Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |  [ show all ]
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: fireworks_god]
    #4247610 -

I will delete that part from the reply as it is irrelevent to the considerations in the rest of my reply.


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: Mixomatosis]
    #4247627 -

You've pulled the notion of what a soul is out of your ass

Please point out someone who has pulled the notion of what a soul is from elsewhere.  :wink:

Definition of soul

Since every mystic has their own favorite definition, often conflicting, of a soul, I have to start somewhere, so I chose one. If you know of a universal definition, let me know and I'll adopt it.

Some kind of magical thing that overrides brain function. <----- remember this is your silly definition

That's not my definition. My definition of soul is the seat of consciousness; the place/thing from which a person's psyche originates and which manifests itself in the physical world through the brain. This is also many mystics' definition, so it isn't original to me.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: SneezingPenis]
    #4247632 -

Quote:
The brain is merely a communication device between soul and body.


The most complex thing in the known universe (I heard that somewhere im sure) is MERELY a communication device between soul and body?

I like the way you state it as if its an empirical fact rather than a fairly flaky belief system!

Im not saying the "soul" doesnt exist just that with out some more convincing proof than "I can feel it" or "Guru wotsisname said it is so" it remains firmly in the realms of vague probability as opposed to something that definitely IS and something that supercededes a "mere brain" in terms of significance.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: Diploid]
    #4247636 -

Diploid said:
I don't buy the explanation that if the brain is damaged, then such a selective deficit in communication from the real world to the soul would occur, leaving all other language skills unaffected.


Then maybe you spent all of your money on drugs and can't afford to purcahse it. :lol:

If an entity sent signals through various wires, and if one of the receivers attached to a specific wire was broken, so that it became incapable of receiving the signal sent through that wire by an entity, but yet all of the other receivers and attached wires continued to exist as intended, capable of receiving signals, then, obviously, it is still possible for other, functional receivers to receive the signals sent through the wire by the entity. The fact that a signal receiver is damaged and incapable of receiving signals doesn't negate the fact that other receivers continue to receive their signals. :shocked: :grin:

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :satansmoking:
Peace. :mushroom2:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you
:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: GazzBut]
    #4247650 -

GazzBut said:
Quote:
The brain is merely a communication device between soul and body.


The most complex thing in the known universe (I heard that somewhere im sure) is MERELY a communication device between soul and body?

I like the way you state it as if its an empirical fact rather than a fairly flaky belief system!

Im not saying the "soul" doesnt exist just that with out some more convincing proof than "I can feel it" or "Guru wotsisname said it is so" it remains firmly in the realms of vague probability as opposed to something that definitely IS and something that supercededes a "mere brain" in terms of significance.


Yeah, didnt really mean it to be a fact. I just Know it to myself. Sorry for the fact stating in a forum that constantly proves that nothing is true or has an intrinsic nature.
I was also misspoken by saying it was merely a communication device ebtween the body and soul, IMO it is a communication device between the universe and the soul also, which is a pretty complex function.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: fireworks_god]
    #4247651 -

If an entity sent signals through various wires, and if one of the receivers attached to a specific wire was broken, so that it became incapable of receiving the signal sent through that wire by an entity, but yet all of the other receivers and attached wires continued to exist as intended, capable of receiving signals, then, obviously, it is still possible for other, functional receivers to receive the signals sent through the wire by the entity.

Your analogy, like Jiggy's, doesn't apply.

There is no damage to any wires as evidenced by the fact that all other language skills remain unaffected. All the words get to the destination. We know this because the literal meaning is understood; it is only the interpretation of non-literal meaning, the metaphors, which are lost.

The data arrives undamaged at the hypothetical soul. Why can't the soul then interpret the meta-data, the metaphor, in the language? This has nothing to do with the 'wires'.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Edited by Diploid (06/02/05 11:32 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: Diploid]
    #4247658 -

Diploid said:
[That's not my definition. My definition of soul is the seat of consciousness; the place/thing from which a person's psyche originates and which manifests itself in the physical world through the brain. This is also many mystics' definition, so it isn't original to me.



It seems that the definition of the psyche itself and a seperate definition of the psyche as simply the soul would be responsible for this whole "thing". :grin: I would not personally define the soul as the "psyche".

If I was feeling frisky enough to even use the word "soul", it would be in the manner that the soul would be defined as a source for consciousness itself, pure awareness, and would not be defined in the manner that a seperate, biological (and subsequent mental system) uses their access to that consciousness, awareness.

Also note that using the term "soul' in this context would not necessarily imply any connotation of the origin or force responsible for such a consciousness or awareness, it would be used simply as a term to represent exactly the definition of it.

:stoned: :stoned:

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :satansmoking:
Peace. :mushroom2:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you
:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: fireworks_god]
    #4247687 -

It seems that the definition of the psyche itself and a seperate definition of the psyche as simply the soul would be responsible for this whole "thing". I would not personally define the soul as the "psyche".

This is exactly why I had to draw a line on the ground and go from there. I could spend all night looking up different definitions for soul and psyche, but then I'd never get this thread started.

None of this definition talk address the question of why, if a person is more than a brain, can they interpret a set of words literally and metaphorically, but if their AG is damage, they lose ONLY the metaphor and all the words can still be literally processed.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: Diploid]
    #4247702 -

Quote:
I don't buy the explanation that if the brain is damaged, then such a selective deficit in communication from the real world to the soul would occur, leaving all other language skills unaffected.




Guess what? I don't buy it either. Who says the soul isn't laughing it's ass off? The person that thinks it is its brain or exists in its brain has no way of knowing it either.

The only reason that my analogy didn't "fit" to you is because your initial assumption is flawed and circular.

The idea of an eternal soul self is that it exists independently from the brain and the body and uses the brain and body as a vehicle/medium/tool of expression in this physical plane.

That is the assumption you are looking to take on. If you take it on assuming the soul is the brain, you already started out with the soul not existing independently from the brain and therefor must not exist beyond it.

:lol: Can't you see how NOT incredible that is to do and where the logic is flawed?


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: fireworks_god]
    #4247706 -

Main Entry: Psy?che
Pronunciation: 'sI-kE
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin, from Greek psychE soul
1 : a princess loved by Cupid
2 not capitalized [Greek psychE] a : SOUL, SELF b : MIND

I have read the same argument several times in this thread:

The function of the brain proves the non-existence of the soul

No, it doesn't!

This seems a bit pointless to me. We can study the function of the brain, and cannot scientifically study the function/existence of the soul. Why assert that the two are correlated?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: Diploid]
    #4247710 -

Diploid said:
The data arrives undamaged at the hypothetical soul. Why can't the soul then interpret the meta-data, the metaphor, in the language? This has nothing to do with the 'wires'.


.....

Diploid said:
Additional unrelated evidence for the idea that the brain is only a very powerful symbol processing machine is the fact that patients with damage to a structure called the Angular Gyrus cannot interpret metaphors




It sounds to me as though damage to this structure would negate the possibility of communication of any evidence of metaphorical value in the rest of the data arriving at the hypothetical soul, as though the specific structure was responsible for communicating that evidence.

If I say to you, "The walls have ears", and all of your structures responsible for communicating specific collections of data of one's experience to some hypothetical soul are functional, but the specific structure that is responsible for comprehension of ontological levels of meaning in words that do not, on their own, carry that meaning at face-value, then, quite obviously, the words at face-value will arrive at this proposed, hypothetical soul, while any possible metahporical and ontological levels of meaning associated with these words will not arrive, as a result of the structure specifically responsible for the task of delivering that data being damaged. :wink:

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :satansmoking:
Peace. :mushroom2:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you
:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #4247732 -

If you take it on assuming the soul is the brain, you already started out with the soul not existing independently from the brain and therefor must not exist beyond it.

I'm not making any assumptions. I'm only drawing a conclusion from the available data.

But let's play your game. Let's assume the soul exists. (Defined roughly as the place where your incorporeal self exists and which will continue to exist after your body dies).

Now, it follows that when I speak to you metaphorically, the words eventually make it to your soul where you grasp the literal meaning as well as the metaphorical one.

If the AG in your brain is damaged and I again speak to you metaphorically, the words still make their way to your soul as evidenced by your perfect literal interpretation of the words; but try as you may, you cannot grasp the metaphor in those words.

How would you explain this observation using the soul paradigm?


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Edited by Diploid (06/02/05 11:51 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: Veritas]
    #4247740 -

The function of the brain proves the non-existence of the soul

No one has claimed proof, only persuasive evidence.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: Diploid]
    #4247748 -

Diploid said:
If the AG in your brain is damaged and I again speak to you metaphorically, the words still make their way to your soul as evidenced by your literal interpretation of the words; but try as you may, you cannot grasp the metaphor in those words.

How would you explain this observation using the soul paradigm?


As I already have, the simple fact that your brain is also responsible for creating the metaphor in those words. :lol:

The words themselves do not carry the metaphor, nor any meaning at all. It is obvious that different structures in the brain are responsible for different levels of meaning, as damaging a specific structure only results in the disapperance of the ability to think through on a more metaphorical, ontological level.

If you are implying that the soul itself is what "does the thinking", then your implication is baseless and not congruent with my understanding of the mechanics of the mind. :grin:

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :satansmoking:
Peace. :mushroom2:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you
:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: fireworks_god]
    #4247751 -

It sounds to me as though damage to this structure would negate the possibility of communication of any evidence of metaphorical value in the rest of the data arriving at the hypothetical soul

Why do you use the words "the rest of the data"? The data consists ONLY of the words. ALL of them arrive at the destination as evidenced by the patient's ability to interpret the words literally.

You keep suggesting that a damaged AG prevents some of the data from getting through. The net sum of the data is the words and they all arrive or the literal meaning would be lost.

ONLY the ability to interpret beyond the literal words, the metaphor, is lost.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: Diploid]
    #4247766 -

As I learned in neuropsychological assessment class long ago, there are people who are born without a corpus callosum and the brain seems to adapt.

The unrelated part to your inquiry is the identification of the word "soul" with personality and neuroanatomy. The word 'soul,' despite its derivation from the Greek 'psyche,' with mythic, metaphysical as well as empirical meanings, tends to have a strictly metaphysical meaning in English. That being the case, one must use 'the right tool for the job,' and neuroscience is not the right tool for handling metaphysics. Metaphysics is best handled with metaphors and symbols.

That subjective psychological experiences have corresponding physical loci in the brain is fascinating, but the point here is in the word 'corresponding.' There is no proof, only theories - materialistic theories - that consciousness is an epiphenomenon of neural processes. If the very fabric of space-time turns out to be 'psychoid' (to use the Jungian term), then the universe will turn out to be as psychic as it is physical, and the ancients who spoke to the notion of 'soul' as being 'psychosomatic' will have recognized that humans are indeed Microcosms of the Macrocosmic universe, because spacetime is psychosomatic and we are one-with the fabric of space-time. Jung died before he and physicist Wolfgang Pauli could put this idea into a full theory, but the idea has been around a long time. It undercuts all the materialistic thinkers who seek to reduce consciousness to a collection of physical reactions.

This argument eventually harkens back to the act of creation - to a point before physics, as we understand it, existed. The word that means 'before physics' is metaphysics and at that point one has to enjoin the thoughts of metaphysicians for insights, not physicists or physical scientists. In the Kabbala, for example, Soul exists in a 'world' which is 'before' the world of Personality, but here 'before' means 'ontologically prior to,' not 'temporally prior to.' It means that like you said, Personality emerges from Soul in the Tree that symbolizes both the human being (Microcosm) and the universe (Macrocosm). The Personality, as a psychic component is 'conjoined to' the Physical, whereas in the Kabbalist system, the Soul includes but transcends the physical Body and psychic Personality, and exists independently of the body and personality.

