[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
By your standards you don’t have proof of anything and never will.
[/quote]
The scientific proof available merely chips away at what is unknown but never will reveal every thing. Their will always be room for doubt, for belief in god. I’ve accepted this.
I am okay with always wondering and never knowing for sure.
If I am right and there is no soul then I won’t know it. I’ll just stop existing, I would only know if I was wrong. I’m okay with this too.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:<<< In the one psych class I took the professor and my textbook implied that the mind-body dualism thing is no longer studied and that all advances would be in physiology/neurobiology. This was psych 101, a basic first year course.
[/quote]Well bless my soul it’s settled then =]
[/quote]
Alteration of the brain through chemicals, injuries, and illness can cause changes in personality, memory, speech, etc. If the mind were separate from the body then why would these things be affected?
Are you saying either A. My textbook and prof were rebels? or B. The neurologists are wrong?
As you are the one who seems more certain(out of the two of us) what is your proof that mind-body dualism is a real thing?
[/quote]
Who said they were separate? Could not the brain be attached to the mind? [/quote]
Or the mind a creation of the brain?
When I die I’ll either be wrong or I won’t know I’m right. 
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:<<< Yes, I have a wife. >>>[/quote]She would I agree I assume?
[/quote]Well, she’s been fine with it for the last 20 years.[/quote]What if you two were to learn that I was conducting an “objective” inquiry into your claim upon her as your own and her alleged concord in the matter? Not denying your claims, but let’s make sure. What would you think? Of me and that situation?
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:<<< In the one psych class I took the professor and my textbook implied that the mind-body dualism thing is no longer studied and that all advances would be in physiology/neurobiology. This was psych 101, a basic first year course.
[/quote]Well bless my soul it’s settled then =]
[/quote]
Alteration of the brain through chemicals, injuries, and illness can cause changes in personality, memory, speech, etc. If the mind were separate from the body then why would these things be affected?
Are you saying either A. My textbook and prof were rebels? or B. The neurologists are wrong?
As you are the one who seems more certain(out of the two of us) what is your proof that mind-body dualism is a real thing?
[/quote]
Who said they were separate? Could not the brain be attached to the mind? [/quote]
No, the mind is a product/function of the brain. Without it [the brain] there’s no existence.
[/quote]
How can we say that? If science tests the physical, how can it show that the non-physical no longer existence because the brain is damaged?
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
You’re implying that only the existence of a supreme intelligence can explain the capabilities you’ve listed without the existence of a supreme intelligence being necessary.
[/quote]
Actually, I am not. I’m asking someone to prove to me how these three things can be possible in a purely physical world. I am implying that we don’t live in purely physical world and that a non-physical world is necessary.[/quote]
Sorry Chris, but your question is just another iteration of the God of the gaps fallacy. Basically what you are saying is that here are three things for which we do not have an explanation, therefore, there must be a God.[/quote]
It sounds like you’re coming up with your own gaps fallacy. Don’t know what my argument is, must be arguing for G-d.
[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:By your standards you don’t have proof of anything and never will.
[/quote]The scientific proof available merely chips away at what is unknown but never will reveal every thing. Their will always be room for doubt, for belief in god. I’ve accepted this.
I am okay with always wondering and never knowing for sure.
If I am right and there is no soul then I won’t know it. I’ll just stop existing, I would only know if I was wrong. I’m okay with this too.[/quote]This may change as you get older.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:By your standards you don’t have proof of anything and never will.
[/quote]The scientific proof available merely chips away at what is unknown but never will reveal every thing. Their will always be room for doubt, for belief in god. I’ve accepted this.
I am okay with always wondering and never knowing for sure.
If I am right and there is no soul then I won’t know it. I’ll just stop existing, I would only know if I was wrong. I’m okay with this too.[/quote]This may change as you get older.
[/quote]
I was actually more certain of stuff when I was in my teens and 20’s, that there wasn’t a god.
I am more accepting of things being unknown now.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:<<< Yes, I have a wife. >>>[/quote]She would I agree I assume?
[/quote]Well, she’s been fine with it for the last 20 years.[/quote]What if you two were to learn that I was conducting an “objective” inquiry into your claim upon her as your own and her alleged concord in the matter? Not denying your claims, but let’s make sure. What would you think? Of me and that situation?
[/quote]
I’m not sure I would care. Why would I? But I’m interested as to where you’re going with this.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:By your standards you don’t have proof of anything and never will.
[/quote]The scientific proof available merely chips away at what is unknown but never will reveal every thing. Their will always be room for doubt, for belief in god. I’ve accepted this.
I am okay with always wondering and never knowing for sure.
If I am right and there is no soul then I won’t know it. I’ll just stop existing, I would only know if I was wrong. I’m okay with this too.[/quote]This may change as you get older.
[/quote]
As I grew older, my faith grew weaker. Not that it was ever super strong to begin with. I would say that I questioned the existence of a supreme being around the same time I learned there was no Santa Claus. I’m not kidding and I’m not just saying that to make people mad. And religion classes were always confusing for me. I recall having lots of cognitive dissonance.
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:<<< I’m not sure I would care. Why would I? But I’m interested as to where you’re going with this.[/quote]What would your opinion be of me allowing for the possibly of your wife not actually belonging to you. Suppose I put it up for a vote? A poll of “experts”? What if a large percentage of people close to you were involved and were also prepared to call you a liar? "maybe you guys have been fakin it huh? At what point along the way would you consider the whole thing idiotic and nonsensical?
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:<<< As I grew older, my faith grew weaker. Not that it was ever super strong to begin with. I would say that I questioned the existence of a supreme being around the same time I learned there was no Santa Claus. I’m not kidding and I’m not just saying that to make people mad. And religion classes were always confusing for me. I recall having lots of cognitive dissonance.[/quote]I had no religious conviction left whatsoever by 11 or 12. Just didn’t care. That’s not what I was referring to. I was referring to his contentment with uncertainty.
[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
By your standards you don’t have proof of anything and never will.
[/quote]
The scientific proof available merely chips away at what is unknown but never will reveal every thing. Their will always be room for doubt, for belief in god. I’ve accepted this.
I am okay with always wondering and never knowing for sure.
If I am right and there is no soul then I won’t know it. I’ll just stop existing, I would only know if I was wrong. I’m okay with this too.[/quote]
what if you are wrong?
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:<<< I’m not sure I would care. Why would I? But I’m interested as to where you’re going with this.[/quote]What would your opinion be of me allowing for the possibly of your wife not actually belonging to you. Suppose I put it up for a vote? A poll of “experts”? What if a large percentage of people close to you were involved and were also prepared to call you a liar? "maybe you guys have been fakin it huh? At what point along the way would you consider the whole thing idiotic and nonsensical?
[/quote]
Are you arguing against the hiddenness of God? In other words, you are saying that He/It is not hidden?
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:<<< I’m not sure I would care. Why would I? But I’m interested as to where you’re going with this.[/quote]What would your opinion be of me allowing for the possibly of your wife not actually belonging to you. Suppose I put it up for a vote? A poll of “experts”? What if a large percentage of people close to you were involved and were also prepared to call you a liar? "maybe you guys have been fakin it huh? At what point along the way would you consider the whole thing idiotic and nonsensical?
[/quote]
I suppose I would consider idiotic from the get go, but again I wouldn’t care so much unless you had a bad motive. For instance, if you were saying that she was really your wife, then I would have a problem - a rather big problem. However, I have a document that states we are legally married, so I have evidence to support my claim. Plus, I’m assuming she would have a say in this and she would and could support my claim. I have witnesses who were at my wedding and could confirm that we were, in fact, married. Does this mess up your example? I’m not trying to be difficult here - I’m really interested in where you’re going with this. But as you can see, my claim that my wife is in fact “my wife” is not based on a mere belief. I have evidence and witnesses to support my claim.
[quote]TheDozer97 wrote:
[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
By your standards you don’t have proof of anything and never will.
[/quote]
The scientific proof available merely chips away at what is unknown but never will reveal every thing. Their will always be room for doubt, for belief in god. I’ve accepted this.
I am okay with always wondering and never knowing for sure.
If I am right and there is no soul then I won’t know it. I’ll just stop existing, I would only know if I was wrong. I’m okay with this too.[/quote]
what if you are wrong?[/quote]
Wrong about what?
Which part?
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:<<< As I grew older, my faith grew weaker. Not that it was ever super strong to begin with. I would say that I questioned the existence of a supreme being around the same time I learned there was no Santa Claus. I’m not kidding and I’m not just saying that to make people mad. And religion classes were always confusing for me. I recall having lots of cognitive dissonance.[/quote]I had no religious conviction left whatsoever by 11 or 12. Just didn’t care. That’s not what I was referring to. I was referring to his contentment with uncertainty.
[/quote]
I most certainly don’t like or find contentment living with uncertainty - I just accept it. And it’s not like I don’t care. I’ve spent lots of time thinking about the existence of God and what place religion has in all of this. I consider these discussions as part of that time. I WANT there to be a loving, benevolent God who watches over us and once in a while helps us out somehow. I WISH that consuming the dry, tasteless wafer in church really did transubstantiate into something that possessed magical healing properties. I simply cannot accept these things because I see no evidence for them. And I find transubstantiation just too ridiculous.
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:<<< I’m not sure I would care. Why would I? But I’m interested as to where you’re going with this.[/quote]What would your opinion be of me allowing for the possibly of your wife not actually belonging to you. Suppose I put it up for a vote? A poll of “experts”? What if a large percentage of people close to you were involved and were also prepared to call you a liar? "maybe you guys have been fakin it huh? At what point along the way would you consider the whole thing idiotic and nonsensical?
[/quote]I suppose I would consider idiotic from the get go, but again I wouldn’t care so much unless you had a bad motive. For instance, if you were saying that she was really your wife, then I would have a problem - a rather big problem. However, I have a document that states we are legally married, so I have evidence to support my claim. Plus, I’m assuming she would have a say in this and she would and could support my claim. I have witnesses who were at my wedding and could confirm that we were, in fact, married. Does this mess up your example? I’m not trying to be difficult here - I’m really interested in where you’re going with this. But as you can see, my claim that my wife is in fact “my wife” is not based on a mere belief. I have evidence and witnesses to support my claim.[/quote]Excellent. And when I quote Romans 1:18-25 to you for about the tenth time:
[quote]18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.
24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.[/quote]You don’t believe this which is fine. I had no illusions of convincing you, but it does illustrate my point. Could be anything. Could be your house. You come runnin out “hey what are you people doin here? Get outta my yard”. To which we answer that were having an “objective” study of whether this is you house or not. You say “wadda ya talkin about? I built this house. I’ve lived here for 20 years. My neighbors all know me. This is all my stuff in here, here’s the deed. My name’s on the mailbox, that’s my car”. Yeah well we don’t see any of that. We’ve been examining our own evidence our way and the way we see it this isn’t your house. (all analogies, especially about God are imperfect)
Regardless of what you believe, that is God’s view of you. His signature and deed of ownership are displayed with blinding brightness in and through absolutely every last fact of existence and especially you yourself as created in His image. You are tripping over Him everywhere and especially in your mirror. He is NOT hiding. YOU ARE. You will probably laugh this off and roll your eyes at my religious stupor, but like I keep sayin. It ain’t just for you. God knows who else may be reading. If it does help you at least understand the biblical position then all the better.
Dead men worship themselves by pretending to be qualified to “objectively” scrutinize reality in such a way as to determine the probability or no of the existence an infinite triune creator God. We’ll decide and God WILL bow. He is in reality the first fact from whom ALL other facts derive their factuality. That’s what makes Him God see? To me this is the most basic concept there is. Everything makes ultimate sense in the light of His glory and nothing makes sense without it.
[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:
[quote]TheDozer97 wrote:
[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
By your standards you don’t have proof of anything and never will.
[/quote]
The scientific proof available merely chips away at what is unknown but never will reveal every thing. Their will always be room for doubt, for belief in god. I’ve accepted this.
I am okay with always wondering and never knowing for sure.
If I am right and there is no soul then I won’t know it. I’ll just stop existing, I would only know if I was wrong. I’m okay with this too.[/quote]
what if you are wrong?[/quote]
Wrong about what?
Which part?[/quote]
My mistake, looking over it again I missed the “I would only know if I was wrong. I’m okay with this too.” Though I do have a couple questions:
I am just wondering why you are ok with it. Out of curiousity, why do you choose “science over relgion” (I quoted it because they are not always in conflict depending upon the specific perspective) when you admit that there will be doubt with either?
Have you heard of tentative belief?
[quote]TheDozer97 wrote:
[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:
[quote]TheDozer97 wrote:
[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
By your standards you don’t have proof of anything and never will.
[/quote]
The scientific proof available merely chips away at what is unknown but never will reveal every thing. Their will always be room for doubt, for belief in god. I’ve accepted this.
I am okay with always wondering and never knowing for sure.
If I am right and there is no soul then I won’t know it. I’ll just stop existing, I would only know if I was wrong. I’m okay with this too.[/quote]
what if you are wrong?[/quote]
Wrong about what?
Which part?[/quote]
My mistake, looking over it again I missed the “I would only know if I was wrong. I’m okay with this too.” Though I do have a couple questions:
I am just wondering why you are ok with it. Out of curiousity, why do you choose “science over relgion” (I quoted it because they are not always in conflict depending upon the specific perspective) when you admit that there will be doubt with either?
