Well what I meant was, when you change your definition you also have to change the reasoning that follows from it. You say that a zygote has consciousness because it is a creature; I could easily call a brick or the number 3 a creature but I wouldn't infer from that that it has consciousness.anarchyisbliss wrote:You did not refute my argument on the definition because the definition you gave was very rudimentary. Creature comes from the Latin root "crea" meaning create or build stipulativley speaking creature is a general umbrella term for all "things" on this planet So when I say creatures I just mean the Earth's inhabitants;its just much more eloquent than saying the word "things".
It is as much as a fact as anything that can't be proven? May I ask what this means?anarchyisbliss wrote:And my concept of an observer is not a conjecture it is as much of a fact as the concept of Ego, subconscious, or any other psychological attribute that cant be explicitly "proven"
I would say there is no evidence that anything else has consciousness; we just infer it from the fact that they behave the same way or have similar nervous systems.
Well I'm not interested in arguments ad hominem. But since you're asking, I'm not a Pyrrhonist, if that's what you mean. I'm a skeptic to the point that I won't just accept any old thing I'm told withour reasoning.anarchyisbliss wrote:it just appears that we have a skeptic in our midst.
Okay. Then may I ask, what leads you to believe that a cell can observe? I mean, it doesn't have eyes or ears anything.anarchyisbliss wrote:My concept of observer is my proof of soul, i.e; the observer is the soul they are synonymous. Neither the observer proceeds consciousness nor vice a versa they occur at the same time. Consciousness makes the observer while the observer makes conciseness. They evolve parallel to each other.
Well I was just wondering what it means for a non-conscious entity to observe? To me, observation seems to be something like the inference of sense-data to the consciousness. Perhaps we have another difference of defintion here.anarchyisbliss wrote:And where is your"proof" that the observer cannot come before the conscious mind? not to be aggressive just wondering.
Lomax