Cito di Pense wrote:

Regina wrote:The link didn't come up immediately.

You want immediate gratification? Or should we call it 'foreplay'? Flirting in someone's second language is usually crude, as I've learned from long, hard experience. It's that damned 'experience' thing, again.

It works just fine for me, the flirting in my second language, that is. I find it a lot easier than in my first.

Cito di Pense wrote:

Destroyer wrote:Do chemical signals rule out the possibilty of responsible causality, in your opinion??

I think nothing rules out simplicity. Simple beginnings do not require a complex creator. Happy, now? What is ruled out is some (complex) MasterMind being the necessary author of simple beginnings. If you want to make the ex recto assertion of complex beginnings, you are left with the problem of what created the complex creator. Think about it for awhile without posting. I think the vacation for your fingers will do them good.

Where have I spoken about any complex beginnings?... You have implied that simplicity rules out any kind of creator, to Little idiot; have you not? I am not Little idiot. I make no claims to complexity... Care to elaborate how exactly simplicity rules out the possibility of any Creator?!

Regina wrote:

Cito di Pense wrote:

Regina wrote:The link didn't come up immediately.

You want immediate gratification? Or should we call it 'foreplay'? Flirting in someone's second language is usually crude, as I've learned from long, hard experience. It's that damned 'experience' thing, again.

It works just fine for me, the flirting in my second language, that is. I find it a lot easier than in my first.

Yeah, but don't forget: you chose the language of business as your second language.

If I were a different person, I'd take that as an insult.
You haven't answered my question concerning your avatar.

Cito di Pense wrote:

Destroyer wrote:

Cito di Pense wrote:

Destroyer wrote:So, you need to be prudent when speaking, unless you are prepared to be challenged and made a fool of!

Are you trying to be frightening? The only frightening aspect of your posts is the paucity of intellectual content in them.

Why should words on the internet frighten anyone?!

The paucity of their intellectual content. You know, worrying that their author might be out somewhere, driving an automobile, and talking on a mobile phone at the same time.

I shall pursue this debate with you and allow my intellectual paucity to speak for itself.

Destroyer wrote:
Where have I spoken about any complex beginnings?... You have implied that simplicity rules out any kind of creator, to Little idiot; have you not? I am not Little idiot. I make no claims to complexity... Care to elaborate how exactly simplicity rules out the possibility of any Creator?!

You've not spoken about much of anything, except to pick at my language toward Little Idiot. I haven't ruled anything out, but have only said that simple beginnings do not require a complex creator. If you want creation to be established by the laws of physics, then that's what establishes it. As deeper thinkers than you have asked, "Did God have any choice in establishing the laws of physics"? If the answer is yes, then you're stuck explaining God's purpose in establishing the laws as they are. If not, then God is nothing but a placeholder for confusion.

Regina wrote::rofl:
If I were a different person, I'd take that as an insult.
You haven't answered my question concerning your avatar.

Which was what, exactly? I forget, having been too busy flirting. If you were a different person, I'd be talking to someone else.

[ Can I have your permission to paraphrase this conversation in a novel I'm writing. It's classic! ]

Cito di Pense wrote:

Destroyer wrote:
Where have I spoken about any complex beginnings?... You have implied that simplicity rules out any kind of creator, to Little idiot; have you not? I am not Little idiot. I make no claims to complexity... Care to elaborate how exactly simplicity rules out the possibility of any Creator?!

You've not spoken about much of anything, except to pick at my language toward Little Idiot. I haven't ruled anything out, but have only said that simple beginnings do not require a complex creator. If you want creation to be established by the laws of physics, then that's what establishes it. As deeper thinkers than you have asked, "Did God have any choice in establishing the laws of physics"? If the answer is yes, then you're stuck explaining God's purpose in establishing the laws as they are. If not, then God is nothing but a placeholder for confusion.

You know my depth of thought, do you??? "Creation to be established by the laws of physics", wherever do you get such an idea?? Please elaborate.

I will demonstrate to you my depth of thought.

Edit: Quotation marks

Is that you in the avatar, or some damn good-looking Swiss skiing instructor?

Regina wrote:Is that you in the avatar, or some damn good-looking Swiss skiing instructor?

Or is it an airplane pilot? Or a heart surgeon? Or a newspaper publisher? What is it about ski-instructors that makes them so good-looking?

Cito di Pense wrote:

Regina wrote::rofl:
If I were a different person, I'd take that as an insult.
You haven't answered my question concerning your avatar.

Which was what, exactly? I forget, having been too busy flirting. If you were a different person, I'd be talking to someone else.

[ Can I have your permission to paraphrase this conversation in a novel I'm writing. It's classic! ]

You have my permission.
Anyway, I feel seriously left out. Everybody seems to be writing novels here.

Cito di Pense wrote:

Regina wrote:Is that you in the avatar, or some damn good-looking Swiss skiing instructor?

Or is it an airplane pilot? Or a heart surgeon? Or a newspaper publisher? What is it about ski-instructors that makes them so good-looking?

No idea, I don't ski. It's just what I think a Swiss skiing instructor would look like.

Regina wrote:Everybody seems to be writing novels here.

That's for sure. Think of it the way you do your golf game (lying with authority), and you'll be writing in no time.

Regina wrote:No idea, I don't ski. It's just what I think a Swiss skiing instructor would look like.

See? You're well on your way to writing novels.

Destroyer wrote:You know my depth of thought, do you???

Yep. I do believe I do.

@ Cito: I don't golf.
You know what they say: Have you taken up golfing or are you still having sex?

But at least I have been hired by the up-and-coming sci-fi writer on this board to do some minor translations for him.
So a bit of the glory might rub off eventually.

Cito di Pense wrote:

Destroyer wrote:You know my depth of thought, do you???

Yep. I do believe I do.

I do believe that you sure do.

Destroyer wrote:

Regina wrote:

Destroyer wrote:

Regina wrote:
To be more precise, I know from where my consciousness originates. I don't talk about consciousness in the abstract. I'm a too practical for that. Plus, I'm not given to intellectual wankery.

So from where exactly does your consciousness originate?

It's a function of my brain. Once there was no Regina-brain, so no Regina-consciousness.
Sooner or later (I really hope later) there will be no more Regina-brain, and also no Regina-consciousness. Or are you suggesting, my former Regina-consciousness will be floating around in space looking for a new host?
I'm happy enough with this definition, as long as no one comes up with a better one:

"consciousness is the sum of the electrical discharges occurring throughout the nervous system of a being at any given instant"

by the biochemist Roc Ordman.
http://chemistry.beloit.edu/Ordman/clas ... rocdef.htm

The question is quite simple: Did your brain originate consciousness? You seem to be saying that no other explanation than brains are required. So please explain exactly how brains originated consciousness.

You have to read some books if you want to know. No one is going to write a book for you here so you need to go and buy some books. After you have read your books get back to me and we'll see if anything is left to explain.

Destroyer wrote:
Do you think that anyone reading these posts are confused by the phrase 'chemical impulses' as opposed to chemical signals?

Maybe not confused but certainly questioning your qualifications to have this discussion.

Destroyer wrote:

Regina wrote:

Destroyer wrote:

The question is quite simple: Did your brain originate consciousness? You seem to be saying that no other explanation than brains are required. So please explain exactly how brains originated consciousness.

Regina-brain is responsible for Regina-consciousness. No Regina-brain, no Regina-consciousness.
Neurology is not my area of research, so why should I come up with an explanation on that level? Start reading what I linked to. That approach works for me, as I said.
If you don't think your consciousness is a function your brain, then happy hunting in the big open spaces.

Neuroscience, unfortunately, will not help you in the knowledge that brains equate to consciousness. So, you need to be prudent when speaking, unless you are prepared to be challenged and made a fool of!

And you know this how? Please explain how you know this.

SpeedOfSound wrote:

Destroyer wrote:

Regina wrote:

Destroyer wrote:
So from where exactly does your consciousness originate?

It's a function of my brain. Once there was no Regina-brain, so no Regina-consciousness.
Sooner or later (I really hope later) there will be no more Regina-brain, and also no Regina-consciousness. Or are you suggesting, my former Regina-consciousness will be floating around in space looking for a new host?
I'm happy enough with this definition, as long as no one comes up with a better one:

"consciousness is the sum of the electrical discharges occurring throughout the nervous system of a being at any given instant"

by the biochemist Roc Ordman.
http://chemistry.beloit.edu/Ordman/clas ... rocdef.htm

The question is quite simple: Did your brain originate consciousness? You seem to be saying that no other explanation than brains are required. So please explain exactly how brains originated consciousness.

You have to read some books if you want to know. No one is going to write a book for you here so you need to go and buy some books. After you have read your books get back to me and we'll see if anything is left to explain.

Anyone who believes that the answer to the origination of consciousness can be found in any books are obvously living in cloud-cuckoo-land.