|
 
Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! Please  login or  register to post messages and view our members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, encrypted messages, file attachments, board customizations, and much more!
|
 nunyoshi
Stranger
Registered: 02/18/08
Posts: 7
Last seen: 5 months, 12 days
|
|
Nearly every religion posits some sort of hidden, immaterial realm which exists behind the visible, physical, and material realm in which we live. Often we are supposed to be partaking in this immaterial realm because who we "really" are is defined by an immaterial, immortal soul. This immaterial realm is also treated as being higher and more important than the material one because it's the realm in which gods live and which we are destined to inhabit after our physical bodies die.
However important these beliefs may be to religious theists, there isn't any solid, verifiable evidence that even suggests any of it is true. On the contrary, everything we do know and everything we continue learn points to the conclusion that all of those claims are completely false, and instead that the following are true: life is material and natural, we don't have anything like an immaterial or immoral soul, and an immaterial, disembodied "mind" like gods are supposed to have just isn't possible.
When all available evidence points away from a particular position, that doesn't necessarily mean that it's false, but it is unreasonable to believe it.
The evidence against the claim that our minds are really immaterial and not a product of our physical brains is unequivocal. When a person's brain is stimulated, through physical implements, drugs, or magnetic fields, and put in a particular physical state, then a person's mental experience corresponds to what we know about that state. Approaching from the other direction, self-reports about particular mental experiences correspond to evidence about their brains' particular physical states. There is no reason for this to be true if our minds and mental experiences are independent of our brains; people who continue to insist otherwise offer no means for testing and verifying that claim.
All of this is true to a much more extreme degree when the brain is injured through physical trauma or certain drugs. Some destroy enough of the brain to end all mental experiences entirely. Some only go far enough to destroy or at least greatly degrade particular mental experiences like language use or particular emotions. Moreover, injuries in particular areas lead to particular changes in mental ability injury to one portion of the brain will affect language while another won't. There is no reason for any of this to happen if our minds and mental states are independent of our brains. If an immaterial mind is what does our thinking for us, then changing the brain shouldn't produce any, or at least any significant, changes in our thinking.
All of this is also true of other animals. It's not just humans whose mental states can be mapped to particular brain states, whether through deliberate manipulation or injury. Not only is the same true in other animals, but there is a high degree of consistency when it comes to which areas of the brain correspond to what sorts of mental abilities and mental states.
Furthermore, every species studied demonstrates increasing mental abilities as they grow older and their brains grow more complex, developing more neurons and more connections between neurons. If our mental capacity and mental states are immaterial and independent of the brain, there's no reason for any of this to be true. Moreover, people who believe in immaterial minds don't normally attribute this to non-human animals, yet they cannot explain how physical brains can produce mental capacity and mental states in other animals but not in humans.
All medical and scientific evidence we have points to our minds, our memories, and our personalities being products of our physical brains. This is no less natural and no less material than how our physical bodies produce other processes, like digestion. If this is true, it means that when our physical brains die then our minds, memories, and personalities will also die. Since these are what make up who "we" really are, then the death of our physical brains means the death of us as well if there is any sort of immaterial soul, it's not "us." It doesn't do our thinking, it doesnt hold our memories, and it doesn't express our personalities. This makes the existence of immaterial minds or souls irrelevant at best.
These issues also impact notions about the existence of gods with disembodied minds. Since everything we know about minds, thinking, memories, and personalities requires the existence of a physical brain as a basis, it's difficult to credit the idea that a disembodied mind without a brain is even possible. Religious theists have certainly not offered any explanation for how this would even be theoretically possible, much less provide evidence for it being an actual state of affairs. It is unlikely that such a disembodied mind exists and, therefore, that a god exists.
None of this is unequivocal proof that no gods can or do exist, nor does it prove that no religions are or can be true. It does, however, provide a strong basis for doubting that some of the most fundamental claims about gods and religions are true. Although they are not logically excluded from being true, they are excluded from being very likely true. This amount of contrary evidence makes belief unreasonable.
|
 Veritas
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 10,648
|
 Re: Mind and Soul [Re: nunyoshi]
#8081922 - 02/28/08 03:27 PM (10 months, 5 days ago) |
|
|
Great post! 
--------------------
there is a lot to discover about one's self, consciousness, and the inebriated states of mind without attempting to mystify what is really happening.
~~~~redgreenvines
|
AlteredAgain
♫²
 
Registered: 04/27/06
Posts: 7,829
Loc: Ңēŗế...
Last seen: 21 minutes, 4 seconds
|
Re: Mind and Soul [Re: nunyoshi]
#8081933 - 02/28/08 03:30 PM (10 months, 5 days ago) |
|
|
It doesn't always make belief unreasonable, even if it is a belief in the immaterial or spirit.. it's not unreasonable if spiritual belief is applied to reflect harmony with nature.
The North American Indians never needed to build trains or erect cities. Their simple relationships with the Earth and its elements benefited them as a social entity. The question whether the invisible forces that assist them are really there matters little when its belief is used constructively to balance and be harmonious. It could be considered fluffy, but not unreasonable in this particular example.
--------------------
|
Veritas
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 10,648
|
|
Unreasonable: Not governed by reason
Reason: The capacity for logical, rational, and analytic thought.
While there may be some loosely-related benefit to unreasonable ideas (such as the belief in living in harmony with nature leading to greater conservation efforts), one cannot say that they are based in logic.
A reasonable approach to conservation efforts would involve analyzing the available resources, the impact upon said resources of our current and estimated future population, the remaining years until these resources are depleted, and then formulating a logical plan to extend the availability of said resources.
No need for fluffy beliefs and Great Spirits. 
