Super Moderator florduh Posted June 16, 2015 Super Moderator Share Posted June 16, 2015 "Most people are dualists. Intuitively, we think of ourselves not as physical devices, but as immaterial minds or souls housed in physical bodies. Most experimental psychologists and neuroscientists disagree, at least officially. The modern science of mind proceeds on the assumption that the mind is simply what the brain does. We don’t talk much about this, however. We scientists take the mind’s physical basis for granted. Among the general public, it’s a touchy subject." Yes, touchy indeed. http://www.salon.com/2015/01/25/you_dont_have_a_soul_the_real_science_that_debunks_superstitious_charlatans/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdelsolray Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 The soul, consciousness, duality, etc. is the third anthropocentric delusion, invented by humans, that will eventually fade away. The first was the claim that the Earth (and implicitly it's human inhabitants) were the center of the universe. That's already been debunked. The second is that humans are the primary purpose/focus of existence. Darwin put that claim to bed, although there is still a minority of humans who resist that reality. The third is the above topic, that human existence transcends physical existence, laws and properties. Were at the beginning of debunking that one now. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest biscuit Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 @sdelsolray - where did you read that the soul, consciousness, duality will fade away?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Really interesting thread, thanks for posting. Whenever I think about these issues, my view is that the mind is what the brain does. I don't believe in a soul anymore, and I accept that one day my body will stop working, my brain will stop working, and with it my mind will just "stop". I feel very fortunate that this prospect does not disturb me. All I care about is leaving my affairs reasonably in order, and my loved ones feeling that they made the most of sharing my time here and that they have good memories of me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burny Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Yep. Humans are finally realizing that we just aren't that special after all. It's about damn time IMHO. We'll be better off for it in the long run although I think the thought of no soul is devastating for simple minds to admit. We so desperately cling to the fantasy that there's an eternal place in the sky just waiting to welcome us with open arms, where all our childish fantasies will come true. Not going to happen folks. Deal with it. Move on. Live life appropriately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted June 16, 2015 Author Super Moderator Share Posted June 16, 2015 ...the thought of no soul is devastating for simple minds to admit. I think "simple minds" is clearly a factor when you look at the hold religion has on uneducated populations as compared to the noticeable absence of religion in the academic community. Still, even some scientists with the evidence right in front of them are hesitant to dismiss any possibility of a soul and afterlife because it seems it is built into us and will take some time to get past that programming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 "Most people are dualists. Intuitively, we think of ourselves not as physical devices, but as immaterial minds or souls housed in physical bodies. Most experimental psychologists and neuroscientists disagree, at least officially. The modern science of mind proceeds on the assumption that the mind is simply what the brain does. We don’t talk much about this, however. We scientists take the mind’s physical basis for granted. Among the general public, it’s a touchy subject." Yes, touchy indeed. http://www.salon.com/2015/01/25/you_dont_have_a_soul_the_real_science_that_debunks_superstitious_charlatans/ Dualism is indeed false. Consciousness is all there is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 @sdelsolray - where did you read that the soul, consciousness, duality will fade away?? No duality (or non-duality) would mean there is no you as a separate person from me...All is not two things. No me vs everything else. It's not supernatural either..It's completely natural. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Margee Posted June 16, 2015 Moderator Share Posted June 16, 2015 Really interesting thread,. Whenever I think about these issues, my view is that the mind is what the brain does. I don't believe in a soul anymore, and I accept that one day my body will stop working, my brain will stop working, and with it my mind will just "stop". I feel very fortunate that this prospect does not disturb me. I wanted more than anything in the world to believe that the brain does whatever the mind tells it...(hence the popular concept of 'The Secret') but why wouldn't a starving child have food when they would think constantly about it??It should somehow magically appear for them. But it doesn't. Everything I have investigated spiritually never can give me a reasonably good answer to why so much suffering exists. I am now watching my MIL die. Her memory is gone for most things because her brain is shutting down. 