Case for Consciousness

[RisingOctopus]

How did you come to the conclusion that answers are within?

[MotionFur]

When it is said that "the answers are within," it's in reference to the basic questions that precede externals. The question of the validity of empiricism for example can not be answered empirically, as assuming the validity of empiricism to prove empiricism is circular. The question of existence and what it means is something that can only be solved threw introspection and logical thinking.

[RisingOctopus]

Yes. I know. You haven't told me anything new. You just clarified the wording of my question without providing an answer. My question is how did you come to the conclusion that questions of existence and what it means can only be solved through introspection and logical thinking?

[MotionFur]

It must out of necessity, because it precedes all any external exploration.

[TrueEmergence]

Absolutely fantastic video. I love this and I'm going to be showing it to friends.

[FlowCell]

/watch?v=tFUDEmMjC-c

Extreme Tree Huggers.

[MotionFur]

I really can't get more then 30 seconds [5 seconds of the screaming] before I HAVE to turn that video off.

[FlowCell]

I understand, but it is very interesting just how many different ways religion can manifest itself. These people seem to believe that cutting down trees is murder.

[EvoinOZ]

Great vlog, mate. It is always a pleasure to stumble upon clear thinkers.

[TheNakedAtheist]

People being rocks is why I argue for strict gun control. Do you REALLY want rock's, cat's, dog's or monkey's to be armed?

[TheNakedAtheist]

continued....

In fact I'd feel safer to see a gun in the hands of a trained chimp than half the people I know.

[MotionFur]

I'm not going to argue gun control, with you here. but I think we can see by the observable evidence that the people who you DON'T WANT to have guns are not really effected by gun control, but it does take guns away from the people who are okay to have guns, and people who actually use them to defend themselves. You may have an aversion to guns, but I think you're letting that get in the way. If you want to talk about it go to the video on it. I'm pretty sure you only watched the first one.

[TheNakedAtheist]

I have no aversion to guns. I'm an army veteran who has owned guns. I have an aversion to a system where it is far easier to legally own a gun than it is to drive a car.

In many states you can be blind/deaf, or have the mental maturity of a 6 years old, and buy one.

[MotionFur]

Illegal firearms are easier to get then legal ones in many states already. These people, the mentally unstable and untrustworthy, will always have access to guns. Now, should we prevent honest law-abiding citizens from owning guns? How will that unbalance of power help our existence? If you want to respond, do it on my gun control videos.

[TheNakedAtheist]

Last response since if I respond on your gun control vid the comment won't be in context.

"Illegal firearms are easier to get then legal ones in many states already."

You can drive without a license as well, but legally allowing more incompetent drivers, or more incompetent gun owners because they could illegally drive, or own guns anyway is ridiculous.

[SuperAtheistBrothers]

Very interesting... I defiantly do agree that a great majority of people are walking talking rocks, but my question is: does this make them less valuable? Does intelligence dictate value? If so how much intelligence is required before it is immoral to kill something?

[MotionFur]

Well, these are questions you need to answer yourself.

And by intelligence do you mean consciousness? I do not take these to be the same thing, many, if not most, intelligent people are just as unconscious as ignorant people.

But if you want me to answer, there are more then single factors that dictate what we decide to do. How I treat an object would largely rest on the potentiality for consciousness, not the actual presence of it.

[SuperAtheistBrothers]

Yea I suppose consciousness is a better attribute than intelligence. Interesting answer.

[mickdornfad]

Great video MotionFur

Always thought-provoking as usual?

Some people have been deluded to what I call the point of no return (that your belief is unfalsifiable)

William Lane Craig was asked that if all of his arguments for god were debunked would he still believe in god and he said yes

I am convinced that even if scientist find a "theory of everything" theist would just claim that god created the theory of everything and that he is outside of "insert new phenomenon here", time and space.

[RyuDarragh]

I agree on the fact that people can diffuse their conciousness and run on "autopilot", but not on connecting "alive" with this. Life is chemical process that does not need conciousness. Mind and conciousness are emergent properties of mind processing equipment. However, many people do become mindless herd animals.

[MotionFur]

What demarcates the chemical processes of our bodies from the chemical processes of things that are not alive? At what point between the first self-replicating molecules and today do we call it life? Or is it the self replication that is life?

[RyuDarragh]

It's the self replication. Nano machines that can self replicate would be alive, for instance. Of course, organic life as we know it *IS* self replicating carbon based nanomachine life.

[blackacidlizzard]

Fucking-A

And in the related videos.....

the horror, the horror.....