Skakos wrote:See a TV. Watch closely. It generates image. You open it and see things inside it "work".
It generates image?
Yes, some technology functions as a receiver, some doesn’t. What this has to do with neuroscience is beyond me. Drawing analogies between the brain and electrical appliances in order to prove a concept is pointless and arbitrary, as you’ve just demonstrated. Might as well try a toaster next time.
Skakos wrote:ALL data we have is equally compatible with the "brain generates consciousness" as well as with the "brain is a reciever of consciousness". (yes, if you break the TV you will not see images any more...)
The data is equally compatible with the brain as a receiver? In that case why stop there? If the data is compatible with the brain as a receiver, then it is also compatible with human consciousness as a software program on the computers of some superior race, or a brain in a vat, or a colony of invisible leprechauns in the head “magically” generating consciousness, or any other fantastical explanation. What these explanations have in common is that they are unsubstantiated, untestable and unfalsifiable, furthermore, they do not generate new experiments or further our understanding but rather serve to remove the whole endeavor from real scientific inquiry.
Skakos wrote:But there are many good indications (from the Princeton non-local consciousness experiments to the NDEs and the lack of success in locating memory) which strongly suggest something you do not wish to see...
“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” and the “evidence” you present lacks both quality and content - it comes nowhere close to cashing out the claims you are trying to make.
Of course there are things we do not currently understand about memory. Does this really prove that “the brain is a receiver”? And what happens when these mysteries give way to scientific inquiry, as so many have in the past? - You will find some other mystery neath which to hide and expound your beliefs. As I said “dualism of the gaps”.
Stormcloud wrote:Michael, I would include all the other "scientists" and "laboratory nobodies" who inject steel needles into bundles of little fur trapped in cages.
I assume you are a vegetarian, then? Furthermore, I assume you completely abstain from science-based medicine as well? You realize, surely, that the majority of modern medical techniques and treatments are based on animal research? Those “scientists” and “lab nobodies” work on curing infectious disease and genetic disorders, ensure medical treatments are safe for human use, and further our understanding of nature, neuroscience and physiology. What do you do?