TA 106 (Müller)

Commentary 35 (to Müller, McCarthy, Patlavskiy)


by Slavoj Hontela
8 August 2008, posted 16 August 2008


(to TA106, and to McCarthy, C32, etc)
Is it true that Dawkins insists the existence of God is a question to be answered by mind-exclusive objective science‘ ?  It is hard to believe Dawkins could say something so ‘mind-limited’.  -  Concerning the handshaking of the Pope with Jewish and Muslim clergymen :  I would judge it very carefully.  It is true the Vatican accepted the concept of evolution, but to the zygote only.  What will the reaction be to synthetic life – which is around the corner – perhaps even this year ?


(to Serge Patlavskiy, C33, etc)
At the beginning I was very impressed by his approach to the problem of consciousness which seemed to be very scientific.  But what about ‘I am happy to accept this natural cretativity in the univdrse as a reinvention of God’ ??  What about Patlavskiy’s ‘General law of Conservation of Consciousness’ ?  What does he mean by ‘each living organism possesses only one consciousness’ ?  Personally I would find a certain correlation of this theory with my own concept of the universal occurrence of DAN/RNA, but later Patlavskiy’s ideas are totally without sense :  the immortality of consciousness, the replacement of a disappeared consciousness by others, even extraterrestrial, cosmic origin, etc. 


Slavoj Hontela
     e-mail <
shontela (at) seznam.cz>