Two Unusual Questions For The Atheists Here

[OrdinaryMelkite]

Last night I had a discussion with a philosophically-minded friend of mine regarding various things. The subject of the conversation ended up getting around to Locke’s “Tabula Rasa” Argument/Theory. Most here will know what I am speaking of.
Anyway, the discussion caused to me remember something that happened with my beloved niece:

My Niece is two years old right now and she is the light of my life.
When she was a month old my brother used to bring her over to my house and I would watch her for a while while he and his significant other did things.
I used to watch her while she slept.

While sleeping she would dream—and she would smile while she was dreaming. Big wide smile. My mother says she was dreaming about Angels and the place she was still connected to----Heaven. And I agree with her. Remember, she was a MONTH OLD at the time.

1. To the Atheists here----what could she possibly be dreaming about at that age if not “Heaven?”
2. Most people do not accept the “Tabula Rasa” Argument/Theory anymore. If that is the case, could my niece have actually picked up “impressions” in the womb and right after birth (and during that month of life outside the womb) that would account for the dreams?

To be honest, I personally do not think so, but I’m interested in what the Skeptics/Agnostics/Atheists think here about it.

I have a third question as well, but I don’t want to ask too many questions of folks here all at once. I’ll wait for the first two to be answered here.

 

[Totterman]

Jesus,our Lords peace be whit You.
First,I don’t think many athesist are visiting this web forum,but to the point. I am a father of two children and a step-daughter,and I know that small children do smile while sleeping,I wish that they would dream about heaven,I realy do,and I have a strong faith,just this morning God gave me one thing I needed,but as far as I know they are making smile-like faces because of stomach pain,gas,You know,so it is moore a medical then a faith “thing”. I do wish I would be wrong,I realy do. The second question is a matter that I don’t know well enough to ansver. But I wish You all the best,children give us so much happiness and joy,and when older,also worries now and then,so enjoy every moment,and when time is right,talk about angels,heaven,God,Jesus and The Holy Spirit and then You can say for sure that a smile while sleeping is because the dream is about all that.
Blessings,Totterman.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

Jesus,our Lords peace be whit You.
First,I don’t think many athesist are visiting this web forum,but to the point. I am a father of two children and a step-daughter,and I know that small children do smile while sleeping,I wish that they would dream about heaven,I realy do,and I have a strong faith,just this morning God gave me one thing I needed,but as far as I know they are making smile-like faces because of stomach pain,gas,You know,so it is moore a medical then a faith “thing”. I do wish I would be wrong,I realy do. The second question is a matter that I don’t know well enough to ansver. But I wish You all the best,children give us so much happiness and joy,and when older,also worries now and then,so enjoy every moment,and when time is right,talk about angels,heaven,God,Jesus and The Holy Spirit and then You can say for sure that a smile while sleeping is because the dream is about all that.
Blessings,Totterman.

May God Bless you as well, Totterman!!!

I have no problem with “stomach pain” sometimes being the cause of “Sleeping Smiles,” but ALL the time under ALL circumstances? I would have to respectfully disagree with you.

To be honest as well, most people I know of would not buy the “stomach gas” theory—butwho knows?.

There ARE Atheists/Skeptics/Agnostics here—not a whole lot, but a few of them. Touchstone is an example of them. It was to him and others that this question was addressed mainly.

And yes, children are a gift from God. Once again, God bless you, Totterman.

 

[_Locke]

I’d like to preface my response by saying dreams and their contents are not fully understand, and, as a non-psychologist, I’m even less prepared to interpret them. But I’ll do my best!

1. To the Atheists here----what could she possibly be dreaming about at that age if not “Heaven?”

I have no idea. That being said, many animals (mammals and birds, but not reptiles or fish) dream, which seems to lead to the conclusion that dreams are a product of the brain (specifically the limbic system), not of a soul. (Source: MITNews, Carl Sagan’s “Demon Haunted World”) I’m sure the Wikipedia article on dreaming would be much more helpful than I am. Here’s another article on dreams in infants. What’s interesting is that REM sleep is actually more common in fetuses and newborns.

1. Most people do not accept the “Tabula Rasa” Argument/Theory anymore. If that is the case, could my niece have actually picked up “impressions” in the womb and right after birth (and during that month of life outside the womb) that would account for the dreams?

Well the Tabula Rasa theory is the idea individuals are born without individual mental content, and has largely been discredited with studies concerning genetic inheritance and brain function, so I’m a little confused by your question. I’d take a guess at yes, she probably does have impressions from the womb and afterward.

 

[phoooiee]

Here’s an article about the stomach pain- there are many more out there also.

parenthood.com/article-topics/when_and_why_a_baby_smiles.html

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

I’d like to preface my response by saying dreams and their contents are not fully understand, and, as a non-psychologist, I’m even less prepared to interpret them. But I’ll do my best!

