12 Jul 13
1 edit
And there is the physical brain which in western thinking is more or less the 'mind'. But in eastern thought the physical brain is manifested from the cosmic mind .
If one were to clone successfully the brain(and body) of a supposed historical divine entity like Buddha or Jesus, I suspect you would just get a healthy , good-working,well-trained brain. It's upto the 'driver' of this 'unit' to see what it is used for 🙂
12 Jul 13
3 edits
Originally posted by karoly aczel
Definately not.
I dont think JC was different than any other normal man, he just used his full potential.
But I'm assuming that this cloning is of his physical aspects only. As we know a man is made up of his genetics and his environmental influences.
Cloning only replicates his genetics.
Definately not.
I dont think JC was different than any other normal man, he just used his full potential.
If you don't think Jesus was divine, then presumably you won't think an exact duplicate of Jesus would be divine either. That's all fair enough.
But I'm assuming that this cloning is of his physical aspects only. As we know a man is made up of his genetics and his environmental influences.
Cloning only replicates his genetics.
The cloning at issue here would be physical duplication in "every particular". I think we can safely defer to Agerg's clarifying remarks above that what we are talking about would be exact duplication of the "arrangement" at issue.
I don't agree that such cloning in this sense would only encompass genetics and not environmental influences. It seems to me that such duplication would surely encompass all relevant environmental influences up to that point in Jesus' development (of course, after that point, perhaps all bets are off, since Jesus and the duplicate could be on divergent paths from there). After all, environmental factors are influences in the sense you mean to the extent that they helped shape that person's mentality and psychological features, such as beliefs, dispositions, character traits, etc, etc. But, as Pawnokeyhole pointed out in his thread that first initiated this question, bodies/brains underlie minds. So it is as close as you can get to a neurobiological certainty that these environmentally-forged features of Jesus would also be there in the duplicate upon duplication. Unless you have some other account of what underlies such features?
EDIT: The 'cloning' at issue here is not simply the usual sense of genetic cloning. It is a much stronger sense of duplication, as described in the hypothetical (and clarified further by Agerg's comments). I should have desisted from using the word 'cloning', since it's potentially confusing. In fact, I think I confused you. Sorry. I agree with your points as it would relate to 'cloning' in the conventional sense of genetic cloning; but I don't agree with your points as it would relate to the duplication at issue in this hypothetical.
12 Jul 13
Originally posted by karoly aczelNot sure what to make of all this.
And there is the physical brain which in western thinking is more or less the 'mind'. But in eastern thought the physical brain is manifested from the cosmic mind .
If one were to clone successfully the brain(and body) of a supposed historical divine entity like Buddha or Jesus, I suspect you would just get a healthy , good-working,well-trained brain. It's upto the 'driver' of this 'unit' to see what it is used for 🙂
12 Jul 13
Originally posted by RJHindsThank you. That's fair enough.
I believe that the Holy Spirit would have to get involved for the divine aspects to be indwelt in the physical body. I don't have any idea how this could happen, but all things are possible when God is involved.
The Instructor
As an aside, this seems like some manner of confirmation that the explanation "Goddunnit" just collapses to something like "I haven't a frickin' clue".
12 Jul 13
5 edits
Originally posted by LemonJelloThankyou for the topic - it's a good question and will hopefully coax out some interesting discussion from others.
Thanks for your comments.
I suppose, though, one could agree that in producing an exact physical duplicate (or "arrangement" in a stronger sense as you clarified) you also duplicate the mind; and yet still deny that the duplicate is "divine" (even given that the original is divine). That sounds like a strange position to me, though.
EDIT: By "phy form as you say. But it might be better to make this more explicit in the hypothetical.
I suppose the main question that has to be asked is: What do we mean by divine? If it is it some fundamental property of Jesus's "construct" that is able to manifest in some perceptible sense in the universe, then surely it would be required that these features are present in any copy of Jesus (else that copy is deficient); but then if that is the case, this copy would be at least divine to the extent that Jesus's divinity has any impact on this universe would it not!?
If this divinity does not have any impact or means to interact with our universe (so no need to capture any of its features) then ... well ... again, what do we mean by divinity?...just some hollow decree that he is divine (whatever that means)!!?
Acknowledging your point to checkbaiter that we need not care about how this clone comes about I am I'm somewhat embarrassed by my ramblings in the third paragraph (and in the second - hinged upon the third ... I'll put it down to a late night).
13 Jul 13
Originally posted by LemonJelloWell, we have clues that God did many things, but it is still a mystery as to how. I believe that is what science is trying to discover in its haphazard way.
Thank you. That's fair enough.
As an aside, this seems like some manner of confirmation that the explanation "Goddunnit" just collapses to something like "I haven't a frickin' clue".
The Instructor
14 Jul 13
Originally posted by LemonJelloWell basically that the physical(body) is just a vehicle for consciousness, which 'drives' the body.
Not sure what to make of all this.
you can clone physical stuff, but the consciousness of a new clone might be just like that of a newborns, like starting with a blank page,even if that clone is a fully grown person. (?)
15 Jul 13
Originally posted by karoly aczelCloning does not mean making a fully grown human like God can do. See the link.
Well basically that the physical(body) is just a vehicle for consciousness, which 'drives' the body.
you can clone physical stuff, but the consciousness of a new clone might be just like that of a newborns, like starting with a blank page,even if that clone is a fully grown person. (?)
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/156134-scientists-finally-clone-human-embryos
The Instructor
15 Jul 13
2 edits
Originally posted by Agerg
Thankyou for the topic - it's a good question and will hopefully coax out some interesting discussion from others.
I suppose the main question that has to be asked is: What do we mean by divine? If it is it some fundamental property of Jesus's "construct" that is able to manifest in some perceptible sense in the universe, then surely it would be required th and in the second - hinged upon the third ... I'll put it down to a late night).[/hidden]
What do we mean by divine? If it is it some fundamental property of Jesus's "construct" that is able to manifest in some perceptible sense in the universe, then surely it would be required that these features are present in any copy of Jesus (else that copy is deficient); but then if that is the case, this copy would be at least divine to the extent that Jesus's divinity has any impact on this universe would it not!?
I pretty much agree with you: to me, it only makes sense that if the original Jesus has the property of being divine, then we should expect than an exact duplicate of Jesus would also have the same property. However, I have thought a bit about this, and below are some conceivable reasons why one may hold otherwise. I would be interested to know your ideas on this.
First, as SwissGambit already pointed out, one may hold that the person is, at bottom, constituted by a disembodied soul. If that's the case, then they do not have reason to think that exact physical duplication of the body would translate to duplication of the person or soul. Of course, if you're like me, then you find this sort of soul talk to be pretty implausible.
Second, although the duplication at issue here would exactly replicate the "arrangement" or "construct", it would fail to replicate some other features and relational properties. The original Jesus and the duplicate are not exactly the same in all respects. For example, their origins are different: Jesus came about from virgin birth orchestrated by God and subsequent development whereas the duplicate came about through duplication in some way largely unspecified in the hypothetical. If one holds that the property of being divine is not divorceable from the way in which one came about, then they do not have reason here to think the duplicate is divine, even if they have reason to think the original Jesus is divine.
Third, this one is rather funny to me. It's related to the second one above. The duplicate Jesus should have all the same beliefs that the original Jesus has. But, hilariously, it would seem that many of these beliefs the duplicate has are false (even if the associated corresponding beliefs in the original Jesus are true). For example, suppose the duplicate is created sometime after the water walking episode. Suppose the original Jesus has beliefs related to episodic memory of this walking on water. The duplicate will also have these memories of walking on water. But did the duplicate ever actually walk on water? No. So it would seem that the duplicate has a bunch of false beliefs, particularly as it relates to episodic memory. Perhaps one would deny that having so many false beliefs is consistent with being divine.
15 Jul 13
Originally posted by karoly aczelOk, I see what you mean. That sounds extraordinarily implausible to me (again, relative to the type of 'cloning' at issue here). But perhaps someone with a different view of consciousness or what underlies minds may have some different take on it.
Well basically that the physical(body) is just a vehicle for consciousness, which 'drives' the body.
you can clone physical stuff, but the consciousness of a new clone might be just like that of a newborns, like starting with a blank page,even if that clone is a fully grown person. (?)
15 Jul 13
Originally posted by LemonJellosure.
Ok, I see what you mean. That sounds extraordinarily implausible to me (again, relative to the type of 'cloning' at issue here). But perhaps someone with a different view of consciousness or what underlies minds may have some different take on it.
Thnx for the thought provoke.
I gotta think about this more