[Arlo previously] Ham has said that at some point in the historical timeline, call it Point Alpha, there were primates that did NOT have consciousness. Then, at a later point, call it Point Beta, there were primates that DID have consciousness.
[Kieffer] To some extent (that is with some qualification) I can agree with his statement, first being: the effect we refer to as consciousness. [Arlo] Oh I agree with this too. I'm not disputing Ham's claims (One, that "consciousness" appears in the timeline at some point, Two, that "consciousness" evolves both historically and ontogenetically (within the human lifespan)). I'm calling Ham out on his absolute inability to ACCOUNT for his claims. Any metaphysics that not only includes, but elevates, human consciousness to the lofty heights Ham does MUST account for it; where it comes from, what is it's nature, does it evolves, if so how... And (I repeat myself) this also stems from Ham's DENIAL that the appearance of "human consciousness" can be traced to genetics (biology) or some manner of social processes. He has been firm that those are NOT the ground from which "human consciousness" appears. I ask you, is my question "alright then, where does it come from?" so unfair? Ham has now retreated to the "transcendental" realm (a great cop-out) that says "hey, you just gotta believe, brother, you just gotta believe". But this raises several other questions. For example. Does "human consciousness" precede the birth of the infant? If you answer "yes", you have to account for "where" and "how it gets attached to that neonate/infant". If you answer "no", then you have to explain how a "transcendental non-existent" comes into being when a male sperm boinks into a female egg. I mean, neither the sperm nor the egg hold any "trancendentalness" do they? So where does the "transcendentalness" come from? Does it float around waiting for fertilized human eggs to attach to? Does God pop it into the new-formed infant from some transcendental netherspace? And, we can take that further, why doesn't a male chipmunk sperm and a female chipmunk egg produce "transcendentalness"? Does this ethereal transcendentalness that floats around looking for human embryos to attach to somehow know not to attach to chipmunk embryos? [Kieffer] I think we both know that within the framework of his thesis he cannot answer. [Arlo] And that speaks volumes for both his "thesis" and him, don't you think? [Arlo previously] Ham has also said that consciousness evolves. That is, at some point in the historical timeline, call it Point Alpha, there were distant humans (Neanderthals, e.g.) that had a lesser evolved consciousness than at a latter point, call it Point Beta. [Kieffer] Again, without any nit-picking, I, and I think you also, agree with this statement. [Arlo] Sure I do. And the "process" by which it evolves is (IMO) the ongoing evolution of the collective consciousness, or cultural milieu, into which successive generations of humans are born. The reason that modern humans have a more evolved consciousness is because the great body of collective knowledge that modern man is born into is far deeper, far greater, and far more complex that what those early Neanderthals were born into. (By the way, I think there is also a socio-biological feedback loop whereas the mental activity of successive generations of humans has brought an unprecedented rapidity in neural-biological evolution; social activity influences biological patterns). [Kieffer] Ham is in the Intelligent Design camp. [Arlo] I'd still say Ham is more theist/deist (which includes IDers, for sure). [Kieffer] Arlo, by discussing Ham's idea we somehow perpetuate it. I hope that Ham has the flexibility to really question the foundations of his thesis. He has put in a lot of work and it always is very difficult in such situations to abandon that large investment. [Arlo] Yeah, I agree, which is why I normally stay clear of dialogue with Ham (or about Ham's "thesis"). 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/
