God:the early answer to a problem?

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by fusion4577, Jan 16, 2008.

  1. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    what is the distinction between a dead thing and an inanimate thing (apart from the apriori knowledge that the dead thing was previously alive)?


    why would it be categorized as life?
    It is simply a processing tool, and doesn't have any greater significance than any other tool utilized by living beings
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    once again, I don't have anything radical to offer
    :shrug:
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    The distinction is that a dead object, in contrast with an inanimate object, has all the 'machinery' needed to sustain life.
    To clarify the edit:
    This was done for such 'objects' as oil for instance. Or bones etc.

    I admit it is controversial, but artificial life does meet all the criteria.
    Processing tool ? I think you misunderstand what I mean with artificial life..
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_life
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. SnakeLord snakeystew.com Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,758
    For the final time, I am not asking for anything radical.

    Maybe a further question should be: cowardice or inability?
     
  8. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    Emnos
    if the inert machinery cannot be re-invested with life, what is the ultimate distinction?
    will a dead body ever be alive again?
    (no post dated cheques in the name of sci-fi please

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    )
    actually it depends on how we understand intelligence

    Thus a computer has no point of view on questions of right and wrong.
    Whatever choices it seems capable of making are actually pre-deliberated by
    a conscious programmer. With superhuman speed a computer blindly follows
    the schemata of those deliberations when so commanded by a conscious user.
    The user inputs choices that the computer mechanically processes to logical
    conclusions. But only the user sees those conclusions to be "correct",
    "better", "hopeful" or "wrong"; the machine, seeing nothing, makes no
    value-judgements.

    -Transcendental Personalism S.Swami
     
  9. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    You are taking it too far.. i said 'regarding life'.
    Do you really want to end up with a "What is real" sort of thread ?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    The word 'again' cannot be applied to an inanimate object in this context, that's a difference.
    Dead bodies can be resurrected.. it all depends on how you define death.
    I don't really see how this is relevant though.

    Intelligence is no criteria for life. Do you think a beetle knows right from wrong ?
     
  10. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    I thought it was quite straight forward
    in what ways does a dead thing behave differently from an inanimate thing?

    and it also cannot be applied to dead things either
    a dead thing behaves strictly according to physical laws (particularly in regard to decomposition)
    while a living thing also has many issues of accordance with physical laws, they are also conscious, which despite theorizing to the contrary, remains unapproachable by current understandings of physical laws



    you don't think it knows the difference between a bad situation and a good one?
     
  11. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    In no way. You are missing the point completely though.

    I know this is childish.. but what about Jesus ? lol

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Certain bacteria can be frozen for millennia and come to live when they are warmed up.

    Artificial life can tell a good situation from a bad one as well.
     
  12. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    what's the point?

    why do they have to be frozen?
    why can't they simply be dead?


    not according to the AI system

    .... only the user sees those conclusions to be "correct",
    "better", "hopeful" or "wrong"; the machine, seeing nothing, makes no
    value-judgements.
     
  13. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    This heading towards the thread I mentioned. Maybe you should continue there.

    Cos they'd rot ?

    Such is life.. words make this confusing.
    Beetles don't make value judgments either.


    This is going nowhere.
    Originally this was about the definition of life. And Snake asking you to give yours, or at least one you think is correct.
    I think you should give yours and let Snake ask his question.
    I'm off to bed now..
    Have fun

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. Jozen-Bo The Wheel Spinning King!!! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,597
    Science has proven its own limits. It can take us only so far.
    How can science prove the God doesn't exist to me when all I see is God?

    Jozen
     
  15. Nickelodeon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,581
    Perhaps it can prove you are nuts?
     
  16. Jozen-Bo The Wheel Spinning King!!! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,597
    Legally I think not.

    Freedom of Religion is so COOL!!!!
     
  17. Crunchy Cat F-in' *meow* baby!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,423
    It's only as limited as the technology and thought of people are, as far as we know.

    For a specific 'God' (like the Christian one) that's a piece of cake... and it's mostly logic that can disprove it's existence. For a generic idea of 'God' it can't because there is no falsifiable detail, but (and this is a big but) that absence of falsifiable detail makes the idea no more credible or probable than any other lacking falsifiable detail.

    What science can do is understand why all you see is 'God'. It's a human psychological phenomena called anthropomprhization. To put it bluntly, humans superimpose human qualities on non-human things and phenomena (or vice versa). Bugs bunny, father time, mother nature, the grim reaper, etc... you get the point. 'God' is anthropomorphization of reality and here is an article that goes into detail on anthropomorphism:

    http://www.buildfreedom.com/tl/tl05ab.shtml
     
  18. Jozen-Bo The Wheel Spinning King!!! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,597
    What a fun answer that was.

    From the stand point you give I do agree.

    From my own perspective, its a little different. Would a God need science to do anything...or could God use Magic??? The rules of reality are not fixed. They are mutating...many of our world"s super top notch Russian Scientist have observed this. We are at a point where the very observation of an experiment affects the results.

    What seems more advanced...some beings relying on their much needed equipment to get what they desire or beings who could manifest anything by simply desiring it?
     
  19. Crunchy Cat F-in' *meow* baby!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,423
    Glad you enjoyed it

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    .

    Did you mean would 'God' need reality do do anything? Science is just a process... look, think, test, validate, repeat. Consequently, what is magic? Is there any evidence such a thing exists? Reality is quite non-magical. It is consistent, persistent, and non-contradictory.

    I think you might be referring to a wave function collapse. Yes any unit that can accept information from a superposition can result in a collapse; however, there is no fundamental rule of reality that is mutating. The evolution of a wave function is probability.

    It depends on what definition of 'advanced' we're using really. A better question might be which one has demonstrable evidence? Truth is the conformity of a concept or notion in the mind to actual reality. Evidence, on the other hand, is a demonstration that a given reality is valid.
     
  20. Jozen-Bo The Wheel Spinning King!!! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,597
    Your logic is strong. Good answers!!!

    Have you ever heard of a torsion field???
     
  21. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    If you want to call the laws of nature God, and everything in it God, then even an atheist can agree to that definition. However, God more commonly refers to something supernatural.
     
  22. Crunchy Cat F-in' *meow* baby!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,423
    Must be the vitamins :thankyou:.

    As in the hypothetical non-Riemanian manifold with both bosonic and fermionic coordinates? Nope, never heard of it

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    .
     
  23. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    Emnos
    not sure why issues of being conscious or dead are inherently related to issues of reality, unless your head has seriously been done in by some philosophical discussion of late
    fancy that

    just try 5 cabbages in a acre of parsley and see how many cabbage moths appreciate the value of cabbage as opposed to parsley

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page