Mind is uncaused cause

Is the mind the same as the body? What is consciousness? Can machines have it?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Mind is uncaused cause

Post by Age »

bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:19 am
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:13 am
bahman wrote: Fri Jan 15, 2021 11:24 pm
Well, first we have to agree on what do we mean by the emergence.
Now this is a GREAT and PERFECT way to START ALL discussions. If, and WHEN, this is done, properly AND correctly, then Truly PEACEFUL discussions can begin, from which a Truly PEACEFUL 'world' can also begin, and be maintained.

So, GREAT advice here "bahman".
bahman wrote: Fri Jan 15, 2021 11:24 pm By emergence, I simply mean that the whole has a set of properties in a given condition that parts don't. And here is the argument: There must be a reason that the whole show a new set of properties rather than any other properties given that the whole is in a specific condition. This means that the properties of the whole are functions. The only variables that are available are the properties of parts. Therefore, the properties of the whole are functions of the properties of parts. Therefore, there is no emergence.
Pity that your GREAT advice previously gets completely LOST here now though. For two reasons:

1. You did NOT WAIT for 'agreement'.

2. You have ALREADY arrived at some conclusion, which you ALREADY BELIEVE and ASSUME is thee Truth, and from which you then say 'things' on the ASSUMPTION that they are, already proven, premises for what you are CLAIMING is ALREADY concluded.

Besides parts of your reasoning being faulty and thus WRONG, what you claim/argue is true is just done through 'circular reasoning' anyway.
Do you agree with the definition of emergence?
What do you mean by using the 'the' word here?

Are you here 'trying to' suggest that YOUR definition of the 'emergence' word is THE definition of 'emergence'?

Either way I agree with A definition of the word 'emergence', which fits in PERFECTLY with ALL of the other CORRECT definitions, for ALL of the other words in existence.

Do I agree that YOUR definition for the word 'emergence' works in well with other words and their commonly accepted definitions, then my answer is 'No'.

See, I SEE 'things' in very simple and in very easy ways.

YOUR definition; the whole has a set of properties in a given condition that parts don't, to mean does NOT describe/define the 'emergence' word, at all really.

To me, that the whole has a different set of properties, in ANY condition, than parts do, is just an obvious fact, and nothing at all REALLY to do with 'emergence', itself.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Mind is uncaused cause

Post by bahman »

Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:30 am
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:04 am
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 12:56 am

But who is saying that ANY one of 'you', adult human beings, is 'free', in the sense of being ABSOLUTELY and UNADULTERATED 'free'?

If 'you' are, then what PROOF do you have for saying this?

If, however, NO adult is 'free' in the ABSOLUTE and UNADULTERATED sense, then they are UNDER INFLUENCE.
By free I don't mean freedom of will which makes you able to do whatever you want.
Since when has the term 'freedom of will' MEANT you are able to do whatever you want?

What does the 'will' word refer to or mean in the term 'freedom of will'?
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:04 am By that, I mean that you are free to choose among options in a situation. Options are available to you.
Okay GREAT. This is EXACTLY how I use the word 'free', as in 'free will' to MEAN also.

This partly EXPLAINS HOW and WHY 'you', human beings, are EQUALLY 'free willed, deterministic' beings.
We are not deterministic.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Mind is uncaused cause

Post by bahman »

Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:37 am
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:08 am
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 12:59 am
Now we are back to YOUR CONTRADICTION.

Here you are saying, "I am 'a' mind", but you have also written "my mind".

So, which one is it. It OBVIOUSLY can NOT be both.

Also, your third sentence here is written as a statement but with a question mark at the end of it. So, which one is it. It OBVIOUSLY can NOT be both.
There is no contradiction in what I said. I am a mind attached to a body. I perceive through the body and act through the body too.
This is getting CLOSER, as long as 'you' can LOGICALLY explain how a "mind" is 'attached' to a body, and you NEVER again write, "my mind".
My mind experiences physical, my body. It causes my body to move too. There are things that my mind cannot move unless my body intervenes. Therefore, my mind is attached to my body only. Mind in principle can attach to everything but I think that need mental practice.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:37 am Do 'you' UNDERSTAND that it is logically IMPOSSIBLE to be some 'thing' as well as NOT be 'it'.

And, if you 'have' 'a mind', then you can NOT be 'a mind', correct?
It depends on what "I" refers to. It could be thinking mind or mind and body which do things together.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Mind is uncaused cause

Post by bahman »

Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 2:14 am
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:19 am
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:13 am

Now this is a GREAT and PERFECT way to START ALL discussions. If, and WHEN, this is done, properly AND correctly, then Truly PEACEFUL discussions can begin, from which a Truly PEACEFUL 'world' can also begin, and be maintained.

So, GREAT advice here "bahman".



Pity that your GREAT advice previously gets completely LOST here now though. For two reasons:

1. You did NOT WAIT for 'agreement'.

2. You have ALREADY arrived at some conclusion, which you ALREADY BELIEVE and ASSUME is thee Truth, and from which you then say 'things' on the ASSUMPTION that they are, already proven, premises for what you are CLAIMING is ALREADY concluded.

Besides parts of your reasoning being faulty and thus WRONG, what you claim/argue is true is just done through 'circular reasoning' anyway.
Do you agree with the definition of emergence?
What do you mean by using the 'the' word here?

Are you here 'trying to' suggest that YOUR definition of the 'emergence' word is THE definition of 'emergence'?

Either way I agree with A definition of the word 'emergence', which fits in PERFECTLY with ALL of the other CORRECT definitions, for ALL of the other words in existence.

Do I agree that YOUR definition for the word 'emergence' works in well with other words and their commonly accepted definitions, then my answer is 'No'.

See, I SEE 'things' in very simple and in very easy ways.

YOUR definition; the whole has a set of properties in a given condition that parts don't, to mean does NOT describe/define the 'emergence' word, at all really.

To me, that the whole has a different set of properties, in ANY condition, than parts do, is just an obvious fact, and nothing at all REALLY to do with 'emergence', itself.
What is the definition of emergence to you? Anyway, the definition that I provided was for sake of discussion.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Mind is uncaused cause

Post by henry quirk »

bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 7:57 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:30 am
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:04 am
By free I don't mean freedom of will which makes you able to do whatever you want.
Since when has the term 'freedom of will' MEANT you are able to do whatever you want?

What does the 'will' word refer to or mean in the term 'freedom of will'?
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:04 am By that, I mean that you are free to choose among options in a situation. Options are available to you.
Okay GREAT. This is EXACTLY how I use the word 'free', as in 'free will' to MEAN also.

This partly EXPLAINS HOW and WHY 'you', human beings, are EQUALLY 'free willed, deterministic' beings.
We are not deterministic.
we're not determined, but our flesh is deterministic...it's our minds that are neither
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Mind is uncaused cause

Post by bahman »

henry quirk wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:25 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 7:57 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:30 am

Since when has the term 'freedom of will' MEANT you are able to do whatever you want?

What does the 'will' word refer to or mean in the term 'freedom of will'?



Okay GREAT. This is EXACTLY how I use the word 'free', as in 'free will' to MEAN also.

This partly EXPLAINS HOW and WHY 'you', human beings, are EQUALLY 'free willed, deterministic' beings.
We are not deterministic.
we're not determined, but our flesh is deterministic...it's our minds that are neither
Yes.
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Mind is uncaused cause

Post by Age »

bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 7:57 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:30 am
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:04 am
By free I don't mean freedom of will which makes you able to do whatever you want.
Since when has the term 'freedom of will' MEANT you are able to do whatever you want?

What does the 'will' word refer to or mean in the term 'freedom of will'?
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:04 am By that, I mean that you are free to choose among options in a situation. Options are available to you.
Okay GREAT. This is EXACTLY how I use the word 'free', as in 'free will' to MEAN also.

This partly EXPLAINS HOW and WHY 'you', human beings, are EQUALLY 'free willed, deterministic' beings.
We are not deterministic.
You announce this as though it is thee absolute and irrefutable Truth. Is what you say here an absolute, irrefutable Truth?

Will you explain how 'you', an obviously caused and created human being, was NOT determined by causes external to your own self?
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Mind is uncaused cause

Post by Age »

bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:08 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:37 am
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:08 am
There is no contradiction in what I said. I am a mind attached to a body. I perceive through the body and act through the body too.
This is getting CLOSER, as long as 'you' can LOGICALLY explain how a "mind" is 'attached' to a body, and you NEVER again write, "my mind".
My mind experiences physical, my body.
Are 'you' seriously going to use and say the phrase, "my mind", especially considering what I have PREVIOUSLY SHOWN and POINTED OUT to 'you'?
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:08 pm It causes my body to move too. There are things that my mind cannot move unless my body intervenes. Therefore, my mind is attached to my body only. Mind in principle can attach to everything but I think that need mental practice.
'you' are FREE to 'think' absolutely ANY thing you like.
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:08 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:37 am Do 'you' UNDERSTAND that it is logically IMPOSSIBLE to be some 'thing' as well as NOT be 'it'.

And, if you 'have' 'a mind', then you can NOT be 'a mind', correct?
It depends on what "I" refers to. It could be thinking mind or mind and body which do things together.
'It' COULD ALSO BE ANY 'thing' else as well.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Mind is uncaused cause

Post by bahman »

Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:21 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 7:57 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:30 am

Since when has the term 'freedom of will' MEANT you are able to do whatever you want?

What does the 'will' word refer to or mean in the term 'freedom of will'?



