Hi Ham, Great post. Thanks. As for the hope expressed in your last paragraph, don't expect much. Arlo can't even answer a few simple, direct questions.
> Arlo, Krimel, Chris, Platt (and other conscious persons) -- > > > Feeling (part of my consciousness) that I've failed to supply the kind of > answers demanded by Arlo, I decided to see what the scientific > objectivists > themselves had to say on the matter. After Googling more than a dozen > references under the key words "Conscious awareness, origin", I stumbled > upon Apologetics Press which had devoted two issues of "Reason and > Revelation" to this topic in May/June of 2003. Much of this effort > appears > on this website, and I strongly recommend that Arlo & Co. review it, if > only > to see that Science has not been able to answer his questions. In their > Editors' Note to "The Origin of Consciousness [Part I], the authors Bert > Thompson, Ph.D. and Brad Harrub, Ph.D. write: > > "The late evolutionist of Harvard, Stephen Jay Gould, candidly admitted > that > 'consciousness, vouchsafed only to our species in the history of life on > earth, is the most god-awfully potent evolutionary invention ever > developed'. But how did it develop? The answer to that question has > eluded, and continues to elude, materialistic researchers in every > discipline - from science to philosophy. Valiant (and repeated!) attempts > to explain consciousness have been made, to be sure. But all have fallen > far short of the mark. Tufts University philosopher Daniel Dennett was > even > so bold as to author a book with the self-congratulatory title, > 'Consciousness Explained' - which promptly was dubbed by his fellow > materialists as 'Consciousness Ignored', because it failed so miserably in > its quest." > > Following are excerpts from their findings which include quotes from Paul > Erlich to Steven Pinker. But the entire article is fascinating and well > worth your while. The URL is http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/498 > : > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > In their book, "Evolution", the late geneticist Theodosius Dobzhansky and > his co-authors wrote: "In point of fact, self-awareness is the most > immediate and incontrovertible of all realities. Without doubt, the human > mind sets our species apart from nonhuman animals". Ervin Laszlo, in his > volume, "Evolution: The Grand Synthesis", commented: "The phenomenon of > mind is perhaps the most remarkable of all the phenomena of the lived and > experienced world." > > Anthony O'Hear suggested: > > "In being conscious of myself as myself, I see myself as separate from > what > is not myself. In being conscious, a being reacts to the world with > feeling, > with pleasure and pain, and responds on the basis of felt needs.... > Consciousness involves reacting to stimuli and feeling stimuli. ... > > "A self-conscious person, then, does not simply have beliefs or > dispositions, does not simply engage in practices of various sorts, does > not > just respond to or suffer the world. He or she is aware that he or she > has > beliefs, practices, dispositions, and the rest. It is this awareness of > myself as a subject of experience, as a holder of beliefs, and an engager > in > practices, which constitutes my self-consciousness. A conscious animal > might be a knower, and we might extend the epithet "knower" to machines if > they receive information from the world and modify their responses > accordingly. But only a self-conscious being knows that he is a > knower." > -- [O'Hear, Anthony (1997), Beyond Evolution: Human Nature and the Limits > of > Evolutionary Explanation] > > In "Man: The Promising Primate", Peter J. Wilson asked: > > "[H]ow is it possible for one species, the human, to develop > consciousness, > and particular self-consciousness, to such a degree that it becomes of > critical importance for the individual's sanity and survival? And what is > the meaning of this development in and for human evolution?" > > Whatever that explanation may be, and wherever that "self " may have come > from, there is one thing evolutionists know it is not - God and the > supernatural. Ian Glynn, in his book, "An Anatomy of Thought: The Origin > and Machinery of the Mind", admitted as much when he wrote: > > "My own starting position can be summed up in three statements: first, > that > the only minds whose existence we can be confident of are associated with > complex brains of humans and some other animals; second, that we (and > other > animals with minds) are the product of evolution by natural selection; > and, > third, that neither in the origin of life nor in its subsequent evolution > has there been any supernatural interference - that is, anything happening > contrary to the laws of physics. ...If the origin of life can be explained > without invoking any supernatural processes, it seems more profitable to > look elsewhere for clues to an understanding of the mind." > > Alwyn Scott ("The Evolution Wars") addressed this same concept. > > "What, then, is the essence of consciousness? An answer to this question > requires the specification of an "extra ingredient" beyond mere mechanism. > Traditionally this ingredient has been called the soul, although the > behaviorists dealt with the hard problem by denying it. From the > perspective of natural science, both of these approaches are > unacceptable." > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- > > I feel less inadequate now, having confirmed that the learned men of > Science > are no closer to resolving the mystery of Consciousness than are the > philosophers. But, since Arlo claims to have resolved it, perhaps he will > now reciprocate and give us the "real" solution, a la Arlo. > > Regards, > Ham > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
