Our Brain, Our Brain on "God"

[POI]

The default position is that a physical brain is necessary to produce "conscious thought". Theists will argue, in addition, an "external source" is also necessary to give us some or all of our "conscious thought". And by 'external source', this could mean a Christian God, another god(s), or maybe even an evil source, or other such as acting as a 'medium' for dead relatives/other.

For debate: Does the material brain need/require an external source, or 'god(s)', to give us any information? I'm leaning towards no-ish. Why?

1) The only time we get information in which we could not have conjured up completely on our own is when we engage other humans/other. Such as, in a classroom, communicating with others at work, etc... However, when one states they are receiving messages from some "invisible/external source", it seems to be information they can manufacture on their own?
2) If a part of our brain becomes damaged, altered, or destroyed, which controls particular function(s), the brain is no longer able to produce/function in the same manor.
3) Brain tumors have been known to change a person's personality and/or impulse behaviors. It is no longer thought to be because of "evil" external sources.

I'll stop here....

[SiNcE_1985]

Negative. My scenario is to state we have physical brains.

Oh, my bad.

I didn't know we had physical brains until you told me, Captain Obvious.

Thoughts emerge from them.

No, all we know is that thoughts correlate with them.

The emergent stuff is something that has yet to be proven, which is why I'm asking you to demonstrate how this is possible.

To assert that some outside/external source is ALSO involved is ALL YOU dude.

Got anything?

And I'm asking you where is the internal inputting software coming from in the brain?

If you start off with chunks of brain matter that is assembled into a brain, where is the internal self awareness coming from?

It isn't something that can be given to the brain via naturalistic processes, because thoughts aren't of physical nature.

It would require an external inputting mechanism (or agent), something of which itself already has self awareness and isn't dependent upon anything else for its existence.

[POI]

It would require an external inputting mechanism (or agent), something of which itself already has self awareness and isn't dependent upon anything else for its existence.

Says you...

Harken back to the computer example. When I state 'emerge', I mean data comes from it. In the case for the computer, we know humans are the actual source of this emergence. With the brain, we see the same emergence, but have not been able to identify any claimed outside source. Is there one? If so, prove it? I'm ready and waiting to see demonstration.

[1213]

The default position is that a physical brain is necessary to produce "conscious thought"...

Apparently only 2 % is then required. Makes me wonder what is the purpose of the other 98 %.

"baby-born-without-a-brain-learns-to-count-and-surf"
https://www.news.com.au/technology/scie ... 7033352293

I believe people have body and soul and brain is only that what connects soul to body. Soul is the part where thought comes, but unfortunately I can't prove it to you.

[TRANSPONDER]

The default position is that a physical brain is necessary to produce "conscious thought"...

Apparently only 2 % is then required. Makes me wonder what is the purpose of the other 98 %.

"baby-born-without-a-brain-learns-to-count-and-surf"
https://www.news.com.au/technology/scie ... 7033352293

I believe people have body and soul and brain is only that what connects soul to body. Soul is the part where thought comes, but unfortunately I can't prove it to you.

The other function of the brain is what it has always been - driving the body. Reactions and instinct. In the dinosaurs the brain was in two parts, in the head, the smaller part processing information and the larger part driving the reaction. In mammals the brain is in one piece doing the same job.

That is what research (tracking brain activity connected with body activity) has found. What it has not found is a soul, which makes speculation about what joins it without any value.

[SiNcE_1985]

Says you...

Harken back to the computer example. When I state 'emerge', I mean data comes from it. In the case for the computer, we know humans are the actual source of this emergence. With the brain, we see the same emergence, but have not been able to identify any claimed outside source. Is there one? If so, prove it? I'm ready and waiting to see demonstration.

You are answering your own question.

Humans are the ones installing the input/output mechanisms for the computer to receive and transmit data/information.

Humans = intelligent designer(s).

If a computer requires intelligent design for it's functionalities, then it must follow that the mind which builds the computer also requires intelligent design.

If the brain is analogous with the computer, then to think that one (computer) requires intelligent design and not the other (brain) is to commit the taxi cab fallacy.
...

That said, back to my scenario..

If you have the brain, where are you gonna get the consciousness to emerge from within it?

If God is not the answer, then the onus is on you to explain how this stuff works...naturally.
....

But here, instead of wasting more time, let me help you out..

You CAN'T do it.

It cannot be done.

The reason you are having difficulty is because you realize that thoughts aren't material.

Thoughts aren't something that you can hold in your hands or get from a jar.

They are immaterial, so they require an external, independent, super source.
.....

If you think otherwise, then back to my original question.

You have the brain at your disposal.

Now, how can you get this brain to become conscious and self aware?

[TRANSPONDER]

Says you...

