How do the atheists explain the consciousness?
>>79949085
Define consciousness.
>btfo
that's how
>>79949294
Consciousness is the state of awareness given by God.
>>79949085
with enough neurons connecting a lifeform is aware of its surrounding and itself
best way i can put it without a degree in something
>>79949085
You're a couple years late to the discussion, neighbor.
>>79949414
You have no proof it was given by God. Brazilian education.
>>79949414
Well then atheists think it isn't given by God of course.
>>79949550
this
couple of decades
>>79949085
>read picture title
>>79949085
the just think it's a random set of events that occur for no reason, has no meaning and has no depth...yet paradoxically insist that morality exists
>>79949454
>with enough neurons connecting a lifeform
It's not even scientific and much less true.
>>79949565
Given by God is the only acceptable answer. There is no other.
>>79949085
richard dawkins gave us conciousness in reward for spreading his word
Does everything need to be explainable at this given moment? There are a lot of holes in our knowledge. Just because we don't know something doesnt mean it its evidence of a god.
Was electricity divine up until we figured out what it was? Then it lost its divine characteristics?
>>79949858
Why do you think awareness isn't a possible property without God?
>>79949085
Integration of multiple sensory inputs to the extent that an organism can perform meta-cognition and react to its internal state in the same manner as lower organisms react to their environment. It's not a huge mystery when you know the basics.
>>79949594
It is given by what?
>>79949085
>the brain and the chemicals man durrrrrrr hurrr WE WUZ CHEMICALS N SHEEEEIT
>>79949085
Consciousness is a memeplex designed to carry memes better, it gives us the illusion of being which makes for an organism with better chances of survival.
>>79949085
It doesn't exist. It's nothing but an illusion, you stupid theist
>>79949754
i meant "with enough neurons, a lifeform..."
but still that makes sense? humans have way more neurons and connections in there brain, and as you go down the scale of having less and less, animals descend in conciousness ( being able to recognize themselevs in a mirror to thinking it is just another animal, whereas apes can actually communicate with humans in certain ways)
again, could be wrong but my old science teacher explained that to me and he was super smart cool guy
You don't explain consciousness; consciousness is what you use to explain everything else.
In a sense, consciousness is the existentialist's God.
>>79950024
Reductionism can be done to any level you like, to chemical reactions, to molecular pathways, or to pure physical interactions. They are just models at different levels of abstraction.
>>79950072
>>79950112
False.
>>79949858
You have a weak mind for science then. You don't have the intelligence to figure out what consciousness is so you just default to God.
>>79949953
because something can't come from nothing
>>79950015
it is not "given" you retard. its a trait we developed over millions of years
>>79949953
God is the full aware being of the Universe, matter have no conscious, so the conscious belong to the God's plan, it's simple.
>current year
>thinking consciousness is real
>thinking free will is real
laughing
out
loud
>>79950248
False. Emergent behavior can arise as if from nowhere based on collections of simpler mechanisms. And something can and did come from nothing in the universe so you're wrong on both accounts.
>>79950357
Free will isn't the same thing as consciousness. We have consciousness but may not have free will, you can be aware and not in control.
We can't. Neither can anyone else.
>>79950196
False? What the hell atomics are you working off? How the hell do you even reconcile words as things without some form of formalism? In short, what is your a priori? If science tells you that everything you perceive exists within the neural network of the brain, then how do you reconcile this without asserting (recognizing, I would say) that consciousness is the first foundation from which all other things is built?
>>79949085
SCP-K
>>79950329
>its a trait we developed over millions of years
It makes no sense and you don't have any proof on this.
>>79949565
You have no proof, that earth is not flat.
>>79950112
What a load of crock. You can define consciousness, using 'God' is a cop out. you use observation and logic to understand the world. If you can decode other metaphysical things then why not consciousness. Explanations of God are just lazy and pigheaded.
>>79949085
>conscious
even most animals are that christfag.
the brain is nothing more than a lit marvelous biological neural network, consisting of different parts to do their assigned task. Just like in an AI.
Some of these parts, are out of your control, these parts of the brain work without you having "a say" in it. On top of this complicated layers, we finally get your consciousness. Quite amazing.
I'm no atheist btw, something of the old
>>79949085
Through their not-religion of science.
>>79950208
You need faith in science to believe in it.
Why are christians always so sure that their religion is the right one?
Tell me why you think consciousness doesn't come from Odin, Osiris or Zeus/Jupiter.
>>79950504
neither do you.
you hipocrite shouldn't be browsing 4chan.
>>79949085
They don't.
>>79950420
>>79949085
We are searching for.
You pretend to have found. (in a book lol)
A small pool of microbial carbon learned to move in the oceans and repeated and fused and combined ad infinitum till natural selection happened and one mutated asteroid dust grew legs and fucked another mutated asteroid dust particle that had ears and then bam they made mutated dust particles that can walk and eventually they realized some things and eventually created that bag of Doritos you have sitting in your refrigerator.
>>79950564
I'm with this oppinion.
>>79949714
>read picture title
>>79950639
How can God exist then? Where is your God if not from nothingness.
>>79949085
What is Mind?
Mind is Matter.
What is Matter?
#NeverMind #YOLO #ImWithHer #DeepImpact
>>79950470
Nice try but Cartesian logic is always the first fall-back people try when cornered, you haven't disproven what I said. Even if you claim to not believe in anything other than Cogito Ergo Sum you still must concede that hypotheses based on experimental data that can make accurate predictions are a better scientific model than saying 'God did it', or something even more lax like 'It doesn't exist'. Even if you presume an a priori God you still haven't explained HOW anything works. On the contrary I can explain how things work based on a clear model without giving an a priori about the creator of the universe.
>>79949085
Ive started to think about this and have come up with an observation.
A person a consciousness the I is not a noun. It is a verb. If you froze the world people would not be alive in that moment that would be static. We only exist in motion. We only exist over a continuous period.
The consciousness in the brain reflecting on its own memories in motion.
>>79949085
The conscience is outside the body.
>>79950557
> you use observation and logic to understand the world
You use your education to believe the world is like they are described it to you, because >muh omni-potent omni-present Science.
If you would use observation, you would be earth-form-agnostic, but no - you belive that the earth is a ball.
the state of being awake and aware of one's surroundings.
>>79950639
funny how your god pales in comparison to everything else outside of earth
>>79949565
>>79949929
>>79949984
>>79950112
>>79950599
>>79950692
Not arguments, ranging from fallacies to laughable scifi babble.
>>79949737
Underrated post.
Atheists are generally nihilistic of some sort.
>>79950564
>Just like ai
Have a PhD in CE or CS? If not, please leave AI out of this.
>>79950564
most animals did not know they exist and no, conscious don't belong to the brain.
>>79950774
Provide proof or consistent argument, anyone can make baseless claims. Stars are made of peanut butter.
>>79950865
>if I don't understand it its scifi babble
Where are the fallacies. Point them out or you have no argument.
>>79950639
Im thinking that there has never been nothing. Infinity is both directions.
And so are you if you believe is any form of god.
>>79950557
Consciousness can define consciousness by using aspects of consciousness? What the fuck does define even mean in context? Where did you get that mirror into your soul exactly, because that sounds an awful lot like a religious assumption.
Also it's clear that you have a misunderstanding of "God." "God" is by no means necessarily an external entity which imprints brutish dictums onto another realm; sophisticated Christian philosophers (such as Augustine, Emerson, and Kant) understood God to be a concept of permanence- a sort of fundamental by which everything else could exist. The transition from Classical Christianity to Modern Atheism is not so much a fundamental thing as it is an inversion of perspective (from outward-looking-in to inward-looking-out).
>>79950601
I presented you God if you are denying it so you need a better explanation.
>>79950571
No. You do not need to have faith in science.
Read a little about the scientific method, and then fucking kill yourself.
>>79949414
Technically, you have two "states of awareness." Because each half of your brain acts in cooperation with one another.
That doesn't explain consciousness in it's entirety, but it's a more informed start than any religion or spirituality has provided.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfYbgdo8e-8
>>79950196
> can be done
Do it.
If you cant, then we can all agree, that science is a cult of degeneracy, which only function is to undermine cultural and social values of our ancestors, to destroy the roots of the white race.
>>79950884
No one proved that the brain makes conscience so far either. Go on and study by yourself.
>>79950804
Hang on, what ? Do you think everything needs to be observed in order for things to be understood? I've never seen an elephant in the wild yet I know they exist.
>>79949085
Why would consciousness necessitate a god? There's nothing magical about it. Other animals demonstrate it too.
>>79950639
hahah nice one fucking saved
>>79949858
we know so because the bible said so.
we know the bible is true because it's written that the bible is true inside the bible which is true.
>>79949085
prove "consciousness" is real
>>79951011
What are you talking about? Do you want me to paste a 1000 page biochemistry book here? There are plenty of models of varying accuracy in their predictions in multiple scientific fields. You are trying to negate all of that actual work with a God of the Gaps argument. Epic.
>>79950979
both have no proof, but I'm not filling my mind with filth (as per definition in your sacred book). WWJD - browse 4chan?
>>79950745
always existed
>>79949085
was that mr clean?
>>79950745
God always existed.
>>79950804
There's demonstrable evidence of earth being round that you can find with experiments that almost anyone can do.
Long story short if you cant make predictions its not a theory, if you cant back it up with logic then its not an argument.
None of you have done the required leg work to talk at even a basic philosophical or scientific level so stop thinking you are being smart or original, you aren't. The same tired attempts at undermining Science have been made over and over, all you are proving is your own ignorance.
tl;dr: kys fags
high concentration of neurons in brain cortex
>>79950865
I agree. I did not post an argument, but a question. What evidence can you produce to convince me that exactly your religion is the true faith?
I cannot produce evidence against the existance of christ or the judeo-christian god, but you cannot produce evidence against Odin or Zeus.
"...one whose negative demands were more violent than his positive, far more eager to escape pain than to achieve happiness, and feeling it something of an outrage that I had been created without my own permission. To such a craven materialist's universe had the enormous attraction that it offered you limited liabilities. No strictly infinite disasters could overtake you in it. Death ended all. And if ever finite disasters proved greater than one wished to bear, suicide would always be possible."
>>79951073
You have the same proof by direct observation that you have of the reality of anything else
>>79950765
I have no idea where you get the interpretation that I'm saying "God did it." God doesn't DO, God IS (or in existentialist terms, We ARE). Granted I haven't gotten into the driving principals of self which guide us, but I was merely answering the question of the existence of consciousness, not the algebra of the spirit (or in existentialist terms, the driving wills).
Saying that there is a prime foundation of consciousness is not saying "I'm going to throw my hands up in the air and stop thinking about anything." It's saying "these are the terms under which I understand the universe, now let's see where we can go from here." It is there to ground me so that I do not use one foundation over here and another over there.
>>79951171
>>79951203
Then the universe always existed.
>>79949085
consciousness is very difficult to define.
I'm Christian. Pic is my church.
I was very ill recently; I had a horrible infection in my throat.
I passed out twice as I was going to the toilet. Once just from standing up and again when I made it to the loo.
The second time I smashed my head on the sink and needed proper medical aid. Which I got as my wife called the emergency number.
I was without consciousness both times. Just nothing. I could have died. It wasn't like being asleep, when you're still aware of sound and light. I was totally unconscious. Nothing.
Religion can explain a lot. Our existence. The need to love our fellow beings. How we perceive the world.
I am just content to be alive and take pleasure in God's creation. Watching my wife give birth, seeing my kids grow up, attending to my garden, whatever. It is all God's plan.
>>79949085
Atoms form electricity that spark is literal consciousness , Newten proved all consciousness is electricity. Though I was enlightened by my own intelligence at the age og 6 before I even read most of the works of Newten before bed and during recess when the pathetic christfags were playing kickball my playmates were Darwin Newten and Carl Sagan any more questions bitch?
>>79951453
>t. Deepak Chopra
>>79950865
All athiests have this robotic autism from the way they write to they way they refute their own biased fallacies, to the way they express themselves in real life.
Like they think of themselves as bioorganic mechanical contraptions akin to a screwgun that can feel things.
If you don't believe in God that's fine, but dont think of yourselves as superior for living in a hollow reality with an impending sense of doom.
Also, if it wasn't for a grandiose faith in God that stems way back to arhiac times, we wouldn't be alive today. If we hadn't developed a sense of purpose or a divine being watching over us, we wouldn't never developed passed being cave people fending off sabertooth tigers. So to discredit someone's belief in God, is to discredit your entire existence and the existence of everyone that left an imprint.
>>79950959
Why are you dragging souls into this. Quite simply I said you can use your brain to translate the world physically around you and the stuff (metaphysical) inside of you. It's perfectly conceivable that you could use the same logic to understand and define consciousness. What is consciousness? Why can't that be answered with cognition an not some fad of GOD.
I have a perfect understanding of God, you appear to have a wikipedia education. You can have a God being omnipotent, beyond time, space, outside of anything physical. There is no reason why God could be actually exist or not exist and have anything to do with consciousness. Your assumption is the love of God. You want - I'd say NEED - to be important. God could be real and have nothing to do with our lives.
So I'll say it again - we can decipher the world as is with what we currently accept to understand. God is a cop out. God is a lazy definition.
Emergent property of brains
I'm getting tired of these christian vs atheist bait posts.
>>79951555
I never said God doesn't exist, I simply said it doesnt explain HOW anything came about.
If I made a fallacy you must be able to point it out.
If not then blow it out your ass
>>79951484
further proof conciousness is electricity is the art of Dubstep and other electronic music? While most of you losers were at church worshiping some old pedophile. I was dancing leting the music just flow through me and I joined the world conciousness we were united by the beat
>>79951438
True. But what I observe can be explained with cold hard physics and chemistry in the brain. Is that all consciousness is I guess?
>>79949085
Why are brazillians so dumb?
>>79951696
No, you can't explain volition that way
>>79949085
So because science can't explain literally everything that happens in the universe, god exists.
Did I get that right?
>>79951658
Being contrarian and not understanding sarcasm from my previous post made it seem like you were autistic, which postulates atheism.
>>79951521
Why do you insist on believing that there is a conflict between spirituality and science? This is quite a recent phenomenon that has no basis in logic.
I can assure you that the theories of medicine and physics, which were constructed using the good principals within consciousnesses are perfectly wonderful and useful expressions of our innate a priori principals.
>>79951014
> Do you think everything needs to be observed
I think if you claim, that your dogma is right, because >muh observations, then you go and observe it. Pro tip: you cant.
But whatever. We both know, that your dogma is not about being right, it`s about your intellectual inferiority complex. All you want is to feel smarter, by supporting the sect.
> never observed something in the particular condition in person, but seen on video multiple times, when CG was not a thing
> is the same level of knowledge of a thing, that you observed in a hand-drawn picture in your schoolbook
You see, people tend to defend shit that got in their head, regardless of the way it get there.
You are fucking retard, that is unable to reevaluate your views based on new information. Science is invalid. Get this or get the fuck out.
>>79949858
>BECAUSE!!!!!!
Nice rationalization.
>>79951454
No. The universe was created.
>>79950639
We can't observe literally nothing since it doesn't exist in the universe.
>>79950921
All those posts... So much effort... No, I think not, if you're not intelligent enough to recognise middle ground abuse or false onus or begging the question, that's your deal.
BTW yours was Sci-Fi babble.
>>79949984
>Integration of multiple sensory inputs to the extent that an organism can perform meta-cognition
Define "meta cognition." Explain why "sensory input" is in anyway necessary to this.
>react to its internal state in the same manner as lower organisms react to their environment.
Explain how "internal state" is in anyway comparable to "environment". Better yet, explain how this is even relevant.
That's sci-fi babble bro, it just looks smart.
Man philosophy threads blow the fuck up on /pol/. I literally can't keep up. >tfw /pol/ must have these conversations well after I'm caffeinated. Can we do this again, I don't know, 10 hours from now?
>>79951015
Because it emerged from the natural rules of the universe, it leads to the question where consciousness began and why not argue the entire thing is conscious with your personal identity simply being a delusion of self created by the wider system. Basically, you are completely defined by natural laws, you think therefore you are, therefore why not argue you are the natural laws themselves? In fact this isn't a huge step from the God described in exodus 3:14; I am what I am.
It's more than that, this isn't the easiest thing to argue which is why it isn't the easiest thing to rebut.
>>79951384
There's only decent reasoning for a single, pantheistic, deist God. The argument for this kind of God necessitates a monad deity.
>>79951555
Yeah, fuck atheists man. Zero mysticism, it's the singular source of decent art, whether you're Bach or Van Gogh.
>>79951836
Again, you didn't explain anything or provide any testable hypothesis. Your argument is invalid. Spirituality that cannot be tested or used to make predictions is useless. If you can't figure that out I suggest you swallow some lead.
If God made the sun on the third day how would he know 3 days went by?
>>79951786
Why not? Will comes from the brain. It's something that exists to keep you alive and improve your odds of reproducing and/or improving the odds that you're family or tribe will survive and be able to reproduce. Is there some reason to doubt this?
>>79951454
>The universe has always existed
That's scientifically impossible. Something can't come from nothing.
That being a FACT there is no scientifically possible natural cause for the origins of the universe and as far as this thread, conciousness.
Since there is no possible NATURAL cause for these things there must be a SUPER natural cause. If you just follow time itself back from this point to its origin there's no other possible explanation than some sort of God.
Athiest BTFO 3:16 edition.
>>79951102
> Do you want me to paste a 1000 page biochemistry book here?
Do it, fagget. You cant.
Because the right answer is: > science does not know shit. But you are stuck too hard to your intellectual inferiority complex, so you cant deliver it and continue brag about >muh evidence, where there is none.
>>79951555
>If we hadn't developed a sense of purpose
Religion didn't create a sense of purpose, religion and spirituality is a symptom of already having a desire for a sense of purpose. In fact, all animals have a "sense of purpose", otherwise they wouldn't be able to survive.
>divine being watching over us
Divinity wasn't even a concept in religion up until a few thousand years ago. Protoreligions were more anthropomorphic with their spirits, akin to like the Greek pantheon, complete with flaws.
>So to discredit someone's belief in God, is to discredit your entire existence
Lol faggot.
>>79951979
meta cognition is performing cognition on aspects of ones own cognition instead of on basic sensory input
sensory input is necessary because the fundamentals of cognition is built upon it- this is known as 'Grounded Cognition'
It's not babble, its one of the leading theories of modern neuroscience.
Just because you are ignorant it doesn't discredit what I said in the least.
>trying to argue with fedorafags
>>79952052
Then where did god come from? He can't have always existed because
>something can't come from nothing
Obviously.
>>79950079
Go smoke another joint.
1. Brazil 1
2. You lt 0
>>79952008
Step n + 1 in an ongoing cascade of atoms is not volition. Your observation is that you choose to raise your arm, then choose to lower it, but physics denies this. Why the elaborate ruse by nature?
>>79951992
because a day has 24 hours ?
Man, Brazil really is a fucking shithole, eh fellas?
Consciousness requires a functional central nervous system
Plants and cells are not conscience
>>79952197
>Your observation is that you choose to raise your arm, then choose to lower it, but physics denies this.
How does physics deny this?
>>79949858
>Given by God is the only acceptable answer. There is no other.
>>79950420
>something can and did come from nothing in the universe so you're wrong on both accounts
Hubris much?
>>79952273
You aren't making a choice. You are simply a consequence. There is no unmoved mover.
Religious people are mentally ill. Stop trying to inject your fantasies into real life. This isn't Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter.
>>79952052
If the universe always existed then it didn't come form nothing since it never came from anything in the first place.
>>79949085
Just because we can't explain it doesn't automatically mean the christian god is the answer
>>79952171
Re read my post. God doesn't need an original as he's supernatural. It's the only possible explanation of the origin of things as any other defies all sorts of physics.
>>79952335
>You aren't making a choice.
says who?
>>79951561
Why do you retreat into a combative little shell every time I use a word that was once used by pagan religions? It is just an analogy. Plato's, I believe; I don't remember.
Again, I ask you how you reconcile the fact that science SAYS that everything you say and experience (including science) exists within your neural network (what science would call consciousness). The word 'consciousness' might be definable, but doesn't science necessitate that the very act of defining exists inside a thing that you SHOULD be calling consciousness?
If you believe you have a perfect understanding of God, then you clearly have you mask on backwards. Just fucking ignore the word God. God is a god damn analogy. It's an analogy of fundamental structure. Something I thought reductionists were all about. But you just want to be combative because I used that four-letter-word "God" and you want to ignore all the philosophy that has built the modern world under the word "God" meaning something very similar to the very idea of formality and think "well of course anyone using the word 'God' is an idiot."
I don't know where you get love, I don't know where you get need, I don't know where you get real. I just don't think you've read my posts.
>>79950504
>Muh long timespan can create anything and is my replacement for a God I do not want to believe in, so I can do whatever I want without the pangs of conscience.
>Conscience is a product of the brain.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12301-man-with-tiny-brain-shocks-doctors/
>>79949085
who cares?
Hello I am god.
Feel free to ask me anything lads
>>79952230
Funny you say that. Biblical scholars go back and forth all the fuckin time on this, because if you can argue that a Biblical day is longer than 24 hours you can better square Genesis up with modern science that proves the Earth is billions of years old.
So, if, prior to the creation of the sun and the Earth and whatnot, a day was 1.7 billion years, Christians and Jews look less stupid.
>>79952405
Says you
>>79952417
Hi God, why are Brazillians so ugly and retarded?
>>79951484
>>79951660
These look just like the types of shit posts I write when I come to 4chan high. Appreciate the effort m8
DAMN YOU NIGGAS DUMB.
I just spent about 6 weeks learning about this in philosophy.
Modern science will mostly say that it's not real. It is an illusion, it's just neuerons firing in your brain. Your identity and how you feel is not real and you have no free will
This being said I believe (and I am an atheist) in panpsycism or the information integration theory that was developed in 2004.
