Re: Does violating the laws of physics require intelligence?

On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 15:36:09 -0800 (PST), Treus <treusdrie@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

raven1 wrote:
On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 14:23:53 -0800 (PST), Treus <treusdrie@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
raven1 wrote:


This may be hard for you to accept, but we actually do know a good
deal about how the brain works, and there is nothing to suggest that
it is inadequate to account for the phenomena of mind. I suppose there
*could* be an immaterial force at work, just as gravity *could* be
supplemented by angels pulling objects downward, but there is no
particular reason to consider either possibility.


Since you seem very unclear on a concept essential to science, I'll
repeat this once again. In the case of gravity, we have a sufficient
and reproducible explanation to account for the phenomenon.


Since you seem unclear on the concept, the brain *is* a sufficient
explanation, your personal incredulity aside.

Angels as the cause of gravity is also sufficient, hence the added
criterion of reproducibility.

Which means what in this context?

As far as
"reproducible", I'm unclear as to how you're applying it to either
gravity or the brain.

Anyone can reconstruct the inverse square law at will with found
masses.

Which has what to do with "reproducibility"? (And which does not rule
out the involvement of angels, one might note).

Your story about of the brain being sufficient for the mind is
not similarly reproducible.

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it
means". - Inigo Montoya.

Again, the ball is in your court. What reason do you have for thinking
that the brain is not sufficient cause? You have offered no rational
response, merely repeated your assertion. We can observe the brain in
action by scanning it in several different ways, by observing the
effects of damage to various areas of the brain, etc.. When we do so,
we find that various parts of the brain are responsible for various
functions.

On what grounds do you conclude that a further agent needs to be
postulated?

Where is your list of measurable causes
through which the brain produces the mind so that someone else can
duplicate the result?

I'm at a loss to guess what you mean by this. Duplicate the result in
what way?

---

"Faith may not move mountains, but you should see what it does to skyscrapers..."

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Does violating the laws of physics require intelligence?
    ... Angels as the cause of gravity is also sufficient, ... Angles are sufficient for gravity in the same way the brain (whatever ... I was asking what "reproducibility" meant in this context. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Does violating the laws of physics require intelligence?
    ... Since you seem very unclear on a concept essential to science, ... Since you seem unclear on the concept, the brain *is* a sufficient ... Angels as the cause of gravity is also sufficient, ... criterion of reproducibility. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: God=G_uv Comments of Isham Dembski Unwin
    ... > with which they have received this remarkable discovery. ... > in what space the curvature G_uv exists! ... > curvature of real space or is even a curvature in the brain! ... > the gravitational field in the brain due to classical gravity is ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: God=G_uv Comments of Isham Dembski Unwin
    ... > with which they have received this remarkable discovery. ... > in what space the curvature G_uv exists! ... > curvature of real space or is even a curvature in the brain! ... > the gravitational field in the brain due to classical gravity is ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: God=G_uv Comments of Isham Dembski Unwin
    ... >> commentaries from Drs. Isham and Dembski. ... >> with which they have received this remarkable discovery. ... >> of the brain. ... >> the gravitational field in the brain due to classical gravity is ...
    (sci.physics)