A few cells in a Petri-dish

[CaptainPrudeman]

I did not mention anything about those lines. Maliciously misinterpreting the words of others is against the rules of the board.

Abortion is pretty much the only thing you’ve talked about outside the world news forum. I’m not misrepresenting your words, I’m just interpreting them in light of your past actions.

Which is STIILL not precise.

By that logic, science is useless. Nothing is certain in science, so obviously it’s not good enough.

To a certain, minor degree. That is not what I was talking about.

So what were you talking about? You’re talking about people who lack the generic genetic markers in human DNA? If they do, they’re probably a new species. Those markers are shared by all of a certain species, and that’s why they can be used for identification.

 

[Abrosz]

Abortion is pretty much the only thing you’ve talked about outside the world news forum. I’m not misrepresenting your words, I’m just interpreting them in light of your past actions.

In THIS thread I was talking about something else.

So what were you talking about? You’re talking about people who lack the generic genetic markers in human DNA? If they do, they’re probably a new species.

That was the point.

 

[Servant31]

So think the broader question is then, when does a human become more than biological or chemical components? I mean we see cells everywhere, bacteria, fungi, plants… what is unique or special about
a human to give it value above a collection of chemicals on a shelf?

The spirit or the soul is generally it. A finger is a finger. It’s tragic to lose one in a accident or some other way…but the person is still a person. This one makes sense to us right…

Ok what about an organ… this is more consequential to a persons health surely. But the person is still a person.

Ok lets move further…a brain. Some people argue that cognition Is the defining principle. This however creates a number of problems. What about those mentally challenged, of lower iq, or in a coma. Many in a coma wake up. Brain damage can sometimes be healed. IQ is a measuring tool, but it doesn’t account for multiple types of intelligence in many cases. Are artists just fools? I was in a scientific field in college, disturbingly there are those who think math and science is the only “real” intelligence… Should we listen to those voices?

This is sometimes referred to as the “reductivist materialistic” idea. The idea that science has the final word. This has an underlying assumption, and presumption. That human dignity is the sum of biological cells and biochemical reactions. That everything can be reduced to the fundamental components. As people of faith we reject this idea. A human is more than just biological synergistic compositions.

This gives a window into the soul and spirit. A Harvard trained neurosurgeon had a near death experience during an aggressive meningitis infection, which rendered his brain basically inert. His experience by scientific standards should have been impossible. Yet he claims to have seen the supernatural, ad describes the brain as “a reducing valve” for the spirit. This is in line with the view that the body is a physical manifestation of the soul.

The issue then is that trying to reduce it down to one specific biological marker, such as DNA, doesn’t take into account the soul. This is why we say that life begins at conception. It’s a complex of body and soul. Sure biology is helpful in that it is a great tool to help clarify and understand. But it isn’t just biology. There is more.

Does that answer your question in some way?

 

[Abrosz]

Does that answer your question in some way?

Not really, but a good presentation requires and deserves an answer. So here we go:

Before we move any further, what is the “spirit” or “soul” and how can we ascertain that it exist? In other words, how can we measure it? As soon as someone will fabricate a “soul-o-meter”, which will distinguish between non-living entities (no soul), lower level biological entities (material soul) and humans (immortal, rational soul) the concept of the “soul” will be entertained. Up until that it remains an unsubstantiated hypothesis. Can’t be more accommodating than that.

Now, let’s consider the brain / mind. The mind is the electro-chemical activity of the brain. This cannot be disputed, because it has been verified “innumerable” times. The place of the “personality” resides in the frontal lobe. Any other tissue or organ can be substituted via a transplant or an artificial prosthesis - EXCEPT the brain. If sufficient blood-flow can be provided to keep the brain alive, the original person is still there, very much reduced in abilities, but still there. Theoretically, if the technology can be advanced enough, even the brain can be transplanted into a “firmware” environment - though for the time being it is just science-fiction.

The example of NDE’s is just an anecdotal proposition, not to be entertained. If an experimenter could replicate the proposition, it will be taken seriously.

The next problem is the question of “life”. Interestingly enough not even the biologists can agree, just WHAT is life? Are the viruses alive or not? The only coherent definition of “life” is “complex responses to complex stimuli”, which is not particularly helpful. But there is nothing better. Moreover it does not require a carbon based existence. A silicon based would be just as fine. If biological viruses are alive, then silicon based computer viruses are also alive. They propagate themselves, create replicas of themselves, interfere with their environment - so they exhibit many of the principles of “life”.

So the problem is rather complicated. It is worth to examine it further.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

That was the point.

