What is your favourite positive argument for atheism/unbelief?

[Brian37]

You are all talk. I should be quite easy for you if you "know" you are infinite, to prove it. I know I am finite and not willing to get stupid and kill myself over something that is not true. I love how believers drone on and on and on about how there is an afterlife, yet none of them want to prove it. I am not heartless, I am glad they don't, but it does demonstrate their horrible logic.

"THERE IS AN AFTERLIFE" 

Me, "Ok prove it"

Theist, "NO". 

Sorry, you have no evidence other than lip service. Please don't attempt to prove me wrong.

NFDEs already proved that there is an afterlife.

Even without NDEs any person with a little bit of imagination would understand that the consciousness
is a build up of hard work therefore it takes many many lives to produce this build up.
From here it is obvious that life goes on and on.  

Only idiots think that the consciousness that we got fall from the sky as per magic.

NO , NDEs are nothing but the person's false perception. It is due to either being doped up on heavy medication and or oxygen deprivation to the brain. If you could survive your body you could be decapitated and still come back. Funny how nobody ever survives having their head chopped off.

No different a false perception than when an amputee swears they can still feel their foot after they have had their leg amputated. 

You are finite, not my baggage you refuse to understand how people  can be gullible.

[emjay]

@Rik. As Lucanus said, if that's the case, how do you explain how brain damage etc effects consciousness?

Been there done that Em.
If you look in the .......What is logic?.....thread at page 22 you will find my answer.  

So, this?

Easy explained Luc.
When you drive your car and you get involved in an accident you car get smashed and most of the time you too get injured.
The consciousness being an abstract entity can not really get damaged but because is stuck inside the
pineal gland and the brain when the brain get damaged the consciousness that rely on the brain as his source of energy can not work properly that is why .............can result in severely altered states of consciousness........ as you say.

So your answer is that a random/arbitrary location in the brain contains consciousness and the rest just supplies it with energy? And then that damage to anywhere in that 'source of energy' just causes random/vague altered states of consciousness? And you're happy with that level of vagueness?

I'd never be happy with that level of vagueness; given a clear connection between matter (the brain) and mind (consciousness) that even you admit in the form of 'source of energy' that when disrupted... 'smashed'... causes 'severely altered states of consciousness', I would want to know why and how that was the case. I would want to know why any particular area of the brain should be considered the seat of consciousness... you've chosen the pineal gland... why that in particular? A better candidate would be the claustrum if you're looking to localise consciousness like that:

Consciousness on-off switch discovered deep in brain | New Scientist

Personally, I don't believe consciousness can be localised like that to a particular area of the brain. I believe it's represents a whole, dynamic network, and therefore under that view the claustrum would be more akin to a switchboard interconnecting several neural networks of the brain, and that if disrupted, disrupts the integration of those areas and therefore affects consciousness. But that's just my opinion.

And I would want to know what particular altered states of consciousness, and even normal states of consciousness, were associated with damage/stimulation of which areas of the brain. And that's one of the things neuroscience investigates. Without it you would not have drugs and brain surgery that predictably affect consciousness, such as to reduce pain with painkillers. How do you explain how the conscious experience of pain can be reduced not only from the inside... through meditation, hypnosis etc... but also from the outside by manipulating the brain through drugs and/or surgery? Neuroscience may never be able to answer the ultimate question of why/how there is a correlation between mind and matter, but the fact that there is a correlation is something that cannot be disputed, even apparently by you. In the end, it's inability to answer that question doesn't matter because by progressive investigation of these correlations (ie neuroscience), the mind can be mapped from the outside through its correlation with matter (ie the brain) which can be mapped. So in a few hundred years, though we may be no closer to answering the philosophical questions of what consciousness is and why/how it relates to matter, we will still have made a lot of progress in mapping the mind and it's dynamics, such that even if we don't know why a given state of consciousness takes a particular form (or even why it has a form... qualia... in the first place) we can still predict that that particular form will be present given a certain state of the brain. So from that perspective, neuroscience is beautiful... it can elucidate the workings of the mind even if it never touches that question (ie the mind/body problem), leaving the hypothetical theist soul less and less place to hide.

Given that even you admit a connection between mind and matter... the pineal gland and the energy that supplies it, what's to say that the NDE's that you're so fond of mentioning aren't exactly that... in your terms, a disruption to the energy that supplies the pineal gland, that results in a 'severely altered state of consciousness', and in my terms, a severely altered state of consciousness that results from the damage/disruption caused by a dying brain?

[AceBoogie]

Well, well Ace.  
You seem to know about the origins of the universe.  
Please go ahead and tell us about these origins.  

And please tell us also which one came first.
The matter, the water, the light-energy, the air or the space.  

---

You know what rik, I can't seem to find my old post. If you can find for me where I claimed to know about the origins of the universe, I'd appreciate that a lot.

Then you can blow that straw man down more easily.

edit: Rik I'm starting to think that you're either a troll, incredibly unintelligent or simply a disingenuous debater.

If you want to contest something in my post, there's plenty for you to contest. But don't attempt to straw man me on a claim I didn't even make. You couldn't argue your way out of getting desert after dinner. Holy fuck.

[Brian37]

Lek, all blasphemy aside for the moment. I watched my mom's slow decline and death unfortunately and it was a horror to witness. The nurses warned me how she would act in that decline. The last two days I saw her talking to things that were not there and even grasping and reaching for nothing. I saw last minute the robotic last motions of her lips/mouth because her brain stem was the only thing left firing off neurons. It really is no different than if you step on a daddy longleg spider and the leg keeps twitching. I don't mean to sound morbid, but that is what happens when your brain shuts down. It is like all the files get dumped out at the same time and the neurons are rapidly firing and then like a dimer switch on a light, or an old tub TV it shrinks down to nothing and the neurons simply stop firing because the brain is completely dead.

It isn't a pretty picture one bit, I hated witnessing it, but my mom's brain was her, there was no consciousness to survive her. The good thing is that she is no longer in any pain and the other good thing is I still have memories of the time I had with her.

[Little Rik]

Well, well Ace.  
You seem to know about the origins of the universe.  
Please go ahead and tell us about these origins.  

And please tell us also which one came first.
The matter, the water, the light-energy, the air or the space.  

---

You know what rik, I can't seem to find my old post. If you can find for me where I claimed to know about the origins of the universe, I'd appreciate that a lot.

Then you can blow that straw man down more easily.

edit: Rik I'm starting to think that you're either a troll, incredibly unintelligent or simply a disingenuous debater.

If you want to contest something in my post, there's plenty for you to contest. But don't attempt to straw man me on a claim I didn't even make. You couldn't argue your way out of getting desert after dinner. Holy fuck.

Calm down Ace and read here.......So even if there is any argument for a deist god, it simply comes from lack of knowledge of the origins of Earth and/or the Universe........
This is what you posted in the previous page yesterday or before yesterday.

From your sentence I understood that because some people do not understand the origins of the Earth-Universe you obviously know that.
How could you judge these people otherwise?
Only someone who knows or pretend to know the truth can judge and because you did judge these people you put yourself in a position to know, that is why i did asked you such a thing.
Do you get it now?  

---

Been there done that Em.
If you look in the .......What is logic?.....thread at page 22 you will find my answer.  

So, this?

Easy explained Luc.
When you drive your car and you get involved in an accident you car get smashed and most of the time you too get injured.
The consciousness being an abstract entity can not really get damaged but because is stuck inside the
pineal gland and the brain when the brain get damaged the consciousness that rely on the brain as his source of energy can not work properly that is why .............can result in severely altered states of consciousness........ as you say.

So your answer is that a random/arbitrary location in the brain contains consciousness and the rest just supplies it with energy? And then that damage to anywhere in that 'source of energy' just causes random/vague altered states of consciousness? And you're happy with that level of vagueness?

I'd never be happy with that level of vagueness; given a clear connection between matter (the brain) and mind (consciousness) that even you admit in the form of 'source of energy' that when disrupted... 'smashed'... causes 'severely altered states of consciousness', I would want to know why and how that was the case. I would want to know why any particular area of the brain should be considered the seat of consciousness... you've chosen the pineal gland... why that in particular? A better candidate would be the claustrum if you're looking to localise consciousness like that:

Consciousness on-off switch discovered deep in brain | New Scientist

Personally, I don't believe consciousness can be localised like that to a particular area of the brain. I believe it's represents a whole, dynamic network, and therefore under that view the claustrum would be more akin to a switchboard interconnecting several neural networks of the brain, and that if disrupted, disrupts the integration of those areas and therefore affects consciousness. But that's just my opinion.

No Em.
Nothing like that.
I did read your link and it doesn't make any sense.
The claustrum can be compared to a spark plug or any other part of a vehicle that is essential or pivotal
in order to make your vehicle move.
Suppose you take away or disconnect your spark plugs.
What will happen?
It happen that the vehicle will not move or work.
As simple as that Em.
The driver is still inside the car but the car will not go anywhere.
The same thing happen when you disconnect your claustrum.
The consciousness will not be able to do anything but it is still there alive and well so as the spark plug is not the driver also the claustrum is not the consciousness.  

And I would want to know what particular altered states of consciousness, and even normal states of consciousness, were associated with damage/stimulation of which areas of the brain. And that's one of the things neuroscience investigates. Without it you would not have drugs and brain surgery that predictably affect consciousness, such as to reduce pain with painkillers.

It all depend what part of the brain is affected.
Every part is in charged for a particular function so according this the consciousness will have a different
reaction.

How do you explain how the conscious experience of pain can be reduced not only from the inside... through meditation, hypnosis etc... but also from the outside by manipulating the brain through drugs and/or surgery? Neuroscience may never be able to answer the ultimate question of why/how there is a correlation between mind and matter, but the fact that there is a correlation is something that cannot be disputed, even apparently by you. In the end, it's inability to answer that question doesn't matter because by progressive investigation of these correlations (ie neuroscience), the mind can be mapped from the outside through its correlation with matter (ie the brain) which can be mapped. So in a few hundred years, though we may be no closer to answering the philosophical questions of what consciousness is and why/how it relates to matter, we will still have made a lot of progress in mapping the mind and it's dynamics, such that even if we don't know why a given state of consciousness takes a particular form (or even why it has a form... qualia... in the first place) we can still predict that that particular form will be present given a certain state of the brain. So from that perspective, neuroscience is beautiful... it can elucidate the workings of the mind even if it never touches that question (ie the mind/body problem), leaving the hypothetical theist soul less and less place to hide.

I don't think so Em.
Neuroscience sooner or later after hitting the wall so many times       will have to change tactic.
At that stage they will have only one choice.
They will understand that the physical approach get them nowhere so they will try the spiritual one by using intuitional science.  

Given that even you admit a connection between mind and matter... the pineal gland and the energy that supplies it, what's to say that the NDE's that you're so fond of mentioning aren't exactly that... in your terms, a disruption to the energy that supplies the pineal gland, that results in a 'severely altered state of consciousness', and in my terms, a severely altered state of consciousness that results from the damage/disruption caused by a dying brain?

You don't getting Em, do you?  
NDEs only happen when the brain is dead not when is dying.
Do me a favor Em.
Read as many NDEs experiences before you start guessing out of control.

http://www.nderf.org/Archives/exceptional.html

Have a good day mate.  

[Little Rik]

NFDEs already proved that there is an afterlife.

Even without NDEs any person with a little bit of imagination would understand that the consciousness
is a build up of hard work therefore it takes many many lives to produce this build up.
From here it is obvious that life goes on and on.  

Only idiots think that the consciousness that we got fall from the sky as per magic.

NO , NDEs are nothing but the person's false perception. It is due to either being doped up on heavy medication and or oxygen deprivation to the brain.

Wrong again Brian.
People who had an NDE experience were pronounced dead by a qualify doctor so your idea that they were
doped or on heavy medication is all garbage.

If you could survive your body you could be decapitated and still come back. Funny how nobody ever survives having their head chopped off.

More garbage Brian.
If God wish a certain person to experience Him and live again to put in practice His teaching then he would't allow that person to die like that.
A person that die like that with his head chopped off clearly must follow a different direction in order to learn the lesson of life.

No different a false perception than when an amputee swears they can still feel their foot after they have had their leg amputated.

Now you are getting lost Brian.
All you say just doesn't make any sense.

You are finite, not my baggage you refuse to understand how people can be gullible.

And you refuse to understand that the bread doesn't fall from the sky.
Life teach us that every penny that we got is earned that is why the consciousness that we have come after we conquer it through a myriad of lives.  

[The Grand Nudger]

Is that what life teaches you?  You must have a very interesting life.

[Little Rik]

Is that what life teaches you?  You must have a very interesting life.

You too Khem.
This however is still nothing.
It will be even more interesting when you will discover that you are immortal.  

There is no such a thing as a rubbish bin where humans end up after their bodies die.
However there is a rubbish bin where all atheists dogmas will end end up to.      

[The Grand Nudger]

You too Khem.
This however is still nothing.
It will be even more interesting when you will discover that you are immortal.  

There is no such a thing as a rubbish bin where humans end up after their bodies die.

Surely that must depend on how many dogs I've kicked?  Like..maybe karma won't turn me into a newt for kicking one or two dogs...but what if I kicked two thousand? Then I'm totally going to get newted, don't you think?

[AceBoogie]

You know what rik, I can't seem to find my old post. If you can find for me where I claimed to know about the origins of the universe, I'd appreciate that a lot.

Then you can blow that straw man down more easily.

edit: Rik I'm starting to think that you're either a troll, incredibly unintelligent or simply a disingenuous debater.

If you want to contest something in my post, there's plenty for you to contest. But don't attempt to straw man me on a claim I didn't even make. You couldn't argue your way out of getting desert after dinner. Holy fuck.

Calm down Ace and read here.......So even if there is any argument for a deist god, it simply comes from lack of knowledge of the origins of Earth and/or the Universe........
This is what you posted in the previous page yesterday or before yesterday.

From your sentence I understood that because some people do not understand the origins of the Earth-Universe you obviously know that.
How could you judge these people otherwise?
Only someone who knows or pretend to know the truth can judge and because you did judge these people you put yourself in a position to know, that is why i did asked you such a thing.
Do you get it now?  

---

So can you show me where I claimed to know of the origins of the universe? Or no?

The sentence you highlighted is a claim about the argument for a deist god. Not about the origins of the universe. You're not very bright, Rik.