Human's Are No Where Near That Simple - an Astronomy Net God & Science Forum Message

God & Science Forum Message
Forums:	Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem


Home \| Discussion Forums \| God and Science \| Post	Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora

Human's Are No Where Near That Simple

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Mike Banks on July 6, 2001 01:48:27 UTC

If you reduce human consciousness to "if-then" statements, they will not be as simple as you explained. You explained instincts or reactions, far different from consciousness.

For example, some people like the feeling of pain. Someone might shove their hand on a hot iron because they feel like it, or as a dare. Conscious thought over-rules basic instincts or "if-then" statements.

Follow Ups:

I oversimplified, but the premise is the same - stormcrow - July 6, 2001 - 02:08 UTC
- Not exaclty. - motumos - July 6, 2001 - 04:03 UTC
  - I agree with you on the level of complexity - stormcrow - July 6, 2001 - 04:17 UTC
    - Not crossed wires - highvoltage - July 6, 2001 - 05:39 UTC
    - I disagree about you saying that pople have no free-will. - motumos - July 6, 2001 - 05:50 UTC
      - Actually atomic bomb was against Stalin's growing power. - alexander - July 6, 2001 - 16:58 UTC
        
        It was a choice nontheless - caprinicus - July 7, 2001 - 00:23 UTC
        
        Even you typing this reply was a choice, not a necessity. - caprinicus - July 7, 2001 - 00:34 UTC
        
        Not neccesarily - stormcrow - July 7, 2001 - 02:34 UTC
        
        I don't think so - highvoltage - July 7, 2001 - 03:32 UTC
        
        Free will works regardless of normal DNA in humans. - caprinicus - July 7, 2001 - 03:52 UTC
        
        I'll try and explain - stormcrow - July 7, 2001 - 13:55 UTC
        
        Wrong again. - caprinicus - July 8, 2001 - 13:08 UTC
        
        Omni-Post - stormcrow - July 9, 2001 - 00:17 UTC
        
        God-days may be true - highvoltage - July 9, 2001 - 05:22 UTC
        
        Sure, back it up - stormcrow - July 9, 2001 - 13:40 UTC
        
        God days.... - highvoltage - July 9, 2001 - 17:07 UTC
        
        I see your point, but doesn't this prove the Bible's ambiguity? - stormcrow - July 9, 2001 - 19:31 UTC
        
        Doens't prove the bible's ambiguity - highvoltage - July 9, 2001 - 20:16 UTC
        
        Bible is full of impossible phenomena. - alexander - July 9, 2001 - 20:43 UTC
        
        again proof - terry - November 15, 2001 - 12:36 UTC
        
        Caprinicus - you don't know how brain, universe, etc works. - alexander - July 9, 2001 - 18:43 UTC

Additional Information

About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy

Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins