Is there a soul?

[ronan]

lg, ronan,

1. We are aware that we have consciousness.

Yes, more precisely, we know there is consciousness, else we would not be able to be aware of anything.

2. We have a brain with some 200 billion neurons and trillions of synaptic connections between them that combined provide processing power equivalent to some 20,000 high end computers operating as a massively parallel multi-processing system. This is an astonishing amount of processing power that we are only just beginning to comprehend.

We have a brain ? what is the 'we'
To be more skeptic (because we have to be carefull here because else we fall in fantasy easily) it is better to say:
there is perception of q a brain which have all the thing that you describe. and that this brain is contained inside bodies that we identify as ours.

Then what?

it magically create conciousness that is in the first place able to perceive this brain and makes you able to reach the conclusion that it exist and that it generate consciousness who is in the first place able to.... ad infinitum; is that your view?

I do not think so because you told me it was not magic.

3. We have no single scrap of evidence that suggests anything other than matter exists.

I quote lightgigantic here:

once again, evidence rests upon qualification
if you want to say that the only thing able to be qualified is matter, you beg the question

first you say that conciousness exist then you say brain exist (which is matter according to you, isnt it?) and that there is only matter. meaning that conciousness is matter. so effetivelly you beg the question


Let me ask you that: What is a difference between consciousness as matter and brain as matter according to your framework?

It seems perfectly credible to suggest that (2) is the overwhelming most likely cause of (1).

doubtful...

That is the sum of my argument.

And you consider it so strong, that no alternative merits investigation?

 

[Cris]

Ronan,

We have a brain ? what is the 'we'

Umm, people, humans, unless you think you are something else.

To be more skeptic (because we have to be carefull here because else we fall in fantasy easily) it is better to say:
there is perception of q a brain which have all the thing that you describe. and that this brain is contained inside bodies that we identify as ours.

Nope. Each of us has a brain. Simple fact.

Then what?

it magically create conciousness

Well, unless you call the awesome equivalent power of some 20,000 powerful computers squeezed inside your head – magic – then yup. It only takes a fraction of that to maintain the basic functions of the body, so what do you think all that power is doing. Do the very simple math –

Stupendously massive computing power – something causing consciousness. Duh! Surely even you can see the obvious here.

first you say that conciousness exist then you say brain exist (which is matter according to you, isnt it?) and that there is only matter. meaning that conciousness is matter. so effetivelly you beg the question

Huh? Consciousness is the label we give to the result of specific material interactions. Consciousness is not a substance, or a separate object, or entity.

Let me ask you that: What is a difference between consciousness as matter and brain as matter according to your framework?

Answered above. Your concept of consciousness here is entirely erroneous.

And you consider it so strong, that no alternative merits investigation?

Only if someone could offer a credible alternative. I offer the brain as the source of consciousness, you offer nothing.

 

[ronan]

Ronan,

Umm, people, humans, unless you think you are something else.

Nope. Each of us has a brain. Simple fact.

Nope,
cogito ergo sum => consciousness exist
there is perception,
more precisely, there is perception of a brain composed of what you said
this brain appears in human bodies

then there are correlation between brain state and personal experience REPORT

then what ?

Well, unless you call the awesome equivalent power of some 20,000 powerful computers squeezed inside your head – magic – then yup. It only takes a fraction of that to maintain the basic functions of the body, so what do you think all that power is doing. Do the very simple math –

no the magic is how this interaction give rise to consciousness and perception

do you mean that everything is conscious?

the earth contaisn many brains and is thus more complex that the brain, should the earth be conscious?

what about the universe which is even more complex?

Stupendously massive computing power – something causing consciousness. Duh! Surely even you can see the obvious here.

No sorry, I am not a brain
at least I perceive it.

do you know taht our perceptions according to the study of the brain are construction due to our brain. objects are abstraction of partial data.
when you see a car, you have the feelign of a three dimesnional object while in fact you receve only photon from the car, it is you rbain that construct the image.
so even in your framework, you know that whqt we see are not what is.

Huh? Consciousness is the label we give to the result of specific material interactions. Consciousness is not a substance, or a separate object, or entity.

a label ?
brain is not a label?

specific material interaction, how specific ? mayeb you can explain the magic here?

cogito ergo sum: consciousness is somethign beyond perception while a brain is a perception.

don't you agree that brain is a perception?
we do not perceive it?

Only if someone could offer a credible alternative. I offer the brain as the source of consciousness, you offer nothing.

I offered:
1) cogito ergosum => consciousness exists
2) everything else is perception
3) all perceptions exist in consciousnes or only yours
=> so your life and your world has to be perceived.

it is an explanation, simple, no contraditction, no assumption more than consciousness exist which is proved by our own experience.

 

[mis-t-highs]

Cris don't you think it is a waste of time. he throws the same argument back at you, even though you've refute it, he quotes Latin as if he knows it's meaning. and keeps SPAGing, as if he is the one and only. Tedious in the extreme.

 

[ronan]

Cris don't you think it is a waste of time. he throws the same argument back at you, even though you've refute it, he quotes Latin as if he knows it's meaning. and keeps SPAGing, as if he is the one and only. Tedious in the extreme.

First Cris did not refute my arguments, he just said his arguments and say that there is no alternative while there are many including the one I present.
second, why do you keep entering the debate without even giving arguments?

I told you you have two choices:
give arguments or leave

he is the one and only, what do you mean by that?
My view is not SPAG (self perception as god has nothing to do with my view, you just show that you do not understand the point)

 

[Sarkus]

1) cogito ergosum => consciousness exists
2) everything else is perception
3) all perceptions exist in consciousnes or only yours
=> so your life and your world has to be perceived.

it is an explanation, simple, no contraditction, no assumption more than consciousness exist which is proved by our own experience.

It's an explanation, certainly, but one that is unscientific, unfalsifiable, unprovable and adds nothing to our understanding of what you would consider "what we perceive".
Much like solipsism.

 

[ronan]

It's an explanation, certainly, but one that is unscientific, unfalsifiable, unprovable and adds nothing to our understanding of what you would consider "what we perceive".
Much like solipsism.

unfalsifiable, I agree, because it is true
unscientific, yes because science is the study of perception,
unprovable, no, it is provable but you have to forgot your ego.

please note that scientific explanation are based on empiricism so cannot be justified because we could be in a dream, perceptions are indeed unreliable,
Furthermore, it assumes the existence of matter behind our perception, this is not justified.

now compare.

 

[Sarkus]

unprovable, no, it is provable but you have to forgot your ego.

Please explain how it is not unprovable?

please note that scientific explanation are based on empiricism so cannot be justified because we could be in a dream, perceptions are indeed unreliable,
Furthermore, it assumes the existence of matter behind our perception, this is not justified.

Like I said - it is a pointless and ultimately meaningless position and adds nothing to understanding.
It is the same as talking about a big bowl of pasta that might happen to reside outside the Universe, and whether the sauce is Carbonara or Bolagnese.

 

[ronan]

Please explain how it is not unprovable?

Meditate about yourself,
You are always changing: your existence is instantaneous while consciousness is always there. cogito ergosum (not a proof?)

Your perception of changes are the proof:
no consciousness no perception

Like I said - it is a pointless and ultimately meaningless position and adds nothing to understanding.
It is the same as talking about a big bowl of pasta that might happen to reside outside the Universe, and whether the sauce is Carbonara or Bolagnese.

exactly, while consciousness exists for sure

 

[mis-t-highs]

First Cris did not refute my arguments, he just said his arguments and say that there is no alternative while there are many including the one I present.
second, why do you keep entering the debate without even giving arguments?

I told you you have two choices:
give arguments or leave

he is the one and only, what do you mean by that?
My view is not SPAG (self perception as god has nothing to do with my view, you just show that you do not understand the point)

There is really no point in putting forward an arguement, as nothing you have said is even close to being a worthy of debate, there are three main reasons for this, not logical, not intelligible, and not sensible.

It is SPAG simply because you believe this is how God/consciousness (your comparison not mine) is, however you have no way of showing this to be true, so it is pure SPAG.

Using Latin and give false meaning just make you look foolish, as I pointed out to you, by posting up you own words, according to you none of us exist, we are all mere perception of God/consciousness.

Wake up call we aren't living the matrix.

Your the one and only, because you keep SPAGing yourself to be the one that knows.

 

[Yorda]

There is a soul because matter can exist in all kinds of different states (fire, wind, water, earth, ether, astral, mental, spiritual). States that we can't see with our physical eyes or technology. But things in those states are nevertheless as real and "physical" as the things in this world.

Ancient people (like the ones who wrote the religious scriptures) could see spirits, that's how we know they exist, even though most of us can't see them. We have faith in them, like we have faith in all other scientists.

That we have an astral body is no more strange than the fact that we have this 'physical' body.

 

[Sarkus]

And I'm assuming you have more to support this claim than mere confidence?

 

[Cris]

mis-t,

Cris don't you think it is a waste of time. he throws the same argument back at you, even though you've refute it, he quotes Latin as if he knows it's meaning. and keeps SPAGing, as if he is the one and only. Tedious in the extreme.

Agreed. A waste of time responding.

 

[ronan]

There is really no point in putting forward an arguement, as nothing you have said is even close to being a worthy of debate, there are three main reasons for this, not logical, not intelligible, and not sensible.

not logical: point out the falacy
not intelligible: your problem
not sensible: on the contrary, it has important consequences for our life.

cogito ergo sum is not the original sentence, Descartes used to write in french: "je pense donc je suis" meaning "I think therefore I am"

in the context thinking was referring to consciousness.:
when you doubt all your perception, you cannot doubt what makes perception possible : consciousness.

so consciousness exists. I think you agree

then because of the fact that we can not justify anything else, it is a less extravagant claim to say that consciousness alone exist.
and more importantly it suffice to explain all perceptions.

on the other hand the scientific claim of the existence of matter is pure fantasy because it is not justified.

It is SPAG simply because you believe this is how God/consciousness (your comparison not mine) is, however you have no way of showing this to be true, so it is pure SPAG.

SPAG is Self Perception As God
It is your bullshit.

Using Latin and give false meaning just make you look foolish, as I pointed out to you, by posting up you own words, according to you none of us exist, we are all mere perception of God/consciousness.

false meaning ?
are you just referring to the word god?
please forgot, use consciousness if you want, the claim does not change

we exist but as perceptions. not as a soul like you probably think even if you say that the soul (individual consciousness) arise from the brain. This is not justified. Cris could not, can you?

Wake up call we aren't living the matrix.

No we are perceptions

Your the one and only, because you keep SPAGing yourself to be the one that knows.

No I am not the only one, I just defend a view shared by many that you are not even capable of understanding and even less fighting.