(July 3, 2018 at 8:43 am)SteveII Wrote: 2. What do you think that "hundreds of thousands of brains spread across different cultures with a method to reliably investigate reality in an impartial way" has indicated? It seems you are just asserting some observation that disproves people's religious experiences. How is that NOT: religious experiences are not true, therefore their must be a scientific reason for them, therefore there is a scientific reason for them. If you are not going to put up some recognized proof, you are asserting your conclusion, you are question begging.
It's so obvious what you are doing. When faced with something you can't refute, you respond with word salad. Like when I pointed out that the Bible was both the claim and the evidence you responded with word salad, that when finally parsed, said that the Bible was indeed both the claim and the evidence.
And then you try to derail the thread to avoid what the person is saying. It's a tactic typical of theists who don't like the arguments they are presented with but don't know how to refute them.
FACT: The brain interprets sensory information. What you perceive is not reality but your brain's response to reality.
FACT: How the brain interprets sensory information is influenced by previous experience.
FACT: Normal brains can be fooled.
FACT: Some brains can be delusional and not realise it.
The scientific method is successful precisely because it is an objective way to investigate reality that relies on measurements, reproducibility, falsifiability and unambiguous definitions rather than subjective experience.
