Immortal Souls / Immortality Debunked
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-10-2012, 12:24 AM
RE: Debunking "Souls"
Sorry, Godless, but Egor's statement: "What remains will be the consciousness that was there before I was born" is acceptable to me.

Zero before and zero after. Any problem with that?

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
06-10-2012, 12:29 AM (This post was last modified: 06-10-2012 12:36 AM by LadyJane.)
RE: Debunking "Souls"
(06-10-2012 12:09 AM)Godless Wrote:  Actually the "mind" that your referring to Egor is simply electrical noise in the circuits of the brain which then causes the brain to translate those impulses into actions.

If you go and do some research into neurology you'll actually discover that what we think of as a "mind" may simply be part of what our DNA codes into our brain cells. We often make a decision before we are even aware of having made one.

As for precognition and remote viewing if they held valid repeatable demonstrable results there wouldn't even be a discussion of reliability.

By the way did you know the US government actually funded remote viewing in the 1970s until 1995 at which time it was discontinued for failing to provide any actual results? It's often called the Stargate project go look it up. As for precognition it falls much into the same trappings.

I may be the only one here but I also find the idea of "...What remains will be the consciousness that was thee before I was born..." hogwash. There is simply no evidence that anything is left except physical matter. If you wish to claim otherwise I'll simply ask for evidence which you readily mark as unviewable since "How could the body see the mind?".

So your willing to claim that the mind can be used to see the body through remote viewing or precognition but not the body the mind? Why would such a thing work only one way if it does indeed work?

Sorry Egor I know it seems I always pick on you but my bullshit meter just goes off a lot around such metaphysical talk.



Awww... you just wrecked the moment with a request of SCIENCE and proof. Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-10-2012, 12:29 AM
RE: Debunking "Souls"
It makes sense given Egors view of the world but I don't see any evidence that worldview is accurate. I'm very agnostic on Egor's view of the universe as god.

If you choose to accept that worldview it's fine but I would ask why. I'm unconvinced because I don't see any real evidence for it.

edit: yeah I know LadyJane ain't I a stinker. Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-10-2012, 12:45 AM
RE: Debunking "Souls"
It also makes sense with the materialistic view of the world.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-10-2012, 12:56 AM
RE: Debunking "Souls"
No a materialistic worldview makes sense with a materialistic world. Defining the universe as "god" implies some form of supernatural or extraordinary trait or traits.

In the sense of this conversation that seems to include a separation of mind and body with one unable to perceive the other. All I'm really doing is asking for evidence of why this would be the case and why such a separation is thought to exist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-10-2012, 02:21 AM
RE: Debunking "Souls"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

If something is not falsifiable, there is no point arguing it.
The moon is made of green cheese.
Egor's god is unfalsifiable, as is the present day assertion of "immortal soul". Egor's god is a "god of the gaps" explanation for a couple phenomena, for which he thinks there are no other explanations. If there were an adequate explanation found, the god would simply fall away. That is no god. A god which is dependent for it's existence, on the present state of human knowledge, is a threatened god.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Sent by Jebus to put the stud back in Bible Study. "I believe Mr. Peanut is the Messiah" -- onlinebiker
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
06-10-2012, 04:24 AM
 
RE: Debunking "Souls"
(05-10-2012 09:50 PM)amyb Wrote:  I can't speak for the OP, but unless you show evidence that these things are real, I don't think it's relevant to the topic. I have yet to see any [believable, testable, repeatable] evidence of these.

I've had four significant undeniable episodes of precognition. It's not repeatable because it doesn't happen in any predictable way, so I can't do experiments on it. You don't have to believe it because I said it, but I can't deny it.

(05-10-2012 08:55 PM)Egor Wrote:  I haven't seen any evidence that I existed before I was born, so I disagree on that point. What remains after I die is some organic material, which will decay, and heat/energy which will dissipate into the surroundings, I think.

But you have no idea whether or not that's true, so why believe it?

(05-10-2012 10:20 PM)LadyJane Wrote:  
(05-10-2012 08:55 PM)Egor Wrote:  Frankly, I don’t believe there are individual souls. I think there is only one mind and it has always existed, and we merely manifest more or less of it through physical bodies. In other words, when I die, the “me” I know from the mirror will be dead. My personality will die; my delusional identity (ego) will cease. What remains will be the consciousness that was there before I was born—which is what I really am…you, too.

Not saying that I agree, but this is absolutely beautiful and so perfect sounding. I wish it were this way.

Thank you. Frankly, I don't see how it can be any other way. That's why I believe it. Shy

(05-10-2012 10:34 PM)DLJ Wrote:  I too have noticed that Egor has been turning up the poetry-dial recently. When it gets to 11, I'll start to genuflect.

LOL!

Quote:I agree with the above quote from da man except for the second sentence.

You, Ed, may think that but I see no evidence for it. Having said that, I can't prove you wrong. Maybe we are all in the Matrix.

I think it probably is something like that, minus the science fiction. I think we are like dream characters. I think the universe is just a dream world in God's mind.

Quote:I guess we differ about what might be that "consciousness" and I would add that we also leave behind a legacy in that we are all part of the continuum of progress..

The human race will die out, and it will die out relatively soon cosmically speaking, and nothing any of us do will matter at all. Imagine you're having a dream and in that dream you are at the Nobel Prize award ceremony, and you are the king of Sweden handing out awards to people, and they are all very proud of their accomplishments. What will those accomplishments matter once you wake up?
Quote this message in a reply
06-10-2012, 04:40 AM
 
RE: Debunking "Souls"
(06-10-2012 12:09 AM)Godless Wrote:  Actually the "mind" that your referring to Egor is simply electrical noise in the circuits of the brain which then causes the brain to translate those impulses into actions.

So, my mind--the thing that perceives--is an illusion?

Quote:If you go and do some research into neurology you'll actually discover that what we think of as a "mind" may simply be part of what our DNA codes into our brain cells. We often make a decision before we are even aware of having made one.

That's not surprising though, is it? Most of what we do we do without ever being aware of it. And the opperative term up there is "may." The fact is, even at the end of 2012, the mind remains a complete mystery. We don't even know what to make of it. We don't understand it, and we don't have any kind of working theory as to how it operates. All we know for sure is it exists.

Quote:As for precognition and remote viewing if they held valid repeatable demonstrable results there wouldn't even be a discussion of reliability.

Well, they don't.

Quote:By the way did you know the US government actually funded remote viewing in the 1970s until 1995 at which time it was discontinued for failing to provide any actual results? It's often called the Stargate project go look it up. As for precognition it falls much into the same trappings.


It didn't fail to produce accurate results. It failed to produced detailed intelligence that could be used. Especially compared to sattelite imagery and other ways of gathering intelligence. The Stargate project actually produced some pretty amazing results.

Quote:I may be the only one here but I also find the idea of "...What remains will be the consciousness that was thee before I was born..." hogwash.

You actually think you're the only one on an atheist forum that thinks that way? Narcisism much. Unsure

Quote:There is simply no evidence that anything is left except physical matter. If you wish to claim otherwise I'll simply ask for evidence which you readily mark as unviewable since "How could the body see the mind?".

Well how could it? Seriously, how could we physically perceive our minds? And yet they are there. Whatever moves the paramecium around and enables it to remember does not die when one adds a drop of iodine to the water drop its swimming in. It can't, because there was never a mechanism present to allow for its willful actions and learning ability to begin with.

I know, I know, "hogwash" says the atheist.

Quote:So your willing to claim that the mind can be used to see the body through remote viewing or precognition but not the body the mind? Why would such a thing work only one way if it does indeed work?

Precognition and remote viewing could only work if there was in fact only one mind in the universe.

Quote:Sorry Egor I know it seems I always pick on you but my bullshit meter just goes off a lot around such metaphysical talk.

And yet here you are--engaging in metaphysical talk. Rolleyes
Quote this message in a reply
06-10-2012, 04:43 AM
 
RE: Debunking "Souls"
(06-10-2012 12:56 AM)Godless Wrote:  No a materialistic worldview makes sense with a materialistic world. Defining the universe as "god" implies some form of supernatural or extraordinary trait or traits.

In the sense of this conversation that seems to include a separation of mind and body with one unable to perceive the other. All I'm really doing is asking for evidence of why this would be the case and why such a separation is thought to exist.

In a dream, you see people. They are acting like people. If you don't know you're in a dream, you think for sure they are people. What is the nature of their mind?
Quote this message in a reply
06-10-2012, 04:46 AM
 
RE: Debunking "Souls"
(06-10-2012 02:21 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

If something is not falsifiable, there is no point arguing it.
The moon is made of green cheese.
Egor's god is unfalsifiable, as is the present day assertion of "immortal soul". Egor's god is a "god of the gaps" explanation for a couple phenomena, for which he thinks there are no other explanations. If there were an adequate explanation found, the god would simply fall away. That is no god. A god which is dependent for it's existence, on the present state of human knowledge, is a threatened god.

Well stated, but "god" to me is simple all that exists. It's not like there's a god of the universe. There is all that exists, and part of that existence is consciousness. It's an attribute of existence. If one thinks about it for a while, they will see that said consciousness must be the subtance of all things--just like our mind is the substance of our dream universes.
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: