Posted: April 23rd, 2008, 10:35 am
No, it is one cell, it just has many parts, the link you gave even defines a neuron as one cell.
Philosophy for Philosophers
https://onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums/
https://onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=19
It appears you are correct, but we have completely deviated from the original thread.... I guess this shows how efficient the human mind actually is....Samhains wrote:If you follow that along the diagram you come to this The Schwann Cell, A PART of the whole that you are claiming is one cell, when clearly there is ANOTHER CELL connected to the Soma, there are 5, which is connected to the Cell nucleus :
If you look at the Diagram again you will see that there are actually 5 cells, 5 schwann cells connected to the Cell nucleus. you will see 5 yellow cells, each one is an individual cell that forms a chain.
At one end the chain of 5 cells connect to the Soma, at the other end they connect to the Axon Terminal.
Schwann cells appear under a light microscope when immunostained with an anti-S-100 antibody
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwann_cell
Named after the German physiologist Theodor Schwann, Schwann cells (also referred to as neurolemmocytes) are a variety of glial cell that mainly provide myelin insulation to axons in the peripheral nervous system of jawed vertebrates.
Clearly I inhabit one body, but many parts it has.
sometimes at least when the atoms doSamhains wrote:anarchyisbliss,
Your right we did stray from the path we where on LOL
Can I just say does a thought really exist?
If atoms are empty balls that pop in and out of existance, and the neron is just made of atoms..does the neron even exist? Cause the atoms that create them really dont, they are just a posibility serounded by a clowd of photon posibilitys...that both pop in and out of existance.
http://www.watch-movies.net/movies/what ... o_we_know/
Then the thought running through them has no atoms, it is just an electric charge running though the atoms that make up the neron..
and if they dont really exist, does thought, consiousness, reason, really exist?
3. The very existence of God and the human soul is a matter of controversy. Notwithstanding fake mediums and the unending sophistries of religious apologists, there is no empirical evidence for the existence of any disembodied spirit.
I don't think religion denies the fact that God could place a soul into a computer. In all of the religions that i have studied he is an omnipotent God so he can do anything he wants.What is more, even if we grant the existence of disembodied spirits, we would still have nothing but arbitrary and baseless religious proclamations to support the contention that God would never ensoul a sufficiently sophisticated computer.
You are right: the idea of an omnipotent God does not rule out computer ensoulment, but more than one person on this thread list has asserted that it does. Hence my words.I don't think religion denies the fact that God could place a soul into a computer. In all of the religions that i have studied he is an omnipotent God so he can do anything he wants.
I know disembodied spirits exist through indirect observation and personal accounts. Probably even in the same methods ( although not the same context) as how physicists proof the existence of atoms. I think if people would open their minds and stop waiting for science to tell them when to jump they would see that there is more to this world than what we perceive through "evidence" and "facts". Not that I think science is bad, or wrong, or a waste, but there are some people who would eat rat poison if a scientist said it had antioxidants in it!There is a difference between knowing that X exists even though it can't be directly observed (as with electrons) and not knowing that X exists at all (as with disembodied spirits).
So far, the only evidence you've offered for the existence of disembodied spirits is your own intuition. And how do we know that your intuition yields reliable information? Because you say so.
Probably even in the same methods ( although not the same context) as how physicists proof the existence of atoms
Granted, but my intuition tells me that a meteor is going to fall from the sky in 6 seconds... ... ... Nope. Still here. Intuition is a grander way to think through a problem, to solve a riddle, to think morally and compassionately, however if the end was near it would have happened one of the various thousands of times that it has been predicted due to Intuition. Even in the book of revelations, it should have happened a couple of thousand years ago, being as it states that Before The Next Generation is Out.Not just my intuition, but everyone's intuition is the most reliable source of information on this planet. We are programmed beings. Instincts tell us more about the outside world than our abstract thought does. Allowing that abstract thought led to a myriad of discoveries. Intuition has kept us alive and for that I think it is stronger than any other source of "evidence".
I am sorry I thought you were just making up the example about the meteor to prove me wrong. I assumed that you hadn't actually had a burst of intuition and you were just saying it so that when the meteors didn't fall I would look foolish. I often get attacked because my radical views represent a minority I guess Im just always on the defensive. I don't often get credit for what I think are good ideas or observations.Abiathar wrote:I did not mean for that to be condescending, though the fact that you took it that way explains a bit. You appear to take most people's responces that way, but alas I will respond civilly as this is the second time you have made a personal attack against my character.
No, I was simply making a point that Intuition does not manifest itself on the three dimensional plane of existance that we all occupy. Hard, tangible objects, however, do, and we strive as we may to understand them using the only true tool that can be used to catagorize and label things... Logic. Intuition, inherently, cannot catagorize anything beyond the general, whereas Logic contains more room for the labeling of... everything.
That was all I was saying, I was simply attempting to be 'short and to the point'.
I know disembodied spirits exist through indirect observation and personal accounts. Probably even in the same methods ( although not the same context) as how physicists prove the existence of atoms.
I think if people would open their minds and stop waiting for science to tell them when to jump they would see that there is more to this world than what we perceive through "evidence" and "facts". Not that I think science is bad, or wrong, or a waste, but there are some people who would eat rat poison if a scientist said it had antioxidants in it!
Not just my intuition, but everyone's intuition is the most reliable source of information on this planet. We are programmed beings. Instincts tell us more about the outside world than our abstract thought does. Allowing that abstract thought led to a myriad of discoveries. Intuition has kept us alive and for that I think it is stronger than any other source of "evidence".