The theory is that everything has PHI or information integration. Humans have a lot, dogs have a decent amount, worms have very little, particles have almost none but it is still non-zero. This gets very complicated as you can imagine, but basically.
CONSCIOUSNESS IS A FUNDEMENTAL FORCE AND ALSO A UNIVERSAL ONE.
To me. This is the logical answer for an atheist. If not, accept that your mind is not a thing.
>>79949085
Science can barely explain the origin of life in terms of chemistry.
Much less we can explain the origin of consciousness and awareness.
At best we can observe a direct correlation of scanned brain activity and thought.
In short: Atheists don't explain consciousness. Because there's not enough data.
It's the religious freaks who want to explain something they do not understand with something as vague as "god did it".
>>79952472
Because I wanted to
>>79951981
Godel's Incompleteness theorem. What you're suggesting (that all things can be reducible to a system of deductive logic) has been proven as contradictory under its own ideas for nearly a century. You HAVE to put your feet down somewhere. If you think you aren't then you're just ignorant of what ground you are standing on.
>>79952134
>meta cognition is performing cognition on aspects of ones own cognition instead of on basic sensory input
>instead of on basic sensory input
You basically know you have a contradiction here, don't you? Clearly the "instead of" proves it's not necessary, so you haven't explained Jack.
>sensory input is necessary because the fundamentals of cognition is built upon it- this is known as 'Grounded Cognition'
Ooh empiricism. Unfortunately there's more to reality than just what can be gathered by sense, a stick in water looks bent but feels straight and is in fact ultimately neither.
Reasoned, strong justifications are needed for beliefs, sensory input on its own can't be the be all end all of reality.
>It's not babble, its one of the leading theories of modern neuroscience.
Just because it's accepted in academia doesn't make it bullet proof from bullshit. But I digress, shove your appeal to authority up your ass.
>>79952339
Science suggest everything has to have have a starting point. Saying that it's always existed is scientifically impossible.
Precisely why the has to be a super natural aspect to origin.
>>79949085
With the scientific method, if it's unexplainable I wont take God for an answer.
>>79952516
I'm a neuroscientist and we do not reject integration of information at all, in fact its widely accepted. Firing of neurons is at a different level of abstraction and doesn't refute it at all. Why is this so hard to understand?
>>79949085
Science is how god created the world you fucking idiot. There is no magic involved.
>>79952432
I never claimed that. Neither does physics. Even computers can make choices and perform physical actions based on them.
Atheist rationality in action:
>God is not real, because I hate him
>>79952408
>iq reduced to 75
I guess that's higher than yours though.
>>79950357
>Believing in determinism
>Not killing yourself
golfclap.jpg
>>79952377
Why is "I don't know" never an acceptable answer? Why does god have to be the only possible explanation? Are you people THAT afraid of the unknown?
>>79949085
Its an input-output feedback loop, wonderful isnt it?
>>79952576
>Clearly the "instead of" proves it's not necessary, so you haven't explained Jack.
I was simply discriminating it from regular cognition, how dense are you?
>>79950639
Something did come from nothing though. Pixels change in images every time you save them. Compression artifacts occur. Etc. You may not see it with the human eye...but enhance and you see them there.
Also, mathematically speaking, if you have a 512x512 image of nothing being displayed on a computer screen. In an infinite amount of time, you will eventually have an image of SOMETHING appear there. Electrons change. Data changes every time displayed, yes, but over time things can change. This includes that image.
Atheists will have to wait a few billion years for say, a picture of bananas going up someones ass to appear...but it will, potentially, appear from nothing.
Also, Virtual Particles. Those come from nothing and can become actual photons with the right conditions.
>Isn't Atheist, but non-creationism Christian
>>79952408
>>79952408
holy shit
>>79952339
When people say the universe always existed they mean the universe existed outside of time
This is proven by hawking because time stops in a singularity. Hawking proved the universe came from a singularity, therefore the universe "always existed"
>>79952565
I never posed logical positivism anywhere, I simply said that there are useful models like scientific ones, and horribly unhelpful ones which can neither be tested or verified such as most religious attempts. Nice strawman
>>79952408
Well I never claimed conscience was a product of the appendix.
>>79952798
Then what you said was no argument, because I have not only conceded as much already, but explained how such things exist within the idea of consciousness as a foundation. Forgive me for assuming you were posting to add to the conversation rather as merely to post.
>>79952408
tiny brain =/= no brain
>mfw fedoras will literally burn in Hell for all eternity along with protestcucks, jews and slimes
>>79949085
the electrical potential of neurons allows them to act as transistors. your brain is a analog computer
i suggest you go to the library of congress website and read some books on the subject matter. its free
>yfw you die and the muslims ere right all along
>>79952629
No they can't make choices, any more than a pachinko ball makes choices. Input passes through it on a predetermined course as with any purely physical system. Plus quantum noise, but quantum noise is not volition.
Athiests are dumb. The bible clearly states that the anti-christ will be the ruler of a one-world government. What exactly are people trying to push these days? NWO. Who is pushing this? The Jews. Bible also hints at an alliance of Muslims and socialists .Already happening. Brexit and Trump will only be little victories in a lost war.
Trump might not be religious, but he is playing his part in the prophecy wonderfully. He is also following Christ.
A man with a 156 IQ is following Christ.
Athiestfags BTFO
>>79952968
>Input passes through it on a predetermined course as with any purely physical system.
Exactly the same for humans. Where do you see a difference?
