Immortal Souls / Immortality Debunked
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-10-2012, 06:02 AM
RE: Debunking "Souls"
Our kind of life develops asshole first, so how come nobody talks about assholes? Consider

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
06-10-2012, 07:35 AM
RE: Debunking "Souls"
(06-10-2012 04:46 AM)Egor Wrote:  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 substance of all things--just like our mind is the substance of our dream universes.

I get that.

But most people call "all that exists" "reality".
Why call it "god" ? Why not just call it "reality" ?

"Substance" is imputing a false "layer". It's a "duality" which does not exist. It's a "metaphysical layer", for which there is no evidence. "Substance" comes from classical Philosophy, which did not know how or why the physical world, or consciousness worked. That duality, ("substance" vs "accident"), is false, and unnecessary. There is no "substance" of some-thing, apart from the thing. It's the same thing the Roman Church does with the Eucharist. They assert there is some woo woo "substance", apart from the accident.

(05-10-2012 06:14 PM)Greatest I am Wrote:  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 substance of all things.

How can that be ? In the only examples of consciousness that we have, it arises from complex, physical brain chemistry. So you're guessing about it arising from anything else.

If "the substance of all things is consciousness", then it can't be "part of existence". It has to BE existence. It appears to me there is a contradiction there. No ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
"And you quit footing the bill for these nations that are oil rich - we're paying for some of their *squirmishes* that have been going on for centuries" - Sarah Palin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-10-2012, 08:39 AM
Debunking "Souls"
So Egor,
No loaded question, just curious:
How does your "god who is all" compare or contrast with the ideas of the New Thought movement and things like The Law of Attraction, Deepak Chopra, The Secret, etc.?

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Erxomai's post
06-10-2012, 08:40 AM
Debunking "Souls"
(06-10-2012 06:02 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Our kind of life develops asshole first, so how come nobody talks about assholes? Consider

Are you saying we don't talk about you enough? Consider

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Erxomai's post
06-10-2012, 10:57 AM
RE: Debunking "Souls"
Is your "mind" an illusion. We simply don't know until you define mind and illusion.

Even given that your both willing to say that the "mind" is what you claim it to be and yet still a mystery. You can't have it both ways either your right on what the mind is or we have almost no clue.

Failing to produce accurate intelligence is the same as failing to produce accurate results. What you and I define as "amazing" results seems to vary quite widely. When in doubt it's always better to ask for more evidence rather then less.

Finally yes I do call hogwash when you try to get out of producing any evidence with a "how could the body perceive the mind" hogwash. It's simply a dodge to having to produce any evidence of your claim.

Finally I posted it twice and you have still failed to answer one of the most basic questions needed to support your claim:

"If the mind can interact with the body through precognition and remote viewing why can the body not interact with the mind through the same or similar channels?"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-10-2012, 05:10 PM
RE: Debunking "Souls"
Quote: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.
My point is still that you experience them as "undeniable." Since we do not have access to the experience itself, we cannot say for sure. Same goes for someone claiming to have a vision of the Virgin Mary. He may really beleive it and want others to believe, but how can I know he wasn't hallucinating? Likewise, for precognition, a lot of things can either be chalked up to coincidence, changing the vision to fit the facts afterward, etc. My dad thought he had a precognitive dream of my brother being a boy (they didn't check beforehand), but he dreamed of a baby boy and the odds of having one were 50/50! If he'd had another girl, he'd have probably forgotten about the dream and stopped talking about it.

Quote:But you have no idea whether or not that's true, so why believe it?
Occam's razor. Because that's what I've observed. When I see an animal die, it decays and I see no evidence it continues to exist. So likewise, I assume the same is true for myself since that's what fits my observations of the world,, and I don't see the need to tack on any arbitrary supernatural stuff (esp. without seeing any evidence for such claims).
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like amyb's post
06-10-2012, 05:39 PM
RE: Debunking "Souls"
Im going to be mega boring and predictable here but I reccomend people watch this video that I have possibly posted millions of times before (simply for the questions it asks of you)... it is important as mooji says to find the "credibility of I"... transcending ego.





(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.

I think this comes as close to how I feel about the universe if im honest, you have an eloquent way of putting it though E. Nice one Thumbsup

Im gonna put another video that I think people will find interesting (and kinda backs up what Egor is saying) which yes.... is theory.... but it contains a lot of scientific data which I admittedly only partially understand but I feel I know enough to get what the video is portraying.





