midniterider Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Maybe, but I can't imagine people just deciding to adopt a belief or philosophy for no reason. Hell, if I could actually believe a thing just because I wanted to, I would choose to believe in magic. I agree with you, florduh. A person who believes that immortality is humanly possible, must have good reasons. I can give you my own reasons: I believe that a spirit world exists because without it, nothing makes sense to me. I need to make sense of my existence, my life, my experiences, to be healthy. Materialism makes me sick, literally. Spirituality makes sense to me. In the universe, we have rocks and consciousness, and everything in between. Materialism states that rocks are the primary substance of the universe. Smash different types of rocks together with energy, long enough, and eventuality consciousness will appear. Spirituality states that spirit (consciousness) is the primary substance of the universe. That there is one great spirit which is a sort of living creative mind, within which everything we know exists. Rocks and conscious beings can spring into existence magically or progressively within this universal mind, in ways we will never be able to undersand, unless we evolve spiritually. Which theory makes more sense to you? to me? Which one came first, the chicken or the egg? Rocks or consciousness? Why does one theory make more sense to one person and not to the other? What does "making sense" mean anyway? The fact that we ask ourselves all these questions to me is a "sign" that we are not material beings. A material being, like a computer, is satisfied with being material. The "spirit" within man in not satisfied with the notion of being only material. Everyone I know gives meaning to his own life. "Giving meaning" is not something material objects are concerned with. Look at everything that is around you right now, everything in the room. All of it was "thought of" before it was created. Everything. A calculator will not be created by an explosive energy smashing rocks together randomly, even if this goes on for billions of years. Thought always comes first, we know this. For a thought to exist, there has to be a spirit behind it. The material stuff comes last. It's logical. To me. But I admit, I'm probably not as educated as most of you. I graduated from high school, then one year of college, then spent the rest of my life reading spiritual books. Actually, the comment about having a reason was in reference to my own conclusions. Honestly, spirituality makes more sense to me intuitively. However, I can understand why that is so. Making sense to me isn't a binding condition on reality. There is surely a lot in life that doesn't make sense yet is real. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wndwalkr99 Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Rejecting Christianity doesn't mean you have to reject spirituality. Materialism is a sad philosophy, in my opinion. But it's just that, a philosophy. No one can prove that a spirit world does not exist. I don't find it difficult to believe that I am a spirit being having a human experience. I know my body will die, no doubt about that, but I believe my consciousness will continue living after physical death. I believe I have an astral body. Where are your critical thinking skills, man?? Unfair attack. Deny is a very intelligent person. Sorry Margee, I'm not backing down from this one. Intelligent people have the capacity for critical thinking skills, so thats why I'm wondering where Denyoz' critical thinking skills are. Hibernating, or what? If you can believe something because it is not falsifiable, you can justify believing damn near anything. By all means, go ahead, but I see no reason to respect that position. It is not reasonable to believe in any and every preposterous thing that cannot be disproven. it seems you expect that any absurdity is OK to believe without repercussion as long as it is not Christianity. Go ahead and accept all the bullshit beliefs you like, but I for one am not going to coddle along those who believe such ridiculousness, as long as that belief is not Christian. Ridiculous is ridiculous and I'll call it like I see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Rejecting Christianity doesn't mean you have to reject spirituality. Materialism is a sad philosophy, in my opinion. But it's just that, a philosophy. No one can prove that a spirit world does not exist. I don't find it difficult to believe that I am a spirit being having a human experience. I know my body will die, no doubt about that, but I believe my consciousness will continue living after physical death. I believe I have an astral body. Where are your critical thinking skills, man?? Unfair attack. Deny is a very intelligent person. Sorry Margee, I'm not backing down from this one. Intelligent people have the capacity for critical thinking skills, so thats why I'm wondering where Denyoz' critical thinking skills are. Hibernating, or what? If you can believe something because it is not falsifiable, you can justify believing damn near anything. By all means, go ahead, but I see no reason to respect that position. It is not reasonable to believe in any and every preposterous thing that cannot be disproven. it seems you expect that any absurdity is OK to believe without repercussion as long as it is not Christianity. Go ahead and accept all the bullshit beliefs you like, but I for one am not going to coddle along those who believe such ridiculousness, as long as that belief is not Christian. Ridiculous is ridiculous and I'll call it like I see it. "If you can believe something because it is not falsifiable, you can justify believing damn near anything" If someone is an idiot, yes, they might believe anything.But, most people with intelligence and common sense limit themselves to only a few preposterous beliefs. :-) "you expect that any absurdity is OK to believe without repercussion as long as it is not Christianity" If it has little or no repercussion then I guess it's just a matter of personal preference. :-) Some people enjoy being ridiculous. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vigile Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 "If you can believe something because it is not falsifiable, you can justify believing damn near anything" If someone is an idiot, yes, they might believe anything.But, most people with intelligence and common sense limit themselves to only a few preposterous beliefs. :-) He has a point about non-falsifiable beliefs. The human mind is very poor at deciphering reality, which is why we need tools, such as falsifiability to help us weed out 'what seems so' from what is more likely to be so. For some people, this doesn't matter and certain beliefs might give them comfort of sorts. To each their own. I personally, having been fed a line of life-altering bullshit from birth and went through a painful, multi-year deconversion process, am not content to 'believe' anything that isn't supported by rigorous research and evidence. Call it a self-preservation reaction if you will. This doesn't mean that everything I believe represents everything that is true. It just means that everything I believe is more likely to be true while undoubtedly vast swaths of things remain to be discovered or are already and I'm just ignorant of them. What I do know is that based on the law of probabilities, things that are made up have virtually no chance in being real as making stuff up is like blindly throwing a dart at the universe and hitting a target of your own imagination. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Since matter is actually mostly empty space with a few subatomic particles here and there, I see no reason to attribute consciousness to matter. It just doesn't make sense to me that consciousness is linked to matter. There is no way I can believe its here today and completely gone tomorrow. But that's just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted March 3, 2013 Super Moderator Share Posted March 3, 2013 Since matter is actually mostly empty space with a few subatomic particles here and there, I see no reason to attribute consciousness to matter. It just doesn't make sense to me that consciousness is linked to matter. There is no way I can believe its here today and completely gone tomorrow. But that's just me. Then why attribute anything to matter? If you get hit by the matter of a car, it sure doesn't feel like "mostly empty space!" Matter matters. It doesn't seem possible or right to me either that what we perceive as consciousness is a perception generated by our own brains, yet all evidence points to that. I can't help but favor evidence over what I wish were true. That's just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Well, the facts do matter, and its a fact that "reality" is actually not solid reality as we think we see it. This is really a scientific fact. It has not been established that consciousness is a product of matter. There are some things that do exist that science cannot completely explain yet. Consciousness is one of them. Indeed - what happens when you get hit by a car and killed? I think consciousness goes elsewhere. That's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wndwalkr99 Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 I think consciousness goes elsewhere. Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vigile Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Well, the facts do matter, and its a fact that "reality" is actually not solid reality as we think we see it. This is really a scientific fact. It has not been established that consciousness is a product of matter. There are some things that do exist that science cannot completely explain yet. Consciousness is one of them. Indeed - what happens when you get hit by a car and killed? I think consciousness goes elsewhere. That's all. What happens to the consciousness of an Alzheimer patient whose brain matter is slowly eroding, and with it a consciousness that comes and goes and slowly just drains away in bits and pieces as more and more matter is damaged? I personally think it's not true that Alzheimer specialists have not established that consciousness is a product of matter. I could be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 I think consciousness goes elsewhere. Why? Its here now, why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrianime Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Within the last year I heard that great saying...the one that goes something like, "Every idea should be open for criticism, so why is it that religion gets a free pass?" That comment sparked a little revalation in me. Criticizing religions is way too taboo, and