5 ms·
Have you considered that our very consciousness is supernatural?
by jdthedisciple 8mo ago
Have you considered that our very consciousness is supernatural?
- qsera 8mo agoAh, a man (or women) after my own heart in HN.
- Tepix 8mo agoDo you limit it to human‘s consciousness?
- Dansvidania 8mo agoI don’t necessarily disagree but how do you get to the conclusion?
- _flux 8mo agoHm, how does one not get into that conclusion? Most everyone would agree we have the concept of "selfness", yet I don't think there's a scientific theory to explain how a set of physiochemical processes can have that endresult to an observer, any more than a computer has the idea of "me".
- Dansvidania 8mo agoI just don't think that unexplained == supernatural, so the conclusion does not seem obvious to me
- oytis 8mo agoIt's not something we can pinpoint in any experiment, even not clear how to design one in theory. Yet we know by our very personal experience that it exists. Sounds pretty supernatural to me.
- cwillu 8mo agoConsidered at length, and ultimately rejected due to lack of evidence.
- snayan 8mo agoThere's a lot of beauty in embracing not-knowing.
- tonyedgecombe 8mo agoIgnorance is bliss.
- card_zero 8mo agoI dunno about that.
- qsera 8mo agoabsence of evidence is not evidence of absence
- cwillu 8mo agoWrong. It's not strong evidence of absence, but it absolutely is evidence.
- qsera 8mo agoWrong. If there is no evidence, then there is no proof either way. Imagine looking at a point in the night sky and say you want to check if there is a start at that point. You look at the most powerful telescope that we have, and yet you see no star. Is that a non-strong evidence, as you put it, that there is no star at that point? I think not. There is no evidence one way or other. That is it. But the scientific community of today is like "We have looked with the most powerful telescopes that we have, and yet there is no star, so it seems that there is really no star there". This is ABSURD. Because "most powerful telescope we have today" is an arbitrary claim. There is always the chance that the "Most powerful" is just not good enough for the task at hand. But the "scientists" (as well as the business that wants this proof badly to sell their products) don't like to admit it.
- pjerem 8mo agoI do believe (believe, not know) that consciousness is something bigger than we know, I can even believe in panpsychism sometimes but I don't think any religion have any real clue about the nature of consciousness.
- Scarblac 8mo agoWhy then does it change if we take drugs?
- krisoft 8mo agoWhat does “supernatural” in the context of your comment means to you?
- mock-possum 8mo agoHow could it be?