The implausibility of brainless minds

[Madhuri]

Originally Posted by Copernicus

Madhuri, how are you in a position to know about the "laws governing Spirit" any more than I am?

Because your argument is based on dismissing claims made by religions and so I am saying that according to those religious concepts, your argument is flawed. It has nothing to do with my understanding of the nature of Spirit.

Originally Posted by Copernicus

But what are the "spiritual laws", and how do you know what they are?

Maybe we can't know. Or maybe we aren't evolved enough to know. Each religion gives different criteria of how we can come to know or experience this alternative reality, and so the only way to find out if it is true or not (based on its own claims) is to practice the disciplines and rule them out if they don't work.
Whether or not the individual chooses to pursue such a path to find out its validity is their own prerogative. Some are motivated by the expressed experiences of others or by their own phenomenal experiences.

Originally Posted by Copernicus

Whatever your religious doctrines preach, there is still the question of how you or your religious sources could be in a position to know more about those things than anyone else. The thing about scientists is that they do not claim to be in a special position to know things about material "laws". Everything they do must be testable and observable by everyone else.

As to the first statement, each religion is likely to provide a different answer. I could give you my opinion, but what my religion says regarding this is straying from my argument. My argument is only that to make a claim about spirit, you have to actually address the specifics regarding the believed or taught nature of spirit in order to be able to properly defeat it. The OP is an invalid argument, imo, because it shows a lack of understanding of what it is attempting to defeat.


[/quote]I don't think that you are in a position to dictate what scientists or anyone else must conclude. Scientists do not make any claims about aspects of reality that are untestable or unverifiable. The question is: Why do you?[/quote]

I don't.
I hope you now understanding my main argument.

[Madhuri]

First read my latest reply to Copernicus. It will address the fact that I am not making any actual claims.

Originally Posted by outhouse

science doesnt deal with imagination or test for it.

Then there shouldn't be any claims that things like spirit do not exist. People can conclude that it is unlikely based on the information they have or that they have no personal reason for belief in it, but if scientists cannot test something or do not know how to find or test something, then claims should not be made.

[atanu]

A brainy and mindless post?

Originally Posted by Copernicus

Most religions depend on the belief that mental activity can occur independently of brains.

I have never seen such a declaration. Can you cite the reference? Mind is the consciousness of individuality and no religious scripture says that individual mind, which operates based on the field called body operates same without the body.

And eastern philosophies at least do not discern difference in the true nature of matter and spirit. Different matter are different vibrational states of one spirit.

What one thinks of as the "soul" or "spirit" is a thinking being that can operate independently of a body.

Because they are two views of the same thing, they are not seen separate ever. A body has never been seen to operate independent of life. Can you show us some inert matter, which is conscious of itself?

----- and scientists can actually take videos of dynamic activity in the brain during specifically targeted thinking patterns.

Do those video recordings show the colour red when the man sees color red?

One can also show intense activity in man's sexual organ when he is thinking sexual thoughts. Does that mean that the sexual organ is the mind or that it gives rise to the mind?
.......................................

Mind is reflector of self/spirit that is a bird, ungraspable, and never seen. Its nature is to fly. Yet there is a function that can bring the mind, back to itself. Brain OTOH is its manifested state that can be grasped and seen. Brain does not prefer to apply its so-called executive role and cry out "Do not bury me", when life leaves -- because it cannot.

[atanu]

Originally Posted by Madhuri

Maybe we can't know. Or maybe we aren't evolved enough to know. Each religion gives different criteria of how we can come to know or experience this alternative reality, and so the only way to find out if it is true or not (based on its own claims) is to practice the disciplines and rule them out if they don't work.

I agree.

[St Giordano Bruno]

It is all about software or how the brain processes information rather than the brain itself. Basically we are made of information or a form of biological bits and bytes.

[Revoltingest]

Since we can alter the brain's & nervous system's circuitry by slicing, drugging & adding interfaces,
thatmpretty strongly points to consciousness being the result of physical processes in the brain.

[atanu]

According to Vedanta, individual mind is the consciousness of individuality, and it is present in every created thing. Even an atom has a kind of mind; it maintains a self-identity, it interacts as per its self identity .

The one singular identity consciousness that we feel in us, is possible only if there is no distinction vitally between mind and matter. It is one thing appearing as two things.

[Thief]

Originally Posted by Copernicus

Most religions depend on the belief that mental activity can occur independently of brains. What one thinks of as the "soul" or "spirit" is a thinking being that can operate independently of a body. Nevertheless, the evidence continues to mount that there is absolutely no mental activity that occurs independently of brain activity. It does not contradict the idea of dualism to say that minds are dependent on brains for their existence, but it does contradict the idea that a mind can survive brain-death.

In the last few decades, scientists have been able to explore the tight connection between thought and brain activity through the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) technology. MRI merely shows where blood concentrates in the brain when mental activity is taking place, and scientists can actually take videos of dynamic activity in the brain during specifically targeted thinking patterns. Scientists have now, for the first time, correlated dreams with volitional behavior. While this kind of experimental evidence does not prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that mental activity depends on brain activity, it does seem to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

So this is another...'I don't believe...prove me wrong".... thread.

A recent science documentary put together several skillful and highly educated professionals, to ask the question is there life after death.

Each one tried, but each one failed.
Still, their efforts could not rule out the possibility.

And now here we are, trying again to say there is life after death.

That much is a matter of faith and faith needs no proving.

There will be no photograph...no fingerprint....no equation....etc.

You just have to make up your mind...and decide you want to keep it...
after you die.

[Madhuri]

Originally Posted by Revoltingest

Since we can alter the brain's & nervous system's circuitry by slicing & adding interfaces, that
pretty strongly points to consciousness being the result of physical processes in the brain.

I disagree. Many religious people believe that consciousness manifests where there is a vehicle capable of supporting it. When the vehicle disintegrates, the consciousness withdraws. The consciousness, once completely withdrawn from one vehicle, enters a new one. This can be a new physical body, ghostly, subtle or spiritual.

From the perspective of one who has this belief, the studies involving brain manipulation have little or no impact and certainly do not point to the consciousness being the result of physical processes. It only reinforces the concept of the illusory nature of self (as opposed to Self) that we so readily identify with and gives purpose to our strive to realise our most permanent Self.

[atanu]

Originally Posted by Revoltingest

Since we can alter the brain's & nervous system's circuitry by slicing, drugging & adding interfaces,
thatmpretty strongly points to consciousness being the result of physical processes in the brain.

Can you add circuitry to a brain outside living system and make it act as you wish? Or alternatively, show a brain outside of living system slicing, drugging and adding interfaces.