(June 22, 2015 at 8:49 am)Little Rik Wrote: Since when an evidence is reasonable?I did not say that the evidence was reasonable. I said that the evidence allows us to reach a conclusion that is reasonable. You have got to start paying better attention than this. The words are literally written down on a computer screen for you to see. How can you keep getting them so wrong?
Little Rik Wrote:Consciousness is YOU.No. Consciousness is a state. You are either conscious or unconscious; aware or unaware. "Consciousness is YOU" is meaningless drivel.
Little Rik Wrote:I can alter the engine of my car and this will affect the way the vehicle run and therefore also the driver will be affected.Now you want me to explain your own awful analogies? Why are you confusing the mind and consciousness? Do you have any idea what you are talking about?
Does this means that the driver is a state of the car?
Little Rik Wrote:In the face of reality?Yes, I'm serious. You seem to be completely confused about all of this stuff. You can't seem to keep your explanations clear, you use atrocious analogies, and you seem incapable of comprehending anything you read, because you keep ascribing to me things I haven't said.
Are you serious Ton?
Little Rik Wrote:What a hell of a confusion Ton.No kidding.
Little Rik Wrote:1) First you say that you don't say that NDEs are bull and then you say the opposite by saying that NDEs have nothing to do with spirits or souls.Those statements are not "opposite." Again, you seem to have no idea what you are talking about, or perhaps even what words mean. I understand that you like to redefine words to suit your purposes, but now you're becoming almost completely unintelligible.
Little Rik Wrote:2) You even state without any evidence that ......... we are learning what causes them..........Read the previous pages of our conversation where I explain all of this.
How did you learn? Where is the evidence that what you presume to have learned is true?
Little Rik Wrote:Are your experts skill enough to understand whether the consciousness is able to live a dead brain or not?As I pointed out earlier, this is an example of "you can't prove it isn't." It's a poor way to push for your claims, since I can simply point out that you cannot prove it IS. So why are you wasting my time with such a useless ploy?
Little Rik Wrote:Ages ago they say that they got rid of malaria.If you are going to try to use an exception to prove the rule, at least try to use an actual exception. Science doesn't make boasts like "they got rid of malaria." Stop making up claims to try and salvage a hopeless point.
After they failed again and again malaria is still the No1 killer globally speaking.
Little Rik Wrote:Actually that is the ONLY way to know whether God is there or not from a physical point of viewI didn't say it was a dumb question. I said it's a dumb argument. If the only way to confirm that god exists is to die, then you have no way to show me that god exists. Same with spirits and souls and any other fairytale creature you want to conjure up. If that's all you have, your argument is a waste of time. It is worthless.
so considering that you take in consideration only what can be proved physically speaking then
the question is not dumb at all.
Little Rik Wrote:I would have thought that ignorant is the one who believe that a piece of matter like the brain is more important than the real I or the super conscious mind.That's one of the things that is keeping you ignorant.
Little Rik Wrote:If we take in consideration only the physical aspect of the issue then it is obvious that nothing can be proved.Lots of things can be proved by taking only the physical into consideration. You're typing this on a computer or tablet somewhere and posting it to a website on the internet, aren't you? That requires numerous layers of technology, from electrical power to microscopic computer circuits to cabling standards and mathematics and lots of things that we prove with only the physical world to study. The best part is that no matter where you are or who you are or what culture you live in, science works the same way every time. Religion, on the other hand? Not so much.
Little Rik Wrote:How can something abstract as the consciousness can be proved in a physical way?First, by realizing that it's not "abstract." Second, by studying how changes to the brain affect a person's mind and personality. By studying how the brain reacts to different stimuli. By studying how environmental and emotional stresses produce similar and reproducible results. I keep pointing this out to you and you keep ignoring it. But as I've said before, this is your problem and not mine. The world is leaving you behind, Rik. Don't wait until you're dead to find out if you were right-- it'll be too late then.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
-Stephen Jay Gould