Philosophy: books and discussion

[FlorenceArt]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Are we?

Attempting to

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Should rocks have rights?

Of course, they are pets just like dogs and cats, right?

BTW just read that article "Do Bacteria Think" loved this part:

"We are left with the delemma of having to accept one of two conclusions: either bacteria think or Supreme COurt justices do not."

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by FlorenceArt

... aliens, ... How would we communicate with them? ...

Some kind of mathematical system would probably work best. To discover signals of extraterrestrial origin beamed out in greetings to other cultures, the late Carl Sagan was an advocate of searching for signals that would not originate in nature, such as pulses that revealed a consecutive list of prime numbers. He felt the prime number method would be the most probable by which extraterrestrial civilizations would say "Hello!" if so inclined. Communications could build from that point, such as the way the video-feed was piggy-backed on the attention signal in the movie Contact (Sagan wrote the novel on which it was based), but unless other civilizations have discovered some way to get around the issue of the tremendous distances between star systems, such communications would invariable be monologues: replies would take too long. Even if the Alpha Centauri system supported intelligent life (which is extremely unlikely according to the majority of astrophysicists), it would take 9 years for receive a reply to any inquiry beamed from Earth, given the limitations of the speed of light. And that's our nearest neighbor! Most replies would not come for generations, if at all. The constraints of nature as we know it place a severe limit on the number of possible alien civilizations with whom we could engage in two-way communication.

[TimMason]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

"Researchers are turning up more and more evidence that these single-cell organisms are living, sensate beings whose activities can be described with such psychologically oriented terms as stimulus, response, excitation, and adaptation The new studies raise a profound question about the evolution of mind: if the simplest forms of life are capable of purposive activity, can they be said to engage in a form of thinking?"

Wonderful stuff. First, behaviourist psychologists ordain that human activity should be analysed as if it were the activity of unicellular organisms. Then they throw their hands up in astonishment when they discover that unicellular organisms share numerous qualities with human beings.

What does the concept of 'purpose' entail? Imputing it to organisms that are not conscious is a metaphorical usage (for my part I would say the same thing of imputing it to an organism without language). If we employ the term strictly, can it really be applied to anything beyond the higher animals - or aliens?

Speaking of aliens, they are around us all the time; simply they are manifest in ways that our senses do not register. For their part, some of them have partial consciousness of our existence, which they, for the most part - and happily for us - regard as no more than a minor irritant. Others are blithely unaware of us, which is why you may, from time to time, have the distinct impression that someone is standing on your foot.

[GeoffC]

define "alien" ....

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by TimMason

Wonderful stuff. First, behaviourist psychologists ordain that human activity should be analysed as if it were the activity of unicellular organisms. Then they throw their hands up in astonishment when they discover that unicellular organisms share numerous qualities with human beings.

What does the concept of 'purpose' entail? Imputing it to organisms that are not conscious is a metaphorical usage (for my part I would say the same thing of imputing it to an organism without language). If we employ the term strictly, can it really be applied to anything beyond the higher animals - or aliens?

Speaking of aliens, they are around us all the time; simply they are manifest in ways that our senses do not register. For their part, some of them have partial consciousness of our existence, which they, for the most part - and happily for us - regard as no more than a minor irritant. Others are blithely unaware of us, which is why you may, from time to time, have the distinct impression that someone is standing on your foot.

Now you are making me think you're the same guy that on another forum claims he is communicating with aliens through a crystal in his brain. And they make him do thing like post on the internet to embarrass him.

[TGS]

Originally Posted by TimMason

What does the concept of 'purpose' entail? Imputing it to organisms that are not conscious is a metaphorical usage (for my part I would say the same thing of imputing it to an organism without language). If we employ the term strictly, can it really be applied to anything beyond the higher animals - or aliens?

One of the things that "purpose" entails I guess is non-arbitrariness. So, when a flower turns to the sun this is not arbitrary but purposive; when an E coli bacterium travels up a sugar gradient this is not arbitrary but purposive. To the best of my knowledge neither daisies nor E coli bacteria are conscious but both seem to exhibit purposiveness - or just purpose - in what they do. And, it's not just a kind of metaphorical purpose. OK it may not be accompanied by the formation of a conscious intention - but then neither does the secretion of insulin by your pancreas - does that not have a purpose?

[GeoffC]

mmm ...

does life exist here on earth by virtue of a purpose, or arbitrariness ?

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by GeoffC

mmm ...

does life exist here on earth by virtue of a purpose, or arbitrariness ?

Does the Earth exist by virtue of a purpose, or arbitrariness ?

[GeoffC]

Without this existence, we would not be having this conversation.

[TGS]

Originally Posted by GeoffC

Without this existence, we would not be having this conversation.

I think you've answered your own question

[GeoffC]

Originally Posted by TGS

I think you've answered your own question

But then I have to ask, with whom or what am I having the conversation ? Is that then the purpose of the Universe and Earth's role in it ?

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by GeoffC

Without this existence, we would not be having this conversation.

Ah, but that does not answer the question. It just states the fact of existence, not whether it is purposeful or not and to whom or what?

[TGS]

Originally Posted by GeoffC

But then I have to ask, with whom or what am I having the conversation ? Is that then the purpose of the Universe and Earth's role in it ?

There might be "local" purposes - like the purpose of the daisy turning towards the sun. There might be slightly less local purposes - daisies might have a purpose. But there might not be any big purpose.

Ooooh, scary

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by TGS

There might be "local" purposes - like the purpose of the daisy turning towards the sun. There might be slightly less local purposes - daisies might have a purpose. But there might not be any big purpose.

Ooooh, scary

Which is the core (or at least one core) of religion. Most people have a hard time accepting that 'all this' could be only due to the natural physical laws of nature.