Posted on 06/15/2003 10:36:08 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
Now I could see how this could relate (or transmit) to consciousness, as some believe it must only be a materialistic process. But that is merely my conscious opinion.
Exactly what 'automata mechanisms' are you speaking of? Are you talking theory or actual fact? If it is actual fact we should have been able to observe them in action in laboratories and as far as I can see there have been no mutations which have created greater complexity in organisms. Mutations are required for any sort of evolution (genealogical, materialistic descent all the way from bacteria to humans). I think if there had been, it would have been brought out hundreds of times on these threads and these discussions might have been over by now.
What we do see in species is adaptability without mutation. Our immune system for example can learn how to deal with a harmful intruder by injecting dead samples of it as we do with vaccinations. Our bodies can cool us off by secreting sweat when it is hot, it can let out tears when something gets in our eyes, etc. But these defensive and adaptive mechanisms are part of the adaptability of species, they are not something due to mutations. Some examples of adaptability are even more striking:
"Limbs that protrude from an animal's body have more surface area per unit mass than the rest of the body. In cold weather the animal loses more heat per unit mass from these limbs than from other parts of the body. In many species the tails and legs are shorter for those living in colder climates and longer for those living in warmer climates. Gull's wings are shorter in cold climates than in warm. Hares and foxes also have shorter ears in cold climates than in warm. Eskimos have shorter arms and legs than do people living in warmer climates [Collier et al. 1973]. Summner [1909] found that mice reared at low temperature had shorter legs and tails than mice reared at higher temperatures. [Johnston and Gottlied 1990]."
From: "Not by Chance", by Dr. Lee Spetner, pp 207, 208.
In short, many of the things which evolutionists call 'evolution' is nothing more than the inherent adaptability of species, part of nature which allows species to survive through the many different challenges they face throughout the centuries. And indeed this adaptability must be inherent, not due to mutations because once the threat arises, there is no time for mutational change to solve it, the species will already have perished.
This is a great point which materialists forget, that because they claim that all there is is what is observable, not being able to observe something is a disproof of the theory. There can be no doubt that the mind has control over the body. My typing this is proof of it. I am putting my thoughts by directing my fingers to move and type this. That the opposite may also be true, does not mean that this is not true also.
But what I am typing is not random words, but specific words which more or less are in accord with the grammar of the English language. My thoughts are in the English language and I think in English. However, a Frenchman will think in French and readily use French grammar in his thoughts. Greeks will do the same as well as those speaking many other languages will think in their own language. Now what quality of matter would allow for this? Words are just symbols, letters also are symbols. But these symbols are the way we think and these symbols are different in every language and the ordering of these symbols (the grammar) is also different in every language.
So what possible material explanation could be found for this? Are we to believe that we inherit the ability to understand and use these symbols from our parents? That cannot be since an adopted Chinese child will understand English as well as one whose parents spoke English. Another explanation which might be offered is that the symbols are somehow translated back and forth to a 'natural' base. However, how could matter alone accomplish a translation? Clearly translation has no materialistic basis either so that there is something within us which is beyond the material cannot be doubted.
This is a great point which materialists forget, that because they claim that all there is is what is observable, not being able to observe something is a disproof of the theory. There can be no doubt that the mind has control over the body. My typing this is proof of it. I am putting my thoughts by directing my fingers to move and type this. That the opposite may also be true, does not mean that this is not true also.
But what I am typing is not random words, but specific words which more or less are in accord with the grammar of the English language. My thoughts are in the English language and I think in English. However, a Frenchman will think in French and readily use French grammar in his thoughts. Greeks will do the same as well as those speaking many other languages will think in their own language. Now what quality of matter would allow for this? Words are just symbols, letters also are symbols. But these symbols are the way we think and these symbols are different in every language and the ordering of these symbols (the grammar) is also different in every language.
So what possible material explanation could be found for this? Are we to believe that we inherit the ability to understand and use these symbols from our parents? That cannot be since an adopted Chinese child will understand English as well as one whose parents spoke English. Another explanation which might be offered is that the symbols are somehow translated back and forth to a 'natural' base. However, how could matter alone accomplish a translation? Clearly translation has no materialistic basis either so that there is something within us which is beyond the material cannot be doubted.
This is a great point which materialists forget, that because they claim that all there is is what is observable, not being able to observe something is a disproof of the theory. There can be no doubt that the mind has control over the body. My typing this is proof of it. I am putting my thoughts by directing my fingers to move and type this. That the opposite may also be true, does not mean that this is not true also.
But what I am typing is not random words, but specific words which more or less are in accord with the grammar of the English language. My thoughts are in the English language and I think in English. However, a Frenchman will think in French and readily use French grammar in his thoughts. Greeks will do the same as well as those speaking many other languages will think in their own language. Now what quality of matter would allow for this? Words are just symbols, letters also are symbols. But these symbols are the way we think and these symbols are different in every language and the ordering of these symbols (the grammar) is also different in every language.
So what possible material explanation could be found for this? Are we to believe that we inherit the ability to understand and use these symbols from our parents? That cannot be since an adopted Chinese child will understand English as well as one whose parents spoke English. Another explanation which might be offered is that the symbols are somehow translated back and forth to a 'natural' base. However, how could matter alone accomplish a translation? Clearly translation has no materialistic basis either so that there is something within us which is beyond the material cannot be doubted.
Is this what you consider science?
But js1138, the category of "psychic phenomena" includes many rather ordinary, prosaic experiences that we take for granted every day, such as (for instance) wanting to know what time it is, reading a book, thinking through a problem that concerns us, praying, talking to our friends, etc., etc.
Why do you seem to want to invoke the extreme things that sometimes occur in this "phase space?" I gather by "psychic phenomena" what you have in view are things like seances, astral projection, and other such-like phenomena. The very selection tends generally to impugn what we mean by "psychic phenomena."
As any competent jurist might say, "hard cases make for bad law."
Excellent points, gore3000. Drat those pesky "psychic phenomena."
I fully agree with you that we receive the Word by faith and are delighted when science confirms what we already know to be Truth. Praise God!!!
In that regard, the metaphysical naturalist view that nothing exists outside of nature is a blindfold. Somebody used this anthill metaphor on a previous thread: all the ants are quite convinced their entire existence is within the domain of the anthill - that is, until someone comes and steps on it.
I had a burst of energy and decided to come in here and read up and post a little, but I'm making it a short night (LOL!)
IMHO, a metaphysical naturalist excludes from reality all things non-spatial, non-corporeal and non-temporal. Thus, in that worldview, there is no soul and consciousness is the result (likely the synapses) of the physical brain. Likewise, the metaphysical naturalist reaction to my transmitter/receiver "hypothesis" is that there would have to be some kind of physical wave phenomenon, like an electromagnetic wave, to transmit or receive at distance.
But from my worldview, the soul exists and is non-temporal, non-spatial and non-corporeal. The transmitting and receiving in my hypothesis would not be via any such physical wave phenomonen at distance. In a higher dimension, distance and time of the lower 4D are quite different - and matter can arise from that geometry alone.
As an example, virtual particles come into and out of existence in a vacuum; likewise I expect the wave function collapse itself, within the brain, to be the result/cause of the soul interacting with the body.
I consider it valid research, including "forensics" and as much of the scientific process as possible (even if it's just a mite). Once again, that is more than we can say for macroevolution hypothesis and research, since there are actual anecdotal cases.
Yes, those tests have been done and haven't proven very fruitful overall (although, some if I recall right, have had some 'positives'). The problem is that these tend to be rare events. There are purportedly recurring events though, with some individuals. That is the kind of thing that Sheldrake tests.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.