Posts: 3872
Threads: 39
Joined: August 25, 2008
Reputation:
43
RE: Boy visits heaven
May 31, 2012 at 8:31 am
(May 31, 2012 at 8:11 am)ChadWooters Wrote: Logical fallacy: arguing from incredulity.
Can you demonstrate what you claim? Because as far as I know, it's not possible to exist without a functioning brain. Unless you can prove otherwise....
It's an extraordinary claim, it lacks credibility.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.
Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.
You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
Posts: 13051
Threads: 66
Joined: February 7, 2011
Reputation:
92
RE: Boy visits heaven
May 31, 2012 at 8:53 am
ChadWooters Wrote:It is important to realize the fact that although the mechanism for the dying process in the brain can be quantified, this by no means proves that NDEs are merely a vision produced by the brain which ends upon permanent brain death. Science is unable to prove this because of the large amount of circumstantial evidence that consciousness can exist far removed from the body. In the same vein, science cannot prove that consciousness can survive death; however, research is underway right now that may provide scientific evidence that consciousness can exist outside of the body.
My intent was not to prove that NDE's were in fact a phenomenon of the brain. I was disputing your statement that "...strongly suggest the continuation of consciousness after physical death."
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
Posts: 8719
Threads: 128
Joined: March 1, 2012
Reputation:
53
RE: Boy visits heaven
May 31, 2012 at 8:59 am
(This post was last modified: May 31, 2012 at 9:02 am by Neo-Scholastic.)
(May 31, 2012 at 8:53 am)Faith No More Wrote: My intent was not to prove that NDE's were in fact a phenomenon of the brain. I was disputing your statement that "...strongly suggest the continuation of consciousness after physical death." Okay. I'll admit to that NDE's are suggestive, but not overtly compelling. I only believe they should give pause and not be taken as conclusive.
(May 31, 2012 at 8:31 am)Ace Otana Wrote: ...it's not possible to exist without a functioning brain...It's an extraordinary claim, it lacks credibility. Saying that an electro-chemical reaction can produce sensation and self-awareness is the extraordinary claim you are making. Put up or shut up.
Posts: 3872
Threads: 39
Joined: August 25, 2008
Reputation:
43
RE: Boy visits heaven
May 31, 2012 at 11:49 am
(This post was last modified: May 31, 2012 at 12:05 pm by Ace Otana.)
Quote:Saying that an electro-chemical reaction can produce sensation and self-awareness is the extraordinary claim you are making. Put up or shut up.
Well, we do have a pretty good understanding of what causes emotions and the like and more, and I see no other way of understanding death. We do know about chemical reactions and how parts of the brain work. Can you support your beliefs? Why not look into the topic a little more?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_brain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death
Even if that wasn't the case, in no way does it prove that your beliefs are right by default.
I'm just going to assume you've got nothing to show in regards to some 'afterlife' then?
Thought so.
One good question I have - Why would there be an afterlife? Try and answer it without answering through personal desire.
Quote:Put up or shut up.
Same visa versa mate. Put up or shut up.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.
Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.
You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
Posts: 12231
Threads: 324
Joined: April 14, 2011
Reputation:
140
RE: Boy visits heaven
May 31, 2012 at 12:42 pm
(May 31, 2012 at 8:59 am)ChadWooters Wrote: Saying that an electro-chemical reaction can produce sensation and self-awareness is the extraordinary claim you are making. Put up or shut up.
Are you seriously this ignorant? Or is there something I've missed.
Posts: 18503
Threads: 79
Joined: May 29, 2010
Reputation:
125
RE: Boy visits heaven
May 31, 2012 at 12:58 pm
(May 31, 2012 at 8:59 am)ChadWooters Wrote: Saying that an electro-chemical reaction can produce sensation and self-awareness is the extraordinary claim you are making. Put up or shut up.
How do you explain the fact that brain damage in specific areas of the brain cause individuals to change their personalities completely? Or the fact that electroshock 'therapy' can have the same effect? How about drugs (that are just chemicals), that alter the personality of people that use them? A tablet of LSD may be worldview changing for you.
All the evidence points towards our conscience being nothing but a function of our brain that isn't more than chemical reactions and electrical impulses, but you seem to be claiming that this isn't the case, that there is more. What evidence do you have of this?
