- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 3/9/24 at 8:34 am to 0x15E
Posted on 3/9/24 at 9:15 am to 0x15E
FALL 2022
The Restoration of the Human
What is the person? Who is the human?
These are not abstract refrains for the philosopher.
Read Comment Magazine
The Restoration of the Human
What is the person? Who is the human?
These are not abstract refrains for the philosopher.
Read Comment Magazine
Posted on 3/9/24 at 9:25 am to JperiodCperiod
OP:
Posted on 3/9/24 at 9:47 am to 0x15E
LINK
This book is interesting, and probably relevant to your question. Anyone curious can get alot of this on his appearances on a few podcasts. The more I look into this stuff, it seems like the idea that consciousness ends when we physically die is going to go the way of flat-earth and the universe revolving around our planet.
This book is interesting, and probably relevant to your question. Anyone curious can get alot of this on his appearances on a few podcasts. The more I look into this stuff, it seems like the idea that consciousness ends when we physically die is going to go the way of flat-earth and the universe revolving around our planet.
This post was edited on 3/9/24 at 9:48 am
Posted on 3/9/24 at 9:47 am to 0x15E
quote:
What makes a human?l
There’s a whole -ism called humanism you can explore.
I’m more into the posthuman nowadays.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 10:22 am to 0x15E
Well “human” is the layman’s term for “Homo sapien”. All known life forms on the planet are categorized in a taxonomic classification system. Sorting in this system as per Wikipedia use the following:
quote:
There are some general practices used, however,[2][3] including the idea that a newly defined genus should fulfill these three criteria to be descriptively useful: monophyly – all descendants of an ancestral taxon are grouped together (i.e. phylogenetic analysis should clearly demonstrate both monophyly and validity as a separate lineage). reasonable compactness – a genus should not be expanded needlessly. distinctness – with respect to evolutionarily relevant criteria, i.e. ecology, morphology, or biogeography; DNA sequences are a consequence rather than a condition of diverging evolutionary lineages except in cases where they directly inhibit gene flow (e.g. postzygotic barriers).
Posted on 3/9/24 at 10:26 am to 0x15E
quote:
(What makes a human?)...
...nothing more than a bag of bones consisting of muscle, fat, a few organs, miles of neuro-electrical and vascular circuitry and one squishy organ that’s driving it all.
Clinically, yes, you described a "human" were we lying on a physician's examination table.
Given all these bits and pieces, we are physical, functioning human beings living in this physical dimension / realm. (as to our specific physical appearance, Genesis 1:27 states that God made man “in his own image”). A human's mental/emotional attributes as opposed to all other creatures: Rationality, creativity -- capacity to love, hate, etc; acknowledge / deny / know / worship Creator.
But who are "we" really? (get the bongs out )
"We" are a Spirit that is disconnected from the Physical (aka, The Brain).
"We" and our spirit and mind are separate from the Brain (which means "We" and who we really are dwell OUTSIDE of this physical realm)...
Does this necessarily mean.... "we" continue on *after death*. YES. (But to where exactly? That may or may not be the subject of another thread.)
quote:
How crazy to think that we are where we are in the evolution of mankind all because of the one brain of everyone who has come before us.
PLOT TWIST:
Mankind has steadily DE-volved. BADLY. The most superior of mankind was created at The Beginning when his DNA was perfect. Evolution = Myth
NOTE: The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics describes basic principles familiar in everyday life. It is partially a universal law of decay; the ultimate cause of why everything ultimately falls apart and disintegrates over time.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 10:29 am to 0x15E
quote:
What makes a human?l
nature and nurture. we are all wired differently. Everyone's brain differs from everyone else's from the moment of birth, and these differences grow as the final shaping of our bodies and brains is done outside the womb and incorporates our individual experiences in the world.
quote:
I ask this follow up question…do we really have as much control as we think we do?
no. you can make choices, but the decision and your judgement are based on past experiences and how you are wired.
people misunderstand the "free will" argument. which choice you make is determined by a lot of calculations that are done behind the scenes.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 10:30 am to Liberator
quote:
Mankind has steadily DE-volved. BADLY. The most superior of mankind was created at The Beginning when his DNA was perfect. Evolution = Myth
there's no such thing as devolving. evolution's purpose isn't to get better, it is to survive.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 10:31 am to bayoubengals88
Nice link. Looks provocative.
