|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,810
|
Re: I believe sentience evolved. [Re: laughingdog]
#23845638 - 11/18/16 03:36 PM (7 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DNA translation is the purpose of life because it's how DNA replicates.
Lol, so wrong 
Lemme hold this up for you.
Quote:
"Conscience is not integral to consciousness."
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: I believe sentience evolved. [Re: sudly]
#23845780 - 11/18/16 04:19 PM (7 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
sudly said:
Lemme hold this up for you. "Conscience consciousness."
Lemme hold this up for you. the 3rd C is for compensation in it's usual accepted meaning
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compensation_%28psychology%29
"In psychology, compensation is a strategy whereby one covers up, consciously or unconsciously, weaknesses, frustrations, desires, or feelings of inadequacy or incompetence in one life area through the gratification or (drive towards) excellence in another area. Compensation can cover up either real or imagined deficiencies and personal or physical inferiority. Positive compensations may help one to overcome one's difficulties. On the other hand, negative compensations do not, which results in a reinforced feeling of inferiority. There are two kinds of negative compensation:
Overcompensation,... Undercompensation..." etc. etc. ....
suppose we all tell you your ideas are wonderful? what then?
it just so happens that, that is not the case. yet you continue to attempt to try to prove to strangers on the internet your profundity in regards to one peculiar hobby horse it sure seems like a case of compensation.
but I won't continue to try to prove it
supposedly Einstein is the one who said "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
just perhaps it is applicable in this case, if your hobby horse isn't providing you with all the happiness, you feel it should ... who knows?
many of us on this board have or have had psychological problems, so losing face wouldn't seem to be an issue most of us care about.
but it would seem it's your happiness that matters most ... who knows?
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,810
|
Re: I believe sentience evolved. [Re: laughingdog]
#23845873 - 11/18/16 04:49 PM (7 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Why does a lecturer talk to his students? To hope they understand it or learn something.
I sometimes enjoy the feedback these forums provide because I'm still developing and writing a thesis on the topic of an evolved sentience.
I'm not looking for approval I'm looking to develop ideas.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
BrotherManBill
Time Traveler


Registered: 03/04/15
Posts: 347
Loc: Here
Last seen: 5 years, 1 month
|
Re: I believe sentience evolved. [Re: viktor]
#23845939 - 11/18/16 05:09 PM (7 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
viktor said: its*
Might have to learn some primary school grammar if your triune brain thesis is going to shock the world as much as you think it will.
It's, not its, was the proper way to say that. Maybe you should learn some grammar, he was shortening it is, hence the apostrophe.
Anyways, I agree op, sentience definitely evolved. But from what and how? I believe evolution is a somewhat conscious change. I'm not a big into the idea that evolution occurs from random mutations that just somehow work out perfectly for the plant/animal. That's just far too unfathomable to actually take serious.
It seems to me that all living organisms have sentience, even protozoa are said to have animal-like behavior. Which to me is a good indication that evolution has been somewhat of a conscious phenomenon, things adapt to new environments, and situations then the mutations and changes occur as generations go on until they reach a culmination.
That's just my view anyways.
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,810
|
|
Quote:
Anyways, I agree op, sentience definitely evolved. But from what and how?
I consider everything alive and capable of DNA replication as experiencing consciousness. This means that sentience must have arose from consciousness to conscience through the development of distinguishable perceptions, aka. a sense of morality.
As for the development of a sense of morality I think it develops when an organisms develops the ability to override their fight or flight response.
Human beings are sentient and we have a proportionally large and recently evolved neocortex that enables us to override our anxieties, fears and the fight or flight response with rationality and logic.
Quote:
Neocortex: a part of the cerebral cortex concerned with sight and hearing in mammals, regarded as the most recently evolved part of the cortex.
  (Reptilian complex is basal ganglia)
30,000 years ago our hominid ancestors had access to opium, marijuana and magic mushrooms as has been depicted in cave paintings around the world in places like Southern France. If during these times societies had free access to entheogens and were widely using them then it is rational to assume they were using magic mushrooms which have anxiolytic properties. Anxiolytic properties result in a temporary inhibition of the fight or flight response. With regular use of magic mushrooms this means individuals within a population could accumulate psychedelic experiences to learn how to use focus to override their fight or flight response and develop a sense of rationality and morality.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
Edited by sudly (11/18/16 05:37 PM)
|
viktor
psychotechnician



