Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-17-2009, 04:12 AM
 
4,511 posts, read 7,520,736 times
Reputation: 827

Advertisements

can you tell hard and soft ware apart, in this case?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-17-2009, 04:20 AM
 
Location: OKC
5,421 posts, read 6,504,185 times
Reputation: 1775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend1111 View Post
It's absolutely impossible to live on this earth without a soul. The soul is real and that is the real you. The brain has nothing to do with it. The mind is a function of the soul just like brain cells are a function of the material body. If you are here now, you have a soul.

Here's an experiment for you guys. When you all die, look me up and tell me you have no mind and no soul. That's gonna be interesting!!

I wish that were true, Rev.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2009, 05:11 AM
 
Location: Indianapolis
4,323 posts, read 6,024,660 times
Reputation: 677
Hey Box,

I doubt that there would be anything I could say to change your mind so I'll leave it to you to believe that. I still like you and think your awesome.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2009, 05:31 AM
 
Location: Bayou City
3,085 posts, read 5,239,673 times
Reputation: 2640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kid EH View Post
If you're interested, here's the link: I Know What It's Like To Be Dead (And So Do You) (http://www.kideh.com/article1.html - broken link)
Interesting summation on the Lucretian symmetry argument. I would submit, though, that human reality in its very structure is essentially a "forward-prone" or progressive phenomenon, and that it is natural for humans to approach the notion of death with reservation.

Considering death as a state of (non)being, it is true that there is no qualitative distinction between it and the "pre-vital" state, and that we will no more long for life after death as we did before life itself. But we have the luxury (and the curse I suppose) of being alive at the very point in time we make this reflection, which effectively renders the entire notion of pre-vital non-being only a temporary phenomenon, pregnant with potential (and thus more 'desirable'). What propels human nature to long to extend life as much as possible now is the disconcerting realization that, absent the possibility of reincarnation, post-vital non-being is forever permanent, with no potential whatsoever. The essential project of human nature is to perpetuate itself toward an ever-approximating state of self-actualization. Death ends that project, and, to echo Sartre, tragically accomplishes this actualization without us even having the benefit of being alive to take part in it. We become simply who we were.

Of course there was no awareness of potentiality prior to being born, nor will there be of finality in death. But the crucial point lies in the "here and now", or, more precisely, in the fact that we are here and here right now, fully capable of making value judgments concerning the world before us and after us. These value judgments, by definition, cannot escape subjectivity. The fact that we are now aware of our being and its implications colors our estimation of pre-life and after-life. We make plans for the future; we have goals, aspirations, dreams. Given this nature, It is indeed quite rational to want to be as chronologically far removed from death as possible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2009, 09:11 AM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,232 posts, read 46,658,013 times
Reputation: 11084
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxcar Overkill View Post
There are numerous different things that can cause the brain to stop working properly. Once the brain is dead, even part of the brain, it's hard to make it start working properly again.

Once cells are dead, they have trouble coming back to life. For example, the longer a drowning victim stays underwater, the greater brain damage they suffer.

Why, I ask you, is that so? Under your soul theory, damage to the brain shouldn't effect the person, assuming they were able to be brought back to life. Yet, there's no little soul that helps the victim here. There is a direct relationship between the amount of brain damage they receive and the amount of damage to their mind.

Similarly, if the part of your brain that controls memory is damaged, you simply wont have memories. If its the part that stores new memories, you wont make new memories. If its the part that hold old memories, you won't have old memories. All of this is the brain, non of it is a soul. Hurt the brain, hurt the mind.

Their is no little soul that helps in those situations. The brain does it all. Damage to the brain, area by area, is directly related to the functioning of the mind.

Your entire ability to reason is dependent on having a functioning brain. If that part of your brain is damaged, even if you are still alive, you won't be able to reason. Where is your soul then? Why does it only kick in once you are dead, but not when you are alive?
The soul leaves, without the soul, the body is just a shell. Scientists have never created a viable lifeform. Viable, as in having the same lifespan as would be typical for the created creature. They haven't developed new life, just modified existing life. And they've done so using gametes and existing genes--they haven't created their own. Why not? Why has science failed to unlock nature's mysteries?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2009, 10:06 AM
 
Location: Indianapolis
4,323 posts, read 6,024,660 times
Reputation: 677
The spirit part of man is that part which contains what may be called the functions of life and the force and power existing in him and which immediately control him in his conduct and living. This real, existing principle of life, unlike the body, never dies, but continues to live after the spirit drops its envelope of flesh.
This spirit part of man contains the seat of the mental faculties and reasoning powers, and uses the organs of the material body to manifest these attributes. These faculties live and exist, even though the physical body may be in such imperfect condition that the spirit may not he able to make its manifestations in such a way as to enable the mortal to perceive or sense the material things of nature. To specify, even though the material organs of sight may become impaired or destroyed, yet in that spirit body, which is within the physical body, exists the actual sight just as perfectly and completely as if these impaired or destroyed organs were doing their functioning; and the same is true as regards the hearing and the others of what are called the five senses of man.
And as to the reasoning faculties and mental qualities, they exist in the perfect state whether the brain is healthy or not, or whether it performs its work or refuses to do so. These qualities do not depend upon the soundness or perfect workings of the organs of the physical body in order that these spirit qualities may exist in a perfect condition, but the proper workings of the physical organs, or rather the proper and natural movements and manifestations of the brain, and the conscious operations of the mental faculties, do depend upon the spirit faculties being able to use these physical organs in a proper way and in accordance with the harmony of the creation of the relative and correlative parts of man.
These spirit faculties, which man calls the intellect and the five senses, are a part of the spirit body which is enclosed in the material body and which in turn encloses the soul. When the material body dies, the spirit body continues to exist and live on in the world of spirit, and with it and as continuing parts of it, these intellectual faculties, performing all their functions free from the limitations that the physical organs placed upon them. And when this change takes place, these mental qualities, notwithstanding that they have not the material organs through which they functioned when in the mortal frame, can conceive thoughts of things material and hear and see things of the material just as they did, and even more perfectly, when they were enveloped by the environments of flesh and blood. So you see when the mortal dies, the only thing that dies and is left behind is the mere physical body, and with the spirit body survives all those things which can be said to be the real man, so far as the mind is concerned. Hence, man never ceases to remember and to progress and to know that he is a being which death cannot destroy or change into something that he was not before death came to him. And thus I answer the question: "When a man dies shall he live again?" He never ceases to live, and his living is not a new life, but merely the continuation of the old life with all the things of mind and conscience that were his in the old life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2009, 10:12 AM
 
4,511 posts, read 7,520,736 times
Reputation: 827
amen. and the word "contains" highlighted.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2009, 03:51 PM
 
Location: California
42 posts, read 174,657 times
Reputation: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSykes View Post
Interesting summation on the Lucretian symmetry argument. I would submit, though, that human reality in its very structure is essentially a "forward-prone" or progressive phenomenon, and that it is natural for humans to approach the notion of death with reservation.

Considering death as a state of (non)being, it is true that there is no qualitative distinction between it and the "pre-vital" state, and that we will no more long for life after death as we did before life itself. But we have the luxury (and the curse I suppose) of being alive at the very point in time we make this reflection, which effectively renders the entire notion of pre-vital non-being only a temporary phenomenon, pregnant with potential (and thus more 'desirable'). What propels human nature to long to extend life as much as possible now is the disconcerting realization that, absent the possibility of reincarnation, post-vital non-being is forever permanent, with no potential whatsoever. The essential project of human nature is to perpetuate itself toward an ever-approximating state of self-actualization. Death ends that project, and, to echo Sartre, tragically accomplishes this actualization without us even having the benefit of being alive to take part in it. We become simply who we were.

Of course there was no awareness of potentiality prior to being born, nor will there be of finality in death. But the crucial point lies in the "here and now", or, more precisely, in the fact that we are here and here right now, fully capable of making value judgments concerning the world before us and after us. These value judgments, by definition, cannot escape subjectivity. The fact that we are now aware of our being and its implications colors our estimation of pre-life and after-life. We make plans for the future; we have goals, aspirations, dreams. Given this nature, It is indeed quite rational to want to be as chronologically far removed from death as possible.
Yes, those are excellent points you made regarding the differences between pre-life and after-life. After-life has no end, while pre-life does. And we are capable of reflecting on pre-life, while we will never be able to reflect on the after-life.

I actually thought of these objections when writing my article, and I addressed them in a Q&A piece which you can read about here: Article 1 Q&A. I argue that these differences you mention have no effect of the subjective experience of non-existence.

Here's what I wrote about your objections:

4. But there is a difference between pre-birth and death! Pre-birth has an end, while death doesn’t.
That’s an objective difference, but it has no effect on the subjective experience of non-existence. At what point after your death would you notice that you’re still dead? The answer is never. You’re not going to suddenly regain consciousness a trillion years from now, find yourself still trapped in your grave and unable to move or see anything, and think to yourself: “Oh crap, I’m still dead?” That’s simply not possible if the human consciousness is permanently destroyed after death.
Remember that before birth: you were in a state of non-existence for an incredibly long time as well, and yet you never felt restless. And if you had never been born at all, you still wouldn’t be feeling restless now. Only the living are capable of feeling restless.


5. Isn’t the subjective experience of pre-birth different because I’m able to reflect on it, while I’ll never be able to reflect on death?
The fact that you’re able to reflect on pre-birth in life does not affect your subjective experience of pre-birth while you were in the state of pre-birth. Individuals are only capable of reflection during life, so a potential (or lack thereof) for reflection on a period of non-existence has no effect on the subjective experience during that period of non-existence. It’s no different than when you reflect on past events that you’ve actually experienced in life. Our memories exert no influence on how we actually felt in the past. Does your ability to remember your first day of high school in any way alter the reality of how you actually felt on that day? No!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2009, 05:00 PM
 
Location: OKC
5,421 posts, read 6,504,185 times
Reputation: 1775
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
The soul leaves, without the soul, the body is just a shell.
I know this is what you believe, but WHY do you believe that? There is no evidence to support that. You might as well believe lemon drops are the tears of unicorns. It's just a make-believe answer because you find it comforting. There is zero reason to believe it is true.

When alive, one is only as sapient as their brain allows them to be. When parts of your brain die, no soul helps you think. Death is nothing but all of your brain being dead.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
Scientists have never created a viable lifeform. Viable, as in having the same lifespan as would be typical for the created creature. They haven't developed new life, just modified existing life. And they've done so using gametes and existing genes--they haven't created their own. Why not? Why has science failed to unlock nature's mysteries?
I have no idea whether that is true, but I also fail to see how that establishes the existence of a soul.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2009, 09:06 PM
 
Location: California
42 posts, read 174,657 times
Reputation: 27
I agree that there's absolutely no evidence to support the existence of a soul. But what's wrong with admitting the possibility that we might have one? There's a logical basis for admitting this possiblity, since we can't actually prove that we don't have souls. And plus, there's no reason for adhering to atheist beliefs with the kind of fervency that Christians adhere to church doctrine. There's no reward in the afterlife for the faithful atheist. And no punishment for doubters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top