Wether you believe it or not... it is defintley fascinating indeed

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes bemore's post
06-10-2012, 07:45 PM (This post was last modified: 06-10-2012 08:26 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Debunking "Souls"
(06-10-2012 05:39 PM)bemore Wrote:  I think this comes as close to how I feel about the universe if im honest, you have an eloquent way of putting it though E. Nice one Thumbsup

Im gonna put another video that I think people will find interesting (and kinda backs up what Egor is saying) which yes.... is theory.... but it contains a lot of scientific data which I admittedly only partially understand but I feel I know enough to get what the video is portraying.

Whether you believe it or not... it is definitley fascinating indeed

One answer to the apparent paramecium reflexive movement was proposed,
( http://rsif.royalsocietypublishing.org/c...4/463.full ), but whatever it is, it's happening at the molecular level, not on a woo-woo level.

Re the second video :
From 00:45 on Hegelin is talking about "created" levels. (???)
He's preaching, using String Theory.

This is him in his priest robes :
(look him up)
[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQzCtz-VuLny9sxGF0slsi...3jH1uYpqfQ]

He has not explained Super-Symmetry, or how it fits in, or Quantum Gravity. or how it works. He explains nothing that is outstanding, left to fnish in the Standard Model.

We know for a fact, that memory and the components of consciousness are dependent on the workings of brains at the molecular, and cellular level, NOT apart from brains, and NOT at the sub-atomic level. so to posit that something is working at a lower level is simply woo-woo. If a brain is injured at the molecular level it stops working. Until there is EVIDENCE for something else, it's all woo-woo.

Szostak has proposed mechanisms, where even less complex structures than paramecia can react. But why stop there. if "consciousness" is the basis of everything, then rocks should show purposeful movement. The movement of *one* thing, (even if it were to be true), does not allow one to conclude EVERYTHING is conscious. If it's true, everything should some purposeful something.

See the end of Part 1, and Part 2.

BTW, depending on the outcome of another discussion, there are plans underway to examine the historical, and theological roots of the concept of "soul", where it came form, and how it changed. I may post it here, or in it's own thread. Hint : did you know St. Paul, did not believe in immortality for everyone ?




Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
"And you quit footing the bill for these nations that are oil rich - we're paying for some of their *squirmishes* that have been going on for centuries" - Sarah Palin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-10-2012, 08:14 PM (This post was last modified: 06-10-2012 08:20 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Debunking "Souls"
(06-10-2012 05:39 PM)bemore Wrote:  Im going to be mega boring and predictable here but I reccomend people watch this video that I have possibly posted millions of times before (simply for the questions it asks of you)... it is important as mooji says to find the "credibility of I"... transcending ego.



I've watched this many times since bemore turned me on to it.

"If not today, one day. If not today, one day. If not this day, maybe another day or another week another month or another year ... another decade, another life maybe, I dunno. But at some point ... one day you will have to drop yourself. You will have to go beyond yourself, what does it mean? Dropping your idea of who you are." - 12:56 to the end.

The I has no credibility. It is the blind narcissistic delusional face of Oz, too dim and dull to even be aware of the little man behind the curtain. ... Fuck the ego, I'm gonna go hang out with the id for a bit ... we're old friends. Big Grin

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
06-10-2012, 08:28 PM
RE: Debunking "Souls"
(05-10-2012 08:54 PM)BryanS Wrote:  "Define soul", I say to the theist who argues for its existence. Incoherent babbling from the theist ensues. Good times.

I had a Catholic define the soul pretty hilariously....*Ahem* I'm sorry; pretty clearly for me.

They said something to the effect of: "It's an energy force that resides within you. It is exactly the shape of you; it has arms, fingers, toes, everything. And it sits perfectly within your body, which is why when you die, your body looks just like it always has; but the soul has parted and gone somewhere else. Contained within this force is everything that defines you as 'you'. Your feelings, your thoughts, everything. Your body is ultimately just a shell."

I'm not sure one could get much closer to saying "So, for all intents and purposes, it IS your body" without actually saying exactly that.

Through profound pain comes profound knowledge.
Ridi, Pagliaccio, sul tuo amore infranto! Ridi del duol, che t'avvelena il cor!
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Misanthropik's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: