(September 9, 2011 at 5:05 pm)little_monkey Wrote: I can't fault with anything you've said. But I must add that in future technology, we could very well trigger a thought in the brain, the kind that, given an electric impulse to neurons ABC,PQR, XYZ, etc. and presto, you see yourself flying to Alpha Centauri. My guess is that a lot of people would pay good money to experience that. Are we that far from such technology? Who knows, but the point is that the possibility of relating brain activity with its content might be just one step away from us.
There's no arguing any of this, but the very same thing could be said for future technology that can locate the flying teapot with the unicorn inside. It's promissory materialism. One day we will know is akin to take it on faith. I'm not denying that it could be true, because one day we're going to know stuff that makes us right now seem like the goat herders the atheists mock.
I'm not in any way saying that objective science is wrong, just that it's only half the story when it comes to evidence. This is one of the most puzzling enigmas. It's often said that someone knows something in theory but not in practice, but the materialists have managed to turn this on their heads because on this score they know it in practice, but not in theory. If you don't believe me, ask them about this pony that's running around. In practice, they get the drill perfectly, but in theory, they are completely stumped as to what the problem is.
