<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Adam the Transformer</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer/169/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer/169/</link>
	<description>Mormon Musings by yer ol' pals</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 02:02:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jacob</title>
		<link>http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer/169/comment-page-1/#comment-24451</link>
		<dc:creator>Jacob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2006 20:12:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer-2/169/#comment-24451</guid>
		<description>Yes, I read the end of the sentence wrong.  Thanks for the correction.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I read the end of the sentence wrong.  Thanks for the correction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Butler</title>
		<link>http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer/169/comment-page-1/#comment-24449</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Butler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2006 19:26:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer-2/169/#comment-24449</guid>
		<description>Jacob,

  I do not mean rationally attuned (e.g. as to a knowledge of God and his laws), but emotionally/spiritually attuned - more likely to feel and follow (and be startled by) the spirit, without knowing why.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jacob,</p>
<p>  I do not mean rationally attuned (e.g. as to a knowledge of God and his laws), but emotionally/spiritually attuned &#8211; more likely to feel and follow (and be startled by) the spirit, without knowing why.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Geoff J</title>
		<link>http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer/169/comment-page-1/#comment-24446</link>
		<dc:creator>Geoff J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2006 19:23:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer-2/169/#comment-24446</guid>
		<description>I think you must have misread #14 Jacob.  I said I do think animals have a rudimentary form of free will but that other people disagree.  I largely agree with your comment.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you must have misread #14 Jacob.  I said I do think animals have a rudimentary form of free will but that other people disagree.  I largely agree with your comment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jacob</title>
		<link>http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer/169/comment-page-1/#comment-24445</link>
		<dc:creator>Jacob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2006 19:14:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer-2/169/#comment-24445</guid>
		<description>Geoff, 

You don&#039;t think animals have free will?  That surprises me.  I would argue that the agency of animals has a much smaller sphere than that of humans because of their limited knowledge and understanding, but I certainly don&#039;t view them as deterministic.  I would not subscribe to Mark&#039;s idea that they are more spiritually attuned either.  I think the scriptural idea that we needed a knowledge of good and evil to be able to exercise agency is explained quite well by comparison to animals who do not have a well developed sense of morality.  This limits their ability to develop morally, which is one of the most important ways for each of us to be developing.  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Geoff, </p>
<p>You don&#8217;t think animals have free will?  That surprises me.  I would argue that the agency of animals has a much smaller sphere than that of humans because of their limited knowledge and understanding, but I certainly don&#8217;t view them as deterministic.  I would not subscribe to Mark&#8217;s idea that they are more spiritually attuned either.  I think the scriptural idea that we needed a knowledge of good and evil to be able to exercise agency is explained quite well by comparison to animals who do not have a well developed sense of morality.  This limits their ability to develop morally, which is one of the most important ways for each of us to be developing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Butler</title>
		<link>http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer/169/comment-page-1/#comment-24437</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Butler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2006 18:38:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer-2/169/#comment-24437</guid>
		<description>I agree that infinitely far in the past even the greatest of intelligences did not have language, logic, law, philosophy, morality developed to any great extent.  However, as a rule I do not see how anything strictly pre-rational or sub-rational can lead to rationality.  Intelligences must have some essential properties, and free will, conciousness and a primitive capacity for rationality are most assuredly among them, lest the term be meaningless.  I do not think conciousness evolved out of non-conciousness.  God has always been concious, and so have we - that is what Joseph Smith taught.  But certainly his capacity and our capacity was once far less than it is now.  That is what eternal progression is all about.

We can have a never ending, roughly exponential increase in capacity, but note that an exponential function is never zero.  One cannot create intelligence out of nothing, nor evolve from nothing.  You have to start somewhere, and since intelligence is the driving force of creation, we must start with intelligence, and some form of rationality or intentionality (goal directed behavior).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that infinitely far in the past even the greatest of intelligences did not have language, logic, law, philosophy, morality developed to any great extent.  However, as a rule I do not see how anything strictly pre-rational or sub-rational can lead to rationality.  Intelligences must have some essential properties, and free will, conciousness and a primitive capacity for rationality are most assuredly among them, lest the term be meaningless.  I do not think conciousness evolved out of non-conciousness.  God has always been concious, and so have we &#8211; that is what Joseph Smith taught.  But certainly his capacity and our capacity was once far less than it is now.  That is what eternal progression is all about.</p>
<p>We can have a never ending, roughly exponential increase in capacity, but note that an exponential function is never zero.  One cannot create intelligence out of nothing, nor evolve from nothing.  You have to start somewhere, and since intelligence is the driving force of creation, we must start with intelligence, and some form of rationality or intentionality (goal directed behavior).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Geoff J</title>
		<link>http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer/169/comment-page-1/#comment-24432</link>
		<dc:creator>Geoff J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2006 18:19:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer-2/169/#comment-24432</guid>
		<description>Well, you&#039;ll have a hard time defending the claim that animals have free will.  I actually agree that all intelligences, including the intelligences in animals have some rudimentary form of free will; but many LDS disagree.  

