The Inter Mind

What you think about how you think.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19316
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Nov 23, 2018 2:59 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Fri Nov 23, 2018 2:46 am


False : Evolution always increases consciousness
I will next further debunk your ridiculous claim, using the evolutionary examples where animals have "dumbed down" as a trade off to achieve an alternative adaptive advantage.
I'd be careful of that, giving any kind of "intentionality" to evolution. Its one of the most common errors made, making evolution the cause of anything when it is ALWAYS the result of the environment and selective adaptation. I hope you use the one about squirrels that was stated just last night on Nature or Nova: tree squirrels are smarter than ground squirrels. Jumping around trees requires it....or selects for it...……..and THEN: cover why there are so many stooped hoomans. Whats the selective advantage there?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11274
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by landrew » Fri Nov 23, 2018 3:01 am

Bigger brains are not necessarily an evolutionary advantage, nor do they confer consciousness. Neanderthal had bigger brains than Cro-Magnon, and whales have the biggest brains of all, but I see no evidence that they are highly conscious beings. I believe consciousness is a uniquely human trait, evolved to give us an advantage in survival, over both our environment and our competitors.

I don't conflate consciousness with intelligence, which seems to be what I'm reading.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

Matthew Ellard
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 30516
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am
Custom Title: Big Beautiful Bouncy Skeptic

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by Matthew Ellard » Fri Nov 23, 2018 3:08 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:I'd be careful of that, giving any kind of "intentionality" to evolution.
I didn't. I used the expression "trade off", as random mutations enter the gene pool and can be positive, negative or neutral in their adaptive advantage.

Steve Klinko is claiming "intentional evolution" which is another way of saying "intelligent design". "Intelligent design always fails as a concept because it has no mechanism for preventing normal evolution taking place.
:D
.
Steve Klinko wrote:The Universe might have been created by Consciousness and for Consciousness. We can also speculate that the ultimate goal of Physical Evolution is to provide a better and better host for Consciousness. We can speculate that maybe the very Existence of the Physical Universe is pointless without Consciousness.

Matthew Ellard
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 30516
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am
Custom Title: Big Beautiful Bouncy Skeptic

Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by Matthew Ellard » Fri Nov 23, 2018 3:13 am

landrew wrote:Bigger brains are not necessarily an evolutionary advantage, nor do they confer consciousness.

Yep. The classical university example is migratory birds. They "dumbed down " to allow for longer flight.

Evolutionary Divergence in Brain Size between Migratory and Resident Birds
Understanding the factors influencing the changes in brain size has been an area of great interest to evolutionary biologists since Darwin [1], who believed that the large size of the human brain was closely associated with its higher cognitive capacities. After more than a century of research, however, controversy remains regarding the selective pressures that have driven the enormous diversification in brain size. One reason is that previous studies have mostly focused on documenting advantages and/or costs of the brain under present ecological conditions

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19316
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Nov 23, 2018 3:18 am

Consciousness has many attributes. Intelligence is one of them. Every issue has many factors to consider making any "one" factor not the equivalent of any other.....so...every issue I can think of does not "cause" anything else but only correlates to it as no one factor acting alone results in anything. Brain size does strongly correlate to intelligence and the level of consciousness achieved....but as you say, its not 1.0. aka: Brain size only correlates to the number of neuron connections which appears to have a 1.0 correlation to intelligence...……….except between the sexes of the same species. I always laugh when remembering that.

And the preliminary data is that "Big Brains" (big defined as able to change the environment to accommodate their species to the exclusion of almost all others) are an evolutionary dead end. Its one of the factors in that Is there Intelligent life elsewhere in the Universe. Look how many factors are present in causing the extinction of hooman life on Earth because of our Big Brains: Nuclear Winter was big for awhile and will always be with us, but now add what is certainly coming: Anthropological Global Warming. ……...hear the drum beat.

I tried to delete my multiple posts....but no can do after anyone response. Too much turkey slows everything down...………..
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19316
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Nov 23, 2018 3:22 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Fri Nov 23, 2018 3:08 am
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:I'd be careful of that, giving any kind of "intentionality" to evolution.
I didn't. I used the expression "trade off", as random mutations enter the gene pool and can be positive, negative or neutral in their adaptive advantage.


Yep, and I agree totally with that exquisite recognition. Thats why my comment was about your FUTURE post you were considering.

Evolution has many avenues it can take. I wonder why it didn't try larger vaginas?.....I've met a few.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19316
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Nov 23, 2018 3:32 am

SteveKlinko wrote:
Thu Nov 22, 2018 1:21 pm
Matthew Ellard wrote:
Thu Nov 22, 2018 1:29 am
SteveKlinko wrote: Ok so I take it from this that you maintain that the experience of Pain to avoid and reduce Injury does not increase survival Rates for Organisms or Animals. Thank You for the answer.
You didn't understand a word I wrote. The genes that make you feel pain have to have already evolved for you to feel pain. Before consciousness evolved 500 million years ago innate behaviour performed all the same tasks without requiring consciousness.
SteveKlinko wrote: Without the existence of these basic Conscious experiences there would be no motivation for any organism to react. There's nothing like a little Pain to motivate you to adjust what you are doing.
Tell us why do don't believe in evolved innate behaviour?


I'm thinking its "innate behavior" that Klinko "mostly" does not understand. PLANTS produce toxic chemicals in response to being eaten. Its an adaptive response meant to increase survival. I think years ago I saw some reports on some device being connected and some kind of "impulse" was seen being transmitted intra and inter plant....but not since, so that might be bogus. Point is: you don't need pain or consciousness to avoid injury....as much as your roots will allow. ((Fun Ftn #1630: "roots" a reference to cultural roots hoomans put down and use to excuse a variety of destructive behaviors))
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 992
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by SteveKlinko » Fri Nov 23, 2018 1:31 pm

Lot's of Rambling diversions from the Physicalists in the above posts. The question to the Physicalists remains: Do you agree or disagree that the experience of Pain would give an Organism or Animal a survival advantage that could affect Evolutionary outcomes. Its a simple Agree, or Disagree answer. I can only guess, because he Rambles incoherently, that Ellard says he disagrees. How about everybody else?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11274
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by landrew » Fri Nov 23, 2018 4:10 pm

SteveKlinko wrote:
Fri Nov 23, 2018 1:31 pm
Lot's of Rambling diversions from the Physicalists in the above posts. The question to the Physicalists remains: Do you agree or disagree that the experience of Pain would give an Organism or Animal a survival advantage that could affect Evolutionary outcomes. Its a simple Agree, or Disagree answer. I can only guess, because he Rambles incoherently, that Ellard says he disagrees. How about everybody else?
Once again, pain fits with a higher behavioral matrix, where a mind essentially trains itself through the experiences of pain and pleasure. For simpler creatures, behaviors are more hard-wired; pain and pleasure are irrelevant. They have simple responses to stimuli, like a machine programmed to do certain tasks.

