The Warfare Is Mental

TWIM / RvA Dialog III

November 29, 2009

jim at RvA has responded to Reason, Intellect, Religion, & Belief. Per the usual format, my response follows, but we should address some tangential things which don’t relate to jim’s actual criticism of my post, first. I suspect that jim composed his response either drunk, or buzzed, because of the way it “went off.” I emailed jim and asked him to distill his criticisms into concise, clearly-stated objections. He refused, and hit me with the surprise of posting that email, instead. Well! It’s like that, eh?

TWIM / RvA Dialog II

jim at RvA has responded to Asteroids, Cathode Rays & Requisite Knowledge, Pt. II, and once again, my response follows.

TWIM / RvA Dialog: Introduction

November 27, 2009

jim has challenged me to what he offers as a "better way to debate." He's written a rebuttal to last week's post Asteroids, Cathode Rays & Requisite Knowledge, and invited me to write a response to his rebuttal, which he's agreed to post in its original entirety on his blog.

I accepted the challenge, and my response follows.

Excuse Me Mr. Preacher Man: Doesn’t Perpetual Mean Permanent?

November 26, 2009

A certain subset of Arabs and Israelis refrain from battle during the holiday of Ramadan, but seeing as how I'm not much a respecter of so-called "holy-days" in the first place, I'll spare no mercy to Ebonmuse this beautiful Thanksgiving afternoon.

Besides, the 'wife' (and 'baby') are out-of-town along with the rest of my usual 'crew' up here, so I've got ample writing time today. Which shouldn't matter, as although we'll certainly give it a fair shake, we don't need more than eight syllables to expose the flaw in Ebonmuse's so-called "Lesson of Autumn Leaves," and I already accomplished that in the title.

A Precognitive Reality: Anomalous Mental Phenomena, II

November 25, 2009

I typically don’t keep jobs too long. At last count I’d worked over 50 jobs by the time I was 30. I was 19 when the following incident happened, and it was my fourth job.

I’d been working for a few months at a private club atop the county’s most prominent skyscraper. It was really a fun gig, to say the least. The day shift basically consisted of lunch for the elite. I was an upscale busboy, complete with a suit, a “crumber” and the whole kit. The clientele consisted of everybody from real estate moguls to business tycoons to sports team owners. Even some Hollywood types. There was a private gym up there where some of these types would congregate for various non-athletic activities, if you catch my drift. The club and the gym took up the entire top floor and you could see out over the Pacific or out over the mountains. Sunsets in wintertime were amazing. The whole setup was just so high-class and… just weird.
Read More →

The Tripartite Model Of Consciousness

November 24, 2009

Last Thursday we made what I felt were some necessary emendations to the cerebro-centric consciousness hypothesis (CCH). Today we’ll do the same for its primary competitor.

By consciousness I refer to a base set of abilities, including but not limited to expression, intuition, volition, emotion, and intellect. Here we introduced the CCH’s primary competitor as the immaterial consciousness hypothesis, with the basic premise being that consciousness can exist outside of a physical body. After much thought, I’ve decided to do away with that name in favor of the tripartite model of consciousness (TMC), with the basic premise being that consciousness is not an exclusively biological or cerebro-centric phenomenon. Under the TMC, three distinct yet overlapping elements merge to create human consciousness: spirit, soul, and body.

“In Defense Of Free Speech” = Banned From Daylight Atheism!

November 23, 2009

Cost of a Typepad Pro account? $149.50 per year.

Cost of freedom of speech? Hundreds of thousands of American lives.

Cost of banning me in the thread from In Defense of Free Speech, and then closing comments so those who really value free speech couldn't criticize Ebonmuse like they did last time? Priceless!

Reason, Intellect, Religion, & Belief

I feel the need to clarify a few things. In general — but in this post especially — when I say belief, I refer specifically to the belief that God exists as described in the Bible. When I say believer or saint, I refer specifically to those who have believed and known God, and henceforth accepted the provision of the Gospel: Jesus Christ. Unless in the pre-stated context of Roman Catholicism, when I say the church, I refer to the body of believers and saints spread across the world.

The biblical definition of a believer is one whose spirit has been regenerated by God. Does this mean that any person who utters with their mouth "I believe" is regenerated thusly? Certainly not. Although the church is the body of believers, not every person who attends church believes. In fact, the Bible grimly suggests the opposite, and such is borne out by the testimonies of former Christians everywhere. The difference between being a member of the church and simply attending church is precisely this matter of regeneration. Again, belief refers to something that actually happens to the subject in the spiritual realm. Anything less than this is a mere puffing up of the religious mind.

On So-Called “Vacuum” Fluctuation

November 20, 2009

I'm going to put off further development of the CCH's competitor in favor of this short post about so-called "vacuum" fluctuation.

Furthermore, the uncertainty principle implies that a particle can never be at rest, but is subject to constant fluctuations even when no measurement is taking place, and these fluctuations are assumed to have no causes at all. In other words, the quantum world is believed to be characterized by absolute indeterminism, intrinsic ambiguity, and irreducible lawlessness.
–David Pratt, Consciousness, Causality, and Quantum Physics

In recent attempts to mitigate the apparent necessity of the Unmoved Mover, D has posited creation ex nihilo as a viable alternative:

Emendations Re: Competing Models Of Consciousness

November 19, 2009

In the past weeks we’ve devoted a couple of discussions to exploring consciousness. Here and here, we’ve discussed what I then called the immaterial consciousness hypothesis, but the more I think about it, the more I realize those words are insufficient and flawed.

I want to begin with as few assumptions as possible. Using the word immaterial commits us to something that may or may not necessarily be the case. It could very well be that consciousness — specifically human consciousness — is actually some hitherto undiscovered form of matter or energy, and if we assume it is immaterial a priori, we’ve already biased our research.
Read More →

← Newer Posts | Older Posts →