Posts: 102
Threads: 1
Joined: May 31, 2012
Reputation:
3
RE: Boy visits heaven
May 31, 2012 at 1:10 pm
These "I went to heaven" stories of near-death experiences have a perfectly logical explanation. There is a chemical called dimethyltryptamine (DMT) that gets released into our brain when we die. It's basically like getting a strong acid trip, causing the host to hallucinate wildly and vividly. Most just see kaleidoscopic, fluorescent patterns, but some experience a phenomenon similar to lucid dreaming i.e. dreaming in incredible detail whilst simultaneously controlling their actions within the hallucination. Then again, some may be fanatical enough to use their near-death experience to their advantage, and lie about "seeing a light" or "standing before the lord Jesus Christ." If this is the best evidence they can come up with, then frankly they shouldn't be believing this nonsense.
I apologise if someone's already said something along these lines, but I haven't read all the comments...
Posts: 653
Threads: 33
Joined: March 14, 2012
Reputation:
13
RE: Boy visits heaven
May 31, 2012 at 1:13 pm
(May 31, 2012 at 1:10 pm)Panglossian Wrote: These "I went to heaven" stories of near-death experiences have a perfectly logical explanation. There is a chemical called dimethyltryptamine (DMT) that gets released into our brain when we die. It's basically like getting a strong acid trip, causing the host to hallucinate wildly and vividly. Most just see kaleidoscopic, fluorescent patterns, but some experience a phenomenon similar to lucid dreaming i.e. dreaming in incredible detail whilst simultaneously controlling their actions within the hallucination. Then again, some may be fanatical enough to use their near-death experience to their advantage, and lie about "seeing a light" or "standing before the lord Jesus Christ." If this is the best evidence they can come up with, then frankly they shouldn't be believing this nonsense.
I apologise if someone's already said something along these lines, but I haven't read all the comments...
Welcome
Posts: 102
Threads: 1
Joined: May 31, 2012
Reputation:
3
RE: Boy visits heaven
May 31, 2012 at 1:41 pm
(May 31, 2012 at 1:13 pm)Mosrhun Wrote: (May 31, 2012 at 1:10 pm)Panglossian Wrote: These "I went to heaven" stories of near-death experiences have a perfectly logical explanation. There is a chemical called dimethyltryptamine (DMT) that gets released into our brain when we die. It's basically like getting a strong acid trip, causing the host to hallucinate wildly and vividly. Most just see kaleidoscopic, fluorescent patterns, but some experience a phenomenon similar to lucid dreaming i.e. dreaming in incredible detail whilst simultaneously controlling their actions within the hallucination. Then again, some may be fanatical enough to use their near-death experience to their advantage, and lie about "seeing a light" or "standing before the lord Jesus Christ." If this is the best evidence they can come up with, then frankly they shouldn't be believing this nonsense.
I apologise if someone's already said something along these lines, but I haven't read all the comments...
Welcome
Haha, thankyou very much :]
Posts: 8719
Threads: 128
Joined: March 1, 2012
Reputation:
53
RE: Boy visits heaven
May 31, 2012 at 3:29 pm
(This post was last modified: May 31, 2012 at 3:55 pm by Neo-Scholastic.)
In this thread, however, I have only claimed that NDE’s are well documented and suggestive. This is clearly and undeniably true. In previous threads I have defended a panpsychic philosophy. Meanwhile, most of the atheists on this forum have made a habit of dodging their burden of proof when it comes to defending the material basis for subjective experiences. The atheist claim presented here is that material processes, at the level of classical physics, i.e. elecro-chemical reations, produce non-physical subjective experiences. That is a very extraordinary, though common, claim. The theory that subjective experience = brain state is so woefully inadequate as to be on the same level as creationism. And here is why.
Mental phenomena have no mass or volume, so whatever is happening, must be happening outside of classical physics. Explaining consciousness as an emergent property of matter at the scale of classical physics defies logic. The most common example of emergence is the relationship between a car and its parts. Drivability for example is a property of the car but not any of the parts. This analogy is flawed. First, it only describes a functional relationship. Functional relationships describe what thoughts do, not what a thoughts are, how they feel, or why they occur at all. Second, a car shares basic physical properties with its parts. Parts respond to heat and collisions in the same way that the car as a whole does. Not so with brain matter and thought. Although they are functionally related, what we call mind and the brain have no shared physical properties. Physical trauma to the brain may alter the contents of consciousness, but it doesn’t make any sense to describe a thought as being physically damaged. You could dye the brain green and it wouldn’t make the thoughts green.
This leads to quite a tangent on a common subject, so I will start a new thread with this post.
|
