Dude, you’re the one that brought silly stoner idea about mind making matter. You’re the one that tried to turn the thread into your personal soap box to spot off about something you obviously know nothing about.
Meanwhile, back in reality, matters makes the mind, it’s know, verifiable and falsifiable, we can even chart how different types of alcohol effect the mind differently: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3607132/posts
And anybody thinking that mind makes the matter smokes too much damn dope and needs to dry out. And when they start thinking more clearly once they get themselves good and sober they will prove again that matter makes the mind.
“And anybody thinking that mind makes the matter smokes too much damn dope and needs to dry out.”
I’ve never used illegal drugs.
You just keep getting nuttier and nuttier.
You seem to think that “it’s obvious” constitutes a scientific argument.
Again, you sound like the global warming settled science group.
Stop pretending to know something about science. You can’t even distinguish the difference between a philosophical argument and a scientific one.
And that would be OK if you weren’t so arrogantly dismissive of something you’ve already admitted you didn’t even look at.
You stated plainly you did not bother to look at the link I posted. You proceeded to rant against it as unscientific. Yet you have provided not one single piece of evidence that your view is supported scientifically.
Your view is an assumption. Nothing more. It is “obvious” and simply a “fact” in your mind. That does not constitute science.
And I never argued that the idea of “mind over matter” is factually true, nor that your claim that mind being an emergent property of matter is false. I stated that there is some scientific evidence to support the prior, and not the latter.
Stating that it is obvious is not science any more than claiming the earth is flat is obvious makes being a flat-earther scientific.
Hoffman conscious agents hypothesis has been peer reviewed. When you can show a similar testable hypothesis that has been peer reviewed, rather than link to articles that are nothing more than juvenile philosophical rants, then get back to me.
“And anybody thinking that mind makes the matter smokes too much damn dope and needs to dry out.”
I’ve never used illegal drugs.
You just keep getting nuttier and nuttier.
You seem to think that “it’s obvious” constitutes a scientific argument.
Again, you sound like the global warming settled science group.
Stop pretending to know something about science. You can’t even distinguish the difference between a philosophical argument and a scientific one.
And that would be OK if you weren’t so arrogantly dismissive of something you’ve already admitted you didn’t even look at.
You stated plainly you did not bother to look at the link I posted. You proceeded to rant against it as unscientific. Yet you have provided not one single piece of evidence that your view is supported scientifically.
Your view is an assumption. Nothing more. It is “obvious” and simply a “fact” in your mind. That does not constitute science.
And I never argued that the idea of “mind over matter” is factually true, nor that your claim that mind being an emergent property of matter is false. I stated that there is some scientific evidence to support the prior, and not the latter.
Stating that it is obvious is not science any more than claiming the earth is flat is obvious makes being a flat-earther scientific.
Hoffman conscious agents hypothesis has been peer reviewed. When you can show a similar testable hypothesis that has been peer reviewed, rather than link to articles that are nothing more than juvenile philosophical rants, then get back to me.