(September 6, 2009 at 4:58 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote:(September 6, 2009 at 1:55 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:(September 6, 2009 at 12:38 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: ... and yes they are inextricably linked and there are thousands of journals devoted to mind/brain all of which tend to treated thought as a physical conceptCare to link me one then?
This is just the psychology journals and it's debatable whether Wiki has the full list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_psy...y_journals
Again...

Thanks for the laughs

Is that the best you can do? A list of psychology journals? Could you be any more vague?
(September 6, 2009 at 4:58 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote:Erm... you're arguing against your own point here. I didn't write that(September 6, 2009 at 1:55 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:(September 6, 2009 at 12:38 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: but to claim thoughts exist beyond the physical is a claim supported by absolutely no (ZERO, NADA, ZIP) evidence ... it is just a fanciful claim, the same kind of claim for your god, and nothing else.You don't see that we have reasonably established the physical nature of thought for one reason and one reason alone ...
Which is? Don't tell me ... there's a bit no one has detected yet because ... guess what ... it's not detectable!!!!! IF that's it (or anything like) what a pile of fucking shit!

(September 6, 2009 at 4:58 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: YOU are the one claiming thought is non-physical not I, YOU are the one making the base claim AGAINST the available evidence. YOU must provide the supporting evidence for YOUR claim not me!Have you listened to yourself Kyu?
I'm the one claiming that something doesn't exist physically = I am the one making the negative claim
I'm the one claiming that something does exist without evidence = I am the one making the positive claim
"in most cases the burden of proof rests on those who claim something exists"