The simple answer is this: The experience of pain can give an organism a survival advantage only when the brain is configured to reprogram its own behaviors in response to pain and pleasure. I don't know where to draw the line, but I believe most invertebrates have mostly hard-wired behaviors, reacting to stimuli instead of feeling pain. It may look the same as pain when an insect avoids getting burned by avoiding a flame, but it's not a learning experience, it's a simple programmed response to heat which will occur every time regardless of external stimuli.

Most mammals have brains that learn from the dual "teachers," pain and pleasure. Beyond the hard-wiring (which I believe we all have to some degree) behaviors are reprogrammed and modified by those experiences. Invertebrates do not. I believe fish and reptiles fall somewhere in between. I'm sure some animal behavioral studies have been done which measure the learning abilities of reptiles in response to pain, but I haven't researched the subject.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

Matthew Ellard
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 30516
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am
Custom Title: Big Beautiful Bouncy Skeptic

Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by Matthew Ellard » Fri Nov 23, 2018 11:14 pm

SteveKlinko wrote: Lot's of Rambling diversions from the Physicalists in the above posts.
Nope. The skeptics have debunked all of your claims, you made in the last page..... so you are avoiding those posts.

Debunk 1
Firstly, you claimed that "consciousness" existed 13 billion years ago, prior to 500 million years ago, when the central nervous systems evolved in animals allowing for earthly consciousness. However you failed to offer any evidence for your claim and cannot tell us what sort of creature you are claiming was conscious.


Debunk 2
Secondly, if you were to claim this 4 billion year old consciousness was an "alien " and not from earth, you destroy your initial claim that another non-physical alien consciousness from another dimension allows them to see red. That is because you don't know if aliens see colour or not.


Debunk 3
You claim the alien sucks terabytes of data every second, from over 10, 000, 000,000,000 animals that see colour, processes that data into colour in another dimension and sends it back to our dimension as colour, yet simultaneously claim animals on earth can't process colour to receive this colour data. Yet no scientist has ever seen time gap where data (electrons) go missing or new data is added to physical brains. Your fairy tale is predicated on something that doesn't actually happen.


Debunk 4
You claim consciousness evolves and claim this is because of the experience of pain, yet simultaneously claim colour is processed by a non physical consciousness in another dimension, which can't feel pain as it is non-physical. . You contradict yourself.


Debunk 5
You claim evolution is caused by the conscious experience of pain. However when we informed you that homo sapien intelligence increased as a trade off reducing bipedal locomotion and extended infantile incapacity durations, you were unable to explain how pain or consciouness had anything to do with this example of evolution. That's because you don't know what the theory of evolution is, despite pretending your read Darwin's Origin of the species, "cover to cover".


Debunk 6
(My favorite) Steve Klinko has never asked himself the most obvious question about his own silly fairy tale. If there is a non-physical alien consciousness in another dimension, that we can never detect........... what evolutionary advantage does it get spending all its time converting brain data to colour data for other creatures that live in another dimension? The concept is clearly ludicrous.
:lol: :lol:

/////////////////////

Let's all watch Steve Klinko run away from his own claim again.
SteveKlinko wrote: Do you agree or disagree that the experience of Pain would give an Organism or Animal a survival advantage that could affect Evolutionary outcomes.
Steve Klinko? How did your non-physical consciousness in another dimension evolve then, if it could not feel pain? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19316
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Nov 24, 2018 4:41 am

SteveKlinko wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 1:05 pm

You will eventually recognize that the Conscious Visual Scene that is embedded in the front of your face (literally) as a Special Category of Phenomenon that must be Explained. Think more Deeply about the actual Conscious Visual Experience.
Klinko: is "Pain" another Special Category of Phenomenon that must be Explained? Does it have a Hard Problem?? Can you further describe what lies deeper? If not, why not???

Its all just stimulus and response...…...run through millions of years of chemical evolution, but still...……. SO...why about other stimulus/response relationships??? Is there a Special Category (of what?) or a Hard problem of a spring releasing its stored energy??? If not, why not?????

"Category."===>an interesting word/concept. Almost makes me want to read the dictionary...……...
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 992
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by SteveKlinko » Sat Nov 24, 2018 2:52 pm

landrew wrote:
Fri Nov 23, 2018 4:10 pm
SteveKlinko wrote:
Fri Nov 23, 2018 1:31 pm
Lot's of Rambling diversions from the Physicalists in the above posts. The question to the Physicalists remains: Do you agree or disagree that the experience of Pain would give an Organism or Animal a survival advantage that could affect Evolutionary outcomes. Its a simple Agree, or Disagree answer. I can only guess, because he Rambles incoherently, that Ellard says he disagrees. How about everybody else?
Once again, pain fits with a higher behavioral matrix, where a mind essentially trains itself through the experiences of pain and pleasure. For simpler creatures, behaviors are more hard-wired; pain and pleasure are irrelevant. They have simple responses to stimuli, like a machine programmed to do certain tasks.

The simple answer is this: The experience of pain can give an organism a survival advantage only when the brain is configured to reprogram its own behaviors in response to pain and pleasure. I don't know where to draw the line, but I believe most invertebrates have mostly hard-wired behaviors, reacting to stimuli instead of feeling pain. It may look the same as pain when an insect avoids getting burned by avoiding a flame, but it's not a learning experience, it's a simple programmed response to heat which will occur every time regardless of external stimuli.

Most mammals have brains that learn from the dual "teachers," pain and pleasure. Beyond the hard-wiring (which I believe we all have to some degree) behaviors are reprogrammed and modified by those experiences. Invertebrates do not. I believe fish and reptiles fall somewhere in between. I'm sure some animal behavioral studies have been done which measure the learning abilities of reptiles in response to pain, but I haven't researched the subject.
This all sounds reasonable to me. But what actually is the Pain experience itself and the Pleasure experience itself. That is the question we are trying to figure out.

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 992
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by SteveKlinko » Sat Nov 24, 2018 3:03 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Sat Nov 24, 2018 4:41 am
SteveKlinko wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 1:05 pm

You will eventually recognize that the Conscious Visual Scene that is embedded in the front of your face (literally) as a Special Category of Phenomenon that must be Explained. Think more Deeply about the actual Conscious Visual Experience.
Klinko: is "Pain" another Special Category of Phenomenon that must be Explained? Does it have a Hard Problem?? Can you further describe what lies deeper? If not, why not???

Its all just stimulus and response...…...run through millions of years of chemical evolution, but still...……. SO...why about other stimulus/response relationships??? Is there a Special Category (of what?) or a Hard problem of a spring releasing its stored energy??? If not, why not?????

"Category."===>an interesting word/concept. Almost makes me want to read the dictionary...……...
Yes, I would put every type of Conscious Experience in a Special Category of Phenomena, which we can call Conscious Phenomena. Each different type of Conscious Experience is different from another type of Conscious Experience but they are all in the single Main Category called Conscious Phenomena. Think about the difference between the Experience of Redness and the Experience of Pain, as an example of how different they can be. When we know more about what Conscious Experience is then sub Categories can be created within the Main Category of Conscious Phenomena. There is no Conscious Phenomena Category in the whole Collection of Categories of Phenomena that Science knows about.

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 992
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Addressing the Ellard Delirium

Post by SteveKlinko » Sat Nov 24, 2018 3:10 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Fri Nov 23, 2018 11:14 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: Lot's of Rambling diversions from the Physicalists in the above posts.
Nope. The skeptics have debunked all of your claims, you made in the last page..... so you are avoiding those posts.

Debunk 1
Firstly, you claimed that "consciousness" existed 13 billion years ago, prior to 500 million years ago, when the central nervous systems evolved in animals allowing for earthly consciousness. However you failed to offer any evidence for your claim and cannot tell us what sort of creature you are claiming was conscious.


Debunk 2
Secondly, if you were to claim this 4 billion year old consciousness was an "alien " and not from earth, you destroy your initial claim that another non-physical alien consciousness from another dimension allows them to see red. That is because you don't know if aliens see colour or not.


Debunk 3
You claim the alien sucks terabytes of data every second, from over 10, 000, 000,000,000 animals that see colour, processes that data into colour in another dimension and sends it back to our dimension as colour, yet simultaneously claim animals on earth can't process colour to receive this colour data. Yet no scientist has ever seen time gap where data (electrons) go missing or new data is added to physical brains. Your fairy tale is predicated on something that doesn't actually happen.


Debunk 4
You claim consciousness evolves and claim this is because of the experience of pain, yet simultaneously claim colour is processed by a non physical consciousness in another dimension, which can't feel pain as it is non-physical. . You contradict yourself.


Debunk 5
You claim evolution is caused by the conscious experience of pain. However when we informed you that homo sapien intelligence increased as a trade off reducing bipedal locomotion and extended infantile incapacity durations, you were unable to explain how pain or consciouness had anything to do with this example of evolution. That's because you don't know what the theory of evolution is, despite pretending your read Darwin's Origin of the species, "cover to cover".


Debunk 6
(My favorite) Steve Klinko has never asked himself the most obvious question about his own silly fairy tale. If there is a non-physical alien consciousness in another dimension, that we can never detect........... what evolutionary advantage does it get spending all its time converting brain data to colour data for other creatures that live in another dimension? The concept is clearly ludicrous.
:lol: :lol:

/////////////////////

Let's all watch Steve Klinko run away from his own claim again.
SteveKlinko wrote: Do you agree or disagree that the experience of Pain would give an Organism or Animal a survival advantage that could affect Evolutionary outcomes.
Steve Klinko? How did your non-physical consciousness in another dimension evolve then, if it could not feel pain? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
If you're going to talk about Aliens from other Dimensions then you have reached the next step in your Ellard Delirium. I can't answer your questions because I never said anything that you talk about in your questions. You are just doing your Pathological Liar routine again.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19316
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Nov 24, 2018 3:23 pm

Klinko you are anthropomorphizing Science as if Science knew anything, as if it too were conscious. Science is a process that can be applied to anything....and has been applied to everything. But, to be fair I think in the sense you mean it, you are simply wrong. What else is anesthesiology except one part of the study of consciousness and how to remove it and to reestablish it, the risks thereto, the different methods....etc.


What else is "psychology?" Entire departments at university studying consciousness, and subconsciousness and all kinds of other mental processes. This is an error of your private meaning for words and why you should adopt the same language everyone else uses.

Amusing.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11274
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by landrew » Sat Nov 24, 2018 4:29 pm

SteveKlinko wrote:
Sat Nov 24, 2018 2:52 pm
This all sounds reasonable to me. But what actually is the Pain experience itself and the Pleasure experience itself. That is the question we are trying to figure out.
I'm not. It seems fairly simple to me that pain is simply a type of biological signal that works with the type of brain that functions administratively. A learning brain needs a teacher, and pain is one of those teachers. The other teacher is the pleasure response.

Simpler brains are hard-wired to simply react to stimuli, therefore the pain signal is absent, because simple brains don't use it. But I'm just repeating myself now.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

Matthew Ellard
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 30516
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am
Custom Title: Big Beautiful Bouncy Skeptic

Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by Matthew Ellard » Sat Nov 24, 2018 10:54 pm

Debunking : Steve Klinko's Inter Mind Religion

Debunk 1
Firstly, you claimed that "consciousness" existed 13 billion years ago, prior to 500 million years ago, when the central nervous systems evolved in animals allowing for earthly consciousness. However you failed to offer any evidence for your claim and cannot tell us what sort of creature you are claiming was conscious.


Debunk 2
Secondly, if you were to claim this 4 billion year old consciousness was an "alien " and not from earth, you destroy your initial claim that another non-physical alien consciousness from another dimension allows them to see red. That is because you don't know if aliens see colour or not.


Debunk 3
You claim the alien sucks terabytes of data every second, from over 10, 000, 000,000,000 animals that see colour, processes that data into colour in another dimension and sends it back to our dimension as colour, yet simultaneously claim animals on earth can't process colour to receive this colour data. Yet no scientist has ever seen time gap where data (electrons) go missing or new data is added to physical brains. Your fairy tale is predicated on something that doesn't actually happen.


