Question for Atheists

actsfourthirty · Jun 16, 2021

See what I mean atheism is flawed coz it’s based on human reason and human reason is part of fallen human nature!
Be patient I’ll answer all your concerns

actsfourthirty · Jun 16, 2021

See what I mean atheism is flawed coz it’s based on human reason and human reason is part of fallen human nature!
Be patient I’ll answer all your concerns

Daemon Sophic · Jun 16, 2021

actsfourthirty said:
Science proves man is a hybrid, body and person. “Science” says no such thing.

According to the scientific law of change, man is a hybrid body and person, according to the law of change the body changes all through life, but the person does not change, you are always the same person, so man must be a hybrid!
There is no such thing in the scientific literature as a “law of change”. You made it up, or borrowed that false expression from somebody else.

Your body is physical and sense perceptible, or known by the senses.
What is the origin of your body, it is according to science the result of natural conception.
OK. You were conceived, then parasitically fed off of your mother’s blood, until you were born. You have a physical body and brain. And from the latter come your thoughts.

Your person is not physical, not sense perceptible, therefore not physical, so there must be some non-physical reality, or spiritual reality! Mmm…Nope! Not as far as anyone can tell.
A supernatural reality, superior to physical nature, with intellect and will. Please see the preceding comment.

What is the origin of your person, it is not physical so it does not result from physical natural conception, at one time you did not exist, now you do exist, the only logical conclusion is????

thanks

OK. So you are posing the normal brain vs mind/self concept that has been posed innumerable times before (including recently by yourself).

Please note that none of which you presented in your post as given, actually is.

As for a separation of brain from mind and personality; what do you make of people whose personalities have been changed by injuries/alterations to their brain by physical trauma, or even temporarily by chemicals/drugs/medicines in their blood as they enter their brains?

What evidence that does actually exist so far, suggests that one’s thoughts, memories, personality, and “mind” are the byproduct of one’s physical brain, and no more.

You have made a fantastical claim that a heretofore undetectable “magical” presence is really what makes up any human’s personality and their thoughts.
“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” - Carl Sagan
It’s not a rule or law of science, but it sure is a good start. So….where’s your evidence?

SigurdReginson · Jun 16, 2021

actsfourthirty said:
See what I mean atheism is flawed coz it’s based on human reason and human reason is part of fallen human nature!
Be patient I’ll answer all your concerns

So... Are you saying that the correct thing to do is to be unreasonable?

Evangelicalhumanist · Jun 16, 2021

actsfourthirty said:
See what I mean atheism is flawed coz it’s based on human reason and human reason is part of fallen human nature!
Be patient I’ll answer all your concerns

I can hardly wait for your answers to "all our concerns." One of my concern is your contention that humans have a "fallen nature." We do not -- we are what we have evolved to be. And reason is what guides me to that conclusion. The very notion of a "fallen nature" is a kind of ad hoc (and not very good) explanation for why everything isn't perfect if there is, in fact, a deity in control of it all.

stvdv · Jun 16, 2021

actsfourthirty said:
What is the origin of your person, it is not physical so it does not result from physical natural conception, at one time you did not exist, now you do exist, the only logical conclusion is????

Brahman created the Universe

Jeremiah Ames · Jun 16, 2021

actsfourthirty said:
Science proves man is a hybrid, body and person.

According to the scientific law of change, man is a hybrid body and person, according to the law of change the body changes all through life, but the person does not change, you are always the same person, so man must be a hybrid!

Your body is physical and sense perceptible, or known by the senses.
What is the origin of your body, it is according to science the result of natural conception.

Your person is not physical, not sense perceptible, therefore not physical, so there must be some non-physical reality, or spiritual reality!
A supernatural reality, superior to physical nature, with intellect and will.

What is the origin of your person, it is not physical so it does not result from physical natural conception, at one time you did not exist, now you do exist, the only logical conclusion is????

thanks

after lugging a body around for nearly 70 years, I realize that the mind doesn’t age, but the body sure does

so is the person you speak of, the mind?

Valjean · Jun 16, 2021

actsfourthirty said:
Science proves man is a hybrid, body and person.

Science does not "prove" this, and personhood is a social or philosophical concept, not a definitive, technical term.

According to the scientific law of change, man is a hybrid body and person, according to the law of change the body changes all through life, but the person does not change, you are always the same person, so man must be a hybrid!

I'm pretty well versed in basic science, but you're going to have to explain this"scientific law of change."
"Body changes, person does not" -- This sounds like philosophy or religious doctrine, not science.

Your body is physical and sense perceptible, or known by the senses.
What is the origin of your body, it is according to science the result of natural conception.

Ambiguous.
"Origin" can refer to the abiogenic origin of life itself, the mechanisms of evolution by which life changes, or the embryological origin of an individual. Clarify?

Your person is not physical, not sense perceptible, therefore not physical, so there must be some non-physical reality, or spiritual reality!
A supernatural reality, superior to physical nature, with intellect and will.

So, abstractions exist: person, three, justice... ergo: a spiritual reality? I don't think this follows.

What is the origin of your person, it is not physical so it does not result from physical natural conception, at one time you did not exist, now you do exist, the only logical conclusion is????

The origin is your imagination. You've defined my personhood into existence. Personhood is a concept.

My person came along with my body, itself a product of a sperm-egg union and biochemistry.

Valjean · Jun 16, 2021

actsfourthirty said:
See what I mean atheism is flawed coz it’s based on human reason and human reason is part of fallen human nature!
Be patient I’ll answer all your concerns

Finally! an enlightened one who can answer it all.
I look forward to your commentary.

blü 2 · Jun 16, 2021

actsfourthirty said:
Science proves man is a hybrid, body and person.

Er, no it doesn't. The brain is part of the body, personhood includes body language, facial expression, and so on. Each human is a unit.

actsfourthirty said:
According to the scientific law of change

I'm not aware of any such 'law'. Could you quote it for me, give me the exact wording, and the source, please?

actsfourthirty said:
the body changes all through life, but the person does not change, you are always the same person

You always have your sense of self, but both in your own perception and the perception of others, you change. You don't think, or act, or desire, as you did a decade ago, and you know it.

actsfourthirty said:
Your body is physical and sense perceptible, or known by the senses.
What is the origin of your body, it is according to science the result of natural conception.

Your person is not physical, not sense perceptible, therefore not physical, so there must be some non-physical reality, or spiritual reality!

Nothing in the evidence suggests that's the case.

Do you keep up with the science news, follow reports on eg brain research, see where we're at in mapping, describing, trying to explain, the brain and its various functions, how its parts communicate and cooperate in complex but wholly biochemical and bioelectrical ways?

It's very interesting, and progress is steady, though there's a long way to go.

actsfourthirty said:
A supernatural reality

Unfortunately for this idea, there's no objective test that can distinguish the 'supernatural', the 'spiritual', the 'immaterial' from the wholly conceptual / imaginary.

actsfourthirty said:
superior to physical nature, with intellect and will.

You can check that intellect and will are material because they can be readily influenced by material procedures, eg Ogden Nash's observation that

Candy
is dandy
but liquor
is quicker.

(and that's before we get to trauma, disease, other drugs, dehydration, anoxia, stress, and so on, all of which affect the brain and its workings, intellect and will included.)

actsfourthirty said:
What is the origin of your person

In a word, biological.

lewisnotmiller · Jun 16, 2021

actsfourthirty said:
thanks

only cos you can’t answer

the only logical conclusion is you were created therefore there is a creator

I'm not sure you want to roll too hard with the 'only logical conclusion is that there is a creator' line of thought.
But (he says whilst dipping his toe in the water) what do you think it suggests about the nature of said God/creator?

lewisnotmiller · Jun 16, 2021

SalixIncendium said:
I'm going to identify as an atheist for the purpose of this thread, then I'll go back to being a transtheist.

What?! Dammit, they let anyone in these days. *sighs* Fine. Join us and then dump us again. But don't think we're inviting you to our next bake sale.

SalixIncendium said:
Vedanta breaks human down to three bodies:

The gross body (it doesn't mean icky, though some are): Your physical form, your body...all of your physical organs...the organs of the senses

The subtle body: Thoughts, feelings, emotions, memory, personality

The causal body: Essentially karma, both good and bad, and the sum of one's experiences (some debate memory, or at least parts of it, can be carried in the causal body.)

Yeah, so I'm not sure you're qualifying as a proper atheist whilst talking about karma in any meaningful way. You're on probation, mister.

SalixIncendium said:
All three of these are ever changing, and the only one that I believe carries through the process of rebirth in samsara is the causal body (though some will claim that parts or all of the subtle body is carried as well).

The only thing that is unchanging is the Atman, one's consciousness...pure awareness with no other qualities or attributes...the witness, and this is eternal. One can be perceive everything in the three bodies, but the Atman is the perceiver...it cannot be perceived. It is the only thing that is immutable.

