Original post by Daerax
No, you simply misunderstood me. I simply meant that he is not correct. He works only, from a suppostion among many. The burden of proof need not be proof of infalliability of theory but rather that it is your task to show that your theory has correctly made accurate predictions. What he stated was not fact nor has there been any experimantal evidence in its favor and is thus mere conjecting. Occam's razor is a common sense principle and any scientific theory which requires it is inherently flawed. Intepretation of measurement in Quantum mechanics for example. I do not see what the existance or lack of, of God or evolution figures into what I said.
Note also that a theory which makes many correct predictions and then one wrong one is not necessarily declared to be wrong or thrown out. In fact no physical theory can be *True* or correct (where correct strictly means Not Wrong) since they are in essence nothing more than approximations since a~b => a <> b
Maybe I did misunderstand you, I thought you are attacking his theory of "brain is a machine" and not just the experiment he suggested, if thats not the case then please ignore my response.
I think you focus too much on the experiment he suggested and ignored the idea of his theory (which is what I tried to protect). While the experiment to clone a human atom by atom is problematic (to say the least) the idea he tried to describe is that the brain is just a machine, made up of matter just like any other machine; and that the feelings and such are just states in the machine.
That theory may not be tested by copy pasting a human, but it is supported by many other experiments, for example the brain malfunctions or interaction of medicine or CT scans and such. They all support the theory that the brain is a machine (made of atoms and nothing more) and the spirit or feelings are just states in the machine. So I would say there is plenty experimantal evidence in its favor.
I dont have any knowledge in the spirit world so I dont know how they explain the effects of chemical medicine on the state of the "spirit" or how they explain a physical damage to the brain affect the nature of the "spirit".
What I said about evolution is that it explains how this brain machine came to be without any need for a God or for a special spirit in us humans. Again, it has nothing to do with the experiment he suggested, only with the main idea he described and I tried to protect.
You cannot answer for me: Are all subatomic particles truly the same? Yes? Then beyond arrangement we are no different, you and I. We are entirely indistinguishable at small enough scales. Why, are we even seperable?
I dont know if all subatomic particles are truly the same, but I dont see the problem with idea that we are indistinguishable at small enough scales, or with the idea that beyond arrangement we are no different. Is that so impossible? beyond arrangment a truck and a spaceship are (almost) the same yet you have no problem telling them apart. Not to mention that a computer running windows and a computer running linux are almost entirely the same but are seperable. I think you agree that beyond arrangment my tricep muscle is the same as your tricep muscle (well, sort of) so why should the brain be different?