--------------------
there is a lot to discover about one's self, consciousness, and the inebriated states of mind without attempting to mystify what is really happening.
~~~~redgreenvines
|
AlteredAgain
♫²
Registered: 04/27/06
Posts: 7,829
Loc: Ңēŗế...
Last seen: 21 minutes, 4 seconds
|
Re: Mind and Soul [Re: Veritas]
#8081973 - 02/28/08 03:41 PM (10 months, 5 days ago) |
|
|
Logic is no requisite for tuning into nature. It's helpful for understanding the experience though.
--------------------
|
Veritas
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 10,648
|
|
We're not talking about "tuning in," we're talking about BELIEFS and IDEAS. One does not use reason in order to listen to birdsong nor to smell flowers, nor does one use belief in order to experience the world through one's senses.
Where we get into the realm of reasonable or unreasonable is when we begin to interpret and assign meaning to our experiences. An unreasonable belief is one which ignores the preponderance of evidence, is in defiance of logic, and eschews analysis in favor of jumping to conclusions.
The belief in an immaterial, immortal soul is an excellent example of an unreasonable belief.
--------------------
there is a lot to discover about one's self, consciousness, and the inebriated states of mind without attempting to mystify what is really happening.
~~~~redgreenvines
|
Jive turkey
friend
Registered: 07/12/07
Posts: 488
Last seen: 1 hour, 5 minutes
|
|
''while soul, meaning the self (as opposed to other) is the only reality one can be sure of, and so is in this way substantial while the external world is insubstantial''.
Sounds like Descartes.
|
EternalCowabunga
21st Century Schizoid Man
Registered: 04/04/05
Posts: 2,623
Loc: Toronto
|
|
maybe there is no subjective world AND no objective world, no spiritual or material
where is the separation between brain and world?
--------------------
Nuisance is this noise of mine, Crying inside the hollow cave, Does the sun never reach the eyes
Of the prehistoric caveman, He had nothing but fire, And yet I make more noise, Not because of my tools, But because of a lack.
Ask the shaman
Or rabbi or priest, This modern world keeps a lid on me,
Contains my noise, so I can release it in poetry,
Release it from nothing, nowhere
Was I forgetting that place near my neck?
Ah yes... the jugular
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 24,231
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Mind and Soul [Re: nunyoshi]
#8083531 - 02/28/08 09:01 PM (10 months, 5 days ago) |
|
|
Welcome and I hope like hell (if there is one) you stick around. Quite the first post.
--------------------
What the thinker thinks, the prover proves. R.A.W.
I don't believe anything, but I have many suspicions. R.A.W.
I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. ~Stephen Roberts
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 24,231
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
EternalCowabunga said:
maybe there is no subjective world AND no objective world, no spiritual or material
and maybe the boogie man is out to get you.
--------------------
What the thinker thinks, the prover proves. R.A.W.
I don't believe anything, but I have many suspicions. R.A.W.
I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. ~Stephen Roberts
|
EternalCowabunga
21st Century Schizoid Man
Registered: 04/04/05
Posts: 2,623
Loc: Toronto
|
Re: Mind and Soul [Re: Icelander]
#8083578 - 02/28/08 09:10 PM (10 months, 5 days ago) |
|
|
i don't get it
--------------------
Nuisance is this noise of mine, Crying inside the hollow cave, Does the sun never reach the eyes
Of the prehistoric caveman, He had nothing but fire, And yet I make more noise, Not because of my tools, But because of a lack.
Ask the shaman
Or rabbi or priest, This modern world keeps a lid on me,
Contains my noise, so I can release it in poetry,
Release it from nothing, nowhere
Was I forgetting that place near my neck?
Ah yes... the jugular
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 24,231
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Well let me put it this way. Speculating can be fun, but only for a little while and then it just gets old here. You do a lot of it and rarely back it up with anything substantial. I'm just commenting on that.
--------------------
What the thinker thinks, the prover proves. R.A.W.
I don't believe anything, but I have many suspicions. R.A.W.
I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. ~Stephen Roberts
|
EternalCowabunga
21st Century Schizoid Man
Registered: 04/04/05
Posts: 2,623
Loc: Toronto
|
Re: Mind and Soul [Re: Icelander]
#8083697 - 02/28/08 09:31 PM (10 months, 5 days ago) |
|
|
Ah, I see. I could see how that would get annoying. I'll post more substantive stuff soon, probably about racquetball or how love is everything
--------------------
Nuisance is this noise of mine, Crying inside the hollow cave, Does the sun never reach the eyes
Of the prehistoric caveman, He had nothing but fire, And yet I make more noise, Not because of my tools, But because of a lack.
Ask the shaman
Or rabbi or priest, This modern world keeps a lid on me,
Contains my noise, so I can release it in poetry,
Release it from nothing, nowhere
Was I forgetting that place near my neck?
Ah yes... the jugular
|
backfromthedead
Activated
Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 3,590
Last seen: 5 months, 9 days
|
|
--------------------
|
daytripper23
Wanker
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 1,909
|
Re: Mind and Soul [Re: nunyoshi]
#8084518 - 02/29/08 12:45 AM (10 months, 4 days ago) |
|
|
By reasonable, I don't believe you mean "as of consensus", but instead the intrinsic meaning of it.
Based upon your argument, all "evidence" is of course found in the material plane. If it is found anywhere else, then the argument is self contradictory.
In regards to the question of what happens after we die, nothing material can serve as evidence. If you define your reality completely in materialistic terms, Immaterial existence is of course unreasonable, but so is nonexistence, because it is literally immateriality.
So basically, a materialist has no point of view on this matter. I mean wouldn't you agree that its just variations of yada yada yada? 
----------
| |
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
Quote 
