rationalskepticism.org

Destroyer wrote:
Ok. Your emphasis is clearly upon the claim that ToM provides a better method for analysing human behaviour than science, whereas my emphasis is upon brain and mind operating as a single function.

I don't care where your emphasis is - I've been asking Zoon to support their claim since before you posted on this thread.

Destroyer wrote: Nevertheless you are still clearly not seeing things from zoon's perspective...

This is not a requirement of discussion. I don't see it from Zoon's perspective because, as far as I am concerned, Zoon's position is wrong.

Destroyer wrote:...which is that ToM is presently just a placeholder due to the fact that neuroscience is still in its infancy.

Not what Zoon has said, and also lacking in meaning. ToM is our ability to posit emotions onto other people - it's not scientific. Neuroscience is not remotely the only science that makes predictions about behavior as I've already made clear in this thread, so it wouldn't really matter even if that were the case, but I still don't accept that even methodologies in the neurosciences are less effective at making predictions about behavior than ToM, not least because no supporting evidence has been shown to establish this contention as true.

Destroyer wrote: The conviction is that mind and brain are fundamentally the same property, so by scientifically studying the brain, slowly but surely, more and more reliable information about the mind is being gleaned.

Again, this is irrelevant and not at all what I am discussing, nor what Zoon has claimed which provoked challenges.

Destroyer wrote: But due to the fact that there happens to be so many corresponding interactions taking place between brain functions and awareness, there is still an abundance for science to learn.

An empty statement: obviously if there was nothing else to learn, then science wouldn't be necessary.

Destroyer wrote:It is for this reason that humans can currently only make suppositions about the inner workings/personal expressions of others,...

This is a false statement apparently unaware of the last 60 odd years of behaviorial science, let alone the numerous examples of machine learning which routinely make complex predictions about human behavior. I note that neither you nor Zoon ever acknowledge these factors, just keep on asserting an alleged absence when it really just means you're either ignoring or ignorant of decades of research and evidence contradicting you.

Destroyer wrote:without having any actual method for determining if those suppositions are factual - hence it been only a theory.

'Only a theory'?

That's a Creationist argument.

Destroyer wrote: Zoon clearly has strong convictions that these suppositions do give a better understanding of human behaviour than the current state of neuroscience to predict what is happening.

Strong convictions absent evidence: that's not something you should be applauding.

Destroyer wrote: But, with the advancements in neuroscience, zoon sees no reason why more and more accuracy with these predictions will not be forthcoming - again, precisely because of the conviction that brain and mind are fundamentally of the same stuff; so the more that scientists learn about the brain, the more advanced they will become with their predictions.

I am getting really fucking tired of you telling me what Zoon believes when I can fucking read what Zoon believes in their own words. At no point have I indicated I don't understand what Zoon has said - rather, I have quite explicitly stated that what Zoon said is false and challenged them to substantiate their position.

Repeatedly telling me how convinced Zoon is of X helps no one at all, and does nothing of value.

Destroyer wrote: This ought to then inevitably - well into the future - lead to science being more reliable at predicting human behaviour than ToM.

If you are prepared to believe in claims about science that are completely absent any evidence at all, then you need to shut up and stop lecturing at people because that is antithetical to how science works and why it's successful.

'Science' is already dramatically superior at predicting people than ToM, and science has been dramatically superior in this regard for decades. In recent years, the gap has grown to an absurd degree - perhaps the speed of this progress has left both you and Zoon behind in a space ignorant of these developments?

Destroyer wrote:However, the current state of affairs with still so much to learn about the brain, means that the very best that humans can achieve is guess work when studying the awareness of their fellow humans...

Objectively false.

Destroyer wrote:Zoon may, on occasion, overstate the case to make it seem as though ToM can give accurate scientific predictions, apparently because of her emotional ties to this theory, but ultimately she is not denying that it is just a theory - hence its name.

Wut?

It's not 'just a theory', the concept of 'just a theory' is a mantra employed by scientifically illiterate people flailing at scientific findings they don't like, and the word 'theory' in ToM has nothing whatsoever to do with a scientific theory - rather, it is about ascribing emotions and mental states to other people.

Destroyer wrote:I reallyy cannot explain it any simpler than this. So this will be my final contribution on this topic.

As with Zoon, you're 'explaining' something that no one has asked you to explain, no requirement to have this explained exists, and you don't even have the excuse of being Zoon.

I don't need your help to read what Zoon's written. I already understand it, and that understanding entails me noting where Zoon's claims are false, and challenging Zoon to support them - assuming these claims are something more than make-believe confidently asserted as fact.

What I will say though is that at least you've managed to accurately acknowledge my challenge - something Zoon has not managed to achieve after 5 pages and a dozen posts - but you simply waved it away assuming that Zoon's claims are right, despite Zoon offering no evidence, apparently you are convinced by Zoon's conviction?

All of this isn't just antiscientific, it's also irrational.