Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (7583)	6/20/2001 9:46:19 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

There is no way to "discover" that people didn't have consciousness 3000 years ago. You can make that hypothesis, but I think it is utterly ridiculous. This was my first thought, but without having read the book I didn't want to express any opinion beyond the fact that it seemed interesting. I often find value in stuff I mostly disagree with. The mystical experience, yes! From the vision quest for a spirit helper to the vision quest for God, they follow the same basic program of dissociating from the body and allowing the mind to hallucinate. I think withholding water speeds up the process more than food as the brain cells shrink dramatically when dehydrated and the processing of sensory input becomes disturbed. Naturally, I do not speak for ALL mystical phenomena. Mustn't nail boards over the door to the unknown. Life requires a little mystery...

To: epicure who wrote (7583)	6/26/2001 9:55:06 AM
From: SGJ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

Its so interesting to me that so many get so riled by the theories presented in this book. The best way to answer your swirl of denial is simply. "I think some animals (maybe all animals) are conscious" Perception is not consciousness. "There is no way to "discover" that people didn't have consciousness 3000 years ago. You can make that hypothesis, but I think it is utterly ridiculous" Read the book before you say there is no way. There is a way to discover it. People 3000 years ago and forward left a lot of clues. That's what the book is about, to give examples to support the hypotheses. That, in my view, doesnt qualify as ridiculous. We are discussing theory here, remember, not the static issuance of a new "bible". "Mystical experience has adaptive value, probably, or there wouldn't be so many people wired for it" Careful, you're close to agreeing with Jaynes' theory. You only have to change the word "has" to "had" in your statement.