Quote (N1ccolo @ May 7 2013 05:17am)

I don't see how it could be possible even in theory. We couldn't know how to verify that the two perceptions are identical. We could never know we have accounted for all aspects of perception, particularly when we begin to look at the particular status of the particles in the brain assuming we were able to figure out how they affect perception precisely because at some point we're theoretically incapable of observing this precisely, i.e. in the quantum realm (if our instruments were good enough to observe specifically enough at larger realms than this).

Quote (WidowMaKer_MK @ May 7 2013 07:05pm)

...the faith came first !

Quote (Thor123422 @ May 7 2013 03:04pm)

Like I said, its currently outside of our realm of testing, and even if we could never generate a mind in reality we can always build simulations in computers to perfectly mimic the brain sometime in the future.

Quote (dajusta @ May 7 2013 01:45pm)

So one needs to test which one is the true religion.

Does the religion look after the poor?  Does the religion look after those who are marginalized? Does the religion pursue peace and healthy relationships among humanity, God, and creation?  Ravi Zacharias is a a heavy weight scholar in the area of true religion.

Quote (N1ccolo @ May 7 2013 04:12pm)

How do you know we could possibly build a perfect simulation? I'm questioning whether it's even theoretically possible given a great deal more understanding of how it works. If it depends on particles at the quantum level, we can't control that. Maybe we could make probabilistic predictions, but I'm not sure how this could possibly give a definitive answer on determinism, it would always be one step back from what's really going on.

Quote (dajusta @ 7 May 2013 17:45)

So one needs to test which one is the true religion.
Does the religion look after the poor?  Does the religion look after those who are marginalized? Does the religion pursue peace and healthy relationships among humanity, God, and creation?  Ravi Zacharias is a a heavy weight scholar in the area of true religion.

Quote (brmv @ May 7 2013 06:56pm)

it is always interesting that you find a concept based on a collection of 'ideas', then claim that concept to be true and want to prove it by quoting the elements of the construct
that you proclaim your personal guru as the master of the universe of religious thought doesn't give it any more credibility either

Quote (N1ccolo @ 7 May 2013 23:35)

Apparently he argues evolution is incompatible with thermodynamics, awesome.