Cell response to electric field (Introduction)

by David Turell , Wednesday, April 24, 2013, 17:15 (4232 days ago) @ dhw


> dhw: The context here is your claim that the genome is an automaton, and you said explicitly that atheists depended on this viewpoint. My post offers an ALTERNATIVE to atheistic chance, which is the "intelligent cell" engaged in deliberate and purposeful cooperation.......-The reason the cell acts intelligently is that it has many automatic paths of action based on the information in its DNA, which information was provided at the start of life. I am a believer in theistic evolution, as you know. - -> 
> DAVID: You make non-conscious energy seem brilliant.[/i]
> 
> dhw: I'm not sure what you're getting at here. We're grappling with two questions: 1) how can we distinguish between non-conscious and conscious? 2) What is the origin of consciousness?..... [T]he acceptance of any one of these unlikely explanations can only be based on faith and not on science.-1) I am conscious, as you are. We are conscious because we experience it. We can infer some degree of consciousness to animals but they are not aware that they are aware, the standard to infer higher thinking than just reacting. I believe in species conscousness because of Rupert Sheldrake's work as discussed in my first book. So I don't think distinguishing is a problem. I don't think individual cels are conscious, but the brain acts through all its cells as a receiver. This is the best theory to fit what we know, from all I have read.-2) I believe consciousness is an emergent phenomenon in part, but it also is connected to a universal consciousnes. Again the best explanation I can come up with from the presentations by the 'experts'.-And, of course, I have faith in my conclusions. I know that your proposal of intelligent energy engenders no faith on your part, just another 'angels on the head of the pin' rumination. Anything to avoid the propostion that only chance or design can explain our reality. There is no third way.