Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Ambrose of Milan

Regulars
  • Content Count

    28
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ambrose of Milan

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Not Specified
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  1. Ambrose of Milan

    Isn't Zen Buddhism compatible w/ Objectivism?

    Do I have to respond to a post like this?
  2. Ambrose of Milan

    Can man mechanically recreate consciousness?

    Is there really a difference between a man and machine, supposing the machine was built with technology beyond our comprehension, except that the man is made of organic material and the machine is made of silicon? If we make something that can walk like a man, reason like a man, and display emotion like a man, does that person have an inner consciousness like we do or is it just responding to outward stimuli? If it does have this inner consciousness, which I will call a soul, shouldnt we give it equal rights, as we would to a living, breathing man?
  3. Ambrose of Milan

    Can man mechanically recreate consciousness?

    Right, so are you saying that man is incapable of producing a machine that can reason by itself?
  4. Ambrose of Milan

    Can man mechanically recreate consciousness?

    We all know that we are conscious. Objectively, yes, but subjectively, too. I can sit here in my little mind, in my little body, observing all the things that happen. I am a subjectively conscious person. I think I can call this subjective consciousness my soul. Now, if man designed artificial computers with a higher and higher intelligence, modifying it so that it displayed all human reactions and emotions, to the point where it appeared identical as a human, would it have a subjective consciousness, just like you do? If so, where, along that process of building the machine, would this consciousness, or soul, enter the hardware? May peace rest with all, Charlie
  5. Ambrose of Milan

    Hi there!

    I am still here lucein...its just that Ive lost any motivation to post in this forum considering the stupid strawman arguments that have been popping up recently
  6. Ambrose of Milan

    Hi there!

    What proof is there that the lady who founded your philosophy is correct, for that matter? You cant prove an abstract concept.
  7. Ambrose of Milan

    Hi there!

    Then we might as well ditch the theory that the Earth revloves around the Sun...guess what...its just a theory! That means it involves "faith" to some extent. Almost everything requires a leap of faith, including God. As I said, when I look at all the events which have happened in Jewish and Christian history, I cannot provide a forensic proof for God's existance, but I can say that he probably does exist.
  8. Ambrose of Milan

    Hi there!

    Thats ok..I dont think you are a jerk
  9. Ambrose of Milan

    Hi there!

    Oh please. Do you KNOW that God doesnt exist?
  10. Ambrose of Milan

    Hi there!

    Objectively speaking, your life is worthless. It may matter to you, but even then it wont matter at death. It can be said that you have meaning now, but if there was no point to your existance in the future then what good is the meaning of your life now? I agree, we are going in circles. Best to stop debating this
  11. Ambrose of Milan

    Hi there!

    This is a very obscure topic Because we know that nothing in this world lasts forever
  12. Ambrose of Milan

    Hi there!

    Yes, it might be said that your life has meaning right now, but time passes infinitely onward. Therefore, we can deduct that, in the grand scheme of things, without God your life is worthless. Comforting isnt it?
  13. Ambrose of Milan

    Hi there!

    Thanks for the welcome, Oakes!
  14. Ambrose of Milan

    Hi there!

    As Ive said, something that does not exist does not have any meaning because it isnt there
  15. Ambrose of Milan

    Hi there!

    Maybe I should have clarified. The Greeks philosophers were wrong about many things. Plato, being one of the better philisophers (IMO), used reason to come to the inevitable conclusions of existance, which is truth and is therefore a part of Christianity. He even scratched the surface of monotheism, but he could never have gotten all the way. This just goes to show that man's reasoning is in vain without divine revelation. Yes, I agree completely. I believe that Christianity is an objective truth. Thus I agree...but with the exception of divine help. God is omnipotent. He made the laws of existance, he can do ANYTHING imaginable. Even the universe itself is just a product of the thought of God. That is how immense, how powerful he is. If you are trying to find a forensic proof for God's existance, you might as well stop here. However, when I look at the Ressurection, the documentational evidence is undeniable. And, when I look at the miracles of the saints, it is hard to think that it was all faked. Or when I look at the image of Mary at Guadalupe. Every fiber is colored, the image cannot be replicated by modern technology. OR when I look at the miracles of Lourdes or Fatima. Of course I will never be able to proove that God exists based on those occurences. But, it is hard for me to imagine someone could fake an apparition which prophecised about the coming Cold War and World War 2, and was attended by thousands of witnesses. As Ive said, Christianity requires a leap of faith, although it itself is within the bounds of reason God bless
×