What's new

Longest Thread Ever

Nah it really is my bad. I tried to interpret your meaning a couple times and should have known that you of all people didn't mean it the way I was reading it. People often use a denigrating tone or are dismissive of things that are old or familiar. I find myself often defending the value of things that aren't esoteric or novel.

I had a friend that could not love anything unless he had heard of it first. It was as if he was laying claim to the work of others and that this somehow elevated him or validated his worth. It seems to me that fewer and fewer people really appreciate anything. They only love their discovery of it. Comradery is dead in the age of one-upsmanship. I have never read anything that you have posted that could be characterized this way and it seems to be more outside your nature than mine so I really should have just said "huh?'.

my bad


Not to my knowledge.

I have done this very thing. I hope it is almost all in the past. Let's just say it's a way people do, for whatever reason. I think it can be done by some in an effort to just "fit in", or be part of the discussion. When you're a fledgling yah gotta flap those wings just the same whether you can actually fly or not.

I hope that a culture will grow in the 'net of better manners, more careful discussions, more respect, and that in fact forums like this can replace college courses for educational values. . . . Probably in a few years a lot of fledglings will have real wings, and great talents to share.
 
Let's say someone you loved suffered partial brain damage. Let's also assume that an artificial neuron is available. Would you replace 10% of their brain with those neurons? Would that person be only 90% conscious? How many neurons could you replace with artificial neurons before that person ceased to be a conscious being?

Actually, I am quite comfortable with the positive values of human limitation. I remember when I was blind for a while, and paralyzed pretty much for a while, how I realized I still had all of my self-worth. At least I thought so. Considering as I do that among the benefits of life in this world are the things we learn under physical and/or mental limitations, which will be of worth to us as cogitating, conscious, feeling beings beyond life as we now know it, I am in the camp of those who do not think people necessarily have to be something, anything.

We are. Existing as some kind of compound/complex entity that in some respects transcends the material world, we have value beyond this world, and above any kind of skill or attainment materially-speaking.

but hell yeah. I'm all for neurons. If we could activate the process of neuron growth and differentiation to restore some diminished capacity? yes.

My view of conscious beings/spirits/will would keep that "spirit" at the helm of even a completely artificial "brain" as long as it was the "will of God". And I have no idea what that will is, generally. A beating heart can be replaced with a pump and we still have a human being. Lungs can be artificial or transplant as well. I'd observe to see if the artificial brain had a certain sense of "will", and if it was consistent with the "will" or attitudes and desires of the person who we've known. . . . then think again. If it resulted in something/someone with no passions, joys, loves, or independent choices I'd think more in terms of Frankenstien or something. . . . .
 
Folks like OB are splendid examples of this sort of thing, in my own very limited "low information" sort of manner of seeing things. . . . .all wrapped around the little feminist finger focused on the many imagined ways women are neglected in Western society. . . . with nary an objection to the Middle Eastern cultures I might point out. . . . or India or China or, indeed, the whole world. . . . where men's mates traditionally were secured by parental negotiations and his lifetime of duty was to provide for his spouse and her children.

I discuss my problems with Western European culture, being immersed in Western European culture on a board populated mostly be being similarly immersed. If you really want to, we can talk about social justice issues in other countries, but it doesn't come up often.

I have previously asserted that without women there would be no such thing as civilization. Included in that sweeping truth is the minor chord that men simply just don't know what needs doing without the female guidance, which in turn arises from the unsnipped interconnections between the two hemispheres of the female brain.

I don't take such assertions seriously, because 1) they over-emphasize the average differences between genders, while ignoring the wide variations within each gender, and 2) you are assigning to hard-wiring what is actually a product of nurture. Were women's brains identical to men's brains, we would still have civilization, because 100 organized people will out-produce 100 disorganized people, whether the task is plowing, hunting, raising children, or fighting.
 
Sounds like you're about to fall into the transhumanism infatuation. Is there room in your lexicon for two entirely different species???

Your question was how chemical reactions can account for consciousness. I was pointing out that we are getting pretty close to consciousness with material reactions. Saying they are not the same because they are electric is beside the point.

consiousness might be an attribute of living things, and maybe a sufficiently huge and well-programmed computer can draw sufficiently from massive data inputs to seem "conscious", but I can guan-damn-tee you that the only "will" a computer will ever have is in the programmer humans.

consciousness is not will. A camera lens does not interpret the world.

I have no idea what you mean by will, here. Computers do exhibit the determination to complete a task using whatever resources are available, but maybe you mean something different.
 
Well, I don't believe you missed the ironical twist at the end, or Log's point. Putting them together like that, of course, would prove that Man's superiority is the result of the brain-clipping blindness to most of the stuff women know. . . . a sort of uninformed mindset. It is very fitting that in The Republic, it is "men" who are chained in such a manner that all they see is the shadows. The shadows, I say, of women's designs. . . . ..

My theory is that it is nevertheless useful in setting priorities in life, because it reduces the options to a more manageable set, perhaps more focused on the basic necessities of life, such as food, shelter, and tools. . . .

Which of course renders Man much more manageable in the hands of women who know how to handle their man properly.

Folks like OB are splendid examples of this sort of thing, in my own very limited "low information" sort of manner of seeing things. . . . .all wrapped around the little feminist finger focused on the many imagined ways women are neglected in Western society. . . . with nary an objection to the Middle Eastern cultures I might point out. . . . or India or China or, indeed, the whole world. . . . where men's mates traditionally were secured by parental negotiations and his lifetime of duty was to provide for his spouse and her children.

It is commonly insisted as a matter of shame that society neglects women, while the truth is that a man is the obligatory provider, the servant if you please. And this is all so because, universally, women just know how to handle their men that well.

To an enlightened soul sufficiently apprised of the origins of modern political puppet shows, the bald marxist view of "equality" for women is a rude reduction of women's rights to near zero, comparatively speaking, to the traditional place women have achieved in almost every traditional society. And how necessary it must be for political revolutionaries fixated on global fascism run by old white men with enough money to nearly achieve immortality through exclusive access to the leading medical technologies, including computer applications, to play out the lies in this manner, with everything they put out in wholesale public indoctrination/media saying everything that is the exact opposite of the truth. David Rockefeller might live another hundred years, and by then he'll be holding title to human souls just like in Gogol's Russia. Some future for trusting believers in "progressive" ideals like "social justice" and "equality". I'd prefer a world run by women with their sensitivities and talents for persuasion that renders a life of service in their care fulfilling and happy.

I have previously asserted that without women there would be no such thing as civilization. Included in that sweeping truth is the minor chord that men simply just don't know what needs doing without the female guidance, which in turn arises from the unsnipped interconnections between the two hemispheres of the female brain.

I will leave it to the reader to surmise who is really in charge.

I know my place, and I love it.

The feminist movement and sexual revolution were a boon for the cad.

r620-d3a8d9ba137e8f4f5ea70c2a57a3d2f1.jpg
 
Your prophet Kermit Gosnell is proud of you.

Feminazi: Just kidding about the "safe" part! Abortion on demand no matter the conditions!

The "safety" laws passed/proposed by conservatives would have done nothing to stop Gosnell, but are shutting down clinics all over states like Texas. This is not a bug, it is the intended consequence. Knowlingly or otherwise, you are spreading a lie.
 
You must have an interesting personal life, what with primate being in your large intestine and all.

Those must be very small primates unknown to modern science yet. Maybe we will have an evidence for "creation" when they eventually fly out!
 
Monkeys are getting pretty close to flying out my butt.

By close do you mean they are at the flight testing stage, but just can't get off the ground, or that their evolution has reached a point where flying instead of dropping out of your butt would provide for a greater ability to compete in their environment?
 
So, first world feminist problems and 3rd world feminist problems?

Yeah, the first world "feminists" can't get enough baby killing to keep women out of the motherhood cage, while the 3rd world "feminists" are having trouble protecting their women from forced abortion and keeping their non-aborted children alive.

9d3a5ec1-ec5d-4500-b219-bc3d259ac4ea_zpsf4152209.jpg
 
Yeah, the first world "feminists" can't get enough baby killing to keep women out of the motherhood cage, while the 3rd world "feminists" are having trouble protecting their women from forced abortion and keeping their non-aborted children alive.

9d3a5ec1-ec5d-4500-b219-bc3d259ac4ea_zpsf4152209.jpg

Please post a link to 'Pakistani forced abortion clinic'.
 
Back
Top