This reminds me of the research on near death experiences, where people see their life flash before their eyes, move through a path of light, etc. By stimulating a certain section of the brain, these same experiences can be replicated.
As a believer, it gave me a bit of a sick feeling in my stomach to think about my religious experiences being replicable by brain stimulation. Still, I insisted that my experiences were special and were evidence of god speaking to me.
People underestimate the power of the subconscious brain, just as they exercise faulty reasoning in determining the statistical probability of events that they label as “miracles”. These “spiritual experiences”, along with rare events that people refuse to attribute to anything other than the divine, allow them to justify and rationalize their faith.
[quote]forlife wrote:
This reminds me of the research on near death experiences, where people see their life flash before their eyes, move through a path of light, etc. By stimulating a certain section of the brain, these same experiences can be replicated.
As a believer, it gave me a bit of a sick feeling in my stomach to think about my religious experiences being replicable by brain stimulation. Still, I insisted that my experiences were special and were evidence of god speaking to me.
People underestimate the power of the subconscious brain, just as they exercise faulty reasoning in determining the statistical probability of events that they label as “miracles”. These “spiritual experiences”, along with rare events that people refuse to attribute to anything other than the divine, allow them to justify and rationalize their faith.[/quote]
lol, don’t worry it’s just the current dehumanizing trend in science and society in general.
Your beliefs are only due a an area or the brain thats active.
we’re all 99.99% genetically identical
all that crap does is strip individuality from people and makes them more like drones.
[quote]forlife wrote:
This reminds me of the research on near death experiences, where people see their life flash before their eyes, move through a path of light, etc. By stimulating a certain section of the brain, these same experiences can be replicated.
As a believer, it gave me a bit of a sick feeling in my stomach to think about my religious experiences being replicable by brain stimulation. Still, I insisted that my experiences were special and were evidence of god speaking to me.
People underestimate the power of the subconscious brain, just as they exercise faulty reasoning in determining the statistical probability of events that they label as “miracles”. These “spiritual experiences”, along with rare events that people refuse to attribute to anything other than the divine, allow them to justify and rationalize their faith.[/quote]
The difference is that NDEs happen without intentional artiface.
We are are all made in God’s image, which means that God and us are very similar, we being an infinitesmally lesser version. Think of Krsna and Arjuna.
It should therefore not be surprising that, just as we don’t speak the same language as white lab rats, God speaks to us differently.
I don’t find it dehumanizing to recognize the role of the brain in determining our personality, attitudes, and beliefs. It may be despiritualizing, but it’s not dehumanizing
Humanists like Carl Rogers, and more anciently like the Greeks and Romans, recognize the beauty of humanity for what it is, without needing to invoke a supernatural being to give us permission to be beautiful.
[quote]forlife wrote:
pat wrote:
You are once again, completely incorrect.
Did you miss the part where I quoted YOU saying that the brain is correlated with a person’s capacity to have faith? You said it, not me.[/quote]
That was the only right part. The rest of it was aimless drivel about your loathing of religion. You assumptions are so incorrect that they seem just made up out of thin air.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
koffea wrote:
ephrem wrote:
pat wrote:I don’t find it unusual that one would need a biological component for religious faith. Radios need an antenna to pick up signals, so do we, so to speak.
…signals that can be simulated using electric currents giving the subject religous experiences aren’t exactly supporting the God-idea, but i do see where you’re coming from. Anyway, not trying to stirr to pot or anything…
just because you have learned to manipulate the dials on your radio, does not invalidate or disprove the creator of the radio
…it does, and it doesn’t. It does invalidate the antropomorphic views we have of [the generic] God, but it doesn’t negate the possibility of an engineering higher force, that is true…
[/quote]
That’s true to a point, unless that part is sensory only, which means it would have to be stimulated, vs. contriving the notion. I am just guessing though.
[quote]forlife wrote:
I don’t find it dehumanizing to recognize the role of the brain in determining our personality, attitudes, and beliefs. It may be despiritualizing, but it’s not dehumanizing
Humanists like Carl Rogers, and more anciently like the Greeks and Romans, recognize the beauty of humanity for what it is, without needing to invoke a supernatural being to give us permission to be beautiful.[/quote]
Unless your sense of spirituality is intimately tied in with your humanity. The only thing that shapes me and my beliefs is ME. I can stop believing and be atheist if a want to, but choose not to. My moods are not chemical imbalances, they are my feelings and emotions from the recess of my soul and they manifest themselves on my physical self through the action of those chemicals.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
Sloth wrote:
ephrem wrote:
Ironic don’t you think: God is the result of evolution, lol.
Some of us maintain the belief that evolution is the result of God. Not to turn this into a discussion of theology and doctrine. Just want to be clear that not all of us reject evolution. Hey, I’m taking a college biology course this semester, and it’s the first subject I’ve actually looked foward to.
But then who created the Creator?[/quote]
By definition, the creator cannot be created. If it is the first cause, it cannot therefore be caused and exists outside the causal chain.
[quote]pat wrote:
forlife wrote:
pat wrote:
You are once again, completely incorrect.
Did you miss the part where I quoted YOU saying that the brain is correlated with a person’s capacity to have faith? You said it, not me.
That was the only right part. The rest of it was aimless drivel about your loathing of religion. You assumptions are so incorrect that they seem just made up out of thin air.[/quote]
What do you not get about the fact that IF the brain is correlated with a person’s capacity to have faith, the logical conclusion is that people with different brains are physiologically limited in the faith that they can have?
[quote]ephrem wrote:
nik133 wrote:
ephrem wrote:
nik133 wrote:Why is there so much discussion into god when we have yet to understand the human condition?
…as it would seem the two are intertwined…
Not at all, here I’ll save you hours of debate, you will never come to a conclusion as if there was a definitive conclusion 99% of people would go by it. There are only two things that can happen after death, 1. It is the end of all consciousness or 2. There is an afterlife where your soul heads off to a different realm. Really all this discussion is meaningless as nothing will ever come of it. Do Religious people really believe they are going to sway someone who made the choice to be an atheist with in an internet post and likewise do atheist believe they will sway a religious person who has most likely devoted at least some time to studying their religion/scripture?
…i don’t disagree with you, but you asked a question and i think my question is the correct one. So many people believe that some god created us and reality, and how we act, how we are is the result of said creation…
This will be my last post in this thread, since as much as I talk about how meaningless this debate is I do nothing to stop it. Religion will always be out of our reach, the more you try to learn the more perplexed you will become, people debating god remind me of Tantalus.
[quote]forlife wrote:
This reminds me of the research on near death experiences, where people see their life flash before their eyes, move through a path of light, etc. By stimulating a certain section of the brain, these same experiences can be replicated.
As a believer, it gave me a bit of a sick feeling in my stomach to think about my religious experiences being replicable by brain stimulation. Still, I insisted that my experiences were special and were evidence of god speaking to me.
People underestimate the power of the subconscious brain, just as they exercise faulty reasoning in determining the statistical probability of events that they label as “miracles”. These “spiritual experiences”, along with rare events that people refuse to attribute to anything other than the divine, allow them to justify and rationalize their faith.[/quote]
There is no way to confirm that NDE’s and electric brain stimulation created the same effect. Secondly, it does little to explain those NDE’s whose experiences involved seeing and accurately reported things that were going on while they were flat lined and could not possibly have known them otherwise…
Here is the good news to all of this, one day we will all know the answers. All we got to do is die.
[quote]forlife wrote:
pat wrote:
forlife wrote:
pat wrote:
You are once again, completely incorrect.
Did you miss the part where I quoted YOU saying that the brain is correlated with a person’s capacity to have faith? You said it, not me.
That was the only right part. The rest of it was aimless drivel about your loathing of religion. You assumptions are so incorrect that they seem just made up out of thin air.
What do you not get about the fact that IF the brain is correlated with a person’s capacity to have faith, the logical conclusion is that people with different brains are physiologically limited in the faith that they can have? [/quote]
It has not been determined first, that the “God spot” is required in order to have faith in God. Second of all, you were saying that anybody physically in able to have faith is automatically damned and that’s just bullshit. Mormonism must have been some rigid hard ass shit to have caused such thoughts.
[quote]Gregus wrote:
Unless your sense of spirituality is intimately tied in with your humanity. The only thing that shapes me and my beliefs is ME. I can stop believing and be atheist if a want to, but choose not to. My moods are not chemical imbalances, they are my feelings and emotions from the recess of my soul and they manifest themselves on my physical self through the action of those chemicals. [/quote]
There is no reason that human dignity, value, and beauty should depend on believing in a supernatural being. Humanity is beautiful and valuable in its own right, without needing to give ourselves permission to be beautiful by creating gods for ourselves.
Could you really stop believing and be an atheist through an act of will? How do you force yourself to believe in or not believe in something? I could not force myself to believe in a god, based on the existing lack of evidence, no matter how hard I tried.
[quote]pat wrote:
By definition, the creator cannot be created. If it is the first cause, it cannot therefore be caused and exists outside the causal chain.[/quote]
What’s the debate? We’re religious-orientated (at least a good many of us). This religiousphobia is futile. It can only be a doubt in one’s non-religious orientation. A closeted religious, if you will.
[quote]pat wrote:
There is no way to confirm that NDE’s and electric brain stimulation created the same effect. Secondly, it does little to explain those NDE’s whose experiences involved seeing and accurately reported things that were going on while they were flat lined and could not possibly have known them otherwise…
Here is the good news to all of this, one day we will all know the answers. All we got to do is die.[/quote]
Sure there is. Put people that have reported NDE’s in a lab, stimulate their brain, and ask them how similar the two experiences are. Again, people fail to account for random chance and other potential explanations in determining the probability of “miracles”, like reporting something that happened while you were flatlined. Sometimes really, really rare things do happen by chance alone.
Unfortunately, if there is no life after death, you will never realize your mistake in believing as you do. Not that your belief is necessarily unhealthy, as long as it doesn’t hinder your happiness or that of other people.
[quote]pat wrote:
It has not been determined first, that the “God spot” is required in order to have faith in God. Second of all, you were saying that anybody physically in able to have faith is automatically damned and that’s just bullshit. Mormonism must have been some rigid hard ass shit to have caused such thoughts. [/quote]
YOU said that the brain is correlated with a person’s capacity to have faith, not me. Why are you talking about Mormonism, when we are discussing the logical conclusion of YOUR statement?
It’s Logic 101:
If a person’s brain is correlated with their capacity to have faith (as you claim), then obviously people with different brains have different capacities for faith. What the hell?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
What’s the debate? We’re religious-orientated (at least a good many of us). This religiousphobia is futile. It can only be a doubt in one’s non-religious orientation. A closeted religious, if you will.[/quote]
…that may be true for the vocal and convinced person on either side, not just the non-religious orientated [as if believers don’t doubt]. But there’s a larger group out there who are on the fence, and you and i have an opportunity to offer an alternative if they are so inclined…
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Sloth wrote:
What’s the debate? We’re religious-orientated (at least a good many of us). This religiousphobia is futile. It can only be a doubt in one’s non-religious orientation. A closeted religious, if you will.
…that may be true for the vocal and convinced person on either side, not just the non-religious orientated [as if believers don’t doubt]. But there’s a larger group out there who are on the fence, and you and i have an opportunity to offer an alternative if they are so inclined…
[/quote]
They’re “on the fence orientated.” It would be “on the fence”-phobic to try and convince them either way.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
ephrem wrote:
Sloth wrote:
What’s the debate? We’re religious-orientated (at least a good many of us). This religiousphobia is futile. It can only be a doubt in one’s non-religious orientation. A closeted religious, if you will.
…that may be true for the vocal and convinced person on either side, not just the non-religious orientated [as if believers don’t doubt]. But there’s a larger group out there who are on the fence, and you and i have an opportunity to offer an alternative if they are so inclined…
They’re “on the fence orientated.” It would be “on the fence”-phobic to try and convince them either way.[/quote]
…nah, it doesn’t work that way. People have a tendency to make their own mind up, so i’m not out to convince anyone. That would be, as they say, an exercise in futility…
