Point Blank: Is there a God, why and why not?

If there is no God then I am a firm believer that there was a creator. Our eco-system is just way too complicated to be an accident. We are also kings of our domain. Mankind is the ruler of the planet as opposed to warring factions of different species. Of course we war against each other but that's not my point.

If this was all just an accident I don't think life would be as diverse as it is. From the maggot to the human, from the weed to the red woods and how everything depends on any one thing in the chain to survive. Its way too complicated a system for me to get my head around that it is all just an accident.

There is a God and he, she or shim is called the creator of earth...

Operating on the assumption that the universe is both infinite and eternal there are an infinite number of possibilities and an infinite duration in which they may be realized. God, and everything else we have conceived of in our imaginations, is one of these. That such an idea as God has had an infinite amount of time in an infinite universe to at some point exist, there is both an infinitely likely and infinitely unlikely possibility that God already exists or has existed. In fact, God both exists and does not exist at the same time in equal portions.

Yet this God I have postulated is a God which creates after itself coming into creation. If we are talking about God as the progenitor of all that is, was, and ever will be, then we are talking about infinity and eternity itself embodied in the concept of a creator. In this case there is no definable limit to possibilities or purposes within creation, there is only the limit of our own imaginations, the limit of our capacity to imagine such a universe as the one we live in.

reply to post by TarzanBeta


You talk of logic, but you then hypocritically argue with faulty logic of your own all the while not pointing to a single thing that screams of being created by god.

If god created the universe, then what created god? If god always existed, then why can't the universe have always had existed as well?

We can point to processes that we don't understand and shout at the top of our lungs, proof of god, but not knowing how something works is not proof of something you think. It's like saying people who pray to rain gods and get rain are valid in believing there is a rain god while not understanding the processes that create rain. It's faulty logic, if we can even call that logic.

The problem with a universe having been created from something else is illogical, because then if our universe requires creation, then that something else should also require creation ad infinity. We're left with an infinite amount of causes leading to our universe, and through logic, reason and common sense, that just doesn't make any sense at all. If something is to be eternal and infinite, then there is only one possible answer which is self evident by itself, and that is the universe. The universe is the only example of existence we have to go by, there is nothing else. We don't see non-existence, we conceptualize it by requiring the universe to have had a beginning because we only see beginnings and endings in our finite existences.

You call him lazy, but your equally so if he truly is being lazy. Your stopping at your god answer without question and without logically looking at the problem. You assume god is so and has always been without realizing that it makes no sense what so ever. All concepts of deities were invented by man, right here on planet earth. Other species on other planets will have different god(s), so logically it makes no sense to believe an invented concept is more correct than another invented concept.

The universe is eternal as it is the most simplest answer. The processes involved in the creation of life are not magical, just poorly understood, the process of how life changes when first started is entirely different. There are a ton of processes involved in our universe and we're still to young in our understanding of those processes.

Originally posted by Unsane
It is actually more probable that a Creator God does not exist, rather than the universe popping into existence - fact.

What if the Universe is God?

You talk of logic, but you then hypocritically argue with faulty logic of your own all the while not pointing to a single thing that screams of being created by god.

If god created the universe, then what created god? If god always existed, then why can't the universe have always had existed as well?

Maybe god is the universe. Maybe god is time, god is the universe and god has always existed.
What is the universe anyway? is it a planet a gas cloud? a star?
Define universe for me. Universe as a meaning means universal.Anywhere and everywhere.
I don't know why people picture the universe as this fantastic galaxy spining around, maybe it's more than galaxies and stars. It's made to work anywhere and everywhere with anyone, and that is why it's universal and that is god.

reply to post by Donnie Darko

Guess we have the same thoughts, I really feel the same.

reply to post by pepsi78


That is a complex solution to a simple problem. If the universe is god and god is some infinite all powerful all knowing entity, then where does that leave life or the laws of physics or how such an all powerful all knowing entity could develop to become discreet properties.

I mean, let's play with the concept even further, if god is the universe, then why such a dislike for the theory of evolution? If god is the universe and evolution is of the universal laws as they exist withing god being the universe, then evolution should have no problems.

How does a complex entity exist for an infinite period of time and one day out of infinite days decide to create us? Why not wait a few hundred more quadrillion years? Why couldn't he have done it 100 trillion years ago? Why 13 billion or 6,000 years (depending on your belief) ago, what's so special about then compared to any other point in an infinite period of time?

Originally posted by TarzanBeta

Originally posted by jd140

Originally posted by TarzanBeta
reply to post by jd140

 

There's plenty of proof for the existence of God.

You're just lazy.

I would say blind, but you have this amazing ability to read.

There is?

Please provide your irrefutable proof for me.

Still on with the laziness!! Gotta have others point it out to ya.

Give it a rest and stop lying to yourself.

Anyone who is intelligent enough to know that you cannot disprove God should be intelligent enough to realize that there IS A GOD!

What is it with people on ATS suffering from the inability to compute logic lately? I've been reading for years and years and I think the group mindset has gotten a little dimmer... that's sad, considering I'm only 25.

But if LOGIC ain't enough fer'ye, then why don't you try developing a machine that can create a VOID (you DO know what a "void" is, right...?) and then have that same machine programmed ITSELF to program ENERGY into this VOID using NO external energy or materials. As if that didn't cause enough of an overload, why don't you try having it to add chaos to the ensuing order which was about to unfold!

(SLAP)

Or we could just assume that it was all a fluke of...what? What else could have happened...?
Oh.. Wait... NOTHING. Nothing is the ONLY OTHER OPTION FROM EXISTENCE.

(SLAP)

This thread was doomed from the get-go.

I didn't say one way or another that there is or isn't a God. You are the one making the claim. I on the other hand am sane enough to know that I will not know the answer to that question until I die.

Please stop with the world is to perfect speech and show me your irrefutable proof or don't reply at all.

Just so you know, I ask the same from those who say that there isn't a God. Both dissapoint equally, so I have no hopes that you can back up your claim.

Keep spreading the unreliable propaganda and get your followers.

That is a complex solution to a simple problem. If the universe is god and god is some infinite all powerful all knowing entity, then where does that leave life or the laws of physics or how such an all powerful all knowing entity could develop to become discreet properties.

You're talking about laws of physics as it were a human invention, just like scince it was there for us to pick it up, we did not invent anything , it was already there and it all makes sence, this should make you think even more that there is something out there.

I mean, let's play with the concept even further, if god is the universe, then why such a dislike for the theory of evolution? If god is the universe and evolution is of the universal laws as they exist withing god being the universe, then evolution should have no problems.

This is not a religios thread so don't make it one, I never said that evolution is not possible but you got things mixed up. Stuff in the universe keeps evolving while laws are there as they were before. Evolution is possible with a probable cause. It was ment to evolve here, and here we are. The dislike of evolution is a religios matter, we are debating on a scientific view rather than a religios one in this thread.

Here is one big question for you, why don't atoms evolve?
If bigger things evolve then why don't the atoms do?
If that happened the universe would go in non-existance, did you know they are all tuned to a specific frequncy? Imagine that, how is that possible from a random perspective? And they are all linked too.

How does a complex entity exist for an infinite period of time and one day out of infinite days decide to create us? Why not wait a few hundred more quadrillion years? Why couldn't he have done it 100 trillion years ago? Why 13 billion or 6,000 years (depending on your belief) ago, what's so special about then compared to any other point in an infinite period of time?

1 Time is relative, time can stop, and time can be eliminated , as in a buble that is outside time and space.
2 If the entity represents time it's self, and it's all as in it is the universe then it;s understandable.

Sorry for my bad English not my first lang...



I in no way picture god like this old guy with white hair and red eyes.
I picture is as a force present everywhere, as an entity rather than an old guy, religion is just an opinion, a transcript of how people see this entity.

I don't base my values of thinking that there is a god on religion.


[edit on 22-9-2009 by pepsi78]

reply to post by pepsi78


Your either misunderstanding what I am saying or your putting words in my mouth. I'm not talking about laws of physics as if we invented them, I'm talking about laws of physics as they exist.

