In recent weeks, UD has been looking at the logic of being of minded intelligence, especially, embodied intelligence. One of the pivotal insights is outlined by Victor Reppert — pardon a bit of review: . . . let us suppose that brain state A [–> notice, state of a wetware, electrochemically operated computational substrate], which […]
The problem is that people can come to think of approved stagnation as a duty and stagnating as a virtue. If a genius comes along, with new ideas, they have lost the habit of listening with expectation.
Clearly, we have come a long way in thinking up new ways to explore the origin of life problem.
Wait till you catch one of the fashionable witches also fronting the idea that we should all trust science. You can at least enjoy a sense of the ridiculous.
As John Gray suggests. It’s important to know whether there is a “ghost in the human machine” vs. “crossed wires we cannot entangle” because the ghost may be acting badly. But evolution can’t go “badly wrong.” Ain’t no such animal.
To find peace, he had to think carefully about the difference between the evolutionary materialist account of the human being and what he was actually experiencing.
“Scientists who do understand and embrace the truth about the beginning of human life are generally too cowardly to press the issue. It’s an enormous scandal.”
For example, “The presence of a band of highly trained, academically qualified scholars with a good track record for publishing in top journals or with highly regarded book publishers, and who are unified in rejecting the view held by even a vast majority of the relevant experts. “
Grinspoon argues that life helping shape Earth means that most planets will either be lush or dead. Maybe. David, find us one that isn’t dead and we promise to get back to you soon.
The researchers who cold not replicate that “conservatives’ brains are more attuned to threats” were dismissed by the AAAS journal Science with no reasonable explanation.
For all we know, this type of hybridization could be common. If it’s a bottom dweller, who was looking? Maybe hybridization plays a bigger role in evolution than we supposed. And then schoolbook Darwinism plays a smaller one.
Robert J. Marks, author with design theorist William Dembski and Winston Ewert of Introduction to Evolutionary Informatics talks with Gary Smith, author The AI Delusion, about how, in general, based data is produced Smith: Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy # 1 is that I’m going to prove what a great shot I am and so I stand […]
If the mind is an illusion, how can it act directly on external things, by the force of decision-making alone?
The folks at Nature will be back to us when they come up with a no-design story.
Case in point, David Bohm. In reality, just about everything except non-materialism is forgiven, despite the history.