The REAL question: Consciousness

Anonymous
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
The REAL question: Consciousness

And does the Law of Conservation apply to this most unique and important of forces???

If it too can neither be created nor destroyed, then surely in the current cosmic schematic there could have been an 'initial cause'.....(read: intent)

This of course does not support or discount a separate and omnipresent/potent 'God'.

Thoughts?


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Re: The REAL question: Consciousness

AddisAbaba wrote:
And does the Law of Conservation apply to this most unique and important of forces???

That matter-energy is conserved certainly does NOT imply that consciousness is, even if conciousness does boil down to purely material things and interactions.

Quote:
If it too can neither be created nor destroyed, then surely in the current cosmic schematic there could have been an 'initial cause'.....(read: intent)

Why, exactly? Rather, I think the opposite is the case, if matter-energy is conserved and cannot be created or destroyed, then no creation event, initial cause or intent is required - in fact, such a thing is excluded. Existence simply becomes axiomatic, matter-energy simply is.

Quote:
This of course does not support or discount a separate and omnipresent/potent 'God'.

I think it makes such an entity unnecessary at the very least.

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


OpiateCopulation
OpiateCopulation's picture
Posts: 36
Joined: 2006-06-27
User is offlineOffline
Re: The REAL question: Consciousness

AddisAbaba wrote:
And does the Law of Conservation apply to this most unique and important of forces???

If it too can neither be created nor destroyed, then surely in the current cosmic schematic there could have been an 'initial cause'.....(read: intent)

This of course does not support or discount a separate and omnipresent/potent 'God'.

Thoughts?

The problem with your questions is that you believe consciousness to be something outside the realm of matter, when it is nothing more than matter. Does a program on your computer follow the laws of conservation? Of course it does because it is nothing more than physical processes of the hardware.

Consciousness isn't some magical essence or property that holds its own flag when it comes to matter or energy. When you die your brain will decay and so will the 'you' that you experience. If anything the laws of conservation of matter/energy refute any idea of a 'God' for the idea itself quantifies the laws of conservation into a subset that is unnecessary and also doesn?t work with what we have observed.

Evidence in our universe won?t be able to conclusively point to a god until such evidence can explain how it exists and fits in our world mathematically. It?s sad but I?ve never seen a creationist do anything of the sort.

'We are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further.' - Richard Dawkins
MySpace