I dunno, I've met douchey Buddhists both online and in real life.

(May 19, 2016 at 5:42 pm)quip Wrote:

(May 19, 2016 at 5:41 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: It's your hypothetical -- why are you asking anyone else to flesh it out?

Lazy thinker spotted.

Not familiar with the Socratic method?

Is that anything like JAQing off?

(May 20, 2016 at 3:07 pm)quip Wrote:

(May 20, 2016 at 4:47 am)Ben Davis Wrote:  I could not have been born in another time because my brain only exists in the temporal 'now' and not at any other point in existence.

This does not necessarily follow.

What?! You're questioning the existence of time? Are you mad or just being obtuse for the sake of argument?
 

Quote:Prior to the established "I" what (mundane factors) determines the particular "I" to which you refer?

I've already answered that: the brain that generates 'me' as qualia.

Quote:Is it contingent upon specific factors or simply chance?

Both. Among the specific factors are the existence of parents that can procreate a brain capable of generating a person, the environment to support development of that brain to the point where the person becomes self-aware, the absence of destructive mechanisms that could prevent the brain from generating a person, and so on. Among the random chance factors are the specific sperm and egg that came together, the birth location, not being dropped on the head as a baby, and suchlike.

Quote:If the latter, under what conditions (milieu) make possible the calculation of said "chances"?

Absolutely no idea. Pre-birth, I'm sure the odds are astronomical, post-birth, the odds are 1-1.

Quote:Or alternatively, Can the atheist rationally avoid the inquiry by simply asserting that there was nothing "prior to the established "I""?

There is nothing 'prior to the established 'I''. The existence of the brain that generates 'me' determines 'my' existence.

(May 20, 2016 at 8:23 pm)Ben Davis Wrote:

Quote:Or alternatively, Can the atheist rationally avoid the inquiry by simply asserting that there was nothing "prior to the established "I""?

There is nothing 'prior to the established 'I''. The existence of the brain that generates 'me' determines 'my' existence.

If there is nothing prior to the established "I" then wherefore the determinate factors denoting your particular quale in distinction to roughly six billion alternate, extant possibilities? 

It's called gene transfer.

Its imperfect process ensures our uniqueness.
Not sure what the point is?

Are we not taking up our own individual space in spacetime?

This is just going in circles. Substituting deepities for meaningful questions. What distinguishes me from the other 6 billion possibilities? The specificity of reality.

It would really be beneficial to understand what atheism is, when on an atheist forum.

Atheism is disbelief in the existence of gods, by default. Some atheists go further and have a belief in the nonexistence of gods. Anything further to this is someone projecting onto the definition.

An atheist can believe that time is made of apples, "the self" equals five and that magical toads run the galaxy.

Plus... you said you don't believe in gods yourself unless I'm mistaken, so you're even strawmanning yourself with such broad statements about atheism.

(May 20, 2016 at 9:07 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: This is just going in circles.  Substituting deepities for meaningful questions.  What distinguishes me from the other 6 billion possibilities?  The specificity of reality.

Close. 

Rather what determined me from the other 6 billion possibilities.

---

(May 20, 2016 at 10:29 pm)robvalue Wrote: Plus... you said you don't believe in gods yourself unless I'm mistaken, so you're even strawmanning yourself with such broad statements about atheism.

What does god have to do with anything? 

Metaphysical does not necessarily equate to God.

I'm wondering where any evidence might be found demonstrating the separability of mind and brain.

What does it have to do with anything?

(May 20, 2016 at 3:26 pm)quip Wrote:

(May 20, 2016 at 3:25 pm)Rhythm Wrote: That, would be an ad hom.  See how easy this is if you just try?

lol...no, "numbskull" would be an ad hom.

Again, I'm asking atheists' to rationally defend their position.

If you are an atheist, you're asking yourself to defend the "atheist position", whatever you think that may be.