I have no idea. That being said, many animals (mammals and birds, but not reptiles or fish) dream, which seems to lead to the conclusion that dreams are a product of the brain (specifically the limbic system), not of a soul. (Source: MITNews, Carl Sagan’s “Demon Haunted World”) I’m sure the Wikipedia article on dreaming would be much more helpful than I am. Here’s another article on dreams in infants. What’s interesting is that REM sleep is actually more common in fetuses and newborns.

Well the Tabula Rasa theory is the idea individuals are born without individual mental content, and has largely been discredited with studies concerning genetic inheritance and brain function, so I’m a little confused by your question. I’d take a guess at yes, she probably does have impressions from the womb and afterward.

Thanks for the (name removed by moderator)ut, Locke. And the links. I did not know about REM sleep in infants. fascinating.
That is the reason I was sure she was dreaming. She doing REMs all over the place. Not quite sure I agree still with your premise but it IS thought-provoking. Thanks again!!!

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

Here’s an article about the stomach pain- there are many more out there also.

parenthood.com/article-topics/when_and_why_a_baby_smiles.html

Thank you so much for the link, Phoooiee!!! Instresting, to say the last!

 

[JDaniel]

Thanks for the (name removed by moderator)ut, Locke. And the links. I did not know about REM sleep in infants. fascinating.
That is the reason I was sure she was dreaming. She doing REMs all over the place. Not quite sure I agree still with your premise but it IS thought-provoking. Thanks again!!!

OM:

I am sure you know that tabula rasa means. But, if not, it means, “blank slate,” It is the notion that a child is born with a blank slate, hence, no memories or intellectual acumen.

There are those, today, that believe that a child is not necessarily born with a tabula rasa. Some psychologists believe that the unborn baby can hear from a very early time in its life. So that loud noises are affective; arguments are affective, cuss words are affective (as in, learned), shots of epinephrine (adrenaline) are affective; as well as other occurrences. But, who knows. We do know that sudden, loud noises and jolts do tend to also jolt a not yet born baby.

The Church of Scientology believes that all cellular life is reactive. Even plant life. They believe that amoebas, e.g., have theta (souls). However, they also believe in the reincarnation of the thetan. So, when something dies, their thetan floats around, looking for another body to inhabit. (I’d hate to be the first amoeba ; the one that never dies - only undergoing mitosis! That would might mean I’d have to spend 75 billion years as an amoeba!) (Oh, a free-floating thetan can inhabit anything that is coming to be.)

However, if there is some writing on the brains of newborns, it may be from its former time in Heaven. That’s my opinion, for what it’s worth - and, it’s free.

God bless,
jd

 

[tonyrey]

The reaction of Skeptics/Agnostics/Atheists to your questions is predictable. How could those who do not believe in heaven possibly accept your explanation? I think you underestimate the extent to which many people’s minds in our secular society are closed and limited to physical horizons…

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

OM:

I am sure you know that tabula rasa means. But, if not, it means, “blank slate,” It is the notion that a child is born with a blank slate, hence, no memories or intellectual acumen.

There are those, today, that believe that a child is not necessarily born with a tabula rasa. Some psychologists believe that the unborn baby can hear from a very early time in its life. So that loud noises are affective; arguments are affective, cuss words are affective (as in, learned), shots of epinephrine (adrenaline) are affective; as well as other occurrences. But, who knows. We do know that sudden, loud noises and jolts do tend to also jolt a not yet born baby.

The Church of Scientology believes that all cellular life is reactive. Even plant life. They believe that amoebas, e.g., have theta (souls). However, they also believe in the reincarnation of the thetan. So, when something dies, their thetan floats around, looking for another body to inhabit. (I’d hate to be the first amoeba ; the one that never dies - only undergoing mitosis! That would might mean I’d have to spend 75 billion years as an amoeba!) (Oh, a free-floating thetan can inhabit anything that is coming to be.)

However, if there is some writing on the brains of newborns, it may be from its former time in Heaven. That’s my opinion, for what it’s worth - and, it’s free.

God bless,
jd

Thanks for that, JDaniel!

I agree with you. My niece was clearly dreaming when I watched her (REMs) and she seemed VERY happy. Somehow, I don’t quite think Stomach Gas could cause that.
I understand what the term “Tabula Rasa” means. I was simply mentioning it because it reminded me of what happened with my niece when I was discussing the subject with my friend.

Yeah, Scientologists are a “trip,” aren’t they? And it’s all because of Xenu!!!

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

The reaction of Skeptics/Agnostics/Atheists to your questions is predictable. How could those who do not believe in heaven possibly accept your explanation? I think you underestimate the extent to which many people’s minds in our secular society are closed and limited to physical horizons…

I was still curious as to what the explanations would be, though. I’m always willing to listen to the “other side.”

 

[tonyrey]

I was still curious as to what the explanations would be, though. I’m always willing to listen to the “other side.”

The stomach pain theory gives you a foretaste of what they will be… The last thing the baby’s smile will be attributed to is a feeling of joy and delight!

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

The stomach pain theory gives you a foretaste of what they will be… The last thing the baby’s smile will be attributed to is a feeling of joy and delight!

Indeed.

I’m willing to countenance the “Gas” theory, but it just does not fly ultimately for me. Gas would cause a baby to cry anyway, as in “colic.”
If that was indeed Gas, my dear niece must have had the most enjoyable case of it ever.

The irony of all this is that arrving at that conclusion is not even philosophical—it’s common sense.

 

[tonyrey]

Indeed.

I’m willing to countenance the “Gas” theory, but it just does not fly ultimately for me. Gas would cause a baby to cry anyway, as in “colic.”
If that was indeed Gas, my dear niece must have had the most enjoyable case of it ever.

The irony of all this is that arriving at that conclusion is not even philosophical—it’s common sense.

This type of answer highlights the negativity and joyless aspect of scepticism. Even the miracle of birth and the development of a person are reduced to a sequence of physical states which lead in the end to precisely nothing…

 

[NaturalEnquirer]

Wait, I’m confused. What about this says “heaven”? I mean, she may have had gas, or she might have just had a happy dream. You ask what she might be dreaming about at one month old?

• boobies
• bottles
• teddy bears
• blankies
• pacifiers
• hugs
• kisses
• smiles

Sorry, I just don’t see why we would assume she’s dreaming about heaven.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

Wait, I’m confused. What about this says “heaven”? I mean, she may have had gas, or she might have just had a happy dream. You ask what she might be dreaming about at one month old?

• boobies
• bottles
• teddy bears
• blankies
• pacifiers
• hugs
• kisses
• smiles

Sorry, I just don’t see why we would assume she’s dreaming about heaven.

You know, I’m willing to countenance that. I prefer “Heaven,” but I’m willing to admit it might be those “impressions” I talked about in the original OP. That was also the reason for my second question.

That reminds me----that joins in with my Third Question----

1. Are those Dreams and Smiles and Happiness just “Reflexes,” as some insist, or are they genuine signs of an already developin (at 1 month) of a Nascent Intelligence?

 

[AntiTheist]

While sleeping she would dream—and she would smile while she was dreaming. Big wide smile. My mother says she was dreaming about Angels and the place she was still connected to----Heaven. And I agree with her. Remember, she was a MONTH OLD at the time.

1. To the Atheists here----what could she possibly be dreaming about at that age if not “Heaven?”

This is an argument from ignorance. You can’t say, “I can’t think of a good solution to my question; therefore, answer X must be correct.”

You’re just presuming your personal interpretation to be correct. What if a Wiccan came along and said, “She’s clearly dreaming of the Summerlands”? Or what if a Hindu came along and said, “She’s clearly dreaming of memories from a happy past life”?

Personally, since you asked, I think it’s likely that a child would dream about things that it’s seen and experienced: its mother, being fed, being in the womb, being changed, etc.

could my niece have actually picked up “impressions” in the womb and right after birth (and during that month of life outside the womb) that would account for the dreams?

Sure, I guess.

I’ve seen animals dreaming (making little running motions in their sleep, etc.), so it’s not a terrible stretch to say that dreams are common to most living creatures with a certain level of brain development.

I’m sure it makes old ladies happy to say that infants are “dreaming of heaven,” but that’s hardly a good basis for drawing conclusions about the world.

 

[inocente]

I’m interested in what the Skeptics/Agnostics/Atheists think here about it.

If I wanted to be ultra-skeptical :

No one knows why we dream, but it must have something to do with helping us to survive. Babies rely on others for everything and need a lot of attention, so it is important to also be as attractive as possible. They may have dreams that cause them to practice using their face muscles to make the most adorable smiles, which they can then use to be more lovable.

Warned you that was ultra-skeptical.

 

[tonyrey]

If I wanted to be ultra-skeptical :

No one knows why we dream, but it must have something to do with helping us to survive. Babies rely on others for everything and need a lot of attention, so it is important to also be as attractive as possible. They may have dreams that cause them to practice using their face muscles to make the most adorable smiles, which they can then use to be more lovable.

Warned you that was ultra-skeptical.

According to that argument all our behaviour must have something to do with helping us to survive!

 

[inocente]

According to that argument all our behaviour must have something to do with helping us to survive!

Keeping my skeptic’s hat on, I guess that may be true if we exclude bad behavior like addictions, and if survival is about more than just bread alone. You may be on to something here.