(August 10, 2015 at 4:49 am)Little Rik Wrote: You are making a hell of a confusion mate.
All your points are build on guessing and guessing alone.
Physical death is no evidence that YOU die.
First of all you should consider that body-brain and consciousness can be separate and will separate as soon as the parallelism between body and consciousness is over.
Unsupported claim. Please give evidence that consciousness is separate from the functions of the brain and can exist outside of it. (89th time we're asking you this)
(August 10, 2015 at 4:49 am)Little Rik Wrote: If you go along with the theory that when the body die is all over then you may well think that when your car rot away you rot away as well.
This analogy falls flat on its face when you consider that I am demonstrably an entity separate from my car, while my consciousness (whatever that is anyway) is not in any way demonstrably separate from my body.
(August 10, 2015 at 4:49 am)Little Rik Wrote: This sort of believes belong to the stone age not to this age of knowledge.
Yeah, sure
(August 10, 2015 at 4:49 am)Little Rik Wrote: My believes are based on results.
Suppose someone tell you......IF YOU DO SUCH A THING YOU WILL GET SUCH RESULT.
I did that thing and i got that result so i believe that by doing that thing the result will be as was indicated to me.
Sorry, but what did you do exactly? What results did you get and with what premises? The way you present your reasoning is not clear.
(August 10, 2015 at 4:49 am)Little Rik Wrote: Why i do not do the claim then?
Because the matter in question is not physical where the evidence must be physical.
Here we are in the real of spirituality and the evidence obviously is not physical.
Atheism is based on matter but matter has really nothing to do with something much
higher and more subtle.
Atheism is the lack of belief in god(s). What you mean is probably materialism, but whatever, there are worse mistakes in your post here.
What is the realm of spirituality? How do you prove its existence? And why shouldn't physical evidence count when "energy", which affects all of the "physical realm" is supposedly "spiritual" in nature? If the spiritual interacts with the physical, shouldn't we be able to tell? If so, why? And if not, why bother with postulating something that can't be experienced at all (and whose existence therefore doesn't mean anything)?
"Every luxury has a deep price. Every indulgence, a cosmic cost. Each fiber of pleasure you experience causes equivalent pain somewhere else. This is the first law of emodynamics [sic]. Joy can be neither created nor destroyed. The balance of happiness is constant.
Fact: Every time you eat a bite of cake, someone gets horsewhipped.
Facter: Every time two people kiss, an orphanage collapses.
Factest: Every time a baby is born, an innocent animal is severely mocked for its physical appearance. Don't be a pleasure hog. Your every smile is a dagger. Happiness is murder.
Vote "yes" on Proposition 1321. Think of some kids. Some kids."
Fact: Every time you eat a bite of cake, someone gets horsewhipped.
Facter: Every time two people kiss, an orphanage collapses.
Factest: Every time a baby is born, an innocent animal is severely mocked for its physical appearance. Don't be a pleasure hog. Your every smile is a dagger. Happiness is murder.
Vote "yes" on Proposition 1321. Think of some kids. Some kids."