Harken back to the computer example. When I state 'emerge', I mean data comes from it. In the case for the computer, we know humans are the actual source of this emergence. With the brain, we see the same emergence, but have not been able to identify any claimed outside source. Is there one? If so, prove it? I'm ready and waiting to see demonstration.

You are answering your own question.

Humans are the ones installing the input/output mechanisms for the computer to receive and transmit data/information.

Humans = intelligent designer(s).

If a computer requires intelligent design for it's functionalities, then it must follow that the mind which builds the computer also requires intelligent design.

If the brain is analogous with the computer, then to think that one (computer) requires intelligent design and not the other (brain) is to commit the taxi cab fallacy.
...

That said, back to my scenario..

If you have the brain, where are you gonna get the consciousness to emerge from within it?

If God is not the answer, then the onus is on you to explain how this stuff works...naturally.
....

But here, instead of wasting more time, let me help you out..

You CAN'T do it.

It cannot be done.

The reason you are having difficulty is because you realize that thoughts aren't material.

Thoughts aren't something that you can hold in your hands or get from a jar.

They are immaterial, so they require an external, independent, super source.
.....

If you think otherwise, then back to my original question.

You have the brain at your disposal.

Now, how can you get this brain to become conscious and self aware?

This is a common human error of imperfect perception. The way things look to us are not always the way things are. Material is not solid. These things are made of atoms and atoms are made or near nothing as makes no difference. Reality is what matter does, not what it is. That is why Physicists sometimes call the reality of Physics 'God', because it is all (on all evidence) there is and is big and mysterious but is not (so far as anyone has been able to show) intelligent and forward - planning.

Everything makes more sense if it is finding its' own way to work and survive; chemical evolution, biological and social. Mind evolved from survival reaction, instinct, social co - operation, problem - solving and reasoning. It is an error to think that because we can evolve breeds to suit ourselves, a god made everything to suit itself. Because humans imitate mind with computers does not mean that a big invisible human had to make consciousness.

Now, don't trouble to tell us what you believe or do not. tell us why you think that a god made consciousness. The computer analogy is debunked by the evidence.

[POI]

If the brain is analogous with the computer, then to think that one (computer) requires intelligent design and not the other (brain) is to commit the taxi cab fallacy.

You have missed the point of my prior response. Allow me to elaborate.

When asked to demonstrate some type of outside origin for a computer's emergence of data/info, we can do that quite easily.

Alternatively...

When asked to demonstrate some type of outside origin for a brain's emergence of data/info; can you do that, because I cannot? I'm ready and waiting for you to do that.

If you have the brain, where are you gonna get the consciousness to emerge from within it?

As stated prior, we know brains exist, and we also know thoughts emerge from brains. You state the 'emergence' happens due to "external forces". I'm asking you to prove that assertion.

If God is not the answer, then the onus is on you to explain how this stuff works...naturally.

But here, instead of wasting more time, let me help you out..

You CAN'T do it.

How does your medicine taste right about now?

"The "god of the gaps" is a theological concept that suggests that gaps in scientific knowledge are evidence of God's existence and intervention. It's an old-fashioned approach that's still used by many people today. The hypothesis is that when people don't understand a phenomenon, they assume that a supernatural agent is responsible."

Thoughts aren't something that you can hold in your hands or get from a jar.

They are immaterial, so they require an external, independent, super source.

More assertions. If this is the case, then I will be waiting for the evidence to demonstrate thoughts are provided by your God.

[Clownboat]

What came first: the brain, or the consciousness?

Since consciousness cannot be detected without a brain, I would lean towards a brain being needed first.

So, what was the brain doing before consciousness evolved into it?

You asked me a question. I answered it and supplied reasoning. Rather than address my answer and my reasoning, you ask an additional question. It seems you are desperate to have gaps in knowledge. Is that so the gods have somewhere to be inserted, or do you not want to tackle the fact that consciousness cannot be detected without a functioning brain as that would then suggest that consciousness is an emergent property of a working brain?

Was the brain sitting there, just chilling...smoking a blunt and drinking a 40 oz, waiting for this hocus pocus consciousness to spring into it?

Why are you inserting the comment, "waiting for this hocus pocus consciousness to spring into it?"
Have you observed something that would require consciousness to be something outside of a functioning mind? If yes, please let us know. If not, can you justify your assertion that doesn't seem needed to explain consciousness?

So, now that you told me which one came first, now tell me...where did the consciousness come from.

Consciousness seems to be an emergent property of a functioning mind. Have you observed something that would go against what seems to be the most reasonable explanation?

Read Ezekiel 18, the entire chapter.

I was quoting from Exodus, not Ezekiel. That there are contradictions in the Bible is not the topic of this thread.

[SiNcE_1985]

You asked me a question. I answered it and supplied reasoning. Rather than address my answer and my reasoning, you ask an additional question.

Because one question begs another.

It is called a follow-up question.

You do understand what a follow-up question is, correct?

If the brain originated before consciousness, and everyone knows that this whole evolutionary process takes hundreds of millions of years for one teeny tiny change to occur...you are basically insinuating that the brain was sitting there for X amount of time before consciousness emerged.

I simply asked you what was the brain doing in all that time.

It is a legitimate question, one of which I'd like an answer to as I attempt to unpack this mess.

It seems you are desperate to have gaps in knowledge.

The gap has been filled with "Goddidit".

And the gap is so tightly filled that there is no leaks or air getting through it.

Is that so the gods have somewhere to be inserted, or do you not want to tackle the fact that consciousness cannot be detected without a functioning brain as that would then suggest that consciousness is an emergent property of a working brain?

Baseless assertion.

If you cannot explain and/or demonstrate how a chunk of matter can emerge mental states of self awareness, then you have a faith based atheistic (naturalistic) system.

"Consciousness is an emergent property of a working brain".

Easy to say.

Hard to prove.

Why are you inserting the comment, "waiting for this hocus pocus consciousness to spring into it?"

Um, you just said that the brain came first.

So obviously, it follows that it had to wait on the consciousness...doesn't it?

Have you observed something that would require consciousness to be something outside of a functioning mind?

Yes.

It is apparent that emotions like happiness, sadness, anger, etc..

Those emotions are not experienced by anything in my brain.

None of the electrons/neurons in my brain are happy or sad.

Neither is any single piece of any chunk of matter experiences these emotions.

Yet, I am happy/sad.

So, who is experiencing these emotions?

It is as if there is an immaterial "me" (self) that experiences these emotions.

And this "self" is completely independent of my physical self.
....

Now, what does this mean?

This means that your mind and brain (body) are not the same thing (law of identity).

Nor can your brain be the sole originator of your mental self...because let's say you had a human brain that you shaped/configured.

And you wanted the brain to feel the emotion of sadness.

Where would you get this emotion from?

First you'd have to get the brain conscious in the first place...to give it the ability to feel emotion.

And then you'd have to obtain the actual emotion.
.....

Now this is where you say "it doesn't work like that!!"

And you will proceed to give any typical atheistic (with a naturalistic twist) response as to why it doesn't work like that.

Yet, on your apparent view...you have a mindless, blind process that was able to get the brain into conveniently shaped skull, and also give it consciousness!!!

That is where I will in return say, "it doesn't work like that"!!

If yes, please let us know. If not, can you justify your assertion that doesn't seem needed to explain consciousness?

Just did.

I was quoting from Exodus, not Ezekiel. That there are contradictions in the Bible is not the topic of this thread.

Um, the point is, context is important and anything can appear to be a contradiction if all you want to do is take a certain part that you thinks serves you best and run with it without reading the context behind it.

[SiNcE_1985]

You have missed the point of my prior response. Allow me to elaborate.

I will see how many more times I will erroneously get accused of missing your point.

When asked to demonstrate some type of outside origin for a computer's emergence of data/info, we can do that quite easily.

Alternatively...

When asked to demonstrate some type of outside origin for a brain's emergence of data/info; can you do that, because I cannot? I'm ready and waiting for you to do that.

First off, it isn't as if I can grab God by the collar to your doorstep and say "here he is"...as you can conceivably do with computer designers.

All I can do is provide valid/sound reasoning as to why...

1. Mind/body dualism is true.

2. Intelligent design is necessary for human consciousness.

And although you disagree, I've accomplished just that, on both ends.

As stated prior, we know brains exist, and we also know thoughts emerge from brains.

Well again, I reject your unproven assertion that thoughts emerge from the brain.

Now sure, thoughts correlate with the brain, but that is about as far as you can go with that one.

You state the 'emergence' happens due to "external forces". I'm asking you to prove that assertion.

Check my response to clownboat.

I'm not big on repeating much of the same stuff to multiple people.

How does your medicine taste right about now?

"The "god of the gaps" is a theological concept that suggests that gaps in scientific knowledge are evidence of God's existence and intervention. It's an old-fashioned approach that's still used by many people today. The hypothesis is that when people don't understand a phenomenon, they assume that a supernatural agent is responsible."

The god of the gaps thing is an arkiac accusation used by atheists to believers...believers of whom exhibited blind faith as they were unable to offer sound/valid reasoning for their beliefs.

Nowadays, not so much.

More assertions. If this is the case, then I will be waiting for the evidence to demonstrate thoughts are provided by your God.

More assertions?

"Thoughts are emergent from the brain".