>>79952407
>Thinks people are incapable of having a conscience without threat of damnation
I mean, we aren't ALL huge pieces of shit like you, anon.
>>79952914
Lumping in Protestants as well, false Christian?
>>79952590
>Science suggest everything has to have have a starting point.
No, causality says this, which is philosophy.
>>79952419
>8But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
for us it is the 24 hour day god can push what ever time he wants in that day
>>79952662
I'm not afraid of the unknown. I used to be a fedora fag of the highest order. I'd troll Christian chatrooms for lulz.
I got sick of the same old arguements and starting looking to scientifically disprove God and various aspects of the bible most people ignore.
Eventually in my quest to be a raging douchbag I came to the stunning realization that the scientific community spews far more bullshit than any religion.
>>79952590
The fun thing about Science is it's a methodology for experimenting rather than a doctrine. Individual things can be wrong or misunderstood and then corrected as our knowledge expands.
It's a massive leap in logic to say "You don't know or can't explain this thing, so my completely made up version of events is entirely correct." If you can prove your version is correct, prove it and we'll all move the fuck on.
>>79953207
>scientific community spews far more bullshit than any religion.
such as?
>>79953136
You'd go to purgatory, but you don't believe in that, so there.
>>79953046
Again, every day, every waking minute, you observe your own apparent volition.
>>79952408
>>79952749
Actually if you read the medical case - his brain is the same brain you and I have. It is just squished around the outside of his cavity.
He has the same brain we do. Please read medical journals before commenting with medical cases.
>>79953207
>disprove God
That was a mistake, God isn't proven to begin with. You can't disprove something if it isn't proven, even if it's purported to be true.
>>79953277
That's not answering the question. What's an example of that? And how is it any different than a computer making choices based on inputs?
>mfw atheists believe an asexually reproducing organism can just decide to develop a male/female sexual system by itself
>mfw this goes against natural selection because a male/female reproduction system makes it much slower and harder to breed
>mfw fedoras on this website think they have the answer to this when it's still an unanswered mystery to the scientific community
Atheists assert a currently unprovable hypothesis that God does not exist, making themselves as foolish as any monkey dancing in front of an obelisk.
>>79953207
>>79953387
This. God can't be proven or disproven. There's simply not a lot of reason to think he exists.
>>79953046
Our souls aren't physical so we can't be judged on a physical basis
>>79953207
Then why did you come to that particular doctrine over others? What other than populism makes it more correct than any other theological story about the creation of the universe?
>>79952747
>you save them
>>79953430
>male/female reproduction system makes it much slower and harder to breed
only for shit tier offspring. Which is the whole point.
>>79952914
Is enjoying the suffering of others sinful? I feel like it should be.
>>79953473
Try to create something out of nothing.
Oh wait. I said create. Creationists win.
>>79953479
How do you know they exist?
>>79953430
Can natural selection exist without gender? I'm obviously not talking about survival, BTW, but without sexual reproduction where is the selection? Asexual beings just split, they don't have anything to judge.
>>79953464
Nothing is provable 100%. God is just unlikely to exist based on our best observations. So assuming he exists seems unwise to many people. This is how all science works.
>>79953430
>mfw this goes against natural selection because a male/female reproduction system makes it much slower and harder to breed
Natural selection doesn't work like that, in fact it's something of a myth. Evolution is a series of mutations at more or less random, natural selection only starts to matter when it comes to passes on the genetic material in competition. It's not impossible for an evolution to continue even if they make things harder, which is why so many animals retain or develop things that are ridiculously inefficient or bad for them but continue to breed.
>>79953581
Not sure what your point is here.
>>79949085
Like this:
>YOUR BRAIN TRICKS YOUR BRAIN INTO BELIEVING THAT YOU ARE EXPERIENCING YOUR BRAIN TRICKING YOUR BRAIN INTO BELIEVING YOU ARE EXPERIENCING YOUR BRAIN TRICKING YOUR BRAIN INTO...
>>79952516
Wow you spent a whole six weeks huh?
Teach us, oh guru-atheist of the made-me-think.
>>79953560
>>79953625
So why and how would they decide to develop a male/female reproduction system then?
This would take thousands of years before it actually works. Do they develop the male or female sexual organs first? Are they developed at the same time? How do they initiate a slow progress of development of theses sexual organs that will only be functional (and somehow compatible) in thousands of years?
>>79952590
>>79952590
That's incorrect.
TIME suggests everything has to have a "starting" point. If there is no time then there is no starting point. Once again Hawking proved this mathematically in his experiments that time DOES NOT EXIST in a singularity (center of black hole)
Hawking also proved that the origin of the universe was a singularity. Therefore the universe always existed.
Theists BTFO
>>79953496
When you display it on your screen then :^) same thing technically. You have artifacts that happen randomly every time.
>>79953625
DNA doesn't replicate perfectly 100% of the time. Also mutations can arise due to radiation or chemical causes.
>>79954019
>Hawking also proved that the origin of the universe was a singularity.
Where is the proof?
>>79953570
Czech boy is a false Christian and a horrible witness showing the atheists here that us Christians are still able to wish hellfire even on each other. So sad.
>>79954126
Where is your proof?
>>79953936
>So why and how would they decide to develop a male/female reproduction system then?
Helps organisms evolve and adopt much more efficiently.
>Do they develop the male or female sexual organs first? Are they developed at the same time? How do they initiate a slow progress of development of theses sexual organs that will only be functional (and somehow compatible) in thousands of years?
Probably in lots of small steps. It's something you can probably look up and find good answers to. I remember finding it impossible to understand how a human eye could evolve. But I looked it up and there was lots of small steps in between that make it seem much more reasonable.
>>79954161
My proof on what?
>>79953070
I was a conscientious atheist for many years. But thanks for proving my point.
>>79949085
lol consciousness designed... By what? A mongoloid child god
Memory is shit, forget and misremember all the time- which is why eye witness testimony is garbage in court.
Get heemed and black out, forget where you are, what you're doing...
Have a few beers and black out. Brain doesn't encode short term memories when you drive long distances...
Get Alzheimer and forget to eat.
Shit tier build.
>>79954231
God?
I'm Christian, I have faith because I choose to - though I have no proof.
You run around here spouting out how Athiests need proof for this or that. You can't ask them for proof when you yourself have none in a faith-based religion.
>>79954126
I don't have time to google it but Hawking's experiments were proven
The worlds leading experts on the brain cannot explain consciousness. Most explanations I've seen are straight up from Sci-Fi sources or gross simplifications trying to compare the human brain to a computer.
>>79954126
I don't know if the universe being a singularity has ever been proved. We do have good evidence that it was once the size of a grapefruit though, and our physics models seem to paint a pretty accurate picture of what the universe looks like now if we assume it was once the width of an atom nucleus.
It seems like what happened before that is really up for a lot of debate still.
>>79953936
There's no certain theory and the only one I remember was failed predation, an organism tried to eat another, failed and ended up with a bit of its prey growing inside of it. There's a video about it that I liked, but can't be fucked finding it.
Come to think of it, it was essentially for this evolution thing that defines theological (therefore not so justified) beliefs.
>>79954100
No, but selection is part of designing species. In essence the process itself is performing some logic or cognition on its own aspects or the logic used to develop organisms that eventually perform that logic of selection.
I'm a little too tired to make this level of theology understandable by people who simply don't want to believe, and in all honesty shouldn't be made to believe.
>>79954223
>Helps organisms evolve and adopt much more efficiently.
Extremely questionable whether that's true, but yes these organisms just knew that, and decided to develop a male/female sexual reproduction system over the course of thousands of years.
If humans collectively want to grow wings, can they initiate a slow progress that will form useless bumps in our backs that will thousands of years from now be wings?
>people worship the same god as Muslims and Jews
Same book, different names, boys.
Also do you believe that an omnipotent god man willed the universe into existence?
>>79950548
Yes I have
>>79953936
>So why and how would th ey decide to develop
>Decide
This, again, is a misunderstanding. There is no decision making process. Mutations are essentially random, and we have a lot of time for something random to happen. It's not like every other species consciously decides to wail on anything different, so as mutations occur they're fully capable of just still slipping into the populace and breeding.
It's not that suddenly an organism radically changed and produced a male and female. Initially they'd be hermaphrodites, one particular organism produced offspring that emphasized either genital, but was still capable of breeding with others. As time goes by genetic markers become inert or active, mutations occur, things change. There are advantages to sexual dimorphism that benefit species enough to propagate emphasis on the male/female dynamic, and there's enough space, resources, and time for some of these species to succeed alongside those that stayed asexual.
>>79954405
>assuming matter cannot be created or destroyed
>the universe was once the size of a grapefruit and contained all the matter in the known universe today
>the grapefruit sized universe must have had an absurd amount of mass and energy
>the mass of the grapefruit sized universe was more than enough to create a singularity
>the mass of existing singularities can be measured
>therefore we can assume that the grapefruit sized universe, due to its immense mass, was indeed a singularity
>>79954367
I just have faith too but he said that Hawking proved something, so I want see where is that proof. protip: there is no proof, just atheist bullshit.
>>79950248
>because something can't come from nothing
So where did god come from?
>>79954370
No. it was not, It is just an absurd assumption to deny God.
>>79954565
>Also do you believe that an omnipotent god man willed the universe into existence?
How is it more ridicolous than believing the universe came from nothing?
>>79954563
>these organisms just knew that
Please stop being retarded deliberately.
The organisms didn't decide anything. There was no decision making process. A baby does not go down the checklist and decide to be born with a mutation for funsies, the mutation occurs without the input of either parent or offspring.
>>79953936
The development of organisms' methods for swapping genes likely went: asexual with no swapping -> asexual with horizontal gene transfer-> hermaphrodite -> distinct sexes
>>79954563
>Extremely questionable whether that's true
how so? Bi-sexuality means you can mix and match genetics from the previous generation pretty easily. The best genes from both parents can be used for offspring and the worst genes of each discarded.
>but yes these organisms just knew that, and decided to develop a male/female sexual reproduction system over the course of thousands of years.
They didn't "know" anything. It happened by random mutation over millions of years. Mutations that were bad caused the organisms to die quick without offspring, mutations that were good caused organisms to produce offspring easier than their peers.
>If humans collectively want to grow wings, can they initiate a slow progress that will form useless bumps in our backs that will thousands of years from now be wings?
Over many millions of years it's possible, if we kept reproducing humans that had small mutations that could be used in part of a chain of mutations to eventually lead to humans having wings. There would be a shit load of work to do though before that would be possible. Could even take billions of years for all I know.
>>79954783
>Brazilian education
Hawkings findings are accepted in the global scientific community. You might learn that if you left your favela
>>79954019
Link?
>>79954749
>Mutations are essentially random, and we have a lot of time for something random to happen.
You can sit there for billions of years, you'll never "randomly" develop a functioning eye, or a male-female sexual system, or something similarly complex.
>>79952660
>believing in indeterminism
Doesn't solve the problem, buckaroo. Whether the universe is deterministic (which it absolutely is on the macro scale) or random/probabilistic (on the quantum level), where does your will come from when all your thoughts and actions are a result of atomic and subatomic interactions in your brain? Are you suggesting that your mind exercises control over its own matter?
