Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

The Soul Vs The Brain.


Mythra

Recommended Posts

 

Electricity is energy, not matter.

According to several sources and  the scientist's definition of "electricity," any claim that says that electricity is a form of energy is wrong.   However, the following sources are unanimous in saying that Electricity is not a form of energy. Moreover they also agree that electrons and protons carry charges of "electricity," and that quantities of electricity are to be measured in units of charge rather than units of energy. To measure the quantity of electricity, scientists use the SI unit called the Coulomb.  SOURCE

 

 

 

Well obviously RogueScholar knows more about this topic than I do.  Go with his definition if you wish.  Most particles have mass.  This doesn't come anywhere near demonstrating your assertions about soul or spirit.

 

 

 

 

Apparently you don't if you conclude the following:

When you put "true" in front of religion that makes me suspect that you are about to use a fallacy.

 

 

Religion is a type of superstition.  It's found in the dictionary.  http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion

And the larger set of things that religion is part of:  http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/superstition

 

 

The No True Scotsman fallacy:

 

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/No_True_Scotsman

 

But since you are so interested in this why don't you explain to me what you think regarding "true religion"?

 

 

 

 

So if you interpret the scriptures that God created a male and female and named them Adam & Eve, then either the scriptures affirm your interpretation or reproves your interpretation.

 

I interpret that particular passage as a myth.  Doesn't the Bible have more of the signs and symptoms of a myth than the Harry Potter series or the Twilight series?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once again, Justus seems determined to convince everyone that his poor understanding of science somehow entails that God exists. It's getting a little old.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Electricity is energy, not matter.

According to several sources and  the scientist's definition of "electricity," any claim that says that electricity is a form of energy is wrong.   However, the following sources are unanimous in saying that Electricity is not a form of energy. Moreover they also agree that electrons and protons carry charges of "electricity," and that quantities of electricity are to be measured in units of charge rather than units of energy. To measure the quantity of electricity, scientists use the SI unit called the Coulomb.  SOURCE

 

I know what religion is.

 

Apparently you don't if you conclude the following:

When you put "true" in front of religion that makes me suspect that you are about to use a fallacy.

 

 

I will take this question too: 

My answer would be "no".  Misinterpreting the (Bible) scriptures isn't an all-or-nothing proposition.

Really? So if you interpret the scriptures that God created a male and female and named them Adam & Eve, then either the scriptures affirm your interpretation or reproves your interpretation.  

 

 

This is the price you pay for keeping the company of skeptics.  Not having your assertions believed.[/color]

That's right Justus, I won't answer - because the obligation is yours to support your assertion, not mine to answer any further questions of yours.

I didn't ask you to believe my assertion, and yes the burden of proof is upon the party making the accusation yet I presented evidence of ex-Christians misinterpretation of the Bible with the fact that as an Ex-Christian you affirmed the interpretations of scriptures made by Christianity and now claim that upon review you are now claiming they are untrue.

 

You response is fallacy, specifically an argumentum ad lapidem which is dismissing a claim as absurd without demonstrating proof for its absurdity.

 

This is false.

If you look back you will see that I did not dismiss your assertion as absurd.  My exact words were...

 

Please substantiate your assertion that... Ex-Christians refuse to even consider the possibility that they might have misinterpreted the scriptures ...with evidence.

 

Therefore, I am not guilty of committing the fallacy of argumentum ad lapidem.

 

As far as bearing false witness, all I will say is "Helllooo neighbor."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I have a good friend who is dying as we speak from Alzheimers.  His brain is very close to not functioning at all.  I cannot accept that his soul is just fine somewhere and his brain just isn't receiving the signal properly.  His memories and knowledge are gone forever.  And he won't become suddenly lucid again once he dies.  (not that you were proposing such a thing, but lots of people think that). 

Last night as I was falling asleep, I woke up and knew that my friend had died. I even told him goodbye. This morning I got the text that it was indeed the case.

 

Kind of weird.  Not totally out of the blue, since I knew he was dying.  But still kinda weird.

 

 

Quantum entanglement?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

BAA: "Therefore, should we ever do this, it would strongly argue that an immaterial component (soul or spirit) is not needed for self-awareness and intelligence.

 

It would further argue that we probably don't possess such an unneeded component.

 

And it would also argue against the necessary existence of the supernatural."

 

...

 

Maybe there is no "need" for a soul to make a physical body work. Maybe the physical body isn't the important part. Maybe the soul is the important part and the physical body is just some unimportant offshoot of existence. Why is this physical life important?

 

The human appendix. It's not needed for anything. Is it real? Or no?

 

Rider,

 

The appendix may not be needed for anything now, but according to this, it once was.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vestigiality

 

It had a function.

 

I will take your word for it on that link.

 

But, if by making an artificial sentient being, we show that a soul was never necessary for self-awareness and intelligence, what then?

 

It will be interesting to see if artificial intelligence can fully replicate the cognitive/creative ability of a human being.  I don't think it has yet, right?  It might be possible, though. There's that computer that plays chess. Is that creative thinking? Or just finding the least dangerous chess move? Is there really a difference? I don't know. A soul might not be necessary for a human being to exist. A physical body may not be necessary for a soul to exist. Which of these important? Will we eventually evolve into a formless intelligence when we don't need to leave the house anymore? (haha)

 

 

Another consideration is that there is more than one way to skin a cat (or be self-aware). Does a self-aware computer intelligence disprove the human soul? Do robotic arms disprove the existence (or need) of human arms?  

 

Why do we need to make an argument for souls to exist in humans?

 

[edit] It's not my thread. I think an atheist started it. smile.png  Ask him.  Why do we need to make an argument against souls? [/edit]

It's in our nature to debate stuff. smile.png

 

If a physical (artificial) body doesn't need a soul to make it work, then what need to is there to invoke it's existence in a natural human body?

 

I can see no evolutionary, practical or functional need for one.

 

I can see no practical need for human beings at all, really. Why do we need them? Why is life important? (/sarcasm)

[edit] Really, truly neither soul nor no-soul has much of an impact on my life.  Neither point of view will cause me harm. I'm just an agnostic and prefer to believe there might be a soul. It's just personal preference. [/edit]

.

.

.

I can't answer any question about the non-physical Rider, because I'm making a strictly reductionist, pragmatic and materialist argument by raising the possibility of artificial intelligence.

 

Understood. I do see your point from a materialist view.   From a materialist view a non-material soul cannot exist. smile.png

 

As far as I know there's no non-physical component involved - so I can't address that point.

 

I think the same goes for your theoretical artificial sentient being that has no soul. It can't really be addressed since it doesn't really exist. All we can say is it is 'fascinating' to consider. smile.png 

 

Sorry!  Wendyshrug.gif

 

 

Thanks,

 

BAA. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Quantum entanglement?

 

Maybe.  If I knew what quantum entanglement was, I might be able to give a more definitive answer.  Don't get me wrong, I looked it up and read about it.  But still don't know what it is.Wendyshrug.gif

 

I don't know how I woke up and knew my friend was dead. And the correct answer is:  No fucking idea.  Not going to give it any magical explanation, though.  I just don't know.

Because it's always a possibility that it was just coincidence. 

 

But, overall, I don't believe in the "fill in the blank" method of providing answers.  The god of the gaps.

 

Problem:  qualia.  Answer: Soul

 

Problem; abiogenesis.  Answer Goddidit.

 

If we don't know an answer to something, it just means we haven't yet figured it out.  Some things we many never figure out - but people don't get to fill in the blank with whatever explanation makes sense to them. 

 

Because at one time, this is how it used to work:

 

Volcano erupting:  god is mad.

 

Hurricane:  god is mad.

 

Your army loses a fight;  god is mad

 

Your child gets sick and dies:  god is mad

 

No rain for the crops:  god is mad

 

Swarm of locusts ate our grain:  god is mad

 

etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mythra: I don't know how I woke up and knew my friend was dead. And the correct answer is:  No fucking idea. Not going to give it any magical explanation, though.  I just don't know.

 

Because it's always a possibility that it was just coincidence. 

 

Sometimes we get an idea in our head that turns out to be true. The source? Who knows? Maybe imagination just matched reality this time. I worked with someone who used to say, "I have a really bad feeling about this [particular work situation]." But her intuitive disaster prediction was usually incorrect. smile.png

 

If we don't know an answer to something, it just means we haven't yet figured it out.  Some things we many never figure out - but people don't get to fill in the blank with whatever explanation makes sense to them.

 

Sometimes it's bad to fill in the blanks with Woo but with a lot of life's little things, saying "I dont know" or "goddidit" ends up turning into "I really dont care that much and am going to forget about it tomorrow anyway when some more pressing life event arises." smile.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Sometimes it's bad to fill in the blanks with Woo but with a lot of life's little things, saying "I dont know" or "goddidit" ends up turning into "I really dont care that much and am going to forget about it tomorrow anyway when some more pressing life event arises." smile.png

Oh, now you made me laugh. GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif   It's the shits to become so transparent, just by typing some letters on a keyboard. bluegrab.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.