So when I am using the term sentience in this post I am referring to the progression of an eternal intelligence from pre-rationality into rationality -- I just used the terms pre-sentience and sentience to describe that.  I think the Garden of Eden narrative shows that progression in all of our intelligences.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, you&#8217;ll have a hard time defending the claim that animals have free will.  I actually agree that all intelligences, including the intelligences in animals have some rudimentary form of free will; but many LDS disagree.  </p>
<p>So when I am using the term sentience in this post I am referring to the progression of an eternal intelligence from pre-rationality into rationality &#8212; I just used the terms pre-sentience and sentience to describe that.  I think the Garden of Eden narrative shows that progression in all of our intelligences.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Butler</title>
		<link>http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer/169/comment-page-1/#comment-24428</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Butler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2006 18:00:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer-2/169/#comment-24428</guid>
		<description>I believe that all anima-ls are sentient (concious, animated) in some sense, but not plants. In other words I believe that animals have intelligences and free will, and plants do not. I understand animals as having an easier time obeying celestial law, because they are simpler, more humble, and more spiritually attuned than most humans, even though they don&#039;t really understand what is going on - they know good from evil according to the spirit which they feel, not according to rationality as a rule.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I believe that all anima-ls are sentient (concious, animated) in some sense, but not plants. In other words I believe that animals have intelligences and free will, and plants do not. I understand animals as having an easier time obeying celestial law, because they are simpler, more humble, and more spiritually attuned than most humans, even though they don&#8217;t really understand what is going on &#8211; they know good from evil according to the spirit which they feel, not according to rationality as a rule.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Geoff J</title>
		<link>http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer/169/comment-page-1/#comment-24425</link>
		<dc:creator>Geoff J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2006 17:51:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer-2/169/#comment-24425</guid>
		<description>So how do you explain the intelligences in animals then, Mark?  Do you think they are sentient too?  If so, perhaps we are using the word sentient differently.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So how do you explain the intelligences in animals then, Mark?  Do you think they are sentient too?  If so, perhaps we are using the word sentient differently.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Butler</title>
		<link>http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer/169/comment-page-1/#comment-24421</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Butler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2006 17:42:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer-2/169/#comment-24421</guid>
		<description>I do not believe that the idea of an unsentient intelligence is comprehensible.  The way I understand knowledge is that the knowledge of divine law is necessary to be able to intentionally transgress it.  And only those who intentionally transgress the law are counted has sinners.

&lt;blockquote&gt;
And that he created man, male and female, after his own image and in his own likeness, created he them; 
  And gave unto them commandments that they should love and serve him, the only living and true God, and that he should be the only being whom they should worship. 
  But by the transgression of these holy laws man became sensual and devilish, and became fallen man.
(D&amp;C 20:18-20)
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

It is worth noting of course that God created his own image, i.e. God created his own (second) nature. Otherwise he is not a creator at all.  The transgression of the law is the transgression or corruption of what God intended. e.g. the natural man is an enemy to God and has been since the fall of Adam and ever will be save he yield to the enticings of the Holy Spirit [i.e. the intent of God in his creation]. Compare Ether 3:8-9.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I do not believe that the idea of an unsentient intelligence is comprehensible.  The way I understand knowledge is that the knowledge of divine law is necessary to be able to intentionally transgress it.  And only those who intentionally transgress the law are counted has sinners.</p>
<blockquote><p>
And that he created man, male and female, after his own image and in his own likeness, created he them;<br />
  And gave unto them commandments that they should love and serve him, the only living and true God, and that he should be the only being whom they should worship.<br />
  But by the transgression of these holy laws man became sensual and devilish, and became fallen man.<br />
(D&amp;C 20:18-20)
</p></blockquote>
<p>It is worth noting of course that God created his own image, i.e. God created his own (second) nature. Otherwise he is not a creator at all.  The transgression of the law is the transgression or corruption of what God intended. e.g. the natural man is an enemy to God and has been since the fall of Adam and ever will be save he yield to the enticings of the Holy Spirit [i.e. the intent of God in his creation]. Compare Ether 3:8-9.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob S</title>
		<link>http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer/169/comment-page-1/#comment-22687</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob S</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Jul 2006 04:44:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2005/11/adam-the-transformer-2/169/#comment-22687</guid>
		<description>I do have a problem with the Garden of Eden being methaphorical. I do believe it is symbolic. Everything I study in ancient Judaism is packed with symbolism, but I feel that Christians must accept it as happening. The entire role of the Messiah is based upon the restoration of all things. The fall of man is what creates the need for that restoration. If the garden never happened, there is no need for a Messiah.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I do have a problem with the Garden of Eden being methaphorical. I do believe it is symbolic. Everything I study in ancient Judaism is packed with symbolism, but I feel that Christians must accept it as happening. The entire role of the Messiah is based upon the restoration of all things. The fall of man is what creates the need for that restoration. If the garden never happened, there is no need for a Messiah.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced (Requested URI is rejected)
Database Caching 1/13 queries in 0.013 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 316/317 objects using disk: basic

Served from: www.newcoolthang.com @ 2012-02-10 04:27:11 -->
