vjtorley says:
"For example, I have defined dFSCI in a completely empirical way, using the empirical concept of a conscious intelligent being both to define design and to define functional specification, two key steps of my definition. And yet, no metaphisical theory of consciousness is required for that, only the practical acceptance of the fact that conscious intelligent agents exist, that they can be observed either directly (inwardly) or indirectly, that conscious processes can be described and that common words we use (meaning, purpose, function) have a well defined correspondence with specific observed subjective conscious representations, while they cannot be defined objectively in any way.
This is all empirical, for me. Observed facts, and reasonable inferences on the observed facts. The only important point is that I include consciousness and its representations in the observed facts. And I am very happy with that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey vince, I'm still waiting for you IDiots to calculate the alleged dFSCI in a banana (or CSI, FSCI, FSCO/I, or whatever other bogus term you IDiots are using this week).
By the way, vince, have you ever observed (factually) a demon, an angel, and a spirit?
You do say:
"Angels, for instance, can do nothing but know and choose. The love they have for God is a choice; it is devoid of passion. Demons’ wills, by contrast, have been fixed in hate ever since their Fall from grace."
"A human being isn’t a spirit, but a human being has a spirit. However, this spirit is also the form of a living body – which is why we can do so many other things apart from thinking an choosing."
"Second, a spirit doesn’t have a location as such; nevertheless it can be said to be wherever its power extends."
"spirits – good and bad – are quite real"
And I have to add this statement from you so that others can have a good laugh too:
"For my part, I don’t equate personal identity to brain identity. If my head could be transplanted to someone else’s body, I don’t think it would be me. I think my identity is bound up with my nervous system as well as my brain, and if someone’s brain were transplanted into my body, I think that body would still be me."
If anyone wants to see how insane vince is, and what his actual (religious) agenda is, look here:
http://www.angelfire.com/linux/vjtorley/thomas1.html#smoking4
http://www.angelfire.com/linux/vjtorley/thomas2.html#appendix
He says on UD: "Third, spirits – good and bad – are quite real. You want evidence? Take a look at this":
http://www.reasons.org/testing-demonic-possession
http://www.worldmysteriesandtrueghosttales.com/modern-day-demonic-possession-documented-true-story-of-exorcism/