Okay GREAT. This is EXACTLY how I use the word 'free', as in 'free will' to MEAN also.

This partly EXPLAINS HOW and WHY 'you', human beings, are EQUALLY 'free willed, deterministic' beings.
We are not deterministic.
You announce this as though it is thee absolute and irrefutable Truth. Is what you say here an absolute, irrefutable Truth?
Yes.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:21 pm Will you explain how 'you', an obviously caused and created human being, was NOT determined by causes external to your own self?
I am free.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Mind is uncaused cause

Post by bahman »

Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:26 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:08 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:37 am
This is getting CLOSER, as long as 'you' can LOGICALLY explain how a "mind" is 'attached' to a body, and you NEVER again write, "my mind".
My mind experiences physical, my body.
Are 'you' seriously going to use and say the phrase, "my mind", especially considering what I have PREVIOUSLY SHOWN and POINTED OUT to 'you'?
There is a mind that objectively exists. You cannot make an argument against that. I have a mind, you have a mind, etc.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:26 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:08 pm It causes my body to move too. There are things that my mind cannot move unless my body intervenes. Therefore, my mind is attached to my body only. Mind in principle can attach to everything but I think that need mental practice.
'you' are FREE to 'think' absolutely ANY thing you like.
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:08 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:37 am Do 'you' UNDERSTAND that it is logically IMPOSSIBLE to be some 'thing' as well as NOT be 'it'.

And, if you 'have' 'a mind', then you can NOT be 'a mind', correct?
It depends on what "I" refers to. It could be thinking mind or mind and body which do things together.
'It' COULD ALSO BE ANY 'thing' else as well.
No.
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Mind is uncaused cause

Post by Age »

bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:11 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 2:14 am
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:19 am
Do you agree with the definition of emergence?
What do you mean by using the 'the' word here?

Are you here 'trying to' suggest that YOUR definition of the 'emergence' word is THE definition of 'emergence'?

Either way I agree with A definition of the word 'emergence', which fits in PERFECTLY with ALL of the other CORRECT definitions, for ALL of the other words in existence.

Do I agree that YOUR definition for the word 'emergence' works in well with other words and their commonly accepted definitions, then my answer is 'No'.

See, I SEE 'things' in very simple and in very easy ways.

YOUR definition; the whole has a set of properties in a given condition that parts don't, to mean does NOT describe/define the 'emergence' word, at all really.

To me, that the whole has a different set of properties, in ANY condition, than parts do, is just an obvious fact, and nothing at all REALLY to do with 'emergence', itself.
What is the definition of emergence to you? Anyway, the definition that I provided was for sake of discussion.
Your use of the 'Anyway' word here DIRECTLY after the clarifying question you asked me here implies or infers that you REALLY have absolutely NO interest at all in what the definition of 'emergence' is, to 'me'.

Now, if the definition, which you provided here was for the sake of this discussion, then you can continue on discussing this part without me.

To 'me', the 'emergence' word just refers to 'things', which come into being SEEN/UNDERSTOOD. Which, by the way, just about EVERY thing that I have been saying here is NOT being seen, NOR understood, by 'you' AT ALL.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Mind is uncaused cause

Post by bahman »

Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:34 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:11 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 2:14 am

What do you mean by using the 'the' word here?

Are you here 'trying to' suggest that YOUR definition of the 'emergence' word is THE definition of 'emergence'?

Either way I agree with A definition of the word 'emergence', which fits in PERFECTLY with ALL of the other CORRECT definitions, for ALL of the other words in existence.

Do I agree that YOUR definition for the word 'emergence' works in well with other words and their commonly accepted definitions, then my answer is 'No'.

See, I SEE 'things' in very simple and in very easy ways.

YOUR definition; the whole has a set of properties in a given condition that parts don't, to mean does NOT describe/define the 'emergence' word, at all really.

To me, that the whole has a different set of properties, in ANY condition, than parts do, is just an obvious fact, and nothing at all REALLY to do with 'emergence', itself.
What is the definition of emergence to you? Anyway, the definition that I provided was for sake of discussion.
Your use of the 'Anyway' word here DIRECTLY after the clarifying question you asked me here implies or infers that you REALLY have absolutely NO interest at all in what the definition of 'emergence' is, to 'me'.

Now, if the definition, which you provided here was for the sake of this discussion, then you can continue on discussing this part without me.

To 'me', the 'emergence' word just refers to 'things', which come into being SEEN/UNDERSTOOD. Which, by the way, just about EVERY thing that I have been saying here is NOT being seen, NOR understood, by 'you' AT ALL.
Everything that you understand is a function of what you have experienced.
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Mind is uncaused cause

Post by Age »

bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:27 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:21 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 7:57 pm
We are not deterministic.
You announce this as though it is thee absolute and irrefutable Truth. Is what you say here an absolute, irrefutable Truth?
Yes.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:21 pm Will you explain how 'you', an obviously caused and created human being, was NOT determined by causes external to your own self?
I am free.
If thee 'I' is FREE, then thee 'I' is NOT a 'human being'. This is because the 'human being' is a caused evolving creation.

Which, by the way, can be EXPLAINED in a VERY EXTREMELY SIMPLE and VERY EASY way, which can be agreed with by EVERY one, and which is ACTUALLY thee One and ONLY ACTUAL Truth of 'things'.

Which is EXACTLY what I have been saying from entering this forum. But not one of 'you', human beings, here believe this could even be possibly true, let alone thee actual Truth, nor has one of 'you' shown ANY real interest to this fact.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Mind is uncaused cause

Post by bahman »

Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:45 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:27 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:21 pm
You announce this as though it is thee absolute and irrefutable Truth. Is what you say here an absolute, irrefutable Truth?
Yes.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:21 pm Will you explain how 'you', an obviously caused and created human being, was NOT determined by causes external to your own self?
I am free.
If thee 'I' is FREE, then thee 'I' is NOT a 'human being'. This is because the 'human being' is a caused evolving creation.

Which, by the way, can be EXPLAINED in a VERY EXTREMELY SIMPLE and VERY EASY way, which can be agreed with by EVERY one, and which is ACTUALLY thee One and ONLY ACTUAL Truth of 'things'.

Which is EXACTLY what I have been saying from entering this forum. But not one of 'you', human beings, here believe this could even be possibly true, let alone thee actual Truth, nor has one of 'you' shown ANY real interest to this fact.
The "I" who decides is mind and not the body.
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Mind is uncaused cause

Post by Age »

bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:32 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:26 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:08 pm
My mind experiences physical, my body.
Are 'you' seriously going to use and say the phrase, "my mind", especially considering what I have PREVIOUSLY SHOWN and POINTED OUT to 'you'?
There is a mind that objectively exists. You cannot make an argument against that. I have a mind, you have a mind, etc.
You "bahman" are absolutely one VERY TWISTED and DISTORTED 'person'.

This is BECAUSE 'you' will ONLY LOOK AT, and thus ONLY SEE, 'things', from what 'you' ALREADY BELIEVE is true, but which are just COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS.

What 'you' BELIEVE is absolutely and irrefutably true can be VERY EASILY PROVEN to be NOT true, AT ALL. But this can NOT be PROVEN to 'you' because you are completely and utterly BLINDED here.

The very reason WHY 'you', human beings, are so LOST in Life is because of the ACTUAL words 'you' use, which are just FOOLING and DECEIVING ALL of 'you'. And a PRIME EXAMPLE of this is in what I quoted you here saying.

Your first sentence is thee ACTUAL Truth of 'things', which is an absolute, irrefutable, objective Truth. (But, which I would used a capital 'M' for with the "mind" word that you used).

Your second sentence is OBVIOUSLY False, Wrong, and Incorrect as an "argument" CAN be made against your first sentence. Just LOOK AT 'you', human beings, and what you CAN do. You ALL make "arguments" against just about absolutely ANY and EVERY thing. BUT, if those 'arguments' are actually VALID and SOUND arguments is a completely whole and different matter.

Your third sentence is just so OBVIOUSLY False, Wrong, and Incorrect, and which I have ALREADY STATED the REASONS WHY. Which can be PROVEN True as they can be CLEARLY SEEN in my writings above. But which 'you', "bahman", appear to have COMPLETELY MISSED and/or MISUNDERSTOOD. But considering just how BLINDED 'you' are here, then you NOT SEEING what I have CLEARLY SPELLED OUT and WRITTEN ALREADY is NOT AT ALL SURPRISING.
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:32 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:26 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:08 pm It causes my body to move too. There are things that my mind cannot move unless my body intervenes. Therefore, my mind is attached to my body only. Mind in principle can attach to everything but I think that need mental practice.
'you' are FREE to 'think' absolutely ANY thing you like.
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:08 pm
It depends on what "I" refers to. It could be thinking mind or mind and body which do things together.
'It' COULD ALSO BE ANY 'thing' else as well.
No.
'you', "bahman", are an EXPERT at expressing ONLY 'that' what you currently BELIEVE and HOLD as being the truth, YET you are a COMPLETE FAILURE is being able to back up and support your BELIEFS and CLAIMS here.

Oh, and by the way, have 'you', human beings, in the days of when this is being written, NOTICED that for thousands upon thousands of years 'you' have not even come close to an understanding nor even an agreement on what words like 'mind', 'life', 'love', 'I' actually 'mean'?

When what these words are ACTUALLY referring to, are SHOWN and REVEALED to 'you', human beings, then 'you' WILL SEE just WHY 'you' were ALL just so BLINDED before.
Post Reply