Okay…

What about them? Why are they important? They aren’t human in the traditional sense, a member of Homo Sapiens. Their rights are up for debate. Don’t see why they’re important, considering that they don’t exist.

 

[Servant31]

Before we move any further, what is the “spirit” or “soul” and how can we ascertain that it exist? In other words, how can we measure it? As soon as someone will fabricate a “ soul-o-meter ”, which will distinguish between non-living entities (no soul), lower level biological entities (material soul) and humans (immortal, rational soul) the concept of the “soul” will be entertained. Up until that it remains an unsubstantiated hypothesis. Can’t be more accommodating than that.

There is as of yet no way to scientifically ascertain it exists. At least not at will. But scientific evidence isn’t the only evidence, sciencd is a tool, a great one. I have a BS is a science. I like science. But it isn’t the sole arbiter of truth in the world. I can’t scientifically prove you exist. You could be an AI robot for all I know. Scientists thought the earth was flat, the sun revolved around the earth (science can be egocentric too), that leeches could cure diasease. Science is great but it is mans attemp at understanding. Flawed and limited by our observational capacity. As well as our ability to compose theories which are testable. My inability to test for alien life in no way means that I can definitively state it doesn’t exist. We keep looking, despite no evidence.

The place of the “personality” resides in the frontal lobe. Any other tissue or organ can be substituted via a transplant or an artificial prosthesis - EXCEPT the brain. If sufficient blood-flow can be provided to keep the brain alive, the original person is still there, very much reduced in abilities, but still there. Theoretically, if the technology can be advanced enough, even the brain can be transplanted into a “firmware” environment - though for the time being it is just science-fiction.

Why do you think that? We don’t know that at all. Some may have surmised this, but we don’t really know. There are many many theories about what’s possible. But at this point it’s science fiction.

The example of NDE’s is just an anecdotal proposition, not to be entertained. If an experimenter could replicate the proposition, it will be taken seriously.

Why is that? Every piece of scientific evidence is anecdotal until it is formalized into a test. Anecdotal evidence is what leads to scientific inquiry. Then a hypothesis is formed, which can be tested in a theoretically controlled environment. A near death experience is one piece of information. And btw there are places which are starting to formalize the testing and investigation.

The only coherent definition of “life” is “ complex responses to complex stimuli ”, which is not particularly helpful. But there is nothing better. Moreover it does not require a carbon based existence.

This is the issue. Life isn’t just a set of biochemical reactions. This is why as Catholics we prescribe to a larger viewpoint.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

I think you mean ‘seek my Truth’. But in any case, I’ve spent a few decades poking around and looking for answers. Luckily I found most of them.

I definitely do NOT mean “my truth”. I spent a few decades wasting much time thinking that that was all that existed: “My truth.” “Your truth.” “His Truth.” “The truth for then.” “The truth for now.” etc. etc. etc. All mere ideas - notions - wasted mental gymnastics.

No, I mean Truth. And if you think you’ve found “most” of them, well, my guess is you’ve found no more than I did, confined to the horizons of my own mind. No, I mean Truth that pre-existed both of us, that exists whether you or I or anyone ever - or never - would find it.

That’s such an amorphous concept as to be meaningless. But let me know when you find it.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

goout:

Freddy:

goout:

Irregardless of whether intelligence can be observed in the process of evolution…
Human beings have exceptional intellect (or rationality) in comparison with the remaining animal kingdom.

That was true when we used to club animals to death for lunch. And once you get to a point when a few grunts become a basic language then everything takes off. You literally don’t have to reinvent the wheel.

Nothing really special about it. Quite possibly our far distant ancestors were close to being as intelligent as we are. We simply have more knowledge.

So you disagree that human beings have exceptional rationality.
Which apes have written symphonies? Which animals do philosophy?
The exceptionalism of human beings is self evident.

I didn’t argue against it, goout. I just explained that it isn’t anything mysterious.

ok whew. Had me worried for a second.
If human beings have intellect, and the universe is intelligible, is it fair to say the universe speaks?

No. Not at all. It’s simply intelligible. No more and no less.

 

[fide]

That’s such an amorphous concept as to be meaningless. But let me know when you find it.

I know - in the subjectivist universe of one’s own “truth” there is no space or place for, or understanding of, the reality that simply IS, without anyone’s permission.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

That’s such an amorphous concept as to be meaningless. But let me know when you find it.

I know - in the subjectivist universe of one’s own “truth” there is no space or place for, or understanding of, the reality that simply IS, without anyone’s permission.

C’mon, fide. I’m just having breakfast. This is a discussion for late at night with a glass of good malt staring into the camp fire!

 

[Abrosz]

There is as of yet no way to scientifically ascertain it exists. At least not at will. But scientific evidence isn’t the only evidence, science is a tool, a great one. I have a BS is a science. I like science. But it isn’t the sole arbiter of truth in the world.

Sure you could ascertain my existence. We could decide to meet, and you would have physical evidence for my existence. There is not even theoretical evidence for the existence of a soul.

You could be an AI robot for all I know.

That is irrelevant. I would exist, though the building material might be different from you thought. But again, theoretically we could meet and you could scientifically ascertain the material I am “made of”.

Of course science is not the sole arbiter of truth. Axiomatic systems are not verified by experimentation. There are all sorts of propositions which cannot be verified experimentally. Events below the Schwarzsild radius. Events outside the event horizon (outside the light cone). Subjective assessments about beauty. Propositions about imaginary beings.

But the existence of supernatural does not belong to these categories - at least not according the believers. They assert the actual, objective, ontological existence beyond the physical world. But there is no evidence for that. There can be experiments to verify this realm, and they were performed, but none of them comes back with a positive outcome.

My inability to test for alien life in no way means that I can definitively state it doesn’t exist. We keep looking, despite no evidence.

Correct. But it would only be a hypothesis without evidence. Just like the soul. I don’t say that the “soul” definitely does not exist. Only that there is no coherent definition and no verifiable evidence for it. Just like the assumption about the paranormal. There is no substantial difference between the supernatural and the paranormal.

Why do you think that? We don’t know that at all. Some may have surmised this, but we don’t really know. There are many many theories about what’s possible. But at this point it’s science fiction.

That is what I said. But an overwhelming majority of the brain functions are verified. Even the emergence of intuitive solution for actual problems.

A near death experience is one piece of information. And btw there are places which are starting to formalize the testing and investigation.

As soon as they start to exist, we shall have a theory, which can be tested.

This is the issue. Life isn’t just a set of biochemical reactions. This is why as Catholics we prescribe to a larger viewpoint.

Fine. What is that larger viewpoint? I am always willing to entertain a new hypothesis. What is the hypothesis and where is the evidence?

 

[Servant31]

There is not even theoretical evidence for the existence of a soul.

Yes there is though. I just gave you some evidence and you discounted it.

That is irrelevant. I would exist, though the building material might be different from you thought. But again, theoretically we could meet and you could scientifically ascertain the material I am “made of”.

This is exactly the point. Just because I don’t have evidence doesn’t mean you don’t exist. I do have evidence , this conversation. Likewise I have evidence that children have souls. Is is visual scientifically measurable, ie spectrographic, evidence? No definitely not. But I don’t have that for you either. Yet there is a reasonable assumption. So you as a human clearly have value, whether I think you do or not isn’t really what matters. You do. Similarly a child has a soul, independent of what others think, and has value.

There can be experiments to verify this realm, and they were performed, but none of them comes back with a positive outcome

I’m not familiar with any experiments which can do that, which are they?

But again what evidence would be pertinent? To me if someone dies and sees the other side…thats pretty relevant. You certainly have to control for mental status, medical status etc… but many near death experiences have done this. So to me at least that evidence worth taking account for.

 

[Abrosz]

Yes there is though. I just gave you some evidence and you discounted it.

I am sorry, if I missed it. Please copy and paste your evidence, so I can review it. Give me a coherent definition of the “soul” and show me the soul-o-meter and demonstrate its validity. As I said, I am always open to evidence.

Likewise I have evidence that children have souls.

What evidence is that?

I’m not familiar with any experiments which can do that, which are they?

Every intercessory / supplicative prayer (though not the meditative prayers). Every day there are millions of such prayers, and in the almost nonexistent case, when they seem to be fulfilled, they are touted as evidence for the supernatural. In the overwhelming cases when there is no positive result, they are quietly swept under the rug. In other words, selectively accepting the “good” results, and denying the “bad” ones. Very bad and unscientific practice.

To me if someone dies and sees the other side…thats pretty relevant.

People who had NDE, did not die.

 

[Servant31]

I am sorry, if I missed it. Please copy and paste your evidence, so I can review it. Give me a coherent definition of the “soul” and show me the soul-o-meter and demonstrate its validity. As I said, I am always open to evidence.

Take a look at this guy. He actually addresses many of your points in this interview. I’ve see quite a few of his interviews and after 1985 he had a really drastic life change, He us very much living it. I at least found it convincing, and I’m a pretty particular skeptic when I want to be

But here is the broader point. If you go into something looking at reasons to not believe you very well might find it. Objectivity is so important right. Even in the sciences we see this sometimes. A scientist’s wife left him, now everyone else’s research is just junk according to him, the reality is he’s in a bad place. We can’t be biased on either the positive, or on the negative.

.

People who had NDE, did not die.

Some really have. And medically they are completely unexplained. They also have reported knowledge they couldn’t have possibly known… there is a red sock under the air conditioning unit in the fourth floor outside the window (on a balcony with no access), or they know about relatives they have never met, or become musical geniuses never having played an instrument…

 

[Abrosz]

Take a look at this guy. He actually addresses many of your points in this interview.

I would prefer if you presented the actual arguments. You said that you presented evidence for the soul. I have not seen it. Just copy and paste it here.

But here is the broader point. If you go into something looking at reasons to not believe you very well might find it.

Sorry, I have no preconceived notion of what to believe and what to discard. Let’s see the evidence and let the chips fall where they may.

Some really have.

If they died, that was no NDE. And how could a dead person tell about what he saw, is beyond comprehension.

Let’s just get to the “meat”:

1. What is the definition of a “soul”. Material and rational and “immortal”. How can you have evidence of something “immortal”?
2. What kind of evidence supports these souls? Objective evidence, not some anecdotes.

 

[Servant31]

I would prefer if you presented the actual arguments. You said that you presented evidence for the soul. I have not seen it. Just copy and paste it here.

I just did, why did you ignore it?

If they died, that was no NDE. And how could a dead person tell about what he saw, is beyond comprehension.

Let’s just get to the “meat”:

1. What is the definition of a “soul”. Material and rational and “immortal”. How can you have evidence of something “immortal”?
2. What kind of evidence supports these souls? Objective evidence, not some anecdotes.

1. I provided some. You discounted it outright. Did you watch that video? How can you know there isn’t something immortal?
2. The evidence is objective. You saying it’s anecdotes doesn’t negate the validity of it. One random story…ok an anecdote…thousands…that’s one pretty large mass delusion.

How about we do get to the meat… What are you looking for? Endless argumentation? Sorry but we have other things going on in life… Understanding…what evidence would you accept? What would you actually listen to?

 

[Freddy]

Some really have. And medically they are completely unexplained. They also have reported knowledge they couldn’t have possibly known… there is a red sock under the air conditioning unit in the fourth floor outside the window (on a balcony with no access), or they know about relatives they have never met, or become musical geniuses never having played an instrument…

‘You nearly died and crossed over to the other side. You have seen what awaits us. You can answe the question that mankind has been asking itself for millenia. This could change the lives of millions. What can you tell us!’

‘Umm. I found someone’s sock behind the a/c unit’.

 

[Servant31]

Edit sorry: @Freddy
So if they came back and changed their lives around completely, gave up good paying and high prestige careers in academia, wrote a book, became a pastor and spoke for 35+ years and said :

My message is that there is a God, he loves you, wants a relationship with you, the world is changing for the better but we have to embrace it, there is a hell…don’t lead a sinful life hell is terrible.

That would probably make sense wouldn’t it…
https://vimeo.com/showcase/3661430

Or a spine surgeon but going around the country to talk about God, love, faith and their experiences:
[

]

 

[Freddy]

Edit sorry: @Freddy
So if they came back and changed their lives around completely, gave up good paying and high prestige careers in academia, wrote a book, became a pastor and spoke for 35+ years and said :

My message is that there is a God, he loves you, wants a relationship with you, the world is changing for the better but we have to embrace it, there is a hell…don’t lead a sinful life hell is terrible.

That would probably make sense wouldn’t it…
https://vimeo.com/showcase/3661430

Or a spine surgeon but going around the country to talk about God, love, faith and their experiences:
[

]

Are you saying that if someone has a life changing experience and leaves their current existence then we should believe what they tell us about it? It certainly appears that way.

So if someone gives up everything to become a Hare Krishna then her experiences are true. Or if someone becomes a Bhuddist monk then his experience is true. Or a Jainist. Or a devout Muslim. Or a Moonie. Or a follower of Jim Jones. Etcetera.

 

[Servant31]

Not at all. Did you watch the video? It’s been posted for what 10 mins…come on friend. You complained that evidence provided that someone’s near death experience was real was a joke”oh they saw a red sock”. I just linked you the greater part of what they do which is much much more. Take a loook for yourself!