being develops a higher level of conscious awareness, that awareness is a soul with a biological body. The body functions somewhat as a machine, because  it has parts that function as a unity. 

[+Liquid Gardens]

2 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

They exist and grow based on our discoveries and are modeled off of our abilities, yes now they are adaptive artificial intelligence  but the did not create their intelligence.

That may be true, although I believe there is a lot of work being done in building systems that can learn.  Did we 'create' our intelligence?  We may have used our intelligence to gather a bunch of knowledge, but intelligence I think implies more than that.  The fact that due to brain injuries or birth defects physical differences in the brain can apparently cause some people to have less intelligence, that leads me to believe that we aren't responsible for creating our intelligence.

[XenoFish]

[jmccr8]

Just now, Liquid Gardens said:

That may be true, although I believe there is a lot of work being done in building systems that can learn.  Did we 'create' our intelligence?  We may have used our intelligence to gather a bunch of knowledge, but intelligence I think implies more than that.  The fact that due to brain injuries or birth defects physical differences in the brain can apparently cause some people to have less intelligence, that leads me to believe that we aren't responsible for creating our intelligence.

Yes I stand corrected about creating intelligence, the premise is that we started with animal instinct with a something else that makes us unique. This is something that tech could never do because it did not have the ability to be something more without us first giving it the advantage of thousands of years of our experience that brought us to the point that we could even build such complex machines.Sure their computing power with give an illusion that it is capable to be advancing itself but ultimately it exists on borrowed experience something our ancestors did not.

jmccr8

[Illyrius]

12 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Define 'sense of meaning'.

Sense of meaning;

It is a capacity to emotionally, intuitively, symbolically and logically grasp the information recieved via senses and interpret it to make sense of your surrondings.

[XenoFish]

One more.....

[jmccr8]

19 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Where it becomes desirable to gain an understanding of the knowledge that's been learned.

 

 

Are you talking about feelings or emotion as they are not the same, if I hit my thumb with a hammer I feel pain and learn to be more careful if I am angry and hit your finger with a hammer I won't feel pain but I experience emotions?

jmccr8

[Aquila King]

5 hours ago, Mr. Argon said:

Are we just biological machines without a soul?

Please share your thoughts

I believe what we call the 'soul' is really just consciousness, and that consciousness is received by the brain (similar to a television or radio) as opposed to produced by it. Too many get caught up in calling the soul 'energy fields' or something, but I think that misses the point. It's just consciousness, plain and simple.

So in short, not really. I mean a radio is just a machine, but the sounds produced by it are received off of radio signals rather than produced by the machine itself. It's the same with us.

[Illyrius]

Just now, Aquila King said:

I believe what we call the 'soul' is really just consciousness, and that consciousness is received by the brain (similar to a television or radio) as opposed to produced by it. Too many get caught up in calling the soul 'energy fields' or something, but I think that misses the point. It's just consciousness, plain and simple.

So in short, not really. I mean a radio is just a machine, but the sounds produced by it are received off of radio signals rather than produced by the machine itself. It's the same with us.

[XenoFish]

Nothing good will ever come of us. Our brains are 66.6% fat. 

[Illyrius]

2 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Nothing good will ever come of us. Our brains are 66.6% fat. 

What's wrong with fat? Its bubbly.

Percentage is cool too. Approximately the golden ratio.

Edited February 1, 2018 by Mr. Argon

[Ultima Weapon]

3 minutes ago, Aquila King said:

I believe what we call the 'soul' is really just consciousness, and that consciousness is received by the brain (similar to a television or radio) as opposed to produced by it. Too many get caught up in calling the soul 'energy fields' or something, but I think that misses the point. It's just consciousness, plain and simple.

So in short, not really. I mean a radio is just a machine, but the sounds produced by it are received off of radio signals rather than produced by the machine itself. It's the same with us.

At least someone seems to have finally defined what this 'soul' even is. At least somewhat anyway.

Although I'd love to see your justification for such a claim.

[Illyrius]

6 minutes ago, Ultima Weapon said:

At least someone seems to have finally defined what this 'soul' even is. At least somewhat anyway.

Although I'd love to see your justification for such a claim.

It is basically a claim that everything is consciousness and that it does not originate in brain but on the contrary that a brain is only an organ of interpretation.

[Aquila King]

Just now, Ultima Weapon said:

At least someone seems to have finally defined what this 'soul' even is. At least somewhat anyway.

Although I'd love to see your justification for such a claim.

There are three main methods by which scientists determine whether or not the brain produces consciousness. They're called: Correlation, Stimulation, and Oblation.

First, scientists can hook you up and scan your brain while you shift from one conscious state to another (or in other words simply focus on a particular task and/or think of something specific), and measure the physiological changes in the brain (i.e. electrical signals firing, etc.). In this case they record a correlation between physiological brain faculties and consciousness.

Second, scientists have proven that by stimulating certain regions of the brain (be it by electro or magnetic shocks to the brain or the intake of certain chemicals and drugs) can affect consciousness to various degrees. They stimulate the brain to cause a shift in consciousness.

Third, scientists cut away certain portions of the brain, and then measure to what degree consciousness has been affected. Known as oblation.

By doing this, neuroscientists conclude that the brain produces consciousness. However, there's a major problem in this line of thinking. Namely, that the exact same methods can used to reach the exact same conclusion when applied to a television set. You can monitor the circuitry to determine whether there's any correlation between certain circuits and the TV signal. You can stimulate certain portions of the circuitry to affect the TV reception. And you could cut out portions of the circuitry via oblation to determine what portions of the signal reception are lost. However despite this we know that the television does not produce the signal, it merely receives it.

Therefore, the notion that science has proven that consciousness is produced by the brain is not at all the case. While this may not be proof positive that consciousness isn't produced by the brain, it also isn't proof positive that consciousness is produced by the brain either.

In order to determine whether or not consciousness is produced by the brain or not, you have to study examples of complex consciousness existing while the brain is inoperable. Most notably cases of NDE's for example.

[Illyrius]

23 minutes ago, Aquila King said:

By doing this, neuroscientists conclude that the brain produces consciousness. However, there's a major problem in this line of thinking. Namely, that the exact same methods can used to reach the exact same conclusion when applied to a television set. You can monitor the circuitry to determine whether there's any correlation between certain circuits and the TV signal. You can stimulate certain portions of the circuitry to affect the TV reception. And you could cut out portions of the circuitry via oblation to determine what portions of the signal reception are lost. However despite this we know that the television does not produce the signal, it merely receives it.

Exactly. This just shows how shallow scientific interpretations and deductions sometimes are.

Edited February 1, 2018 by Mr. Argon

[XenoFish]

Ladies and gentlemen. I present the point in the thread where all starts going downhill.

[Illyrius]

12 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Ladies and gentlemen. I present the point in the thread where all starts going downhill.

 

 

[quiXilver]

I have the palpable and so far this life, unshakable sense that my true essential nature is formless awareness and the experience of my body and emotions and ego, are a small dense frequency of vibration within the source field awareness.

Of all the things my body has experienced, of all the things I've done and remember, or mis-remember, or have forgotten outright... one thing alone remains certain to me.

I am aware.

Baseline awareness is transcendent, indescribable and untouchable... yet it is utterly transforming and to touch it once, for any span of time... is to be forever shifted by the exprience... unfolding, awakening, opening... and above all... the sense of fluidity.  Nothing anywhere is rigid, static and fixed.  Every observable thing at its core, is subatomic vibration in pattherns.  Essentially empty. 

It's challenging though, for the body is awareness as well and very persistent... so much so, that any pauses in this process are rather rare and tend to bring ecstacy and revelation and so are treated and labeled as 'sacred', or 'spiritual' and become a cult icon of mind form.  Where bodily sensations are available, they tend to dominate awareness.

[Illyrius]

13 minutes ago, quiXilver said:

I have the palpable and so far this life, unshakable sense that my true essential nature is formless awareness and the experience of my body and emotions and ego, are a small dense frequency of vibration within the source field awareness.

This goes quite in line with the interpretation that brain is only a receptor of awareness and not a creator, if i interpret this correctly. I also think physical world is only a dense field of energy/spirit/awareness/consciousness, it is the interpretation which makes the most sense to me when thinking about the universe and nature. Physical body from this perspective is only a temporary suit for experience of this dense frequency of vibration within the source field awareness.