Actually, you've provided reference material that would be nuthin but a bunch of speculation, unless you can provide me with one single piece of independently verifiable evidence......what is that?
You have not looked at a single word of any of the sources I have presented. You have not even attempted to experiment with yourself around this subject.
You've decided that because we don't know everything possible to know about consciousness, that opens the door to a mystical possibility, even though there is no evidence for this belief other than a starting point of mysticism.
What I know is that we know almost nothing about the genesis of consciousness and that your comment about not knowing "everything possible" is a deliberate over-statement of the state of the art in consciousness research. There is a vast fund of evidence that things connected to what we loosely call "consciousness" are non-physical (perhaps only in the sense that radio waves are non-physical). Had you looked at the sources I presented you would have the chance to examine some of the scientific evidence that things are happening that don't fit into our "objective" view of the world.
You suggest I'm reluctant to sign off on something that lacks a shred of independently verifiable evidence.....it's essentially the same as saying, "well, we have no proof that a 50 ton elephant lives on the moon, but let's investigate anyway".
I don't believe that I have asked you to sign off on anything. You are comfortable that you already know all that is necessary to know about human consciousness and you deny that there is anything else to look at or look for. Fine, no one is asking you to pay for the research or to look at the things that make you uncomfortable.
You should have become a cosmologist, most of them are religious/mystics as well.
Calling people names is hardly scientific. Cosmology is a field of scientific endeavor, it contributes to the fund of human knowledge, doesn't it? Or are you saying that cosmology--like religion--has produced nothing of value?
Everything we know suggests that consciousness is an attribute of the brain/CNS....this is the proven model that any serious scientist should pursue, not some fairy tale.
This is a good paragraph.
"Everything we know..." which does not address what we don't know, and that's a lot according to the scientists who are actually doing the research. The
"proven" model to which you refer is a theory which is in no way proven beyond the meager amount of information that we currently have on this subject. But my favorite is
"...any serious scientist SHOULD pursue..." (my emphasis). Anytime someone tells scientists what they
should pursue that implies that there are avenues that they should NOT pursue, that kind of thinking stifles pure research. Remember when Soviet scientists were forced to accept Lysenko's work?
One can clearly see that the more advanced the brain/CNS, the more advanced consciousness is....there's an obvious pattern that supports consciousness as an attribute, but no independently verifiable evidence to support your mystical position.
I'm not arguing that evidence doesn't exist for the position that you are presenting, I'm just saying that I think there is more to it than what we currently know.
Btw, I'm just speaking bluntly to you....you're not a stupid person, but you're on the wrong track.
I'm a fan of objective science, but I despise junk science in all forms, and I relish the opportunity to expose its flaws.....so don't take it personally, for all I know, some of your views on social issues might be quite reasonable.
I'm not much of a fan of Junk Science either, but I won't throw out the baby or the bath water. For much too long arrogant people have assumed that they knew far more than they actually did and science has been set back dramatically because of it. Had Heaviside not trashed Maxwell's work we would be perhaps a century further advanced in electrical theory than we currently are. Science can be just as blindly dogmatic as religion.
There is no way to tell if I'm on some kind of "wrong track" until I work it to the end, you don't know what will be found in ANY field of endeavor ahead of time. Now that we have managed to teleport matter, we've blown another hole in a cherished scientific theory. What's next? I'll keep an open mind and look at all the options.