>>79954774
>therefore we can assume that the grapefruit sized universe, due to its immense mass, was indeed a singularity
do you know what a singularity is? If it's the size of a grapefruit it's not a singularity. A singularity has no width or height. Hence the same. It's a single point in space.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPXK2Ls-xzQ
Conscience can leave the body, so it's not a body product.
>>79949085
earn money=good
loose money=evil
consciousness=mental process of obtaining money
>>79952259
new evidence says plants have conscience
>>79955061
>you'll never "randomly" develop a functioning eye
Not in one go, there are a series of steps in the development of the eye, look it up.
>>79949858
>Start off with assumption
>All other opinions are wrong because they cannot account for my initial assumption
Where do people think legs came from if not gifts given by seals? Legs in this case is defined as those appendages on the lower half of our body that assist in locomotion that were given to us by seals.
>>79955018
Hawking proves fucking nothing. You just have faith he is intelligent and tried deny God but he is just a fool like you.
>>79954917
> A baby does not go down the checklist and decide to be born with a mutation for funsies,
One case of a birth defect is not the same thing as a slow major development across the whole species. Please stop being retarded deliberately.
>The organisms didn't decide anything. There was no decision making process.
You tards don't seem to be able to understand that I'm making fun of you, and quite obviously don't believe they decide.
>>79954917
>Over many millions of years it's possible, if we kept reproducing humans that had small mutations that could be used in part of a chain of mutations to eventually lead to humans having wings. There would be a shit load of work to do though before that would be possible. Could even take billions of years for all I know.
Lol
>>79955019
>the earth revolves around the sun
>Link?
>>79949085
They don't. They have various theories. Panpsychism, neurons firing at the brain, etc, etc. We hardly know anything about consciousness.
>>79955224
Wrong. That is idolatry. Money can be burnt and rendered meaningless because it takes consciousness to give it meaning
>>79955392
>>One case of a birth defect is not the same thing as a slow major development across the whole species.
Mutations are the start of a slow major development across the whole species.
>>79955142
>mass
>determined by width and height
Are you retarded? Black holes aren't visible, so how the fuck can you measure their width and height
>>79955018
>if you left your favela
Says the basement-dwelling NEET
>>79955061
Apparently I did.
Sensing light is advantageous, as an organism evolves beneficial senses are strengthened, sensing light becomes interpreting light becomes sight.
>>79955392
It's literally the same. As long as the defect is a mutation caused by genetics, rather than being caused by an outside influence that impacts the bodies ability to develop along its actual genetics, then it's a mutation. We call unwanted ones defects, but things like a sixth toe can be passed on, if enough people with a sixth toe started having lots and lots of babies with enough people then they'd become commonplace. Evolution, baby.
>>79950804
It's actually an oblate superior
And we've had proof the earth is not flat for over two millennium
>evolution is totally legit
>but there's no such things as races, and the races that built western civilization are scum who should be genocided
Don't see how this works.
>>79952982
How do you know Trump isn't just LARPing to get the Christcuck vote?
>>79954565
>voted trudeau
>>79955727
I said a singularity has no width or height. Because that is what they are by definition.
>Black holes aren't visible, so how the fuck can you measure their width and height
That's not actually that hard since you are generally measuring the event horizon.
>>79955234
Consciousness is not a scientific thing. Sentience is however. Plants are not sentient because they do not have a functioning central nervous system
>>79949085
Existence is identity, consciousness is identification.
>>79951011
>science is a cult of degeneracy, which only function is to undermine cultural and social values of our ancestors
>>79955535
Don't associate theoretical bullshit with proven facts.
I just asked for a link to this Hawkins study to further the discussion. Don't be a cunt.
>>79949085
>>79951453
>Saying that there is a prime foundation of consciousness is not saying "I'm going to throw my hands up in the air and stop thinking about anything."
Yes it is. Consider trying to figure out the workings of a car. You can't explain the motor's function, so you decide the Universal God of Engines must be at work.
>It's saying "these are the terms under which I understand the universe, now let's see where we can go from here." It is there to ground me so that I do not use one foundation over here and another over there.
You don't use a final and total explanation as a framework for further investigation. "God is the source of consciousness" is as logically valid as "God is the source of motor power". It's a retarded kind of finality which forbids questions like "how to we artificially simulate a sub-component of conscious thought"?
It's either "God of the gaps" framed a little differently, or a semantic zero-sum with no bearing on reality.
>>79955741
No, you are falling into the pit of no-God theory. Randomness does not create anything functional or higher than what the substances that comprise the randomness are. Throw vivid blue, green, bright reds an yellows against a wall and you get a lower-state color of mucky brown.
>>79955925
This i agree with, but there is more to the picture than just you and me and You and I. No-God ers just don't get it yet.
>>79955741
>Evolution, baby.
Micro-evolution.
Yes that's very reasonable, a certain trait becoming more common over time, however it's not the same thing as major transformations, like a fish becoming a bird.
Evolutionists argue that the same exact mode of operation demonstrated in micro-evolution would also work, given enough time, for these major long-term changes. They have no proof of this.
>>79952052
>Since there is no possible NATURAL cause for these things there must be a SUPER natural cause.
It wasn't nature, it was SUPER nature! Y'see, SUPER nature avoids all those irritating logical hurdles intelligent people keep throwing at me
>>79955662
Everything contemporary is based on the cult of Moloch. They are stronger than Christianity or even old morality. It consumes literally children.
Btw virgins do not give births and humans do not resurrect.
