[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Could set the stage for a good discussion but neither of them is informed enough about cognitive science to make any useful comments on the only interesting part they touched on.
luckyme
[/ QUOTE ]
I believe the point was that the cognitive sciences don't have useful comments in regard to understanding sapience. If there is something that will unravel it, please point out the source.
Semiotics was brought up which points to a third party acting between mind and matter, or God.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't agree with this. Some of advances in cognitive science have given fascinating insights into the mind and the process of higher thought. See, for example,
How Brains Think by William Calvin. The very fact that we can already describe much of the architecture of the mind and its manifestations in higher thought is a big plus for those who claim science will figure it out. Compare this to 100 years ago for example - the knowledge we have now would stun them.
I agree that it's an open question as to whether it
will happen. But enough of the basic physics -> cells -> cell superstructures -> human consciousness and personality continuum has been mapped that it seems likely we'll be able to explain most of it.
At the very least, brain damage and brain experiments have proved that human behavior and conscience requires the functions of the brain to operate or be filtered through from one's soul. And personality changes following brain damage, which can include the loss of conscience along with higher facilities, indicate that what we see manifested is in large part a person's physical brain. So whether or not God is cavorting in people brains, a self organizing structure of sufficient magnitude still needs to exist. Exactly the thing you'd require if there was no God at all...