I was trying to clarify what Mr. Quike was saying, but I'll try your question. Yes a dog is conscious as opposed to unconscious. Does a dog reflect on it's own dogness?
No I don't think so.
So really the religious question is consciousness not created by the brain.
I was trying to clarify what Mr. Quike was saying, but I'll try your question. Yes a dog is conscious as opposed to unconscious. Does a dog reflect on it's own dogness?
No I don't think so.
So really the religious question is consciousness not created by the brain.
So are you saying that self-awareness/self-consciousness is a reserve of the human race?
I once read that an animal is just the same as a human, albeit in a different way - it just has a different view of things.
I think it depends upon the level of complexity the animal has though, for instance parrots, crows, dolphins and elephants are supposed to be extremely intelligent.
People think all kind of things, obviously. What about you?
Are you saying possession of a soul is not enough for self-awareness and that that such awareness is dependent on the level of mental faculties?
Ironically "people" is the name given my rescue dog.
When I consider philosophical questions I can't help but envision what other people think. I was influenced during several times spent in Bali, by Hindu Dharma and how the Balinese I met seemed to embody this philosophy.
I'm saying that an entity can have a soul but is limited by the brain capacity of its form, as to whether it engages in self reflection or can communicate self reflection. To add, that is not to say the brain creates the soul. The form just determines the expression.
Do dogs whine and moan to each other about their dog state? Walt Whitman thought not.
Come now ... I am a busy human being ... I have things to do ... what evidence do you have that such a thing as a soul exists ... everytime you imagine it, all you can conjure are physical metaphors and descriptions ie: Transparent , Wavey ... all of which belong and only belong to the physical universe ...
Come now ... I am a busy human being ... I have things to do ... what evidence do you have that such a thing as a soul exists ... everytime you imagine it, all you can conjure are physical metaphors and descriptions ie: Transparent , Wavey ... all of which belong and only belong to the physical universe ...
Whenever I read your thoughts I am struck that you are permanently stuck in an either-or way of thinking - which of course is common in Western society.
In particular you seem to focus on seeing things as either imaginary (to you inconsequential) or real (which you seem to view as meaning some combination of concrete/provable).
However, what is imaginary can be real, and what is real can be imaginary, by which I mean:
- things that are real in this world may have started off as something imagined which was then developed
- when we interact with something you would consider real our imagination automatically comes into play; it becomes a fusion of the two
- you seem to like science and mathematics, in maths we have imaginary numbers (sqrt -1, or i)which despite the fact they are imaginary have an important part to play in practical scientific applications
- the distinction between real and imaginary is an artificial one the Western mind has created in order to try to make sense of nature, however nature knows of no such clear cut distrinction. In fact you could say this distinction, and even the definition of reality, are imaginary.
Come now ... I am a busy human being ... I have things to do ... what evidence do you have that such a thing as a soul exists ... everytime you imagine it, all you can conjure are physical metaphors and descriptions ie: Transparent , Wavey ... all of which belong and only belong to the physical universe ...
Come now ... I am a busy human being ... I have things to do ... what evidence do you have that such a thing as a soul exists ... everytime you imagine it, all you can conjure are physical metaphors and descriptions ie: Transparent , Wavey ... all of which belong and only belong to the physical universe ...
One analogy if I may.
Think about music on an iPod. It simply does not physically exist, yet as soon as I press a button out come the most beautiful sounds. Yet where are they? I can take the iPod to pieces and examine every last piece of the gadget under a microscope yet find absolutely nothing. Yet the music is in there.
Think about music on an iPod. It simply does not physically exist, yet as soon as I press a button out come the most beautiful sounds. Yet where are they? I can take the iPod to pieces and examine every last piece of the gadget under a microscope yet find absolutely nothing. Yet the music is in there.
You can do that with a radio too. There isn't even data on a hard drive in that.
Think about music on an iPod. It simply does not physically exist, yet as soon as I press a button out come the most beautiful sounds. Yet where are they? I can take the iPod to pieces and examine every last piece of the gadget under a microscope yet find absolutely nothing. Yet the music is in there.
No it isn't, sorry.
The music is in your mind. iPods are designed to produce sequences of vibrations in the air around the ears of the user. I do see what you're getting at, but for the analogy to work - the iPod would hear, and hopefully enjoy, what it's producing.
The soul is simply that part of us which has an opinion on the quality of its lot. The part which understands the drudgery, or otherwise, of its workload. The part which can rend the whole entity to a mess of tears. The part which maybe still hopes that against all the odds...
Think about music on an iPod. It simply does not physically exist, yet as soon as I press a button out come the most beautiful sounds. Yet where are they? I can take the iPod to pieces and examine every last piece of the gadget under a microscope yet find absolutely nothing. Yet the music is in there.
