Re: ::scr long waffley post about consciousness

[Alaric Snell <alaric@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Monday 08 April 2002 15:01, you wrote:

> I'm saying that the consiousness is brain-based, but the soul isn't
> at all.

Ahah. Then what use is this 'soul'? Any reason to imagine that it exists?

> When replacing a *single* neuron with a black box that does exactly
> the same job, how can your personality be affected? You'd have no
> way of telling the difference.

Quite.

> Since there's no single part of you that contains your soul, and I've
> just taken part of you and replaced it with something else, and you
> can't tell the difference, it seems only logical that there's as much
> of your soul in that black box than there was in the neuron that I
> took out of your head.

If there is a soul. Why do we need one?

> Your consciousness (your brain) is just a view on that collective
> soul.
>
> That make any sense?

Yes. But why come up with this theory? Does it predict anything? Does it 
explain anything that cannot otherwise be satisfactorily explained?

ABS

-- 
                               Alaric B. Snell
 http://www.alaric-snell.com/  http://RFC.net/  http://www.warhead.org.uk/
   Any sufficiently advanced technology can be emulated in software