A THEORY OF INTELLIGENCE Part Two (Identity)

by dhw, Tuesday, July 10, 2018, 10:40 (154 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: The degree to which a person can shape his/her own personality is the whole open question. Crick said no. You say yes. Nobody knows.

DAVID: Bad example of expert. I'm quoting psychiatric theory. Crick is far from it. And was very wrong about what DNA really does in his initial pronouncements.

Egnor quoted Crick, whose view summarizes the materialistic viewpoint. Nobody knows the truth, “expert” or not.

dhw: Experience may well change personality, but it can be argued that the way different people respond to their experiences (or are “changed” by them) is also preprogrammed by their materials!
DAVID: Ah, no free will for you!

I am summarizing the materialistic view! I am not giving an opinion.

dhw: Tony’s machine leans towards Crick, with different wiring determining the type of personality, capabilities, response times, and with no exchanges, you get what you get, attributes that can’t be altered. But he says there is still room for a soul, so perhaps he could tell us what powers his version of the soul has.
DAVID: I'm unconvinced you understand Tony's approach.

So am I. That is why I have asked for clarification.

dhw: What does "networks for thought" mean, if not that the networks are responsible for advanced thought (= materialism)? You still haven’t offered us any function in addition to information and expression..

DAVID: 'Expression' has two meanings: announcing the thought and also developing the thought. Newton and Leibniz both had to recognize the concept of calculus and then work out the details of its construct with their souls using their frontal lobe networks.

dhw: Since when did expression of thought mean developing thought? It may well be that giving material expression to the thought brings out possible flaws (especially when you discuss it with other people! ), but the dualist’s frontal lobes will not say to the dualist’s soul: “Hey, you’ve missed something out, you're confused, you've just contradicted yourself.” So please tell us what the dualist’s soul uses the frontal lobe networks FOR, apart from providing information and enabling the soul to give material expression to its thought.

DAVID: Do you think the development of a concept simply springs into existence as only a 'eureka' moment. Thinking through a puzzle requires contemplation over time.

Another straw man. By definition, how can the "development" of a concept “spring into existence”? The “eureka” moment is what you have called the initiation of the thought (e.g. the spear), but the development and completion of the thought depend on an ongoing process, in which the dualist’s brain provides information and material expression, while the dualist’s soul does the continual processing. And once again, “expression of thought” does not mean “development of thought” – which is the point you have tried to avoid.

DAVID: There may well be the thought I'm confused. Have you forgotten my self is my immaterial me using my material brain networks to think and produce immaterial thought.

You may well be confused if you have forgotten that I keep telling you the dualist’s soul produces immaterial thought, using the material brain for information and material expression, and that I keep asking you what other functions the brain performs during the thought process and you can’t offer any.

DAVID (article on autism): More proof you have to work with the brain you/soul are given.

Yes of course you do! Nobody ever said that a dualist can swap brains! But if the brain determines how you behave and how you think, you have a good case for materialism.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum