(September 1, 2021 at 10:56 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: The existence of counterfiet money isnt proof that real money doesnt exist.

That is true, but, my bank can verify that which is real from that which is counterfeit.

Atheism isnt completely sane either. The levels of lust, greed, anger is often animalistic and savage.

(September 1, 2021 at 11:06 am)purplepurpose Wrote: Atheism isnt completely sane either. The levels of lust, greed, anger is often animalistic and savage.

None of that has anything to do with atheism.

(September 1, 2021 at 11:10 am)Jehanne Wrote:

(September 1, 2021 at 11:06 am)purplepurpose Wrote: Atheism isnt completely sane either. The levels of lust, greed, anger is often animalistic and savage.

None of that has anything to do with atheism.

Your right. I meant that human nature at its pure, without religion isn't always sane.

(September 1, 2021 at 11:12 am)purplepurpose Wrote:

(September 1, 2021 at 11:10 am)Jehanne Wrote: None of that has anything to do with atheism.

Your right. I meant that human nature at its pure, without religion isn't always sane.

At best your observation is that religion is useful, which, of course, does not make it true.

(September 1, 2021 at 11:02 am)Jehanne Wrote:

(September 1, 2021 at 10:56 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: The existence of counterfiet money isnt proof that real money doesnt exist.

That is true, but, my bank can verify that which is real from that which is counterfeit.

(September 1, 2021 at 10:56 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: The existence of counterfiet money isnt proof that real money doesnt exist.

I think you misunderstand the objection. If one replaces real causes with an epiphenomenal god, then all one is doing is engaging in pointless metaphysics. Yes this fit of epilepsy could be caused by god, and gravity could be the effect of an omnipotent machine projecting force throughout the universe, but why would you? If you replace one cause with God then you can replace them all. The principle of insufficient reason will cut down all such moves. If you can replace them all, then "God" just becomes a new name for nature, and your attempt to explain the original phenomenon turns out to be nothing more than bullshit semantics. It's the same problem with Berkeley's argument for God; all you're doing is insisting on calling nature God for Reasons[TM].

(September 1, 2021 at 11:02 am)Jehanne Wrote:

(September 1, 2021 at 10:56 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: The existence of counterfiet money isnt proof that real money doesnt exist.

That is true, but, my bank can verify that which is real from that which is counterfeit.

IMO a reasonable person could conclude that the visionary experiences of people afflicted by specific medical disorders are inauthentic without jumping to the conclusion that all visionary experiences are inauthentic because those experiences can be artificially stimulated.

(September 1, 2021 at 9:56 am)Jehanne Wrote: can be generated artificially

snipped for brevity

(September 1, 2021 at 10:56 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: The existence of counterfiet money isnt proof that real money doesnt exist

Both sets - the lab observed and the god alleged - are artificial, both sets are counterfeit, regardless of whether a god or a researcher touched them.  Brain states can be induced, and the inducement of these states produces effects consistent with reported experience.  

No one trying to explain how these experiences occur with this sort of research is positing that the experiences don't exist.  They're trying to work out how they do exist.

In direct equivalence, the observance of induced brain states isn't proof that uninduced brain states don't exist, sure...but what would that have to do with brain states induced by gods?

You're up there talking about inauthentic experiences..inauthentic to what? Are they not having the reported experiences? Are you using inauthentic as shorthand for "not induced by gods"...or? Artificial would include, by definition, any artifice of any gods...such as a god making them see something, or feel something.

(September 1, 2021 at 11:17 am)Angrboda Wrote:

(September 1, 2021 at 10:56 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: The existence of counterfiet money isnt proof that real money doesnt exist.

I think you misunderstand the objection.  If one replaces real causes with an epiphenomenal god, then all one is doing is engaging in pointless metaphysics.  Yes this fit of epilepsy could be caused by god, and gravity could be the effect of an omnipotent machine projecting force throughout the universe, but why would you?  If you replace one cause with God then you can replace them all.  The principle of insufficient reason will cut down all such moves.   If you can replace them all, then "God" just becomes a new name for nature, and your attempt to explain the original phenomenon turns out to be nothing more than bullshit semantics.  It's the same problem with Berkeley's argument for God; all you're doing is insisting on calling nature God for Reasons[TM].

No. I was not suggesting that epilesy was a means by which any god communes. I am saying that one experience can be authentic and another inauthentic depending on the chain of events that brought* it into being. By way of analogy, the perfect forgery of a Vermeer painting can never be an authentic Vermeer.

<continued>

So for example there is Nun Anne and Matrix Jane. Nun Anne has lived a life of Catholic devotion. Anne has a prayerful brain-state prior to brain-state V (for visionary). Matrix Jane is connected an electro-helmet. Jane has any random brain-state prior to the induction of brain-state V. I contend that the experience of Nun Anne can be deemed likely authentic and the experience of Matrix Jane as clearly inauthentic based on observable characteristics of both Anne and Jane.

*Interesting how it seems so intuitive to use teleological language!