it's a shame! I hope people aren't getting offended that their spiritualism is being criticized. That being said, I don't believe there is any good reason to believe that your consciousness, personality, or mental individuality (whatever you want to call it) is NOT tied to your physical body. The only reasons I can think of to believe this are to either wish it were true or to not understand how it all works, so you assume a conclusion. To me those aren't justifiable reasons. In my eyes they are just a subset of the reasons that people would believe in a god. I strongly feel the same type of thinking is being applied here. I hold nothing against those who believe this, just as I hold nothing against most religious people. But, I think that belief is unrealistic, and still kind of in the fairy tale realm of how to look at existence. However, maybe these types of beliefs (including theism) have just become part of the natural state of a human being. If only we knew how to read other animals' minds. Although I doubt they think in a way we could comprehend. But, I would actually bet that they never worry about the after life, whether magic exists, or whether there is a god. If a hypothetical ultra intelligent race of beings who understood far more than us about existence could study us as a species.....hah, I bet they would find us pretty silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Well, the facts do matter, and its a fact that "reality" is actually not solid reality as we think we see it. This is really a scientific fact. It has not been established that consciousness is a product of matter. There are some things that do exist that science cannot completely explain yet. Consciousness is one of them. Indeed - what happens when you get hit by a car and killed? I think consciousness goes elsewhere. That's all. What happens to the consciousness of an Alzheimer patient whose brain matter is slowly eroding, and with it a consciousness that comes and goes and slowly just drains away in bits and pieces as more and more matter is damaged? I personally think it's not true that Alzheimer specialists have not established that consciousness is a product of matter. I could be wrong. I don't claim to have concrete scientific proof, but there are many indications that consciousness doesn't end with death, such as the evidence (admittedly circumstantial) collected by the late Dr. Ian Stevenson. Just because science can't design an experiment for something doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It means there are still mysteries in the universe. I personally find the materialist position to be very limited. It is a shame more scientists don't do more study on these so-called "stupid" ideas like telepathy and reincarnation. Biologist Rupert Sheldrake has done some interesting experiments on telepathy between dogs and their masters. I totally agree with what he says in this article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-rupert-sheldrake/why-bad-science-is-like-bad-religion_b_2200597.html Dr. Stevenson was not and Dr. Sheldrake is not stupid. Neither was the late physicist Dr. David Bohm, who proposed we live in a holographic universe. These scientists, as far as I can understand them, at least considered the possibility of consciousness surviving death. I don't have the statistics on how many scientists think that consciousness may survive death. If someone does have a poll on that, I would be interested in seeing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrianime Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 I personally think it's not true that Alzheimer specialists have not established that consciousness is a product of matter. I could be wrong. Vigile was that an intentional double negative (so it means the same thing if we remove both "not")? If so then I would lean towards agreement. If it was an accidental double negative, then I lean towards disagreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vigile Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Well, the facts do matter, and its a fact that "reality" is actually not solid reality as we think we see it. This is really a scientific fact. It has not been established that consciousness is a product of matter. There are some things that do exist that science cannot completely explain yet. Consciousness is one of them. Indeed - what happens when you get hit by a car and killed? I think consciousness goes elsewhere. That's all. What happens to the consciousness of an Alzheimer patient whose brain matter is slowly eroding, and with it a consciousness that comes and goes and slowly just drains away in bits and pieces as more and more matter is damaged? I personally think it's not true that Alzheimer specialists have not established that consciousness is a product of matter. I could be wrong. I don't claim to have concrete scientific proof, but there are many indications that consciousness doesn't end with death, such as the evidence (admittedly circumstantial) collected by the late Dr. Ian Stevenson. Just because science can't design an experiment for something doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It means there are still mysteries in the universe. I personally find the materialist position to be very limited. It is a shame more scientists don't do more study on these so-called "stupid" ideas like telepathy and