₦airaland Forum

UyiIredia:
No. Because consciousness is something different from firing neurons. That makes all the difference.

I didn't say they were the same. I said one caused the other.

UyiIredia:
The only one whose reasoning is poor is yours.

How did you make your inference? I know you have poor thinking abilities and I've shown it but this is just your childishness manifesting itself.

UyiIredia:
Ah ! But how does this change occur. Not by adding new genetic information but by the death of unfit organisms and the flourishing of a better fit species. So in the end it still has nothing to do with the genetic code of a species.

Please take an elementary course in biology because you clearly are out of your depth. Fitness has nothing to do with genes? This sort of ignorance while speaking on these issues is just mindboggling. Take the time to read the Wikipedia article you started quoting because it looks like you don't understand what was written in it.

The very second paragraph says:

Wikipedia: Variation exists within all populations of organisms. This occurs partly because random mutations arise in the genome of an individual organism, and offspring can inherit such mutations. Throughout the lives of the individuals, their genomes interact with their environments to cause variations in traits.

Learn to read please.

UyiIredia:
Continue forgiving you brainless buffoon.

And I forgive you again little punk.

UyiIredia:
But neurons firing is obviously different from the consciousness it produces. Neurons firing is not consciousness though it effects it.

Then what is your problem? You agree that neurons firing cause consciousness but you're confused because it is subjective? The fact that consciousness is caused by neurons firing is all that needs to be known.

UyiIredia:
No. It was inferred from the presence of consciousness. I'd you don't want to make the only rational inference to be made I can understand.

How did you make this inference because your premise wasn't good enough to make that inference. Your inference is just an empty assertion based on poor reasoning.

UyiIredia:
Natural selection is the differential survival of organism's better suited to their environment. It has nothing to.do with the genetic code and certainly cannot add new genetic information.

It has everything to do with new genetic information. Look at the next sentence you copied from Wikipedia.

Wikipedia: It is a key mechanism of evolution, the change in heritable traits of a population over time.

What do you think heritable traits refers to?

UyiIredia:
Forgive away you brainless oaf.

I forgive you again child. Go and stop acting like a punk child.

UyiIredia:
What physical process ?

Neurones firing.

UyiIredia:
God is uncaused as a non-contingent conscious entity so his consciousness need not be explained.

Therefore, not all conscious entities come from other conscious entities. Now, how do you know your God actually exists and is this uncaused entity? Did he tell you?

UyiIredia:
There's no known observable natural process by which one can add new genetic information to an organism's genetic code. And you need to do that if you want to men from apes, or fishes from bacteria.

Natural selection is such a natural process. If you disagree, do your research and go for your Nobel Prize.

UyiIredia:
I don't take the words of a bumbling, imbecilic fool seriously.

And this is why you remain a foolish child trying to take on topics beyond your ken. Don't worry, I forgive your insolence ignorant child.

UyiIredia:
We don't observe consciousness as a physical process. I told you only one answer could be correct. We observe/percieve via consciousness.

You told me something wrong and I've pointed that out. We do observe consciousness as a physical process.

UyiIredia:
How so ?

The fact that for that premise to work, your God needs to have come from a concsious entity. So, which conscious entity did your God come from?

UyiIredia:
The only one spouting ignorant nonsense here is you. You have failed to show anything. There's nothing you've said to which a sufficient rebuttal hasn't been given.

Then show what is wrong with the theory of evolution and win your Nobel Prize.

UyiIredia:
Suit yourself in your stupïdity then. You like it.

This is why you'll remain a child. Your childish behaviour and thinking can't help but manifest itself.

UyiIredia:
It isnt. Do you observe consciousness or observe via consciousness ? Only one answer is correct.

We observe consciousness and perceive with consciousness.

UyiIredia:
You are not serious. God is uncaused.

Then that premise fails.

UyiIredia:
As I always say the theory of evolution is a failed theory. BTW my consciousness argument hasn't failed. The only failed thing is your ability to reason.

You've said a lot of ignorant things and this is just one along those lines. I showed you how it failed above.

UyiIredia:
Meh. Suit yourself.

I will.

UyiIredia:
This doesn't apply when something (ie consciousness) is doing the observing.

That's a rubbish rule you just made up.

UyiIredia:
I already stated why in my former argument. Conscious beings come from conscious beings remember.

Which conscious being did your God come from? Can give you a hint. Humans.

UyiIredia:
I can't physically demonstrate God because God is not a physical being. But I can provide arguments that show that God exists without a shadow of doubt. The argument from consciousness is the most powerful arguments that indubitably proves there is a God. The next most powerful argument is the argument from design in life.

Having lots of bad arguments doesn't somehow make them good arguments. Your so-called argument from consciousness has already failed and the theory of evolution neatly explains why living organisms appear designed.

UyiIredia:
I first said it of your atheism.

Still what I say about your God.

UyiIredia:
But is not observed as a physical process. Which is why I say consciousness is not physical.

Observing something requires that what is being observed be physical.

UyiIredia:
What matters is that God caused consciousness to come about.

How do you know this?

UyiIredia:
Conscious beings arise from conscious beings. So humans arise from a conscious being, God.

You've not actually demonstrated that your God exists. You need to show that your God exists before you can say that humans arose from him.

UyiIredia:
Believe what you will that doesn't make it true.

That's what I say about your God.

KingEbukaNaija:
God took the life he created , what's the problem or how is that nefarious ?

It is nefarious in declaring that it is a good idea to kill 6 month old babies because they're boys.

KingEbukaNaija:
No one tells me that but many people have impugned your intelligence because of the ignorant posts you make . I think you should pay attention to them

I know you guys have bad to no arguments and I can see that you're getting desperate. I will humour you. Which posts bother you so much? And why do they have this effect of making you lose your mind?

KingEbukaNaija:
Seun, Plaetton , Johnydon22 ilovetheline, JackBizzle, Kay17, Weah96 , AgentOfAllah, Ayomikun37 , hahn , sonOfLucifer , frank317 muskeeto , Decker , PastorAIO , ValentineMary , Pyrrho , braithwaite , dragonEmperor , theoneJabulani , cloudgoddess , ifenes , brigance , stephenmorris , thehomer

All these atheists we have on Nairaland , they claim they have moral compass when apparently they have none .

As long as you think your God is good, it would indicate that you don't just lack a moral compass, but your compass confuses evil for good.

KingEbukaNaija:
Lmao ... oh boy o' boy ! You were told you don't make intellectual points and I thought I was the only one that made that observation . Discussing evolution is your forte , please just stick to that .

What was anti-intellectual about what I said? I know you find it difficult recognizing intellectual issues even when they smack you in the face but don't attribute your ignorance to me.

Amberon11:
You are dumb.
Get well soon.

And you're foolish.

Get stuffed.

UyiIredia:
But consciousness is the means by which observation is done. How then can you claim it is observed?

It is observed subjectively. The person experiencing it can observe it.

UyiIredia:
An irrelevant question.

How is it irrelevant? The topic title is about the most powerful argument for your God.

UyiIredia:
It follows. But I can see why you wouldn't want to agree to that. To preserve your precious atheism.

How does it follow?

UyiIredia:
God is a metaphysical truth and metaphysical questions happen to fall under the category of things science cannot answer.

No, your God is made up.

UyiIredia:
If it is then one can observe consciousness via the senses. Do you agree this is the case?

Yes.

UyiIredia:
Meh.



I'm not confusing anything. Consciousness as experienced is different from the neural processes that account for it.

And at which point does your God come in?

UyiIredia:
It follows. Conscious beings come from conscious beings therefore conscious humans arise from a non-contingent conscious being. I've already explained that the reason it's non-contingent is because it should require no explanation.

No that doesn't follow. Your conclusion should be that humans come from conscious beings. You're smuggling stuff in that shouldn't be there.

You didn't explain anything, you merely smuggled in an assertion. You've not explained how your God managed to arise from a non-conscious being. Secondly, humans come from non-conscious sperm and egg.

UyiIredia:
Science can't answer all questions. There are some things that science in principle can never answer e.g. aesthetic questions

Is your God an aesthetic question? Why does he keep retreating to areas still under investigation?

naijadeyhia:
Jack my boy sorry but that argument supports it and is not against it. Just because you want it to be against it so bad your brain selectively read the article. Did the water in his brain suddenly receive neurons and begin to function like the brain?

It is against your God having anythign to do with consciousness. The cerebrospinal fluid wasn't acting like the brain and note that he had below average IQ. It really counters your theory about a sould remote-controlling a body,

naijadeyhia:
Even the flimsy scientifc explanation said, (IT SEEMS) which is simply an imaginative assumption since they found it baffling yet needed an escape route.

Looks like you're not familiar with how scientists hedge their statements rather than issuing proclamations like you're used to seeing with your God who has often been wrong.

KingEbukaNaija:
This actually supports our argument bro

No it doesn't.

UyiIredia:
I have considered it. Consciousness is not a physical process. It is an immaterial effect of a physical process going on in the brain.

No, it is subjective but is still a physical process.

UyiIredia:
No they aren't right. I have already said that consciousness runs against materialistic atheism. And because of the immaterial nature of consciousness. Science, in principle, can't explain it as science deals only with the physical.

You can say that all you want, but you're still wrong.

UyiIredia:
Evolution deals with how physical things change. Consciousness not being physical can't be explained by evolution.

You're confusing the subjective nature of consciousness with the process itself. You do realize that consciousness is available in stages.

UyiIredia:
Here's the reasoning behind the inference to God as the cause of consciousness.

P1) Humqns are conscious
P2) Conscious beings always come from conscious beings
C) Humans must arise from a non-contingent conscious being.

If it's non-contingent, then its consciousness doesn't need an explanation.

Your conclusion doesn't follow from your premises. There's no talk about non-contingent conscious beings in your premises.

How does your second premise explain your God? Which conscious being did he come from? Besides, the sperm and egg aren't conscious but the human at a certain point in its development is conscious. Thus your second premise is the failure that keeps on failing.

On a side note, I always find it fascinating how your God keeps on retreating into areas still under investigation by science.

UyiIredia:
It's actually one of the arguments I posted earlier on this thread

https://www.nairaland.com/2353987/three-arguments-gods-existence

The argument from consciousness: Consciousness is not a physical thing. It's also called awareness and that's not physical. It's not a physical thing that you can observe and measure but is the means by which you observe and measure. It's critical to my argument that consciousness be understood as something immaterial, which it actually is, going by its definition. If you think about it all knowledge stems from consciousness because to truly know anything you must be aware of it. You cannot know what you are not aware of.

Have you considered that consciousness may be a process?

UyiIredia:
Now if atheists are right then there should be no consciousness at all. In a purely physical world consciousness would be the anathema, something strange. But there is consciousness and therefore the atheist is not correct. Consciousness being immaterial cannot be explained by physical means.

Well atheists are right and there is consciousness so where do we go from here? You've simply made an argument from incredulity. Finding it amazing that we're in a physical world and we're conscious doesn't mean you're automatically right in asserting your God.

UyiIredia:
It did not evolve since evolution applies to physical beings. It does not spontaenously emerge because emergence typically deals with how complex PHYSICAL systems arise from simpler precursors. Atheism being materialistic in nature has nothing to offer to explain mental awareness. But the theist believing in an eternal conscious God has a means to explain consciousness. And that my friends wraps up my argument.

Cc thehomer Seun cloudgoddess Blaqsmith dalaman ichommy HardMirror johnydon22 onetrack joseph1013 Kay17 plaetton Davien ValentineMary lepasharon reallest freecocoa K9blunt Amusaopeyemi

Why couldn't consciousness have evolved? Our close cousins alse express behaviours similar to what we express under certain circumstances. Though we won't consider them as being as conscious as humans are.

How does your God explain consciousness? Mere assertions aren't arguments. How can your God even be conscious without a body? How do you know he is conscious? How does he even know he is conscious?

KingEbukaNaija:
It was not - you atheists are always dogmatic about your claims or opinions

What was inaccurate about what I said?

KingEbukaNaija:
The Jewish Law is different from a moral law .

Who gave those laws to the Jewish people? Don't the laws hold anymore?

[quote author=KingEbukaNaija post=47376319][/quote]Why did you strikethrough my comment? It was accurate.

According to your Bible, your God thinks children who talk back to their parents should be killed. Do you agree with that law?

KingEbukaNaija:
Is that an oblique statement indicating that God makes his moral laws arbitrarily ?

Objective morality means God's moral laws guide me from going astray or erring . His laws tell me whats right or wrong . That means even if societal laws assent to a particular way of life , I can disagree if it is at variance with the moral laws from God .

No it isn't. Though your God's moral laws are arbitrary.

Since God is a person or people, his moral laws are therefore subjective. Whether you think they tell you what is right or wrong doesn't change this fact.

How exactly do you know what God's moral laws are? Does he speak to you using voices?

KingEbukaNaija:
Subjective morality : It allows seeing what is right or wrong from a personal perspective . And in most cases , anyone who subscribes to subjective morality allows the society to tell him whats right or wrong - societal laws detect morality .

I subscribe to objective morality - moral laws come from God .

I don't subscribe to subjective morality.

You do subscribe to subjective morality you just don't seem to recognize it. The "moral laws" from your God are subjective to him or you. Therefore you subscribe to subjective morality.

KingEbukaNaija:
Do you subscribe to subjective morality ?

Depends on what you mean by subjective morality. What is it? And do you subscribe to it yourself?

analice107:
The difference between you and I is that, I admit to my sins and asks for forgiveness. But you say you have no sin, but God is sending you to hell anyways.
My joy is that, you admit you'll end in hell. But, why do think you'll end in hell when you an atheist?

