truthislight:

its sounds like a bush man argument.

I thought the argument was about 'mind' and not life ?

Lol. I smell a Ph.D syndrome now. The argument is about existence of the material and/or immaterial.

Lb claims that the brain is the same thing as the mind. A synonym for the brain. The brain is material and has life. Life here signifies function or not dead. And it is only in this light, that is, functioning of the brain-life, can we be talking about thoughts.

Or do you prefer we talk about mind, brain and thoughts where the brain is dead or non-functional.

So now tell me, is it still a bush man or a simple argument?

Dont you think you should rather spill out what you think is responsible for the abstract thought/mind ?

A 'Being' ?
Lol.

truthislight: Dont you think you should rather spill out what you think is responsible for the abstract thought/mind ?

A 'Being' ?
Lol.

Haba! Don't make me wonder or begin to question how you understand or what you understand.

There is an order here. An order this argument, between Mr Urban and I, has followed. We are still exploring the brain-mind problem.

To now come and ask what I think is responsible for abstract thought/mind, a thing you made up,does not follow the argument because I am still questioning Lb on what these things really are. If I were done, your question will still not follow because no one is asking what is responsible for the mind.

Did I help you?

UyiIredia:


Oh I will say never. The same as I say never to time travel. Tech predictions such as those are based on a misunderstanding of nature.

Time travel is impossible because time itself doesnt exist.


But consciousness......that is something that is replicable in nature....if we can create a mechanical heart....nothing is impossible


If it were allowed to clone humans and then test their brains and CNS while alive like lab rats......

Reyginus: Haba! Don't make me wonder or begin to question how you understand or what you understand.

There is an order here. An order this argument, between Mr Urban and I, has followed. We are still exploring the brain-mind problem.

To now come and ask what I think is responsible for abstract thought/mind, a thing you made up,does not follow the argument because I am still questioning Lb on what these things really are. If I were done, your question will still not follow because no one is asking what is responsible for the mind.

Did I help you?

truthislight has exposed you.


All these silly and repetitive questions will get you no where....just state your beliefs on consicousness

truthislight: Dont you think you should rather spill out what you think is responsible for the abstract thought/mind ?

A 'Being' ?
Lol.

Simple and short.

Thanks for this, truthislight

TheBigUrban2:


truthislight has exposed you.


All these silly and repetitive questions will get you no where....just state your beliefs on consicousness

Lololol. I finally give up, chief. I have been exposed and disgraced. Chai!!

UyiIredia: No. Computer software is ALWAYS material. I cant believe you Mr Anony and donroxy can misunderstand something so basic.

Pardon my ignorance then .....

TheBigUrban2:


Time travel is impossible because time itself doesnt exist.


But consciousness......that is something that is replicable in nature....if we can create a mechanical heart....nothing is impossible


If it were allowed to clone humans and then test their brains and CNS while alive like lab rats......

I swear you be the most stupid atheist I don argue with. All show and no stuff. See wetin u don dey write. Time doesnt exist ! Abeg no kill me before my time with your lack of reason. I'm just 23.

donroxy: Pardon my ignorance then .....

Pardoned.Just know that softwares are always encoded in a computer in a material form. They are material. Very material. Maybe you mistook the fact that softwares are intangible (iie you cant touch it the way you touch hardare like keyoards) for being immaterial.

UyiIredia: I swear you be the most stupid atheist I don argue with. All show and no stuff. See wetin u don dey write. Time doesnt exist ! Abeg no kill me before my time with your lack of reason. I'm just 23.

Please, google "does time exist".


I dont know why both nairaland atheists and christians always shout down things that they havent heard about before.

This is the same way, some atheists were trying to claim that objective morality is bunk and insulted me....only to find that humanists and many leading atheists accept an objective morality.


============================
Please do not be confident in your ignorance. You are 10 days younger if you use the islamic calendar.

Gregorian calendar- Uyi is 23 years old
Islamic calendar- Uyi is 22 years, 135 days old.


Time doesnt exist....we just put arbitrary measurements to say something is x days/months old.

Why is a second 60 minutes and not 50 minutes?

Use your brain

UyiIredia: Pardoned.Just know that softwares are always encoded in a computer in a material form. They are material. Very material. Maybe you mistook the fact that softwares are intangible (iie you cant touch it the way you touch hardare like keyoards) for being immaterial.

I'm only trying to be humble Uyi !!

The Human algorithm seems immaterial to you because it is presently beyond human logical realm and that doesn't imply theories can't be developed around it to bring it to logical realm !!

Tis not as if you have conducted a research or any scholarly piece has concludes , it is Immaterial !!

There are so many innovations in our world today which are beyond conception of some civilisations so remote from this reality !!


We all know that Human being has consciousness , it may be immaterial to you know but it is not immaterial to its creator ....


The Creator knows what it is and what He used to invent its properties .....


All I'm trying to say is that , you never can tell what Future may evolve in years to come ....


what engendered consciousness in human may even be an invincible drop of vapour that special tools will soon discover in the future !!

truthislight:

Hehehehe. Lol. If daftness of comprehension for the sake of criticism is anything to go by, you surely glory in it.

Keep deluding yourself, keep riding on your high horse of imagining you are special for posting what others had never seen or understood befor. Smh for infantile excitement.

If i give a word picture of being broke for the sake of passing an object lesson, then in truth i am broke. True. No ?

You sure have an issue, if it is mental, i cant say from here, maybe, it comes from what you are feeding, be it physical or spiritual, i dont know, but i do know it is not good for your mental ativity/ comprehension.

I have wasted too much time on you already.

Enjoy anyway, in your ..................

You are clearly the "infantile." You have resorted to ad hominem attacks because you can't refute what is stated. You accused me of "posting what others had never seen or understood befor(sic)" but does that make it false or "delusional?" Hardly! You should not blame me for your willful ignorance.

You have been in your own cocoon of delusion for too long. What I cited was lifted from the Bible verbatim so don't blame me. It is not my fault that you did not know of these verses. The verses I quoted are in the bible aren't they?

You insinuated that I have mental issues because you alleged that I informed you of Biblical verses you neither knew existed of nor understand. Talk about blaming the messenger instead of the message! It is pertinent here that I give you more info from the Bible that you probably don't know about Christ and mental illness:

Many of them said, "He is demon-possessed and raving mad. Why listen to him?" John 10:20

"When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, 'He is out of his mind.'" Mark 3:21

You would agree with me that these verses are self explanatory. Thank you for being an armed chair psychiatrist. The joke is on you after all. The bible is my watchword! I do not add or subtract neither do I run from the good, the bad and the ugly from it. It is what it is!

The Bible says what it means and means what it says. It states that “scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35) and “Your [God’s] word is truth” (John 17:17). If we are to believe that the Bible is unbreakable truth, then we must believe things the way they are stated.

You were at least honest in saying that you do not understand these verses. But all I can say is that, it is sad that you and most people do not understand these straightforward verses. Nevertheless, I am not to blame for your lack of understanding. Therefore your quote above is nothing but a travesty.

I think your problem is more like you do not like what the verses quoted by me portray. Since you never knew about the verses before, you assume that there is comfort in you continuing to feign ignorance.

Sorry dude, I know many of you are confused about how to place me. But contrary to your assertions, I have never claimed directly or indirectly to be "special." I am a self acclaimed Bible scholar. I have taken the time to read and understand the bible unlike many of you that show up here to propound absurd theories.

I cite the Bible for my positions. On these basis, you and your ilk cannot justifiably vilify me and that is your conundrum.

TheBigUrban2:
We are all born with equal potential. No one is born intelligent. One might have the intelligent genes but they are useless if not harnessed with quality education

People born with deformities are usually a result of parents' negligence or ignorance towards childbirth

Down syndrome is a result of having children at old age and also an extra chromosome....there is testing from down syndrome before the baby is born.

Anyhoo, we are all the same specie, according to science. We are equal in that sense.

actually every one is not born intellectually or even physically equal.
All you explanations about "how it happened" only proves it.

Ubenedictus: actually every one is not born intellectually or even physically equal.
All you explanations about "how it happened" only proves it.

We are all humans at the end of the day....so the same human rights should apply to all


Science says that we are the same species, despite our varying levels of intelligence or physical strenghts

TheBigUrban2:


We are all humans at the end of the day....so the same human rights should apply to all


Science says that we are the same species, despite our varying levels of intelligence or physical strenghts

that is interesting!


So all men are "equal" based on the fact that they are of the same species! Not because they are socially, physically or intellectually equal but because they are of the same specie.

Is that the best and only reason why humans are equal?

Ubenedictus: that is interesting!


So all men are "equal" based on the fact that they are of the same species! Not because they are socially, physically or intellectually equal but because they are of the same specie.

Is that the best and only reason why humans are equal?

Panadol and Paracetamol are equally capable painkillers

But as regards to marketing(popularity with customers), they are far from equals.


=======================

We are unequal as humans in many specific aspects but in totality, we are all humans- members of the same species.

Yes, being the same species is the strongest reason for equal treatment

TheBigUrban2:


The bold is a lie that you have been corrected on. We dont know that much the origins of life and the universe to be sure that it is from chance.


Furthermore, man is only better than animals because man can reason. Without reasoning, we are just another ape-like primate.


Eugenics is not science. To even put Eugenics on atheists shows how bigoted you are. Sicko.



And please, we are waiting for the figures

this is just another personal attack, so you guys nolonger know the origin of life, you don't even know if evolution is true. But you feel justified to attack whatsoever religion says about the origin of man, tell me again who is a bigot?

striktlymi:

The above does support the belief that every man is equal either from the Atheist stand point or that of Religion.



If indeed human intelligence is a characteristic that is 'acquired' from birth then it necessarily follows that inequality in human intelligence means inequality of humans themselves.



I agree that his argument, in my opinion, does not support equality from an Atheist point of view but neither does yours support it from the 'Religious' angle.

the aim of my arguement isn't to show the equality of man from the religious angle but to show the problem with the arguement in the op.

I do not agree. Some Christians support that dreadful act. Some Atheists are against abortion too.

i've never really heard of any atheist against abortion.

Ubenedictus:


this is just another personal attack, so you guys nolonger know the origin of life, you don't even know if evolution is true. But you feel justified to attack whatsoever religion says about the origin of man, tell me again who is a bigot?

Personal attack? Are you insane?


You tried to put Eugenics on atheists and now you are claiming attacks on religion?

Not only that, you assume that atheism has something to do with the origin of life.....whereas, no one knows the origin of life- what we know is the origin of species. Atheism exists with or without evolution.



Guy, go and sleep

MrAnony1:
I am quite sure bigurban is logicboy, I can smell that guy a mile away. He has a distinctly bad way of reasoning that you just can't miss. It's like a signature.

Lmao. This is just wicked abeg

TheBigUrban2:


Personal attack? Are you insane?


You tried to put Eugenics on atheists and now you are claiming attacks on religion?

Not only that, you assume that atheism has something to do with the origin of life.....whereas, no one knows the origin of life- what we know is the origin of species. Atheism exists with or without evolution.



Guy, go and sleep

get serious man, atheist have been smashing the evolution theory on creationist since the theory had any sort of circumstantial evidence, they thought that if if can be proved that man was a product of some wasteful sequence of adaptation then it will prove God false. I know this because atheist have tried to embarass me in discussions by bringing up the inconclusive theory of evolution. So my dear i do find it interesting that you "don't know" about the origin of the human specie yet your favourite pastime is to insult those believe man has a cause. If you don't know then it is only right that you keep quite until you know.

Secondly, i tried to be charitable when talking of eugenic and euthanasia even though in most cases they repulse me. The arguement i propose that says an atheist will be more open to eugenics wasn't an attempt to insult you. Infact i took the atheist arguement for eugenics from a popular atheist; dawkins.

He argues that man is just another animal and since there is no God or objective morality according to him, then if falls to man to breed the most healthy human race.

So tell me again, do you share dawkins idea that mans opinion is the decider of right and wrong? Do you reject objective morality? And if you do then sorry, i see no basis for which atheist claim "all men are born equal" i see no basis for human rights because if morality is subjective then it follows then anyone is right to treat another human anyhow he like, it follows that one man can decide to kill everybody because he is the decider of right and wrong.

Woe to the man without power! He will die before he lives. That is the picture you paint.

It isn't bigotry, it is critical thinking.

Have a nice evening.

Ubenedictus:


get serious man, atheist have been smashing the evolution theory on creationist since the theory had any sort of circumstantial evidence, they thought that if if can be proved that man was a product of some wasteful sequence of adaptation then it will prove God false. I know this because atheist have tried to embarass me in discussions by bringing up the inconclusive theory of evolution. So my dear i do find it interesting that you "don't know" about the origin of the human specie yet your favourite pastime is to insult those believe man has a cause. If you don't know then it is only right that you keep quite until you know.

Secondly, i tried to be charitable when talking of eugenic and euthanasia even though in most cases they repulse me. The arguement i propose that says an atheist will be more open to eugenics wasn't an attempt to insult you. Infact i took the atheist arguement for eugenics from a popular atheist; dawkins.

He argues that man is just another animal and since there is no God or objective morality according to him, then if falls to man to breed the most healthy human race.

So tell me again, do you share dawkins idea that mans opinion is the decider of right and wrong? Do you reject objective morality? And if you do then sorry, i see no basis for which atheist claim "all men are born equal" i see no basis for human rights because if morality is subjective then it follows then anyone is right to treat another human anyhow he like, it follows that one man can decide to kill everybody because he is the decider of right and wrong.

Woe to the man without power! He will die before he lives. That is the picture you paint.

It isn't bigotry, it is critical thinking.

Have a nice evening.

1) Eugenics is debunked science and very racist....both sensible christian and atheist scientists have thrown it away. For you to anyway pin Eugenics on atheism is a clear sign of bigotry. Shame on you

2) Dawkins does not and has never supported Eugenics. Please stop lying. Feel free to define Eugenics and directly quote (with links) where Dawkins supports it.

3) Euthanasia has nothing to do with atheism. Some support it, some do not

4) Evolution has nothing to do with atheism. Even the catholic church supports evolution. Catholic schools and organisations teach evolution. Please, think before you talk. Atheism existed before Darwin....centuries before.

5) You are a shameless, hopeless man. I dont know if christianity teaches you to lie.


Good night

TheBigUrban2:
1) Eugenics is debunked science and very racist....both sensible christian and atheist scientists have thrown it away. For you to anyway pin Eugenics on atheism is a clear sign of bigotry. Shame on you

2) Dawkins does not and has never supported Eugenics. Please stop lying. Feel free to define Eugenics and directly quote (with links) where Dawkins supports it.

3) Euthanasia has nothing to do with atheism. Some support it, some do not

4) Evolution has nothing to do with atheism. Even the catholic church supports evolution. Catholic schools and organisations teach evolution. Please, think before you talk. Atheism existed before Darwin....centuries before.

5) You are a shameless, hopeless man. I dont know if christianity teaches you to lie.


Good night

hehehe, and you wonder why few people take you seriously.

You have resorted to ad hominen attacks like a little kid even without reasoning!

When you seem capable of partaking in reasoned discussions, you'll wipe away those personal attacks and discuss like a matured human that i hope you are.

Ubenedictus:

hehehe, and you wonder why few people take you seriously.

You have resorted to ad hominen attacks like a little kid even without reasoning!

When you seem capable of partaking in reasoned discussions, you'll wipe away those personal attacks and discuss like a matured human that i hope you are.

Saying that Dawkins doesnt support Eugenics is an ad hominem
Saying that atheism has nothing to do with Euthanasia is an ad hominem

And of course calling out the lies you told and calling a liar a liar is an ad hominem




Go and sleep

Ubenedictus:
the aim of my arguement isn't to show the equality of man from the religious angle but to show the problem with the arguement in the op.

Ok! I agree that the OP has many flaws.

Ubenedictus:
i've never really heard of any atheist against abortion.

There are a number of Atheists against abortion. Kristine Kruszelnicki is the president of 'Pro-life Humanists'. She has gone into public debates with her fellow Atheists, whilst seeking to protect the right to life of the unborn. She even considers abortion to be murder.

striktlymi:

I do believe my position is true! This belief, in itself, is not enough to accuse another who hold a contrary opinion of falsehood. It takes more than making a wrong statement to tell lies. In my opinion, the following components must be demonstrated before one can be accused of telling lies:

1) The statement in itself must be false.
2) The individual knows that the statement is false.
3) The individual's intent is to deliberately deceive.

For me, without those components present, I can't really say someone is lying. It may be easy to demonstrate that the statement made is untrue but how I know for sure that the individual knows this and deliberately attempts to deceive is another matter. It is possible for one to give an opinion without knowing it is false nor does he have an intent to deceive.

I understand that you are unwilling to call another person a liar. That's fine but if you believe that your position is true, then you must hold that the opposing view that all humans are equal is false whether or not those who hold the view are consciously trying to deceive.

Yes!

Interesting, let's now examine your reasons.

* They should be treated equally because it is fair in that instance. If one human being can be allowed to live without anyone determining whether it is murdered before birth then the next child deserves the same treatment. Our lives, unlike some other things, belongs to us. It will only be unfair for another to 'destroy' it for very selfish reasons.

Fairness for me, is what is key here. Like I implied in one of my posts, people need not be equal to be treated fairly. The very fact that you said one is strong while the other weak demonstrates that humans are not equal.

We may get fair treatment which some times may mean being given equal rights but this does not suggest that every human was born with equal capabilities. Let's forget about Children born deformed and focus more on those who are born in good health.

Even with that, the abilities of humans defer regardless of whether they are brought up in the same environment and given the same opportunities in life. Some will most definitely turn out better than others because of the disparity in abilities.

* Fair treatment does not always mean equal treatment or equal rights. I am pretty sure that I don't have the same rights as a diplomat nor do I have the same rights as a member of the senate. I am also very sure that, though people's right to life is equal, they don't have access to the same medical facilities.

My friend, you have not answered the question I asked you.

I asked you "Why is it fair to treat unequal people (i.e. the weak and the strong) equally?" And your reply was "because it is fair....." You just totally begged the question. Please try again.

TheBigUrban2:




You must feel so smart!! You found out something that everyone knows from 3 months ago.

Or did you think I was hiding my true identity?


lol.....and my reasoning is so bad abi? How many people have you swayed with your sophistry?

I didn't think you were hiding your identity. I just recognized your bad reasoning. that's all.

Ubenedictus: that is interesting!


So all men are "equal" based on the fact that they are of the same species! Not because they are socially, physically or intellectually equal but because they are of the same specie.

Is that the best and only reason why humans are equal?

I wonder how his claim is any more valid than that of a white supremacist saying that "all white men are equal because they are white"

MrAnony1:
I didn't think you were hiding your identity. I just recognized your bad reasoning. that's all.

lol...


Why do some christians lie like this? It was not my reasoning but the way I write.

The irony here is that your reasoning has been so poor that it has been noted by many and has been systemized-


Various components of Anonyism-
1) Answering questions with more questions that are sometimes irrelevant (eg "can u prove god?" ans; "can you prove god doesnt exist"?)
2) Falsely equivocating two similar but different issues. (eg religious humanism and humanistic religion)
3) Claiming that the opponent misunderstands your point (eg Ihedinobi's misunderstood jutsu)


I can bet my life that you have done all 3 or at least 2 in this thread alone

UyiIredia: In computer systems, the software is very much material. This is somewhat true of aspects of our consciousness (eg the five senses) as they are encoded for in neural circuitry in the brain.

Really? Well let's test that assertion.

Matter is anything that has a mass and occupies space.

Now all you need to do is pick any software like Microsft Word or Windows media player or Angry Birds e.t.c. and tell us it's mass in kg and also tell us it's cubic metric volume (m³)

Once you do this and we can objectively verify it, then I'll concede the point to you and we can all leave satisfied.

MrAnony1:
Really? Well let's test that assertion.

Matter is anything that has a mass and occupies space.

Now all you need to do is pick any software like Microsft Word or Windows media player or Angry Birds e.t.c. and tell us it's mass in kg and also tell us it's cubic metric volume (m³)

Once you do this and we can objectively verify it, then I'll concede the point to you and we can all leave satisfied.

You are right.

But maybe Uyi Iredia is thinking of the software CD's or the visual or audio representation of a software.

Sofware is mostly immaterial but some aspects are material.