reincarnation. Biologist Rupert Sheldrake has done some interesting experiments on telepathy between dogs and their masters. I totally agree with what he says in this article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-rupert-sheldrake/why-bad-science-is-like-bad-religion_b_2200597.html Dr. Stevenson was not and Dr. Sheldrake is not stupid. Neither was the late physicist Dr. David Bohm, who proposed we live in a holographic universe. These scientists, as far as I can understand them, at least considered the possibility of consciousness surviving death. I don't have the statistics on how many scientists think that consciousness may survive death. If someone does have a poll on that, I would be interested in seeing it. Yes, but how do you explain the very observable disintegration of consciousness that accompanies Alzheimer patients that coincides with the disintegration of their brain tissue? Also, one doctor's opinion doesn't make a truth. I believe this doctor/scientist has an opinion that is contrary to the vast majority of doctors and scientists. Those who deny global warming, evolution, etc... also point to one or two experts that contradict the majority in their field. This is why appeals to authority are considered logical errors. Anyway, I don't want to be a jerk and try and force you to believe or disbelieve what I believe here. That's not my business. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vigile Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 I personally think it's not true that Alzheimer specialists have not established that consciousness is a product of matter. I could be wrong. Vigile was that an intentional double negative (so it means the same thing if we remove both "not")? If so then I would lean towards agreement. If it was an accidental double negative, then I lean towards disagreement. Deva said that it has not been established that consciousness is not solely a product of the brain. I argued that I believe it is well established that it is and that this is a fact reasonably understood by experts such as Alzheimer specialists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wndwalkr99 Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 I think consciousness goes elsewhere. Why? Its here now, why not? If that is your best reason, then your standards are far lower than mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denyoz Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Consider dimensions: We live in the third dimension. Look at the forth. It's identical to the third, but on another plane, but they are linked. If we think in 3 dimensions, it's impossible to perceive the fourth. "In physics and mathematics, the concept of dimension is not restricted to physical objects. High-dimensional spaces occur in mathematics and the sciences for many reasons, frequently as configuration spaces; these are abstract spaces, independent of the physical space we live in." from Wiki: Dimension (mathematics and physics) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 I think consciousness goes elsewhere. Why? Its here now, why not? If that is your best reason, then your standards are far lower than mine. Actually I am just playing with you. I don't really feel obligated to defend myself here, and my "standards" are actually pretty high. I don't believe most people live life according to peer reviewed science and I find the materialist position to be a narrow view. There are things which I believe, on review of the evidence and my own experience, that science has yet to prove, such as the survival of consciousness after death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted March 3, 2013 Super Moderator Share Posted March 3, 2013 I don't believe most people live life according to peer reviewed science and I find the materialist position to be a narrow view. I agree with both of these statements. We all believe that which we are able to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 A bunch of years ago I made this quiz. More than anything, I made it so I could come to grips with what my beliefs about death meant to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kris Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Well-- based on your quiz, I am an extintivist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrianime Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 I personally think it's not true that Alzheimer specialists have not established that consciousness is a product of matter. I could be wrong. Vigile was that an intentional double negative (so it means the same thing if we remove both "not")? If so then I would lean towards agreement. If it was an accidental double negative, then I lean towards disagreement. Deva said that it has not been established that consciousness is not solely a product of the brain. I argued that I believe it is well established that it is and that this is a fact reasonably understood by experts such as Alzheimer specialists. Understood! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dB-Paradox Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Has been going from "living forever in heaven with the Lorduh, Yay!!!!" To "Well, fuck, this is it? That bastard Richard Dawkins was right? Well shit, fuck, SHIT!!!!!" I mean, one day you're immortal and the next, you're mortal. That's literally the way it worked out for me... When I realized it was all bullshit, this was the most powerful and sobering epiphany. Who else hates that their immortal super-power was taken from them? How are you coping? If only you could crush a planet or a galaxy to make you feel better... But guess what, you can't! You're just a mere mortal! hahahahaha But seriously. I battle with this being it... I want to believe in something else so I'm always looking for the latest NDE or "spiritual" experience... If there's one thing that gives me hope, it's that this universe is an enigma. There's vastly far more we don't know than we do... It's just that the things that we do know don't do the afterlife idea any favors. *sadface* I always had a hard time believing in an eternal afterlife. The concept was too difficult, even if it was reassuring. Having said that, I personally see no reason to find comfort in believing that we will see our loved ones again, and that we will leave one realm, and enter another. It may not be true, but it may also be a coping mechanism that some people need. I sometimes find myself embracing such a philosophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 "If you can believe something because it is not falsifiable, you can justify believing damn near anything" If someone is an idiot, yes, they might believe anything.But, most people with intelligence and common sense limit themselves to only a few preposterous beliefs. :-) He has a point about non-falsifiable beliefs. The human mind is very poor at deciphering reality, which is why we need tools, such as falsifiability to help us weed out 'what seems so' from what is more likely to be so. For some people, this doesn't matter and certain beliefs might give them comfort of sorts. To each their own. I personally, having been fed a line of life-altering bullshit from birth and went through a painful, multi-year deconversion process, am not content to 'believe' anything that isn't supported by rigorous research and evidence. Call it a self-preservation reaction if you will. This doesn't mean that everything I believe represents everything that is true. It just means that everything I believe is more likely to be true while undoubtedly vast swaths of things remain to be discovered or are already and I'm just ignorant of them. What I do know is that based on the law of probabilities, things that are made up have virtually no chance in being real as making stuff up is like blindly throwing a dart at the universe and hitting a target of your own imagination. Critical thinking, reasoning and logic are what keeps us alive, I agree. It is wise to question everything and if it doesn't stand up to rigorous examination of facts and evidence it's probably bullshit. My life is based on common sense actions. But I still enjoy "what if" thoughts. I was fortunate enough to grow up in a skeptical household. My Christianity rode on top of 30 years of skepticism :-) so after 10 years of Christianity it was relatively easy to discard it. I can't even imagine what it might be like to be born and raised as a Christian and then suddenly find out the truth. Still, if we dont entertain some ridiculous ideas we may stunt our growth. Some things that were inconceivable hundreds of years ago are reality now. I'm not trying to prove there is a god, or that there are supernatural 'things' but that there are natural 'things' that may exist outside of our current scientific comprehension. Some day our scientific comprehension will expand to include and exploit these things. Some day we will be able to measure 'stuff' that today we are positive does not exist. Check out these for a chuckle: http://www.rinkworks.com/said/predictions.shtml Wouldnt it be interesting if it were possible to take a man from the 1st century and have him witness a rocket launch from Cape Canaveral or let him communicate with someone on a cell phone. Then ask him to describe what this experience was and what it meant to him. Technology today would totally blow him away. Not so much that he might think it was magic or think it was god, just an inability to comprehend it altogether. :-) In the very early 70s I watched Star Trek and thought about how cool it would be to be able to talk to people in a space ship orbiting the earth. In the late 70s I got my ham radio license and with this tiny bit of knowledge "knew" that talking on a walkie talkie to a spaceship was impossible... well, until I put a radio signal through the Russian RS-12 satellite using a Radio Shack ham radio walkie talkie a few years later....though my antenna was bigger than Kirk's small communicator. But now we have sat phones that fit in your pocket. But I digress. Thanks for reading. Enjoy your Sunday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Well, the facts do matter, and its a fact that "reality" is actually not solid reality as we think we see it. This is really a scientific fact. It has not been established that consciousness is a product of matter. There are some things that do exist that science cannot completely explain yet. Consciousness is one of them. Indeed - what happens when you get hit by a car and killed? I think consciousness goes elsewhere. That's all. I remember someone somewhere saying that what is solid matter to a human being is quite insubstantial to a radio wave. Light travels through windows but I can't, without injury. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts