Philosophical Question - Amiguing

[nicholas]

There is divine revelation in everything from ancient texts to beehives. How could there not be, if God pervades all things? Nikola Tesla credits a vision in the sky for his invention of the electric motor. I'd wager there are even bits of divine revelation in the Linux kernel.

I can identify with it myself. There are times when I really don't feel like I can take all the credit for my own work, times when I really can't account for where an idea came from, or when I seemed to know something that I had no earthly right to know.

Indeed.

Surely there are signs for those that reflect.

[Iggy]

True, I just find it highly unlikely any one of them is right.

I like the use of that word.
That is why its sometimes useful to roll your own.

[psxphill]

There are times when I really don't feel like I can take all the credit for my own work, times when I really can't account for where an idea came from, or when I seemed to know something that I had no earthly right to know.

It comes from your imagination & no divine intervention is required for that. If my thoughts are guided by god then he seems to be doing something different with me than he is with his believers.
 
The brain is complex and regularly does things without us being aware of it and can't necessarily comprehend how it does it.
 
The Hensel conjoined twins are pretty good at volleyball, despite each of their brains only being able to control one half of their body.
 
http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethebox/2012/08/abby-and-brittany-hensel-5-things-you-should-know-about-the-conjoined-twins-from-tlcs-new-show.html
 
Now I find that pretty amazing.

[Mrs Beanbag]

It comes from your imagination & no divine intervention is required for that.

Oh does it I'm glad you know everything.

So do tell me, where does my imagination get it from?

[nicholas]

It comes from your imagination & no divine intervention is required for that. If my thoughts are guided by god then he seems to be doing something different with me than he is with his believers.
 
The brain is complex and regularly does things without us being aware of it and can't necessarily comprehend how it does it.
 
The Hensel conjoined twins are pretty good at volleyball, despite each of their brains only being able to control one half of their body.
 
http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethebox/2012/08/abby-and-brittany-hensel-5-things-you-should-know-about-the-conjoined-twins-from-tlcs-new-show.html
 
Now I find that pretty amazing.

Now that we are truly way off topic I thought I'd mention something truly amazing.

Both my parents have a twin each.  Both of them literally feel the pain their twin is experiencing even when hundreds of miles away, both emotional and physical pain.

My Mum went through 11hrs of labour pains whilst she was still a virgin when her twin gave birth 1 month prematurely and they were in different countries at the time.

I find that amazing.

[stefcep2]

Recently I read one of Richard Feinmann's books.

In it he devotes a chapter on a topic that I could relate to and he says, was not uncommon during his teaching years: the situation when a student with religious up bringing ends up studying science.  That student, he says, goes through a period of unease, a struggle, as his studies conflict with many of the basic tenets of his religion.

The resolution of this conflict doesn't necessarily mean abandoning science or his religion, and many scientists maintain their religious beliefs.  How scientists reconcile this is often up to the person himself.

It seemed to me that my religion-along with most popular religions- seem to have two main aims. One is to explain the world we find ourselves in.

I was brought up as a Christian, but later went on to do a MSc.  During that time I was exposed to pretty much every branch of science there was: from calculus to relativistic mechanics and quantum theory to the life sciences to anthropology to electrical engineering and materials science.  

I came to the conclusion that science does a better job of explaining the world around us then any religion that I've come across.

The other thing religions seem to do is to provide a set of rules on how one should live their life, a moral code or set of values, complete with rewards for those that do, and punishment for those that don't, including the biggies of eternal life or eternal damnation.  I can see how this in ancient times would have been important in terms of protecting the community and maintaining social order: after all what bigger reward is their than eternal life, and what worse punishment is their than eternal damnation-  Eternity is a long time!

The important things in life-love, family, health, mutual respect however in my mind haven't changed all that much over the eons.  I'm yet to be convinced that modern takes on what is a "good and moral life" are any better than the majority of what's in the Bible. I don't believe I'll get to heaven or hell one way or the other, but the Bible's life-rules make pretty good sense to me.  

So that was my resolution of my "conflict". I still regard myself as a "small c" Christian.

[stefcep2]

Oh does it I'm glad you know everything.

So do tell me, where does my imagination get it from?

There are scientific possibilities for how the brain "imagines".

In a sense everything we perceive is a form of "imagination".

What we see as "reality" is only a mental construct of the real world: "color" for example only exists in our mind, perspective is an illusion-things aren't really smaller as they get further away.

One of our abilities is to predict mental scenarios based on prior experiences. We can recreate "what ifs" in our minds. The prediction may never have actually been observed by the person before, or indeed may actually be physically impossible but using previous observations and experiences a new scene or vision can be created within the brain.  

How does all this happen at the biochemical level-God knows.

No actually there's no need to invoke God, yet.

.

[bloodline]

Since this is an off topic thread, I will continue

I'm not going to discuss the possibility of a god/gods/etc and the validity or otherwise of the various religions... My feelings are well known and I have little interest in changing others views

But what does trouble me is the idea of a soul or thy humans are in some way special... I feel that puts other organisms in a very unfair position. But worse, much worse than that, it implies that a machine could never be "intelligent" or "creative" or even be considered as sentient. This to me seems absurd, I think it's perfectly reasonable to have sentient machines and for that I will argue

[Iggy]

...But worse, much worse than that, it implies that a machine could never be "intelligent" or "creative" or even be considered as sentient. This to me seems absurd, I think it's perfectly reasonable to have sentient machines and for that I will argue

Pure science fiction, the idea of sentient machines.
Machines that mimic sentient behavior so well that it seems realistic?
Sure.

Now your point on animals?
I wholly agree, they deserve consideration.

[Mrs Beanbag]

But what does trouble me is the idea of a soul or thy humans are in some way special... I feel that puts other organisms in a very unfair position. But worse, much worse than that, it implies that a machine could never be "intelligent" or "creative" or even be considered as sentient. This to me seems absurd, I think it's perfectly reasonable to have sentient machines and for that I will argue

I just use the word "soul" to mean a person, as in the essence of what makes them "them" as distinct from their body, but not necessarily a thing that can exist separately or float away after they die. It means the sum of their personality, memories &c., or in other words, the mind (as opposed to the brain). This is closer to the original meaning in fact. In the New Testament the word translated as soul is "psyche" which expresses the same idea today in such words as "psychology".

The Greek philosophers did develop the idea of immortal souls as something separable from the body, which fits in with their way of thinking in terms of essences &c., but isn't necessarily what the Bible means at all. We owe a lot to Descartes for this way of thinking, too. It's not for no reason it's called Cartesian Dualism!

The other word "spirit" simply means "breath" (Gk. pneuma), that which physically sustains us alive, as in "respiration", "aspiration" &c. and of course spirits that you drink, presumably because of the vapours.

[bloodline]

Pure science fiction, the idea of sentient machines.
Machines that mimic sentient behavior so well that it seems realistic?
Sure.

Now your point on animals?
I wholly agree, they deserve consideration.

Your assertion is prejudiced, you like organisms that operate along the lines by which you operate... That's a bit unfair

[nicholas]

Since this is an off topic thread, I will continue

I'm not going to discuss the possibility of a god/gods/etc and the validity or otherwise of the various religions... My feelings are well known and I have little interest in changing others views

But what does trouble me is the idea of a soul or thy humans are in some way special... I feel that puts other organisms in a very unfair position. But worse, much worse than that, it implies that a machine could never be "intelligent" or "creative" or even be considered as sentient. This to me seems absurd, I think it's perfectly reasonable to have sentient machines and for that I will argue

I can't speak for other religions but according to Islamic belief all the animals have souls.

The difference is that humans can sin, other animals can't so they all go to paradise.

[bloodline]

I can't speak for other religions but according to Islamic belief all the animals have souls.

The difference is that humans can sin, other animals can't so they all go to paradise.

Again, I feel that is a bit arrogant (trying to think of a less pejorative word here), it suggests animals can't be responsible for their own actions. We can see clearly in the higher primates and other social animals, that individuals can commit acts that are considered "wrong" by their peers and are punished within their society, they are clearly responsible for their actions... To use religious language, they have sinned!

[Mrs Beanbag]

...suggests animals can't be responsible for their own actions. ...social animals ... can commit acts that are considered "wrong" by their peers and are punished within their society, they are clearly responsible for their actions... To use religious language, they have sinned!

Sinning is to rebel against God, not society. God never told animals to do or not to do anything, so nothing is "wrong" for them.

I just hope there are mosquito nets in heaven.

[bloodline]

Sinning is to rebel against God, not society. God never told animals to do or not to do anything, so nothing is "wrong" for them.

I just hope there are mosquito nets in heaven.

That assumes you are an authority on what god decided to disclose to you and the animals... It seems like an arrogant position to me, I prefer not to assume I know everything

[Mrs Beanbag]

That assumes you are an authority on what god decided to disclose to you and the animals... It seems like an arrogant position to me, I prefer not to assume I know everything

It's a good point, I never caught my dog reading the Bible but maybe there is divine inspiration in some of the things he sniffs.