The fact they these laws exist doesn't tell us something must have created them for them to exist, thoughts such as those are born from our species whom live finite lives and only deal with beginnings and endings. So we naturally assume the universe must have had a beginning, which is why we conjure up thoughts of gods and big bangs. There is no evidence indicative of either idea existing or needing to be required for the universe to exist.

This is not a religios thread so don't make it one, I never said that evolution is not possible but you got things mixed up. Stuff in the universe keeps evolving while laws are there as they were before. Evolution is possible with a probable cause. It was ment to evolve here, and here we are. The dislike of evolution is a religios matter, we are debating on a scientific view rather than a religios one in this thread.

Whoa, back up there lil' fella, I replied to your idea that god was the universe. No need to attack me against something you initially brought up. Hypocritical stances don't win arguments. As for your stance on evolution, I was under the impression that you don't fully subscribe to such an idea per this thread LINK

More specifically

The "evolution is all and god does not exist" fails when things like this come in to view. Things that do not have shapes, legs and so on.

Here is one big question for you, why don't atoms evolve?

Because there is no law of physics that allows for an atom to change form, simple as that unless you can show such a law that allows for that process. Your arguing why doesn't a turtle turn into a monkey.

[EDIT TO REVISE ANSWER FURTHER]

If you mean why do atoms not evolve into different atoms, well then the answer is they do. If your asking why atoms don't evolve into something that isn't atoms but another form of matter totally different from the matter we are composed of, the answer is I don't know and as far as I know there doesn't appear to exist any process that allows for such a change.

Matter and energy can never be created nor destroyed, or so the idea goes. If that is the case, then something broke that rule/law to create matter and energy, which would mean that rule/law isn't valid as something can create and destroy matter and energy.

Matter and energy are basically one and the same, it's interchangeable because it is the same thing. It changes form and function under certain conditions all the time following the rules/laws of the universe as they exist.

It's hard to deal with thoughts, logic, laws and then say god does not exist.

Not so, thoughts are born in the mind, the mind exists in the brain. We have no evidence indicating otherwise. No one has come back from the dead to relate stories of an afterlife or that the mind is separate from the body. Not understanding the full working process of a conscious mind isn't a valid argument for a god or for supernatural entities or forces. You can't point at human consciousness as valid proof when there are evidences that point to the contrary. No, we don't understand how the brain works to the extent of giving rise to a conscious being, but we've only just really begun any real work on the human brain. 2000 years ago we didn't even know what the human brain was or what it was capable or how it function. Lack of knowledge then gave rise to a mind separate from body and this belief has stuck ever since.

1 Time is relative, time can stop, and time can be eliminated , as in a buble that is outside time and space.
2 If the entity represents time it's self, and it's all as in it is the universe then it;s understandable.

There is no such thing as time in the sense that we consider time to exist. The past are memories never to resurface with physical processes again and the future contains events that don't exist. We exist within an eternal now and no amount of remembering 10 years ago or planing 5 years from now can change that. There is nothing indicative of a fundamental of time in the universe that can change, stop or reverse. Time exists as a concept, nothing more.

I in no way picture god like this old guy with white hair and red eyes.
I picture is as a force present everywhere, as an entity rather than an old guy, religion is just an opinion, a transcript of how people see this entity.

I don't base my values of thinking that there is a god on religion.

It's perfectly acceptable for you to believe what you want, but arguing those beliefs with another person as if they are true while using faulty forms of logic and hypocritical arguments to prove the existence of that belief is not OK. If god is nothing more than the forces that hold the universe together, then fine, we agree that the laws of physics exist as they exist and have always existed as they exist. We're a step closer in agreeing on something.

[edit on 22-9-2009 by sirnex]

[edit on 22-9-2009 by sirnex]

Whoa, back up there lil' fella, I replied to your idea that god was the universe.

It has nothing to do with religion.

Because there is no law of physics that allows for an atom to change form, simple as that unless you can show such a law that allows for that process. Your arguing why doesn't a turtle turn into a monkey.

Funny you have to bring this up because everything is made up of atoms.
So it's the same atoms only rearanged, so at a microscopic level where atoms can be seen is evolution at point 0?
Since animals are made out of atoms then everything is just the same, and evolution is just a visual carnival because in esence deep down under the microscope it's all the same. So where is evolution?

Not so, thoughts are born in the mind, the mind exists in the brain. We have no evidence indicating otherwise.

Thoughts are part of the other world, the non phisical world, tell me do thoughts exist? How are they shaped? Can you describe them to me?
Since they help acomplish tasks and generate great ideas they must be real. How do you see in your mind without an eye? Just close your eyes and you can see your thoughts, incredible isn't it? And this is not some hocus pocus stuff that I'm bringing up.

From a logical point of view.
So how do you see your thoughts, since your brain does not have an internal eye, everything visual must have an eye to capture the events.
So you must have an internal eye that is focused on the brain cells reading your thoughts so you can see them in your brain.
Or another logical view is that it's part of the real stuff that is not part of the phisical world.

When you have a visual on an object you see it, then if you close your eyes you do not see it anymore. How in the world do you generate pictures in your brain without seeing it with your eyes.


The only reasonable answer is that there are some things that are phisical and are real, and some things that are real but are not phisical like your images in your head. The brain can do so much to calculate and generate movment , reactions. But something that you see in your mind as in a real picture is not phisical, it's a feeling of the mind with real image and sense of the mind. As long as I'm aware the brain is just a big computer, simply put the brain can't generate images in your head, that is the mind, your mind is part of you but it's not part of this world, but hey it's real.

If you can explain to me how images are generated in your brain allowing you to see them without any eyes then I give up.


Hey I can close my eyes and see anything I want very clear, how do I do that? Do I flex my brain cells?

I don't know if you know but you just have been left without any explenation.

There is no such thing as time in the sense that we consider time to exist.

This is not even relevant for our discusion, it will deviate to something else, I could go on with Enstien theory on time and relativity but it won't serve our discution on topic.



[edit on 22-9-2009 by pepsi78]

reply to post by spy66


God canot be cognizized (I think I misspelled that) by the senses but what is beyond the senses.

We give the Unnameable One the title GOD but that is not a name.

If we believe in evil we get evil as we are cocreators with creations.

As Jesus said, "It WILL be done unto as you BELIEVE." He also said " I and the (Father) sometimes translated as Source, are One" and he told us to keep His words, in other words, make them are own, so I and My source are one. Thus God or Father or Source are connected, merged if you will.

When you "die" you leave your physical vessel but you are alive and you sense or cognize the presence of all or the presence of the it we call God.

I agree that if there was nothing in the beginning, then what existed to let what is come into existence.

And what if there are aliens or other peoples living on other planets? Could they have been earlier creations?
Some want us to believe they created us, like Zachary Sitchin, if so, who created them?

As we can not get our minds around the vastness of the Universe, and for some the take over of America, how can we think in our small minds we can get our minds around that which is higher then ourselves?

To question is the work of the ego, to know is the work of the soul.

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by pepsi78

 

Let's look at a random number generator. There is no such thing as a random number generator. What a random number generator does is follow a specific algorithm that leads one to be unable to predict with any accuracy the outcome of the numbers generated. Yet, because it is following that specific rigid set of instructions, it isn't truly random in any sense.

You're both generally correct. Pepsi78 is using the standard dictionary definition for random which makes him correct. You're using it from a deterministic aspect which makes you correct. I like the wikipedia article on randomness:

en.wikipedia.org...

It is of my opinion that this multiplicity of terms is what causes the most uncertainty in debates of this type and a hindrance in our quest for truth. I can see instances of it creeping into almost every page rendering debates like this futile. We can't even agree on the definition of God.

reply to post by pepsi78

It has nothing to do with religion.

Nor did I bring up religion, I simply stated that all concepts of a deity or god like being are born from religious doctrines. There is no concept of a god without a religious belief behind it. No example of such exists on earth. I'm not trying to discuss religion, just simply pointing out that without religious doctrine, you would not have developed a concept of a supernatural deity, god like entity, or some other form of being as describable as a god.

Since you brought up the notion of the universe being god, I felt it appropriate to point out as much of where our concept of a god comes from. I fail to understand why your taking such a defense stance against this. Why bring up the concept if your not going to like the reply?

Funny you have to bring this up because everything is made up of atoms.
So it's the same atoms only rearanged, so at a microscopic level where atoms can be seen is evolution is at point 0?
Since animals are made out of atoms then everything is just the same, and evolution is just a visual carnival because in esence deep down under the microscope it's all the same. So where is evolution?

OK, to reassert what you previously asked:

Here is one big question for you, why don't atoms evolve?

I will state again, there is no process for an ATOM to evolve into another form that is not an ATOM. You asked a specific question, you got a specific answer. Where is the underlying issue with that?

Thoughts are part of the other world, the non phisical world, tell me do thoughts exist? How are they shaped? Can you describe them to me?
Since they help acomplish tasks and generate great ideas they must be real. How do you see in your mind without an eye? Just close your eyes and you can see your thoughts, incredible isn't it? And this is not some hocus pocus stuff that I'm bringing up.

Without a human body a brain can't exist, without a brain a thought can not form. We have no indication that thoughts are formed from some other source that is not of the human brain, therefore, logically, thoughts are a part of this world.

No, I can't personally describe the processes involved that lead one to form a thought or idea, then again neither can the most intelligent neuro-scientist. We just don't know that much about the brain and how it works as of yet. Any answer that involves lack of knowledge of a process is not a logical answer. You can't argue I don't know so x = y because I wish it so.

From a logical point of view.
So how do you see your thoughts, since your brain does not have an internal eye, everything visual must have an eye to capture the events.
So you must have an internal eye that is focused on the brain cells reading your thoughts so you can see them in your brain.
Or another logical view is that it's part of the real stuff that is not part of the phisical world.

Now your simply disregarding that the brain has a central area for processing visual data, both external and internal all the while trying to attribute this process as not occurring within the brain and yet not showing how this process can occur outside the brain. Your either arguing with lack of understanding, or you just simply don't understand what your arguing.

As long as I'm aware the brain is just a big computer, simply put the brain can't generate images in your head, that is the mind, your mind is part of you but it's not part of this world, but hey it's real.

If your going to continue this line of argument, I would strongly recommend backing it up with some references and evidences that show this. I know your struggling to keep up with me here, but going this route with the same continued hypocritical, illogical, and non-evidenced arguments are only going to make thing's worse for you. It's time to man up and argue with mature complete arguments and not half-witted misunderstandings, either knowingly or unknowingly.

I believe that their is a God.

I personally think that almost all religions that have started on Earth all originate from Extraterrestrials Beings who have come to Earth and have visited different civilizations on Earth. It just seems that way because almost every Religion says that God exists in Heaven, which is in the Sky/Space, Extraterrestrials have come from the Space and down to Earth. Obviously with their advanced knowledge and flashy equipment they have prompted people to honour and worship them, either through force or inspiration.

But what needs to be asked is, how did the universe come about? who created it? are our preceptions on God true? What does he look like? Is he the way to enlightenment? (By the way I am in absolutely against religion due to the fact that they seem corrupt, apart from Buddhism, that religions seems good).

Its hard to tell if their is a good because I bet we have little to no understanding in him what so ever ! if he/she/it exists.

Originally posted by WickettheRabbit
reply to post by Valeri

 

You are not the next phase of human evolution. I'm sorry to burst your bubble. One of the foundations for the the next phase would have to be modesty, which you appear to not have.

As I stated, I AM NOT quite done with my incarnations as of yet,so I still have ways to go.But there are many out there,who obviously have even more ways to go.the question is,will those others catch up to me by learning hteir lessons faster in the next lives,which would mean me not beoing able to learn modesty.Because one may need several incarnations to fully master a lesson- modesty being one of them.

And who said I AM the next stage of evolution. First of all if someone is, then we all are. And secondly, it is just the way I chose to name the phase, where you are able to gain knoweldge from your pineal gland/third eye or in some other way.
Because truth be told, a person who believes in a sky-daddy, who will decide over his fate, hell or heaven, is far less evolved in the spiritual sense as of yet than me. But it doesn't make him/her worse than me.NO!
It just makes him on another level/phase of evolution.

Hope I clarified that.

Originally posted by Lasheic

What the hell is this even supposed to mean anyhow? Evolution affects populations, not individuals. Perhaps you mean "the next step in human Lamarckism"? I don't know, and I don't care how you accomplish your ego stroking. But please don't bring evolution into it. There's enough silly misconceptions as it is without more contributions, however minute.

I'm saddened to find out that almost none of you recognize humour. And partially I was telling it how it is. Spiritual evolution is a completely different thing than the physical/DNA one. It doesn't make you better or worse and has nothing to do with ones self-importance either. It simply shows at what stage you are on your eternal evolutionary journey. No matter how long it may take some of us, at the end the others will still be waiting for you, cause there is no separateness.
Please read my posts again.
read my past post for clarification.

[edit on 9/23/2009 by Valeri]

[edit on 9/23/2009 by Valeri]

No, I can't personally describe the processes involved that lead one to form a thought or idea, then again neither can the most intelligent neuro-scientist. We just don't know that much about the brain and how it works as of yet. Any answer that involves lack of knowledge of a process is not a logical answer. You can't argue I don't know so x = y because I wish it so.

Brain cells are not capabile of projection of images and so on, you got eyes for that on a phisical level, you can't state that with some magical force all the brain cells emanate some magic powder that helps you project images in your head. The truth is that brain cells only help proccess information exchange and that is about it, image projection in your head is done by your mind, your mind is not phisical, I can't help noticing you refuse to notice that above anything else you are an entity.

Hey it's the truth, thoughts are real, they exist and are not part of the phisical realm, it is where you find god. How else were you expecting to see images in your head? with your brain cells? I did not know brain cells had eyes.

Now your simply disregarding that the brain has a central area for processing visual data, both external and internal all the while trying to attribute this process as not occurring within the brain and yet not showing how this process can occur outside the brain. Your either arguing with lack of understanding, or you just simply don't understand what your arguing.

Yes as in information, the brain does not preform some magical functions, it's just a mechanism. Your confusing pojection with information proccess.

It can't explain how the brain pojects stuff, or better put your mind. There is no such thing, proccessing visual data in to information does not project pictures in to your head, you need visual sight for that. A computer can't do that without a camera, a human can. It's simply beyond our understanding. Things that do not exist as shapes makes sence, ever herd of that?

Show me where it says that the part of the brain that you speak of can project images and that it's not only information, information as in 010201210102012021 because that is information.

Data of colors, red, blue for example is only data, in other words red is red as you see it only when your eyes see it. It's why projection is special, it's connected to the mind and the mind is conected to the brain.
It's only logical since the brain is just a function, a computer.
Artificial inteligence is not alive because it does not have a mind.
It's hard for you to accept it, I know.

I can hear voices in my mind also, tho no one is speaking, it's like someone is, gray matter does not have eyes, and do not speak.

Best conlcusion is that to have information in the form of images there must be a link.This is very simple.

Link A is when you have your eyes open, you have image, you close your eyes the image is no more.Your eyes feed the brain images in the form of visual sight and not information.

Link B your mind is the other source, the other eye, it's open and it feeds your brain. For every image there must be a source, an eye or else either you are dead or you have your eyes closed.

It's simple there are two words, a phisical one and another one that is not touchable with your hands. They are bolth real or else visual thoughts would not make sence.






You are never going to be able to answer how information turns visual inside your brain. There is no answer for that my friend.

[edit on 23-9-2009 by pepsi78]

reply to post by pepsi78

Brain cells are not capabile of projection of images and so on, you got eyes for that on a phisical level, you can't state that with some magical force all the brain cells emanate some magic powder that helps you project images in your head. The truth is that brain cells only help proccess information exchange and that is about it, image projection in your head is done by your mind, your mind is not phisical, I can't help noticing you refuse to notice that above anything else you are an entity.

Specifically:

Brain cells are not capabile of projection of images and so on, you got eyes for that on a phisical level

What? The same brain cells for visual information process are used in either instance. Whether you directly look at something or visualize something with your eyes closed. Those same centers of processing light up either way.

Please show where the mind is not a product of the mind, that is a pretty extraordinary claim there. You could possibly rewrite all of neuroscience and everything we know about how a brain works so far!

It can't explain how the brain pojects stuff, or better put your mind. There is no such thing, proccessing visual data in to information does not project pictures in to your head, you need visual sight for that. A computer can't do that without a camera, a human can. It's simply beyond our understanding. Things that do not exist as shapes makes sence, ever herd of that?

The brain 'projects stuff'? I've never even heard this argument before. I suppose there has to be a first time for everything. Is this an original idea of yours or are you getting these ideas from someone else?

I mean, this whole paragraph of yours makes no sense from a scientific standpoint, I've never even heard of this!

Show me where it says that the part of the brain that you speak of can project images and that it's not only information, information as in 010201210102012021 because that is information.

I don't understand where this 'projecting images' terminology is coming from, the visual cortex processes information as visual data, it doesn't 'project' anything.

Data of colors, red, blue for example is only data, in other words red is red as you see it only when your eyes see it. It's why projection is special, it's connected to the mind and the mind is conected to the brain.
It's only logical since the brain is just a function, a computer.

Are you saying projection as in labeling different thing's we see through the eyes? If that's the case then we need to bring in the language processing center as now we're discussing an entirely different function separate from sight.

Artificial inteligence is not alive because it does not have a mind.
It's hard for you to accept it, I know.

AI technology is rapidly advances, even to the point where right now people are having difficulty in telling an AI apart from a human. What happens when it come's to the point where not even yourself will be able to tell the difference?

I can hear voices in my mind also, tho no one is speaking, it's like someone is, gray matter does not have eyes, and do not speak.

I don't think I'm the best person to help you out with that problem, nor do I think you should openly discuss this with anyone than your doctor or therapist if you have one.

Link B your mind is the other source, the other eye, it's open and it feeds your brain. For every image there must be a source, an eye or else either you are dead or you have your eyes closed.

So, the brains ability to store memories is in question with you then?

It's simple there are two words, a phisical one and another one that is not touchable with your hands. They are bolth real or else visual thoughts would not make sence.

It sounds more like you have a lack of understanding in how the brain operates, processes information, stores memory and recalls memory. Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with that in itself. Only issue I have is where your developing these weird ideas that lack any common sense behind them. I mean, can you show unquestionably that the mind is seperate from the brain or that thoughts exist in this weird and unheard of magical realm you describe? Or, would you rather me gather up the pertinent information about the brain for you so you can learn something?

AI technology is rapidly advances, even to the point where right now people are having difficulty in telling an AI apart from a human. What happens when it come's to the point where not even yourself will be able to tell the difference?

AI will never have dreams, have you seen AI the movie, with the robot saing, will I dream, it's the best it will do.It will never dream.

I don't think I'm the best person to help you out with that problem, nor do I think you should openly discuss this with anyone than your doctor or therapist if you have one.

You're being sarcastic, ok no problem, I'm sure when you calculate in your mind things , you may speak from time to time in to your mind ok this and that equals that, but without you saying anything with your vocal cords, I'm sure you do it from time to time, and I'm sure you can hear actual words, either that or your a robot. I'm sure you can find alot of movies where this event is shown, did you know you can even laugh in your mind.

So, the brains ability to store memories is in question with you then?

Information stored is in the form of data, just like data on the silicone chip.
It's 01010101010101010010101 , just like binary code, it's just data, it does not look like an image ok.It's just logical to asume that, beyond that
it's out of our understanding science field but real, can't be explained ok,
but it's real, it's just how things are and you are going to have to face it.

It sounds more like you have a lack of understanding in how the brain operates, processes information, stores memory and recalls memory.

You ment to say "data"

Can you close your eyes and see the red color, does it look red?
Don't tell me that "data" makes it look red, I guess it's your mind.



[edit on 23-9-2009 by pepsi78]