Spiritual development means crossing the 'Veil of Paroketh' from Personality to Soul, and identifying oneself with the latter so that one does not think of oneself as a Body and a Personality with a Soul, but rather, as a Soul that is clothed with a Body and corresponding Personality. OOBE's and profound Psychedelic Experience can often catalyze this development. One has then entered the sphere of Tiphereth, and from there alone can further development in higher spheres and Union with GOD take place. Of course, as you can see, all of this is entirely metaphysical, yet said to occur while still quite alive and psychophysical.

Thanks for bearing with me.

Peace.


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: fireworks_god]
    #4247774 -

As I already have, the simple fact that your brain is also responsible for creating the metaphor in those words.

So, when I die, my soul will no longer be able to understand metaphors? Alright...


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: Diploid]
    #4247775 -

Diploid said:
[Why do you use the words "the rest of the data"? The data consists ONLY of the words. ALL of them arrive at the destination as evidenced by the patient's ability to interpret the words literally.


The data doesn't only consist of the words, it also consists of all of the processing of those words that has been done by the mind, which is responsible for the meaning and the interpretation of those words. One structure responsible for a certain level of interpretation of those words is damaged, that is not transferred to the hypothetical soul, nice and simple. :grin:

Quote:
You keep suggesting that a damaged AG prevents some of the data from getting through. The net sum of the data is the words and they all arrive or the literal meaning would be lost.


The literal interpretation of those words is also part of the data, which is why it is not lost (it resulted from a seperate structure of the brain).

Quote:
ONLY the ability to interpret beyond the literal words, the metaphor, is lost.


Because of the fact that the structure from which that ability stems is damaged. :lol:

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :satansmoking:
Peace. :mushroom2:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you
:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: Diploid]
    #4247787 -

Diploid said:
So, when I die, my soul will no longer be able to understand metaphors? Alright...


If such a hypothetical soul is capable of thinking for its own, then why would it be associated with a brain and its programming, the mind, which exists to think and process, in the first place? :grin:

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :satansmoking:
Peace. :mushroom2:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you
:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Neurological Science And Evidence Of The Non-Existence Of A Soul [Re: fireworks_god]
    #4247820 -

If such a hypothetical soul is capable of thinking for its own, then why would it be associated with a brain

I dunno; this is your assertion, not mine. You claim metaphors are processed in the brain. If so, by logical extension, when I die, my soul, without the benefit of a brain, will be unable to grasp metaphors.

I don't buy this. You're making things up to explain the neurological evidence rather than taking an honest look at that evidence and the likely consequences it represents.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |  [ show all ]

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Do Basic Human Morals Exist
( 1 2 all )		 mrfreedom 5,471 24 05/28/02 07:55 AM
by Sclorch
* Entheogens and Soul Crotalus 1,272 4 06/13/03 04:44 PM
by Crotalus
* Do you have a soul? *DELETED* dorkus 2,220 10 11/13/04 03:05 PM
by Alan Stone
* Are you a slave to a God that doesn't exist?
( 1 2 3 all )		 Larrythescaryrex 8,063 42 07/30/02 04:00 PM
by Larrythescaryrex
* Einstein A Father of Science Believed in GOD...
( 1 2 3 all )		 BleedingSickness 6,254 42 10/07/02 02:00 PM
by Zahid
* The Holographic Universe- Science and Spirituality
( 1 2 3 all )		 gettinjiggywithit 6,884 42 03/17/08 03:25 AM
by 764hero
* The Limitations of Science
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )		 Anonymous 7,378 85 01/22/04 12:17 AM
by trippy
* Soul goes on or are we just worm food?
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 upupup 3,723 61 11/23/02 08:19 PM
by Murex

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
11,926 topic views. 2 members, 16 guests and 5 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.035 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 16 queries.