'She', the person she was...is no longer with me anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Really interesting thread,. Whenever I think about these issues, my view is that the mind is what the brain does. I don't believe in a soul anymore, and I accept that one day my body will stop working, my brain will stop working, and with it my mind will just "stop". I feel very fortunate that this prospect does not disturb me. I wanted more than anything in the world to believe that the brain does whatever the mind tells it...(hence the popular concept of 'The Secret') but why wouldn't a starving child have food when they would think constantly about it??It should somehow magically appear for them. But it doesn't. Everything I have investigated spiritually never can give me a reasonably answer to why so much suffering exists. I am now watching my MIL die. Her memory is gone for most things because her brain is shutting down. 'She', the person she was...is no longer with me anymore. Hugs, Margee. I am thinking of you. xx 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PurpleStarGirl Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/biocentrism/201112/does-the-soul-exist-evidence-says-yes This is probably just purely a psychological concept but this article implies that there's evidence of a soul existing in us. I for one would love to to see the research first before jumping to any sort of conclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RogueScholar Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 I instantly discounted the author of the article when it was clear they really do not understand how the double slit experiment is set up. What happens when we "observe" a system? We have to interact with the system and this interaction will invariably perturb said system. I'm so tired of people who have no ideas what they are talking about or do understand and do not present an honest assessment make conclusions based on these flawed assertions. The assertion that particles only exist as waves of probability is simply not acknowledging the entire story. Our ability to know certain aspects of a particle or system at the same time is limited. In essence, we cannot know both position and momentum with arbitrary accuracy. The more we know about one, the less we know about the other. This is far from saying something doesn't exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 I'm at a loss to explain why such an otherwise credible scholar would get it so wrong. I checked out his bio, as I usually do when reading articles like this, and he's not some low-brow semi-scientist from a religious college. Anyway, it's not my field, so I'll leave it to those who know more about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RogueScholar Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 No, he's actually quite distinguished in his field. However, he continues to push his idea he calls "biocentrism." Unfortunately, I cannot see where his ideas make robust predictions that can actually be tested and stand the test of falsifiability. Even well regarded scientists are not immune to criticism when they present ideas that do not hold up. One of my heroes, a Nobel laureate by the name of Linus Pauling fundamentally changed chemistry believed in a vitamin hypothesis that simply did not pan out. Lanza has been pushing around his "theory" since at least the mid 2000's and his ideas have received much criticism. Another important consideration is that a scientist tends to be an expert in a certain specialty or will spend years working on learning a new specialty. When one begins to make claims outside of their field that are not robustly developed and cannot be tested, they really do a significant disservice to science in general. It's fine to bring up questions and to point out where things lack intuition and complete understanding; however, it's another thing to say you have a fully developed "theory" that cannot make robust predictions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 No, he's actually quite distinguished in his field. However, he continues to push his idea he calls "biocentrism." Unfortunately, I cannot see where his ideas make robust predictions that can actually be tested and stand the test of falsifiability. Even well regarded scientists are not immune to criticism when they present ideas that do not hold up. One of my heroes, a Nobel laureate by the name of Linus Pauling fundamentally changed chemistry believed in a vitamin hypothesis that simply did not pan out. Lanza has been pushing around his "theory" since at least the mid 2000's and his ideas have received much criticism. Another important consideration is that a scientist tends to be an expert in a certain specialty or will spend years working on learning a new specialty. When one begins to make claims outside of their field that are not robustly developed and cannot be tested, they really do a significant disservice to science in general. It's fine to bring up questions and to point out where things lack intuition and complete understanding; however, it's another thing to say you have a fully developed "theory" that cannot make robust predictions. Yeah, totally. I just don't understand why he hasn't listened to the criticism. Surely he has the intellect to understand it? Or, are even the brightest minds capable of blindness to the flaws of their own ideas? I guess the answer is yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdelsolray Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 I agree with RogueScholar. Lanza has medical credentials but his Biocentrism is basically speculation with sides salads of philosophy and new age woo woo, with him claiming "science". Pseudoscience is more accurate, at least until he can present a valid and falsifiable hypotheses with appropriate testing procedures which produce results that support his claims. Curiously, he seems not willing or capable of doing so. That's not science. Issac Newton, a brilliant and foundational mathematician and physicist, believed in Alchemy and spent much of his productive years chasing down rabbit holes in that debunked pseudoscience. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdelsolray Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 @sdelsolray - where did you read that the soul, consciousness, duality will fade away?? Well, I guess I didn't mean that the concept of consciousness would fade away, just the concepts of a soul and duality would fade away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Medical credentials but talks about woowoo? Reminds me of Deepak Chopra. **Shudders** 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duderonomy Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Medical credentials but talks about woowoo? Reminds me of Deepak Chopra. **Shudders** Last year, a man I knew for less than an hour in real life cut three cancerous tumors off my left kidney. I have no idea if he has a soul or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/boy-lived-life-woman-killed-chicago-fire-article-1.2121264 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/20/boy-reincarnated-woman-chicago-fire_n_6715128.html One of the videos didn't play for me, so provided another link....kind of interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted June 17, 2015 Author Super Moderator Share Posted June 17, 2015 This brings up an issue, end3. Do you think reincarnation is compatible with the Bible? Inquiring minds want to know.There are many cases of supposed reincarnation; some seem to have physical evidence for corroboration and others have been clearly shown to be phony. Some of the stories are compelling, but I have no way to ascertain the validity of any of the tales. It's a bit like the detail laden, multiple witness stories of Bigfoot encounters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 This brings up an issue, end3. Do you think reincarnation is compatible with the Bible? Inquiring minds want to know.There are many cases of supposed reincarnation; some seem to have physical evidence for corroboration and others have been clearly shown to be phony. Some of the stories are compelling, but I have no way to ascertain the validity of any of the tales. It's a bit like the detail laden, multiple witness stories of Bigfoot encounters. Don't think Christianity touts reincarnation that I remember. Just thought it was interesting because the mother, grandmother(?), and child didn't come across to me as untruthful. I'm open to changing my mind about whatever is ultimately there after we die, but really don't think it's "nothing". I think Christianity makes the most sense to me at this point, but things like this story are refreshing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 This brings up an issue, end3. Do you think reincarnation is compatible with the Bible? Inquiring minds want to know.There are many cases of supposed reincarnation; some seem to have physical evidence for corroboration and others have been clearly shown to be phony. Some of the stories are compelling, but I have no way to ascertain the validity of any of the tales. It's a bit like the detail laden, multiple witness stories of Bigfoot encounters. Don't think Christianity touts reincarnation that I remember. Just thought it was interesting because the mother, grandmother(?), and child didn't come across to me as untruthful. I'm open to changing my mind about whatever is ultimately there after we die, but really don't think it's "nothing". I think Christianity makes the most sense to me at this point, but things like this story are refreshing. Why wouldn't it be nothing? That is what all the evidence points to. If you are going to ignore all of it then how can you be open to changing your mind? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 This brings up an issue, end3. Do you think reincarnation is compatible with the Bible? Inquiring minds want to know.There are many cases of supposed reincarnation; some seem to have physical evidence for corroboration and others have been clearly shown to be phony. Some of the stories are compelling, but I have no way to ascertain the validity of any of the tales. It's a bit like the detail laden, multiple witness stories of Bigfoot encounters. Don't think Christianity touts reincarnation that I remember. Just thought it was interesting because the mother, grandmother(?), and child didn't come across to me as untruthful. I'm open to changing my mind about whatever is ultimately there after we die, but really don't think it's "nothing". I think Christianity makes the most sense to me at this point, but things like this story are refreshing. Why wouldn't it be nothing? That is what all the evidence points to. If you are going to ignore all of it then how can you be open to changing your mind? It could be nothing....we will see....or not. Edit: None of us really live like it's nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted June 17, 2015 Author Super Moderator Share Posted June 17, 2015 I think very few of us actually hope there is nothing after death, but unfortunately that's where the evidence points. Some tales of reincarnation seem to point to a continuation of consciousness, and I think some of the verifiable aspects of these stories are the best evidence for continuation; assuming the stories are true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts