I love Dan Dennett....[video=youtube;fjbWr3ODbAo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjbWr3ODbAo[/video]this shit is fascinating.
...you totally missed the point.
What was the point?...did you write every science book? Can you tell us the difference between intelligence and consciousness? (going to wait for that answer)
...the point was that you cannot look at a 'holy' book with scientific eyes. It does not require the sort of scrutiny that you'd prescribe. It's no big deal, it's just that you can't expect to argue about your own thoughts and feelings, right? Those are subjective and have no real place in the scientific arenas.What was the point?
...yes, and no (imo). How could someone be sustained on locusts and wild honey, as an example. I think that's why people scrap over this stuff. To your point, though, it is not a subjective view that we're supposed to take when looking at 'any biblos', either. They call that lunacy. Religare (religion) is union, sexual union...so in that sense it happens to be the only creator of multiple realities - unless you were in a Sigourney Weaver movie However, that doesn't make that particular scroll the only one to 'eat'. At this point in my development, I feel comfortable in saying that all of those books form a bigger picture. They should compliment each other instead of divide. But, I dream.the bible claims to be the one and true reality . . .its is not meant to be interpreted as subjective . . .. so that pretty much settlers that argument
I certainly can look at a book that makes objective claims about reality with scientific eyes....the point was that you cannot look at a 'holy' book with scientific eyes. It does not require the sort of scrutiny that you'd prescribe. It's no big deal, it's just that you can't expect to argue about your own thoughts and feelings, right? Those are subjective and have no real place in the scientific arenas.
...apocrypha and its interpretation is what you'd be arguing, in this case. It's a tough gig no matter which 'side' a person is on. It's even an argument within the groups of believers. I guess the thing to remember is that a lot of these cats were being persecuted one way or another. They had to hide with words.I certainly can look at a book that makes objective claims about reality with scientific eyes. It depends on what you're arguing.
...that is so very cool. Gracias for the link! Kind of a mind benderEye, you might like this. I've only made it to point 8 and am not sure I agree, but was struck by this sentence. cnFromhttp://meta-religion.com/Philosophy/Articles/Philosophy_of_the_mind/is_the_mind_real.htm
...the question asked at 3:47(ish) is messed up[video=youtube;kmZaA_xoJiM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmZaA_xoJiM[/video]
I think awareness is a softer criterion than self-awareness. I would say a waking dog or lizard is conscious ... even if not very much so in the lizard's case. cnI would have to ask how one defines intelligence before deciding on the difference. As I was discussing earlier with ganja man, there are many animals that demonstrate varying levels of intelligence, but tests confirm that they may not even be self-aware. We all know dogs display intelligence as an ability to learn. Bees and many other insects show intelligence in problem solving at the level of the hive but not so much individually, i.e. the hive mind. It is well established that predators need more intelligence than prey and this is often demonstrable with brain architecture.
Consciousness is merely being self-aware and for that we need the ability of abstract thought, another level of intelligence, so in a way, they are related IMO.
Sadness, yes, shame no. Guilt, shame, etc. are human responses to a moral value. Like intelligence, consciousness can have varying levels of meaning. It can simply mean sentience, then qualia, and every level up to self-awareness and intentionality.I believe my dog is conscious. It clearly exhibits emotions like happiness, sadness, shame, deceit, panic, etc., etc.,. I don't have any basis for this, just living with him and being around him all the time...