Debunk 4
You claim consciousness evolves and claim this is because of the experience of pain, yet simultaneously claim colour is processed by a non physical consciousness in another dimension, which can't feel pain as it is non-physical. . You contradict yourself.


Debunk 5
You claim evolution is caused by the conscious experience of pain. However when we informed you that homo sapien intelligence increased as a trade off reducing bipedal locomotion and extended infantile incapacity durations, you were unable to explain how pain or consciouness had anything to do with this example of evolution. That's because you don't know what the theory of evolution is, despite pretending your read Darwin's Origin of the species, "cover to cover".


Debunk 6
(My favorite) Steve Klinko has never asked himself the most obvious question about his own silly fairy tale. If there is a non-physical alien consciousness in another dimension, that we can never detect........... what evolutionary advantage does it get spending all its time converting brain data to colour data for other creatures that live in another dimension? The concept is clearly ludicrous.
:lol: :lol:

/////////////////////

Let's all watch Steve Klinko run away from his own claim again.
SteveKlinko wrote: Do you agree or disagree that the experience of Pain would give an Organism or Animal a survival advantage that could affect Evolutionary outcomes.
Steve Klinko? How did your non-physical consciousness in another dimension evolve then, if it could not feel pain? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
SteveKlinko" wrote: I can't answer your questions......
We all already knew that. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11274
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by landrew » Sat Nov 24, 2018 11:13 pm

:pc:
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19316
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Addressing the Ellard Delirium

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Nov 25, 2018 3:38 am

SteveKlinko wrote:
Sat Nov 24, 2018 3:10 pm
Matthew Ellard wrote:
Fri Nov 23, 2018 11:14 pm
Debunk 1
Firstly, you claimed that "consciousness" existed 13 billion years ago, prior to 500 million years ago, when the central nervous systems evolved in animals allowing for earthly consciousness. However you failed to offer any evidence for your claim and cannot tell us what sort of creature you are claiming was conscious.

I can't answer your questions because I never said anything that you talk about in your questions. You are just doing your Pathological Liar routine again.

This caught my attention for its Trumpyness. Denying what a written record before us can PROVE one way or the other. so, I took the very first Ellard Claim and did a search and in two minutes found this on page 51 from Klinko:
Here's what I really said:

The Evolution of life on this Planet is probably directly driven by Conscious experience. Any organism that experiences Pleasure will seek out that Pleasure. Any organism that experiences Pain will try to avoid that Pain. Without the existence of these basic Conscious experiences there would be no motivation for any organism to react. There's nothing like a little Pain to motivate you to adjust what you are doing. This applies to simple organisms and to Humans. It would seem that Evolution is directly guided by Conscious experience.
Now, this is not undeniably rock solid for like Trump you are speaking out of both sides of your mouth, but any consequences of that error are yours....not anyone elses. While evolution of conscious entities no doubt is influenced by pleasure/pain responses these are just quality/precision enhancements to what "simple" or even first entities possess: qualities that aid or inhibit success in breeding. BUT single cell creatures, aka the best understanding of what "simple organisms" are who were not unimportantly transitional states from organic chemistry to life itself were in that sense the first steps of Evolution on this Planet. Hmmmm....overly wordy, but I'll let it stand. All to the point that Matthew Ellards Debunk 1 fairly states your position that you run away from now.

Stand your ground...……..defend it...……..or change it. But what you have said is before anyone willing to spend two minutes.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1312
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: USA

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by Cadmusteeth » Sun Nov 25, 2018 3:54 am

Which page was that on?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19316
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Nov 25, 2018 4:32 am

Confirmed. Page 51 about 2/3rds the way down. I don't know how to provide a closer link. Heres the entire post:
SteveKlinko wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 1:25 pm
Matthew Ellard wrote:Think really hard Steve Klinko. You wrote this crap. :lol:
SteveKlinko wrote:Consciousness probably is a result of Evolution.
That means "consciousness" came into existence with humans 195,000 year ago.
However SteveKlinko previously wrote: Consciousness might have existed prior to the Big Bang and might have even been the cause of the Big Bang."
That means your same "consciousness" was around 13.8 billion years ago.
SteveKlinko yesterday wrote:I never say anything about Time Travel. That is you Demented Aberration.
Soooo.....Steve Klinko? If you claim consciousness evolved and only came into existence with humans 195,000 years ago, how do you simultaneously claim consciousness existed 13.8 billion years ago with the Big Bang?

You are contradicting your own crap religion unless you are claiming "consciousness can time travel"
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Think harder next time Steve Klinko. :lol: :lol: :lol:
Here's what I really said:

The Evolution of life on this Planet is probably directly driven by Conscious experience. Any organism that experiences Pleasure will seek out that Pleasure. Any organism that experiences Pain will try to avoid that Pain. Without the existence of these basic Conscious experiences there would be no motivation for any organism to react. There's nothing like a little Pain to motivate you to adjust what you are doing. This applies to simple organisms and to Humans. It would seem that Evolution is directly guided by Conscious experience.

Since Science is unable to say what Consciousness is we can and should speculate what it could be and how it could have developed. We can, for example, speculate that Consciousness might have existed prior to the Big Bang and might have even been the cause of the Big Bang. The Universe might have been created by Consciousness and for Consciousness. We can also speculate that the ultimate goal of Physical Evolution is to provide a better and better host for Consciousness. We can speculate that maybe the very Existence of the Physical Universe is pointless without Consciousness. Maybe the Physical Body is just some sort of incubator for the Conscious Mind and the Conscious Mind is the more important part. Maybe the Physical Mind creates a Connection to Conscious Space in order to create a Conscious Mind in that Conscious Space. The Conscious Mind would then strictly exist only in that Conscious Space. All speculations are still on the table. Remember that the only thing we know about the Physical Universe is through our Conscious experiences. Conscious Experiences are Primary to what we are.

Scientists need to find a way to understand and study Consciousness. They have to stop hiding their inability to study Consciousness by trying to minimize its importance. The Primacy of Consciousness must be understood.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 992
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by SteveKlinko » Sun Nov 25, 2018 4:39 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Sat Nov 24, 2018 3:23 pm
Klinko you are anthropomorphizing Science as if Science knew anything, as if it too were conscious. Science is a process that can be applied to anything....and has been applied to everything. But, to be fair I think in the sense you mean it, you are simply wrong. What else is anesthesiology except one part of the study of consciousness and how to remove it and to reestablish it, the risks thereto, the different methods....etc.


What else is "psychology?" Entire departments at university studying consciousness, and subconsciousness and all kinds of other mental processes. This is an error of your private meaning for words and why you should adopt the same language everyone else uses.

Amusing.
If you are going to quibble about anthropomorphizing the word Science then you must be out of ammunition. Everyone says Science does This and Science Knows that.

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 992
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by SteveKlinko » Sun Nov 25, 2018 4:42 pm

landrew wrote:
Sat Nov 24, 2018 4:29 pm
SteveKlinko wrote:
Sat Nov 24, 2018 2:52 pm
This all sounds reasonable to me. But what actually is the Pain experience itself and the Pleasure experience itself. That is the question we are trying to figure out.
I'm not. It seems fairly simple to me that pain is simply a type of biological signal that works with the type of brain that functions administratively. A learning brain needs a teacher, and pain is one of those teachers. The other teacher is the pleasure response.

Simpler brains are hard-wired to simply react to stimuli, therefore the pain signal is absent, because simple brains don't use it. But I'm just repeating myself now.
You talk like you are a Zombie that has never actually experienced Pain. Think about the Pain itself as a Conscious experience. It's not just a Biological signal it is a Conscious Phenomenon that exists only in your Mind.

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11274
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by landrew » Sun Nov 25, 2018 5:17 pm

SteveKlinko wrote:
Sun Nov 25, 2018 4:42 pm
landrew wrote:
Sat Nov 24, 2018 4:29 pm
SteveKlinko wrote:
Sat Nov 24, 2018 2:52 pm
This all sounds reasonable to me. But what actually is the Pain experience itself and the Pleasure experience itself. That is the question we are trying to figure out.
I'm not. It seems fairly simple to me that pain is simply a type of biological signal that works with the type of brain that functions administratively. A learning brain needs a teacher, and pain is one of those teachers. The other teacher is the pleasure response.

Simpler brains are hard-wired to simply react to stimuli, therefore the pain signal is absent, because simple brains don't use it. But I'm just repeating myself now.
You talk like you are a Zombie that has never actually experienced Pain. Think about the Pain itself as a Conscious experience. It's not just a Biological signal it is a Conscious Phenomenon that exists only in your Mind.
I don't know how you managed to redefine consciousness as neural activity. It's not. An insect brain isn't much more complicated than the wiring harness in your car, which connects various sensors to a microprocessor, which makes simple, programmed decisions based on the inputs. It doesn't make decisions based on learning, or on developing strategies (at least not yet). It doesn't learn to make better decisions as a result of experience, correlating data with observation the way a higher mind does.

Contrast this to the higher minds. Higher levels of organization create administrative "departments" which do not respond to signals directly, but read a "report" which provides an "opinion" that a situation is good or bad for the organism. Higher brain functions process this data without impulsively reacting to stimuli in a non-thinking way.

Touch a hot needle to an insect and it runs of flies away. It will never consciously go through the extra steps of experiencing pain; it simply throws the switch that makes the bug flee. No conscious thought required.

Touch a hot needle to a human being, and you may not make a break for the door. You may remember that you are receiving acupuncture, and you have decided to sit there and endure the pain, ostensibly for a beneficial purpose. The administrative functions of a brain use pain as a type of data used for data processing.

Feelings have nothing to do with reality. Feeling compassion for an insect because you imagine that it's feeling pain doesn't make it so. The insect isn't having a conscious experience. If its wings are torn off, it will probably try to carry on according to its programming, as if nothing had happened. You seem to think that every brain is like our own, but they aren't. "Brain" isn't even the correct word to describe the bundle of neurons that function to switch on the various responses to stimuli, similar to the microprocessor in your car that switches on the anti-lock brakes or adjusts your engine timing. Higher minds have several compartmentalized (departments) levels which rely on processed data from lower levels, of which the experience of pain is one.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 992
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Addressing the Ellard Delirium

Post by SteveKlinko » Sun Nov 25, 2018 5:18 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Sun Nov 25, 2018 3:38 am
SteveKlinko wrote:
Sat Nov 24, 2018 3:10 pm
Matthew Ellard wrote:
Fri Nov 23, 2018 11:14 pm
Debunk 1
Firstly, you claimed that "consciousness" existed 13 billion years ago, prior to 500 million years ago, when the central nervous systems evolved in animals allowing for earthly consciousness. However you failed to offer any evidence for your claim and cannot tell us what sort of creature you are claiming was conscious.

I can't answer your questions because I never said anything that you talk about in your questions. You are just doing your Pathological Liar routine again.

This caught my attention for its Trumpyness. Denying what a written record before us can PROVE one way or the other. so, I took the very first Ellard Claim and did a search and in two minutes found this on page 51 from Klinko:
Here's what I really said:

The Evolution of life on this Planet is probably directly driven by Conscious experience. Any organism that experiences Pleasure will seek out that Pleasure. Any organism that experiences Pain will try to avoid that Pain. Without the existence of these basic Conscious experiences there would be no motivation for any organism to react. There's nothing like a little Pain to motivate you to adjust what you are doing. This applies to simple organisms and to Humans. It would seem that Evolution is directly guided by Conscious experience.
Now, this is not undeniably rock solid for like Trump you are speaking out of both sides of your mouth, but any consequences of that error are yours....not anyone elses. While evolution of conscious entities no doubt is influenced by pleasure/pain responses these are just quality/precision enhancements to what "simple" or even first entities possess: qualities that aid or inhibit success in breeding. BUT single cell creatures, aka the best understanding of what "simple organisms" are who were not unimportantly transitional states from organic chemistry to life itself were in that sense the first steps of Evolution on this Planet. Hmmmm....overly wordy, but I'll let it stand. All to the point that Matthew Ellards Debunk 1 fairly states your position that you run away from now.

Stand your ground...……..defend it...……..or change it. But what you have said is before anyone willing to spend two minutes.
I stand by the paragraph you cited. But you need to see it in the context that it is written on the website:

The Evolution of life on this Planet is probably directly driven by Conscious experience. Any organism that experiences Pleasure will seek out that Pleasure. Any organism that experiences Pain will try to avoid that Pain. Without the existence of these basic Conscious experiences there would be no motivation for any organism to react. There's nothing like a little Pain to motivate you to adjust what you are doing. This applies to simple organisms and to Humans. It would seem that Evolution is directly guided by Conscious experience.

Since Science is unable to say what Consciousness is we can and should speculate what it could be and how it could have developed. We can, for example, speculate that Consciousness might have existed prior to the Big Bang and might have even been the cause of the Big Bang. The Universe might have been created by Consciousness and for Consciousness. We can also speculate that the ultimate goal of Physical Evolution is to provide a better and better host for Consciousness. We can speculate that maybe the very Existence of the Physical Universe is pointless without Consciousness. Maybe the Physical Body is just some sort of incubator for the CM and the CM is the more important part. Maybe the PM creates a Connection to Conscious Space in order to create a Conscious Mind in that Conscious Space. The Conscious Mind would then strictly exist only in that Conscious Space. All speculations are still on the table. Remember that the only thing we know about the Physical Universe is through our Conscious experiences. Conscious Experiences are Primary to what we are.

The first paragraph stands on it's own. I think most people would agree with it. The experience of Pain and Pleasure is obviously dependent on Organisms and Animals having a Pain or Pleasure experience. There is no statement of when this Pain and Pleasure entered the Evolutionary scene. What Ellard does is to try to confuse the first paragraph with the second.

The second paragraph is very explicitly flagged, up front, as Speculation. It is food for thought. There are no Claims made here, just Speculation. Unfortunately we are forced to Speculate because Science is silent on anything to do with Consciousness. I should add that we not only can Speculate because of the lack of Scientific understanding of Consciousness, but we very well should Speculate. It is every Thinkers duty to Speculate about Consciousness. The second paragraph is Speculation and should not be connected to the first paragraph. But this is a typical Ellard tactic. He mixes things up and takes things out of context and then throws in a few Lies then demands some absurd question be answered. I have answered his questions for a year and a half just to humor him. I'm more picky now. That question you cite is completely bogus and if you examine it you will see it's not about anything I have said. My thoughts on Pain and Pleasure are not related to my Speculation that Consciousness could have existed from the beginning.

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 992
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by SteveKlinko » Sun Nov 25, 2018 6:03 pm

landrew wrote:
Sun Nov 25, 2018 5:17 pm
SteveKlinko wrote:
Sun Nov 25, 2018 4:42 pm
landrew wrote:
Sat Nov 24, 2018 4:29 pm
SteveKlinko wrote:
Sat Nov 24, 2018 2:52 pm
This all sounds reasonable to me. But what actually is the Pain experience itself and the Pleasure experience itself. That is the question we are trying to figure out.
I'm not. It seems fairly simple to me that pain is simply a type of biological signal that works with the type of brain that functions administratively. A learning brain needs a teacher, and pain is one of those teachers. The other teacher is the pleasure response.

Simpler brains are hard-wired to simply react to stimuli, therefore the pain signal is absent, because simple brains don't use it. But I'm just repeating myself now.
You talk like you are a Zombie that has never actually experienced Pain. Think about the Pain itself as a Conscious experience. It's not just a Biological signal it is a Conscious Phenomenon that exists only in your Mind.
I don't know how you managed to redefine consciousness as neural activity. It's not. An insect brain isn't much more complicated than the wiring harness in your car, which connects various sensors to a microprocessor, which makes simple, programmed decisions based on the inputs. It doesn't make decisions based on learning, or on developing strategies (at least not yet). It doesn't learn to make better decisions as a result of experience, correlating data with observation the way a higher mind does.

Contrast this to the higher minds. Higher levels of organization create administrative "departments" which do not respond to signals directly, but read a "report" which provides an "opinion" that a situation is good or bad for the organism. Higher brain functions process this data without impulsively reacting to stimuli in a non-thinking way.

Touch a hot needle to an insect and it runs of flies away. It will never consciously go through the extra steps of experiencing pain; it simply throws the switch that makes the bug flee. No conscious thought required.

Touch a hot needle to a human being, and you may not make a break for the door. You may remember that you are receiving acupuncture, and you have decided to sit there and endure the pain, ostensibly for a beneficial purpose. The administrative functions of a brain use pain as a type of data used for data processing.

Feelings have nothing to do with reality. Feeling compassion for an insect because you imagine that it's feeling pain doesn't make it so. The insect isn't having a conscious experience. If its wings are torn off, it will probably try to carry on according to its programming, as if nothing had happened. You seem to think that every brain is like our own, but they aren't. "Brain" isn't even the correct word to describe the bundle of neurons that function to switch on the various responses to stimuli, similar to the microprocessor in your car that switches on the anti-lock brakes or adjusts your engine timing. Higher minds have several compartmentalized (departments) levels which rely on processed data from lower levels, of which the experience of pain is one.
You might not be trying to figure out what the experience of Pain and Pleasure are but that is the issue of this thread. You have no idea what the Conscious experience of an insect could be. But in any case that's not the issue. We are trying to understand the experience of Pain in a Human. I never defined Consciousness as Neural Activity. The Physicalists say Neural Activity is Conscious Activity. I have been trying to get the Physicalists to Explain that. They cannot Explain it, so I conclude that Neural Activity must not be the same thing as Conscious Activity.

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11274
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by landrew » Sun Nov 25, 2018 6:58 pm

Trying to figure out what the experience of Pain and Pleasure are NOT is the issue of this thread, because it's a non sequitur. You are making a naive assumption that lower life forms experience pain and that they have consciousness. There is simply no evidence to support that. I've already made it abundantly clear why that can't be the case. Only a highly developed brain is capable of consciousness and capable of processing the sensations of pain and pleasure. There's simply no room in the "brains" of simple organisms for consciousness. They are simple biological switching organs, which respond to stimuli.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

Matthew Ellard
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 30516
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am
Custom Title: Big Beautiful Bouncy Skeptic

Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by Matthew Ellard » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:15 am

SteveKlinko wrote: Think about the Pain itself as a Conscious experience. It's not just a Biological signal it is a Conscious Phenomenon that exists only in your Mind.
Are you retarded? You claim your magical non-physical consciousness from another dimension....is non-physical.