Gonna check it out.
Gonna check it out.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 10:33 am to Corinthians420
quote:
there's no such thing as devolving.
evolution's purpose isn't to get better, it is to survive.
According to whom?
All DNA is a copy of a copy of a copy since Day One. It is constantly devolving and degrading -- that's a proven scientific fact.
Current human conditions and accomplishments are devolving.
If by "evolution" you mean "adaptation" that's arguably a case.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 10:34 am to Liberator
quote:
All DNA is a copy of a copy of a copy since Day One. It is constantly devolving and degrading -- that's a proven scientific fact.
Current human conditions and accomplishments are devolving.
If by "evolution" you mean "adaptation" that's arguably a case.
ok that clarification works for me
Posted on 3/9/24 at 10:41 am to Liberator
Mutating is a more accurate term than devolving.
Eta and “degrading” is a pretty careless term to use in general. Within the human body, I think “degrading” could be applied as a person ages.
Eta and “degrading” is a pretty careless term to use in general. Within the human body, I think “degrading” could be applied as a person ages.
This post was edited on 3/9/24 at 10:43 am
Posted on 3/9/24 at 10:43 am to 0x15E
quote:
What makes a human?l
Opposable thumbs, empathy, and free will.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 10:47 am to Liberator
Comment, The Hedgehog Review, Plough, and The New Atlantis will keep you busy! Enjoy
Posted on 3/9/24 at 10:52 am to 0x15E
Human means we are both body and soul.
Also, only the human person has the ability to love and be loved.
The gift of reason has been given to humans alone.
Also, only the human person has the ability to love and be loved.
The gift of reason has been given to humans alone.
This post was edited on 3/9/24 at 11:01 am
Posted on 3/9/24 at 11:00 am to 0x15E
quote:So you’re a reductionist materialist. Congrats, there’s no point to life and being is not better than non being.
0x15E
Thankfully, you’re wrong.
All these folks are wrong too.
Some of the biologists thought the materialist view of the world should be taught and explained to the wider public in its true, high-octane, Crickian form. Then common, nonintellectual people might see that a purely random universe without purpose or free will or spiritual life of any kind isn’t as bad as some superstitious people—religious people—have led them to believe.
Daniel Dennett took a different view. While it is true that materialism tells us a human being is nothing more than a “moist robot”—a phrase Dennett took from a Dilbert comic—we run a risk when we let this cat, or robot, out of the bag. If we repeatedly tell folks that their sense of free will or belief in objective morality is essentially an illusion, such knowledge has the potential to undermine civilization itself, Dennett believes. Civil order requires the general acceptance of personal responsibility, which is closely linked to the notion of free will. Better, said Dennett, if the public were told that “for general purposes” the self and free will and objective morality do indeed exist—that colors and sounds exist, too—“just not in the way they think.” They “exist in a special way,” which is to say, ultimately, not at all.
I’m with Nagel, who dares to be different.
The Heretic. Washington Examiner.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 11:08 am to 0x15E
quote:
The two ways of thinking can coexist
Not here my man, not here
Posted on 3/9/24 at 11:11 am to bayoubengals88
quote:
I’m with Nagel,
quote:
The neo-Darwinian materialist account offers a picture of the world that is unrecognizable to us—a world without color or sound, and also a world without free will or consciousness or good and evil or selves or, when it comes to that, selflessness. “It flies in the face of common sense,”
I wonder how he came to the conclusion that evolution is discredited by selflessness. Evolution is about procreation of a species, not just the individual. If selflessness in the members of a species means more of them survive and their genes are passed down, then selflessness as a trait can be selected for.
there are many animals that die when giving birth, how is that not selfless?
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News