So are you a rapist, a murderer, a liar, an abortion provider, a thief or a greedy person?

I don't think I'll end up in hell, I'm just humouring you.

analice107:
O, Wow. Look at that. I think My God wants this very important man to go to hell.
Yes, and why not? He is responsible for all your stupidity. He made you commit all those sins, all the stealing, lying and murder, all the women you raped, all the abortions you sponsored. Yes, he is responsible. After making you commit all these sins, he is sending you to hellfire.
And, yes, you are really a catch.

Your God is responsible since according to many of you, he knew what I would do even before he created me.

I've not stolen, I've not been lying, I've not murdered anyone, I've not raped any mend or women and I've neither undergone nor sponsored abortions. But your accusations are more revealing about yourself. Do you see yourself as not being forgiven for having performed those actions?

I know I'm a catch yet you and your God are running scared of me. The best part is that most of you who call yourselves Christians will end up in hell with me. Looking forward to seeing you in hell. Please make sure you introduce yourself to me in hell.

analice107:
LOlzzz. You must think yourself a catch. Pls don't change your mind. Hahahahahahahaha. Small pikin

Of course I'm a catch you child. Looks like you think your God wants me to go to hell. In that case, why should I bother with such a malicious agent?

UyiIredia:
Your mind is too steeped in illogic and unreason. There's no hope of change for you ever.

Said the ignorant to one wiser than himself. The fact that you have poor arguments and defend a man made entity shouldn't make you despondent. If you have faith and your God answers prayers, why are you afraid?

KingEbukasBlog:
Mister , I asked you for proof - this does not mean I didn't know .

Yes it does. If you know, why would you act as if you didn't know? That woudl be dishonesty of a high rank.

KingEbukasBlog:
Alright .

You're welcome. I hope you've learned a lot from this exchange.

winner01:
Welcome home!!! I praise God for your life my brother. Which church do you attend my brother, which part of Nigeria do you stay, we can discuss on email. God bless you.
Now I also pray and hope that Loj Blackjewelry Sirwere RobinHez FrancisTony donnffd Antiparticle Krystalzkris freecocoa OgundeleT TheDauraMallam, thehomer K9blunt ( f ), joywendy( f), herald9 , MarieSucre reallest PAGAN9JA krattoss hahn Queed, dabosuker Johnydon22 realtem sorextee Dekatron djdoxxx kolajamesjnr Liekiller SIRANDREWS , seun plaetton , menesheh wiegraf , finofaya Redlyn , Longstride, Rainess rinrin23 tangled Misogynist2014 Pr0ton , davien teempakguy dorox Joseph1013 cloudgoddess sweetcocoa dalaman hahn menehsheh frank317 plaetton ifeness realmindz lilbrown007 et al. will follow.

He advised you to come and preach and keep preaching. You're welcome to try to preach to me. Let's see if I change my mind.

KingEbukasBlog:
How does asking you to prove something imply ignorance

Thinking that before Christianity, people thought incest was a good idea is breathtaking ignorance.

KingEbukasBlog:
God is the wisest being in existence .

He clearly isn't if he thinks that torture is a good idea.

KingEbukasBlog:
Only God judges and his judgement determines who would gnash his teeth in Hell or enjoy the guerdons of salvation in Heaven

Unless he is arbitrary, Abraham will be in hell with the rest of us. Be happy that your God isn't arbitrary.

KingEbukasBlog:
Prove it . Where is proof ?

Are you really this ignorant? You think that before your Christ, people thought incest was a good idea? See the reference to China here.

KingEbukasBlog:
The thread .

How did it work?

KingEbukasBlog:
Hell is a deterrent . And deterrent aint threats or a show of wickedness . Being thrown into Hell is the comeuppance for aberration .

So you agree with your God that torture is a good idea.

KingEbukasBlog:
God is the giver and taker of life . Eternal torture in Hell is a deterrent .

And you think that torture is a good idea.

KingEbukasBlog:
This guy ! When someone tells you to stop engaging in sexual immorality - this means stop engaging in either fornication , adultery , masturbation , sexual abuse , rape , orgies etc . The bible says that menstealers will go to hell - this means that kidnappers , slave traders , slave catchers , slave dealers etc will face " eternal torture " .



Do you now understand ?

Father Abraham had slaves. I guess he should be expected in hell then. And he should expect eternal torture.

winner01:
I need not argue anything with you. The thread is just to expose the muderous tendencies of atheists.

In other words, you don't have arguments, you just want to moan that people are rude on the internet. Glad that we have that out of the way. Would seeing examples of Christians being rude on the internet reveal the muderous tendencies of today's Christians? Because we know of those Christians who like the "fall down and die" gospels.