Have you heard of tentative belief?[/quote]
Because science has answers that they can explain to me and can be verified. I have a lot of curiosity about life and science and not being sure means there are always new things to learn about.
Religion asks me to just believe, as a skeptical person I find this impossible to do. Years ago I just accepted my skepticism, and accepting this meant being comfortable with things being left unexplained. I have always found believing to be stressful, because I could never really believe. I found with atheism I could abandon this belief thing.
Tentative belief? No never heard of it, but tentative means without confidence or uncertain.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:<<< I’m not sure I would care. Why would I? But I’m interested as to where you’re going with this.[/quote]What would your opinion be of me allowing for the possibly of your wife not actually belonging to you. Suppose I put it up for a vote? A poll of “experts”? What if a large percentage of people close to you were involved and were also prepared to call you a liar? "maybe you guys have been fakin it huh? At what point along the way would you consider the whole thing idiotic and nonsensical?
[/quote]I suppose I would consider idiotic from the get go, but again I wouldn’t care so much unless you had a bad motive. For instance, if you were saying that she was really your wife, then I would have a problem - a rather big problem. However, I have a document that states we are legally married, so I have evidence to support my claim. Plus, I’m assuming she would have a say in this and she would and could support my claim. I have witnesses who were at my wedding and could confirm that we were, in fact, married. Does this mess up your example? I’m not trying to be difficult here - I’m really interested in where you’re going with this. But as you can see, my claim that my wife is in fact “my wife” is not based on a mere belief. I have evidence and witnesses to support my claim.[/quote]Excellent. And when I quote Romans 1:18-25 to you for about the tenth time:
[quote]18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.
24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.[/quote]You don’t believe this which is fine. I had no illusions of convincing you, but it does illustrate my point. Could be anything. Could be your house. You come runnin out “hey what are you people doin here? Get outta my yard”. To which we answer that were having an “objective” study of whether this is you house or not. You say “wadda ya talkin about? I built this house. I’ve lived here for 20 years. My neighbors all know me. This is all my stuff in here, here’s the deed. My name’s on the mailbox, that’s my car”. Yeah well we don’t see any of that. We’ve been examining our own evidence our way and the way we see it this isn’t your house. (all analogies, especially about God are imperfect)
Regardless of what you believe, that is God’s view of you. His signature and deed of ownership are displayed with blinding brightness in and through absolutely every last fact of existence and especially you yourself as created in His image. You are tripping over Him everywhere and especially in your mirror. He is NOT hiding. YOU ARE. You will probably laugh this off and roll your eyes at my religious stupor, but like I keep sayin. It ain’t just for you. God knows who else may be reading. If it does help you at least understand the biblical position then all the better.
Dean men worship themselves by pretending to be qualified to “objectively” scrutinize reality in such a way as to determine the probability or no of the existence an infinite triune creator God. We’ll decide and God WILL bow. He is in reality the first fact from whom ALL other facts derive their factuality. That’s what makes Him God see? To me this is the most basic concept there is. Everything makes ultimate sense in the light of His glory and nothing makes sense without it.
[/quote]
I’m not rolling my eyes because this is good, and I like your analogy about the deed to the house. Let’s take that a step further. The reality is that title to property is questioned every time there is a sale. Every time property is sold, a title company does a title search. And many times the issue isn’t just whether the people selling the property are the real owners but whether there are any liens on the property that the new owners might get stuck with. And the owners may truly and honestly believe that title is good, but potential buyers will still want proof. Why? Because from experience, we know that people lie, but we also know that good and honest people can make a mistake. But here’s the key to this analogy: the only time title is questioned is during a sale. In other words, the only time it is questioned is when it would affect other people. If I have no interest in buying your house, I could care less if you have good title. But if I do want to buy your house, I want evidence of good title. And I realize that you may be annoyed as hell at the idea of having to pay a title company to provide me with evidence of good title when you’ve lived there for years, and you’ve paid all your bills for utilities and improvements so there is no way there would be any liens on the property. But if you sat down and calmly thought it through, you would realize that there is a small chance you could be wrong, and it is perfectly rational and not at all “evil” for me to want evidence of good title.
And so it is with God and religion in general. I don’t care what you or others believe until it affects me or others. If you want to believe that the earth is 6,000 years old and that evolution is a sham, fine by me. However, if you want to teach this in a science class, then at that point I start to care and I’m going to want some evidence. If you believe that God would find stem cell research immoral and wish to refuse any treatments derived from stem cells, that is your right to do so. However, when you want to deny me a potentially life-saving treatment derived from stem cells because you think such treatment is immoral, then I’m going to care and I’m going to want you to present evidence for your position.