Registered: 11/03/10
Posts: 4,293
Loc: New Zealand
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
|
|
Quote:
BrotherManBill said:
Quote:
viktor said: its*
Might have to learn some primary school grammar if your triune brain thesis is going to shock the world as much as you think it will.
It's, not its, was the proper way to say that. Maybe you should learn some grammar, he was shortening it is, hence the apostrophe.
Quote:
sudly said:once a salmon fish reaches the end of it's life cycle it will return as nutrients
Quote:
sudly said:the end of it's life cycle
Is this forum literally getting dumber? I mean some of the posters that have turned up recently seem like they flunked out of primary school.
Maybe what PS&P needs is some kind of beginner's subforum, where new posters go and if they fail to demonstrate basic reasoning skills or grammar knowledge (like sudly and BrotherManBill) they are not invited to the grown ups' one.
-------------------- "They consider me insane but I know that I am a hero living under the eyes of the gods."
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: I believe sentience evolved. [Re: viktor]
#23846291 - 11/18/16 06:57 PM (7 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
viktor said:
Quote:
BrotherManBill said:
Quote:
viktor said: its*
Might have to learn some primary school grammar......Is this forum literally getting dumber? I mean some of the posters that have turned up recently seem like they flunked out of primary school. ....
Wow -- viktor you and LE sure are strict grammar police! especially if you all dislike what is being said.
Edited by laughingdog (11/18/16 07:09 PM)
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,810
|
Re: I believe sentience evolved. [Re: viktor]
#23846876 - 11/18/16 09:51 PM (7 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I changed the word to its*
Thank you for your one and only contribution.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
viktor
psychotechnician



Registered: 11/03/10
Posts: 4,293
Loc: New Zealand
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
|
Re: I believe sentience evolved. [Re: sudly]
#23847160 - 11/18/16 11:09 PM (7 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
This thread was dead upon birth at least I gave it some fire.
-------------------- "They consider me insane but I know that I am a hero living under the eyes of the gods."
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,810
|
Re: I believe sentience evolved. [Re: sudly] 1
#23847192 - 11/18/16 11:24 PM (7 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I would like to thank the useful feedback I've received from BrotherManBill, DividedQuantum, mantis83, deff, redgreenvines, laughingdog and OrgoneConclusion with your moral support.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
|
Re: I believe sentience evolved. [Re: sudly]
#23847685 - 11/19/16 08:10 AM (7 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
it's been a slice
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
phio


Registered: 10/07/16
Posts: 369
|
Re: I believe sentience evolved. [Re: sudly]
#23850045 - 11/19/16 10:20 PM (7 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
The process of evolution reflects a sentient and purposeful process beyond mankind's present understanding.
So, you're effectively stating : I believe something that is sentient beyond and above this present domain of sentience created it under a process beyond my grasp and that process is playing out over time.
Stop fighting these realizations. It hurts and limits no one other than yourself.
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,810
|
Re: I believe sentience evolved. [Re: phio]
#23850073 - 11/19/16 10:32 PM (7 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
DNA translation is the only purpose of life.
I believe conscience is not integral to consciousness, that consciousness is being aware of external surroundings and having a conscience means being aware of your individual sense of morality.
I am not limited by my beliefs.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: I believe sentience evolved. [Re: sudly] 1
#23850083 - 11/19/16 10:41 PM (7 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
There is more to life than pounding female genitalia.
There is also... um... bowling?
--------------------
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,810
|
|
I find happiness in values, passions and hobbies too.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
phio


Registered: 10/07/16
Posts: 369
|
Re: I believe sentience evolved. [Re: sudly]
#23850299 - 11/20/16 01:08 AM (7 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
In essence, ponderings..
Quote:
sudly said: DNA translation is the only purpose of life.
I believe conscience is not integral to consciousness, that consciousness is being aware of external surroundings and having a conscience means being aware of your individual sense of morality.
I am not limited by my beliefs.
If you disagreed with my rewording of your belief, I'm assuming you would have stated it. Instead you cut over to comfortable and grounded biology (DNA translation) and base philosophy(conscience vs consciousness).
You're seemingly avoiding a certain depth on this topic
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,810
|
Re: I believe sentience evolved. [Re: phio]
#23850322 - 11/20/16 01:33 AM (7 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The process of evolution reflects a sentient and purposeful process beyond mankind's present understanding.
So, you're effectively stating : I believe something that is sentient beyond and above this present domain of sentience created it under a process beyond my grasp and that process is playing out over time.
The process of evolution is not sentient. Evolution is guided by things like natural selection and survival of the fittest which are natural phenomena.
I don't think evolution is sentient but I do believe evolution resulted in human beings and service animals which display sentience in the form of a sense of morality and internal perception.
You have done nothing but continue to be vagrant in your interpretation of my words.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
phio


Registered: 10/07/16
Posts: 369
|
Re: I believe sentience evolved. [Re: sudly] 1
#23850379 - 11/20/16 02:49 AM (7 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
sudly said:
Quote:
The process of evolution reflects a sentient and purposeful process beyond mankind's present understanding.
So, you're effectively stating : I believe something that is sentient beyond and above this present domain of sentience created it under a process beyond my grasp and that process is playing out over time.
The process of evolution is not sentient. Evolution is guided by things like natural selection and survival of the fittest which are natural phenomena.
I don't think evolution is sentient but I do believe evolution resulted in human beings and service animals which display sentience in the form of a sense of morality and internal perception.
You have done nothing but continue to be vagrant in your interpretation of my words.
You don't think? and how much research and consideration have you given to it? Because I can point out some of the most significant contributors to scientist who thought much deeper than that which is why they made these fundamental discoveries and found order where there previously was none known. They first believed it to be there and went in search of it.
Charles Darwin himself (the father of evolution) reflects this truth : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Charles_Darwin
With the aim of becoming a clergyman he went to the University of Cambridge for the required BA degree, which included studies of Anglican theology. He took great interest in natural history and became filled with zeal for science as defined by John Herschel, based on the natural theology of William Paley which presented the argument from divine design in nature to explain adaptation as God acting through laws of nature.
Charles Robert Darwin established that all species of life have descended over time from common ancestors.
See the theological belief driving and steering one's quest for answers and confirmation? See how he went in search of a unifying and common cause/trace behind the diversity of species?
So, you're saying a processes that has lasted the test of time which pervades hundreds of thousands of years of natural history and governs all aspects of biological life across all species just spontaneously came about due to : > natural selection > survival of the fittest which are natural phenomena.
What's doing the selection? What's determining the fittest solution? Why select? why fit? Why survive? There's nothing natural and non-sentient about that as it recurses right back into the properties of sentience. You can't escape it but you sure can weave a confusing box of convoluted nonsense to avoid what stares you in the face.
Order, structure, selection, fitting, persistence .. but hey, the root of all of it is just random man... Yeah that sentience is like 'natural' man ... from nature... its formed via a very intricate clearly purposeful and deep process but the process itself.. yeah, that's just random man... it's like nature just being random man. what created nature is just random man and why laws even govern the universe is just random man... Imagine how science would have progressed with this kind of thinking.
Nothing is just 'random man'. The basis of science centers on the belief that nothing is 'random' which is why they search for the causes of things and discover it. You don't go from causes to causes to causes and hit nothing .. a blank.. there aren't causes upon causes upon causes that center on nothing .. zilch.
Such a belief goes against all of science and is foolishness You couldn't name a single thing in the universe that is : cause -> cause -> cause -> complexity -> complexity -> zilch
Science isn't based on 'zilch'. You don't go in search of zilch. If a scientist goes in search of a deeper cause for evolution they're necessarily subscribing to a non-existing belief. Darwin himself shaped his pursuit from Anglican theology and a Teleological_argument formed by : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Paley Maybe you should give it a read: http://archive.org/stream/naturaltheologyo1802pale#page/n5/mode/2up
So, you can squirm all you want and claim vagrancy. The facts and truth is : The very process you seem to fawn over (Evolution) is rooted in Anglican Theology and Darwin's claim to evolution is prior art and anything but athiest. God is written all over as its what Darwin hoped to find and label as the 'unifying process and -root- of species' ..
 Published 7 years before Darwin was even born.
Reworded, proofed, and limited in scope for those who can't handle deep leaps in understanding :

What I find to be vagrant are outlandish misattributions of the spirit of Scientific pursuits.
"there is nothing in the desert and no man needs nothing"
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,810
|
Re: I believe sentience evolved. [Re: phio]
#23850413 - 11/20/16 03:34 AM (7 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Darwin's personal motivation does not change the fact of evolution.
I'm saying the diversity of species on Earth is due to natural selection, survival of the fittest and biological evolution.
The animals that survive to reproduce are 'selected' by nature because they are the organisms that live to be able to reproduce and raise offspring to propagate their genes.
Evolution is the accumulation of minute physiological changes over thousands of generations.
Quote:
Sentience is the capacity to feel, perceive, or experience subjectively.
The process of evolution is not a sentient being, it is a natural and biological process.
If an adaptation or mutation helps an organism to survive in its environment and reproduce then that animal is considered fit in evolutionary terms.
Genetic mutations are random.
You clearly have little to no understanding of what science is or what it entails. Science is based on the scientific method.
Quote:
Scientific method: a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses
Religions have been a part of human history for centuries and we've accumulated over 2500 different gods and deities. Tradition does not equate to inherent truth.
When Darwin released his theory on the origin of species he was met with most criticism from his church who believed God was the only thing that influenced the diversity of species.
Paley had a theological stance on species diversity whereas Darwin seeked a further explanation in what he would soon call evolution.
Quote:
Charles Darwin had a non-conformist Unitarian background, but attended a Church of England school. With the aim of becoming a clergyman he went to the University of Cambridge for the required BA degree, which included studies of Anglican theology. He took great interest in natural history and became filled with zeal for science as defined by John Herschel, based on the natural theology of William Paley which presented the argument from divine design in nature to explain adaptation as God acting through laws of nature. On the voyage of the Beagle he remained orthodox and looked for "centres of creation" to explain distribution, but towards the end of the voyage began to doubt that species were fixed. By this time he was critical of the Bible as history, and wondered why all religions should not be equally valid. Following his return in October 1836, he developed his novel ideas of geology while speculating about transmutation of species and thinking about religion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Charles_Darwin
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
|
Re: I believe sentience evolved. [Re: phio]
#23850585 - 11/20/16 06:32 AM (7 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
phio said: The process of evolution reflects a sentient and purposeful process beyond mankind's present understanding. ....
the term "reflects" here should be suggests.
believing this suggestion is not clear thinking, it inflates complexity that is not fundamental to understanding, and will definitely impart false understanding to people who cling to ancient dreams:
 medieval cosmology did not help the understanding of astronomy or physics.
I have to agree with sudly that there is no "purpose" underlying the theory of evolution, other than better understanding the Origin of Species: it is more of an observation of the cumulative effects of survival from random mutation, than any theory of a process.
Maybe the villain here is our mental habit to consider that any process must have a purpose or a function in some grander scheme or system, but this is not the case at all.
During the long entropy process of the universe, evolution is merely a side effect.
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
|