Are you now claiming it feels pain when it falls over, stubs its toe, burns itself on the stove top?
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Matthew Ellard
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 30516
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am
Custom Title: Big Beautiful Bouncy Skeptic

Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by Matthew Ellard » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:25 am

Cadmusteeth wrote: Which page was that on?
Steve Klinko is copying and pasting his religious "intelligent design theory" from a "manifesto" he wrote in 2012. ( It's also the same site he sells his "Inter Mind t-shirts") :lol: :lol: :lol:

Here is the web page address
http://www.theintermind.com/#ConsciousLightScreen

Here is the entire paragraph where he lays out the "science" for his religion.
"The Evolution of life on this Planet is probably directly driven by Conscious experience. Any organism that experiences Pleasure will seek out that Pleasure. Any organism that experiences Pain will try to avoid that Pain. Without the existence of these basic Conscious experiences there would be no motivation for any organism to react. There's nothing like a little Pain to motivate you to adjust what you are doing. This applies to simple organisms and to Humans. It would seem that Evolution is directly guided by Conscious experience.

Since Science is unable to say what Consciousness is we can and should speculate what it could be and how it could have developed. We can, for example, speculate that Consciousness might have existed prior to the Big Bang and might have even been the cause of the Big Bang. The Universe might have been created by Consciousness and for Consciousness. We can also speculate that the ultimate goal of Physical Evolution is to provide a better and better host for Consciousness. We can speculate that maybe the very Existence of the Physical Universe is pointless without Consciousness. Maybe the Physical Body is just some sort of incubator for the CM and the CM is the more important part. Maybe the PM creates a Connection to CSp in order to create a CM in that CSp. The CM would then strictly exist only in that CSp. All speculations are still on the table. Remember that the only thing we know about the Physical Universe is through our Conscious experiences. Conscious Experiences are Primary to what we are."

The "manifesto" is absolutely hilarious, contains no scientific citations and is a bad copy of older "intelligent design" arguments for god. :D :D

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10854
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by Poodle » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:55 am

The whole idea is shot to bits by the ninth word in that quotation. Even then, it's the wrong word. In the complete absence of evidence, 'possibly' is as strong as the argument can be.

User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1312
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: USA

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by Cadmusteeth » Mon Nov 26, 2018 2:19 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:25 am
Cadmusteeth wrote: Which page was that on?
Steve Klinko is copying and pasting his religious "intelligent design theory" from a "manifesto" he wrote in 2012. ( It's also the same site he sells his "Inter Mind t-shirts") :lol: :lol: :lol:

[/color]
I'm aware. I've been following this thread for past few months. I just couldn't find when you first asked Steve about his otherworldly entity to link it, like bobbo did, and I gave up.

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11274
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by landrew » Mon Nov 26, 2018 4:31 pm

The "science" of evolution makes it abundantly clear that there is no purpose or consciousness guiding evolution. Evolution is a blind watchmaker as explained by author Richard Dawkins. Evolution is not guided by anything at all. It is simply a result. A result of natural selection. "Natural" means unguided by anything at all, and simply the result of a natural process of elimination.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

Matthew Ellard
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 30516
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am
Custom Title: Big Beautiful Bouncy Skeptic

Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by Matthew Ellard » Tue Nov 27, 2018 12:20 am

Cadmusteeth wrote: I'm aware. I've been following this thread for past few months. I just couldn't find when you first asked Steve about his otherworldly entity to link it, like bobbo did, and I gave up.


Steve Klinko actually wrote his "paper" in 2012. I went searching around the internet to see where he had previously posted its claims. I didn't get any hits. I then assumed his first public outing was on our Skeptic forum in 2018. That suggested he hadn't previously had to explain his hilarious claims before.

Essentially he is claiming Intelligent Design and making all the same errors that intelligent design did. I think he is realising, for the first time, in six years, that he has huge holes and contradictions in his claim and skeptics already know all the standard flaws concerning intelligent design.

Matthew Ellard
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 30516
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am
Custom Title: Big Beautiful Bouncy Skeptic

Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by Matthew Ellard » Tue Nov 27, 2018 1:23 am

SteveKlinko wrote: The Evolution of life on this Planet is probably directly driven by Conscious experience. Any organism that experiences Pleasure will seek out that Pleasure. Any organism that experiences Pain will try to avoid that Pain.................There is no statement of when this Pain and Pleasure entered the Evolutionary scene...
1) Non conscious innate behaviour evolved 3.8 billion years ago to motivate species to behave in particular ways. You didn't know that innate behaviour existed until we informed you three weeks ago. :lol:

2) Pain must already have evolved for a creature to feel pain. You keep getting this back to front as you do not know what the theory of evolution is. :lol:

3) Pain can only be experienced by conscious creatures. The first conscious creatures only evolved 500 million years ago. You keep claiming life on Earth, that started 3.8 billion years ago was directed by consciousness that only evolved 500 million years ago. That's because you didn't know what "innate" behaviour is and don't know what the theory of evolution is. :lol:
SteveKlinko wrote:I read the Origin of Species cover to cover over 40 years ago, and over the years have read other more modern approaches to Evolution.
Where does Darwin or anyone else say consciousness directed evolution on Earth? :lol: :lol: :lol:

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19316
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Nov 27, 2018 3:18 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Tue Nov 27, 2018 1:23 am

1) Non conscious innate behaviour evolved 3.8 billion years ago to motivate species to behave in particular ways. You didn't know that innate behaviour existed until we informed you three weeks ago. :lol:
More than a quibble, you again are making ((the results of)) evolution a cause rather than an effect. LMFTFY: "Non conscious innate behaviour[/i][/b] evolved 3.8 billion years ago to motivate species to behave in particular ways as a superior adaptive behavior increasing chances of survival to reproduction. Increasing and more sophisticated/adaptive reactions evolved from these non conscious innate behaviours with pain and pleasure enhancements. Add the evolution of higher order consciousness and you get morality and culturally determined values affecting survivability as well. ITS ALL DARWIN. What survives is what ((HAS BEEN)) is selected for. What is selected for is affected by whatever the current environment presents and with hoomans that includes the CULTURAL environment, aka what the individual "thinks" about things. Its really kinda interesting. Religions that teach the esthetic of isolation and celibacy: last one generation and die out---surviving only by heresy?. Religions that teach be fruitful and multiply have a better chance at evolutionary success until too much fruit is produced. See the connection?

Rigour in our language. It helps.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19316
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Nov 27, 2018 3:22 am

SteveKlinko wrote:I read the Origin of Species cover to cover over 40 years ago, and over the years have read other more modern approaches to Evolution.
Where does Darwin or anyone else say consciousness directed evolution on Earth? :lol: :lol: :lol:
[/quote]

Ummmm…..did you read what was BETWEEN the covers?

BHWAHAHAHAHAH. I LAUGH. I tried to read the tome...got about 10 pages in and as I do with all Great Books: I found satisfaction with a good summary. Makes Dostoyevsky a quick read. I recommend short understandable reads over pretensions of greater accomplishment.

As to more modern approaches...….like what? eg: does consciousness come up in any exposition of punctuated equilibrium?....or what more modern concept/theory are you thinking of?...…………………… anything????
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19316
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Nov 27, 2018 3:32 am

SteveKlinko wrote:
Sun Nov 25, 2018 4:39 pm
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Sat Nov 24, 2018 3:23 pm
Klinko you are anthropomorphizing Science as if Science knew anything, as if it too were conscious. Science is a process that can be applied to anything....and has been applied to everything. But, to be fair I think in the sense you mean it, you are simply wrong. What else is anesthesiology except one part of the study of consciousness and how to remove it and to reestablish it, the risks thereto, the different methods....etc.


What else is "psychology?" Entire departments at university studying consciousness, and subconsciousness and all kinds of other mental processes. This is an error of your private meaning for words and why you should adopt the same language everyone else uses.

Amusing.
If you are going to quibble about anthropomorphizing the word Science then you must be out of ammunition. Everyone says Science does This and Science Knows that.
I'm bored, so backfilling. Ha, ha: No, "everyone" does not say Science does this and knows that. In the main: only NON SCIENTISTS use such terminology. As close as I think you can get is many scientists saying "We know.....". And if they 1% of the time say "Science tells us....." they are speaking loosely for the popular press. You won't find the term or the idea in any published paper ((thats a bald faced assertion.....but prove me wrong???)). And even if it is: its still an anthropomorphication that should be avoided, AND continue to dodge the counterargument made in the same sentence: consciousness has been and is studied across its many aspects. Is everything known? No, of course not. What are you, a silly bunny?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19316
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Addressing the Ellard Delirium

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Nov 27, 2018 3:49 am

SteveKlinko wrote:
Sun Nov 25, 2018 5:18 pm

I stand by the paragraph you cited. But you need to see it in the context that it is written on the website:/// No. All valid positions can be contextually summarized in one sentence for use elsewhere. Calling for a Snipe Hunt is just a dodge.

The Evolution of life on this Planet is probably directly driven by Conscious experience. //// I think just in the last 2-3 pages of this thread that position has been totally exposed as bogus, yet you persist.

Any organism that experiences Pleasure will seek out that Pleasure. Any organism that experiences Pain will try to avoid that Pain. /// I can accept that as a general truth but with so many exceptions as to make it a worthless observation. Again: especially as the point of this post is higher consciousness, see Landrew's dispostion of this point just above. You know: you can learn alot if you read .....what you haven't written yourself.

Without the existence of these basic Conscious experiences there would be no motivation for any organism to react. //// "This is ground control to Major Tom:...………." and so: the entire 3 Billion year history of life on Earth pre multicell animals is completely ignored. Good Job.

There's nothing like a little Pain to motivate you to adjust what you are doing. This applies to simple organisms and to Humans. It would seem that Evolution is directly guided by Conscious experience. /// Pure Crap. Do you really think this or rather consciously ignore the mountain of evidence and argument placed before you in this thread?

Since Science is unable to say what Consciousness is we can and should speculate what it could be and how it could have developed. /// Pure God in the Gaps Argument giving credence to Matts opinion that this is all Intelligent Design rewrite.

We can, for example, speculate that Consciousness might have existed prior to the Big Bang and might have even been the cause of the Big Bang. /// Or that Consciousness is the dropping of a Pink Unicorn.

Further pure speculation avoided as the Unicorn droppings that it is.

The first paragraph stands on it's own. I think most people would agree with it. The experience of Pain and Pleasure is obviously dependent on Organisms and Animals having a Pain or Pleasure experience. /// And for the 3 Billion years when there were no such creatures? How did they evolve?

There is no statement of when this Pain and Pleasure entered the Evolutionary scene. What Ellard does is to try to confuse the first paragraph with the second. //// No, Ellard shines a light on where YOU are confused...…..if not being manipulative.

The second paragraph is very explicitly flagged, up front, as Speculation. It is food for thought. There are no Claims made here, just Speculation. Unfortunately we are forced to Speculate because Science is silent on anything to do with Consciousness. /// Ha, ha: this garbage heresy to common sense is PAINFUL for me to read.....and I am avoiding it. I see no higher goal to overcome the pain. EVERYONE AGREES: Science doesn't know everything about *anything--including consciousness* but only a fool will confabulate this into saying: "....Science is silent on anything to do with Consciousness." ===>we are into the feebly demented territory with such statements.
Derp.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Matthew Ellard
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 30516
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am
Custom Title: Big Beautiful Bouncy Skeptic

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by Matthew Ellard » Tue Nov 27, 2018 4:24 am

Steve Klinko wrote:Without the existence of these basic Conscious experiences there would be no motivation for any organism to react
Matthew Ellard wrote:) Non conscious innate behaviour evolved 3.8 billion years ago to motivate species to behave in particular ways. You didn't know that innate behaviour existed until we informed you three weeks ago. :lol:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist" wrote:More than a quibble, you again are making ((the results of)) evolution a cause rather than an effect.........
No Bobbo. Steve Klinko simply didn't know about innate behaviour.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19316
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Inter Mind

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Nov 27, 2018 4:50 am

I agree Klinko posts without appreciation for many basic facts.

innate behavior DOES NOT MOTIVATE: anything. such behavior is the RESULT of evolution and depending on its exact functioning will make some organisms more successful in reproducing than others. Only certain qualities of consciousness has motivation affecting behaviors. I could generally say only hoomans....but I do allow for other animals to be at least on the cusp of motivated behavior?==like friendship among chimps, but such behavior is aped (sic) by cats too.

Especially tricky when we all used undefined terms, or we all use the same words with our own separate definitions?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?