Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Curious About An Internet Ad
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="sjastro" data-source="post: 77453091" data-attributes="member: 352921"><p>Your posts follow the all too familiar pattern of resorting to strawman attacks and a need of making ignorant opinion based comments to fill the vacuum for your own lack of understanding.</p><p></p><p>Since my post went over your head let me simplify it in a way you will hopefully understand.</p><p>This is what I responded to in your post.</p><p>“<em>For now, I maintain that meaningful code can only be generated by entities which understand meaning, which does not include atoms and molecules and chemicals. Seems axiomatic to me.</em>”</p><p>This is a sweeping generalization which is a recurring theme in many of your posts and can therefore be responded to without taking the rest of your post into account. Are you still with me?</p><p></p><p>I used the example of the driver selecting a pathway which minimizes the travel time which falls into your category of an entity which understands meaning in order to make the correct selection.</p><p>If we substitute the driver with a beam of light and the dry and muddy surfaces for air and glass respectively the beam of light would follow a similar path.</p><p>If you understood the science and mathematics behind this it wouldn’t be “supernatural” at all.</p><p>The common denominator between the driver and the beam of light doesn’t involve the supernatural but the principle of least action at work which is physics model developed from the mathematics of optimization and has nothing to do with conscious minds or intelligent design.</p><p></p><p>Instead of being willfully ignorant and summarily dismissing everything you don’t understand with the simplistic binary argument of it’s either conscious or it isn’t, go learn why both types are subject to the same principle.</p><p>Here is a starting point.</p><p></p><p style="text-align: center">[MEDIA=youtube]2nrncgGzOAQ[/MEDIA]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="sjastro, post: 77453091, member: 352921"] Your posts follow the all too familiar pattern of resorting to strawman attacks and a need of making ignorant opinion based comments to fill the vacuum for your own lack of understanding. Since my post went over your head let me simplify it in a way you will hopefully understand. This is what I responded to in your post. “[I]For now, I maintain that meaningful code can only be generated by entities which understand meaning, which does not include atoms and molecules and chemicals. Seems axiomatic to me.[/I]” This is a sweeping generalization which is a recurring theme in many of your posts and can therefore be responded to without taking the rest of your post into account. Are you still with me? I used the example of the driver selecting a pathway which minimizes the travel time which falls into your category of an entity which understands meaning in order to make the correct selection. If we substitute the driver with a beam of light and the dry and muddy surfaces for air and glass respectively the beam of light would follow a similar path. If you understood the science and mathematics behind this it wouldn’t be “supernatural” at all. The common denominator between the driver and the beam of light doesn’t involve the supernatural but the principle of least action at work which is physics model developed from the mathematics of optimization and has nothing to do with conscious minds or intelligent design. Instead of being willfully ignorant and summarily dismissing everything you don’t understand with the simplistic binary argument of it’s either conscious or it isn’t, go learn why both types are subject to the same principle. Here is a starting point. [CENTER][MEDIA=youtube]2nrncgGzOAQ[/MEDIA][/CENTER] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Curious About An Internet Ad
Top
Bottom