It does physically exist, it is stored as electrons trapped in microscopic circuitry. These particles being present or not present represent 1s and 0s that can be converted into analogue sound.
The soul, however, does not show any signs of physical existence.
It does physically exist, it is stored as electrons trapped in microscopic circuitry. These particles being present or not present represent 1s and 0s that can be converted into analogue sound.
The soul, however, does not show any signs of physical existence.
Indeed, by definition the soul is immaterial, therefore could have no physical existence whatsoever.
Comments
I was trying to clarify what Mr. Quike was saying, but I'll try your question. Yes a dog is conscious as opposed to unconscious. Does a dog reflect on it's own dogness?
No I don't think so.
So really the religious question is consciousness not created by the brain.
So are you saying that self-awareness/self-consciousness is a reserve of the human race?
I'm sure there must be aliens smarter than us around the universe.
Wonder what their philosophy is?
A dogs actions indicate that a dog is aware of a squirrel, a cat, a pack member, another dog, a biscuit as something other than itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_test
science biatch
I think it depends upon the level of complexity the animal has though, for instance parrots, crows, dolphins and elephants are supposed to be extremely intelligent.
No. I don't doubt that dogs are self aware on a certain level but I doubt that they reflect on their condition. Those are two different things.
Now I wonder what factor dogs lack that gives us that facility?
Do they lack a soul or spirit etc which we possess or is it a difference in mental facility?
Some people obviously think dogs do have a soul or spirit ( persons who believe in reincarnation for example.
It doesn't have to be either/ or, does it.
The dog could have soul or spirit but lack the cognitive skills to self-reflect on their "dogness."
People think all kind of things, obviously. What about you?
Are you saying possession of a soul is not enough for self-awareness and that that such awareness is dependent on the level of mental faculties?
Their "dogness" is merely a human quality....:kitty:
Ironically "people" is the name given my rescue dog.
When I consider philosophical questions I can't help but envision what other people think. I was influenced during several times spent in Bali, by Hindu Dharma and how the Balinese I met seemed to embody this philosophy.
I'm saying that an entity can have a soul but is limited by the brain capacity of its form, as to whether it engages in self reflection or can communicate self reflection. To add, that is not to say the brain creates the soul. The form just determines the expression.
Do dogs whine and moan to each other about their dog state? Walt Whitman thought not.
I knew you'd do this! I just knew it!!
No they could not because the idea of a soul is a load of nonsense ...
But human's have at least 3. Fact.
One on each foot, and not forgetting the ar-soul!
Come now ... I am a busy human being ... I have things to do ... what evidence do you have that such a thing as a soul exists ... everytime you imagine it, all you can conjure are physical metaphors and descriptions ie: Transparent , Wavey ... all of which belong and only belong to the physical universe ...
Why did you have to bump this...
Whenever I read your thoughts I am struck that you are permanently stuck in an either-or way of thinking - which of course is common in Western society.
In particular you seem to focus on seeing things as either imaginary (to you inconsequential) or real (which you seem to view as meaning some combination of concrete/provable).
However, what is imaginary can be real, and what is real can be imaginary, by which I mean:
- things that are real in this world may have started off as something imagined which was then developed
- when we interact with something you would consider real our imagination automatically comes into play; it becomes a fusion of the two
- you seem to like science and mathematics, in maths we have imaginary numbers (sqrt -1, or i)which despite the fact they are imaginary have an important part to play in practical scientific applications
- the distinction between real and imaginary is an artificial one the Western mind has created in order to try to make sense of nature, however nature knows of no such clear cut distrinction. In fact you could say this distinction, and even the definition of reality, are imaginary.
I think you just failed the Turing test.
One analogy if I may.
Think about music on an iPod. It simply does not physically exist, yet as soon as I press a button out come the most beautiful sounds. Yet where are they? I can take the iPod to pieces and examine every last piece of the gadget under a microscope yet find absolutely nothing. Yet the music is in there.
You can do that with a radio too. There isn't even data on a hard drive in that.
The music is in your mind. iPods are designed to produce sequences of vibrations in the air around the ears of the user. I do see what you're getting at, but for the analogy to work - the iPod would hear, and hopefully enjoy, what it's producing.
The soul is simply that part of us which has an opinion on the quality of its lot. The part which understands the drudgery, or otherwise, of its workload. The part which can rend the whole entity to a mess of tears. The part which maybe still hopes that against all the odds...
It does physically exist, it is stored as electrons trapped in microscopic circuitry. These particles being present or not present represent 1s and 0s that can be converted into analogue sound.
The soul, however, does not show any signs of physical existence.
Indeed, by definition the soul is immaterial, therefore could have no physical existence whatsoever.