So getting back to your question, it would appear what you are calling "the body" is what Vedanta calls the gross body, and what you are calling the person, Vedanta calls the subtle body. Both are ever changing and both have a beginning (birth) and end (death). The causal body survives death and remains in samsara until the karmic account is cleared, and the Atman is immortal.

So per Vedanta and in my experience, your premise that the person does not change is faulty.

If I can be serious for a moment...and who knows if that is actually possible...why did you need to flip to 'atheist' mode for that explanation? I found it pretty interested, fwiw, just trying to get a handle on how you're seeing that as a non-transtheist position or explanation.

lewisnotmiller · Jun 16, 2021

TagliatelliMonster said:
"logical" conclusions are quite worthless when they are drawn from illogical premises.

Dude, if you're going to pick apart my last 100 posts this ruthlessly, at least you could have tagged me in...

Heyo · Jun 17, 2021

lewisnotmiller said:
If I can be serious for a moment...

Not fair mixing a post this way. How shall I decide whether it deserves a "funny" or "useful" froobal?

viole · Jun 17, 2021

actsfourthirty said:
Your person is not physical, not sense perceptible, therefore not physical, so there must be some non-physical reality, or spiritual reality!

And you have evidence of this, right?

Ever tried to see what happens to your spiritual person after you ingested 30 very physical shots of Vodka?

Ciao

- viole

viole · Jun 17, 2021

actsfourthirty said:
What is the origin of your person, it is not physical so it does not result from physical natural conception, at one time you did not exist, now you do exist, the only logical conclusion is????

That you are begging the question.

Ciao

- voice

viole · Jun 17, 2021

TagliatelliMonster said:
If not as poor as I think, then even poorer.

It is poorer. Actually, it is not even wrong.

Ciao

- viole

TagliatelliMonster · Jun 17, 2021

Trailblazer said:
No, it is not 'physical evidence' of the soul because the soul is not physical, but it is evidence that the soul exists.

The "evidence" you cited, IS physical.

That a soul exists.

That's merely a belief. Like "bigfoot exists"
I say it's not true. Now what?

You cannot speak for everyone as to want are good or bad reasons for believing in things.

Off course I can, since what constitute a "good and valid" reason to warrant belief, is not dependent on individuals, but rather on rational reasoning, logic and evidence.

A good and valid reason is a misnomer because what is a good and valid reason to one person is not a good and valid reason to another person.

This is just wrong. And the very root of the problem.
What constitutes rational reasoning and evidence, is not a matter of mere opinion.

No, it is a very bad reason

Right, so you DO recognize that what constitutes good or bad reasons, isn't dependent on opinion, but rather upon rules of logic and rational reasoning...?

Often I don't want my religion to be true but I cannot disbelieve in what I know is true.

You don't "know". You "believe".
Knowledge is demonstrable.

To quote AaronRa: "you don't know it, if you can't show it"

Then explain why it is poor, or poorer.

Pascal's wager - Wikipedia

You are dead wrong, it you will pardon the pun. This is not my first rodeo with atheists so I know all the logical fallacies they commit.

The only evidence you have is that when the physical body dies it is dead. You have no evidence that the soul does not leave the body and live on -- zero, zilch, nada.

There is no more evidence that the "soul" doesn't leave the body, or that there is such a thing as a "soul", then there is evidence that the "life generating pixies" leave the body, or that there is such a thing as a "soul".

The positive claim carries the burden of proof.

The complete lack of any evidence for any afterlives, or souls or life generating pixies, coupled with all the evidence that dead = dead, is completely consistent with death being the end and completely inconsistent with death not being the end.

And that is why if you assert that there is nothing that lives on after the body dies it is and argument from ignorance.

Not any more then it is "an argument from ignorance" to assume that there is no bigfoot, no loch ness monster, no life generating pixies, no gravity regulating graviton pixies, no alien abductions, etc.

There is insufficient information to prove the proposition is either true or false.

The proposition is "a soul exists and lives on after death". That is the proposition that carries the burden of proof. There is zero evidence for this. What is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.

The choices may in fact not be two (true or false), but may be as many as four,

1. true
2. false
3. unknown between true or false
4. being unknowable (among the first three).[1]

And the same goes for bigfoot, the lochness monster, life generating pixies, alien abductions,....

That is not what an argument from ignorance is. I suggest you bone up on your logical fallacies.
An argument from ignorance asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true.

Which is what you engage in when you insist that a soul exists that lives on after death.

You are asserting that the proposition "an immortal soul exists" is false because it has not yet been proven true so that is an argument from ignorance because the choices may in fact not be two (true or false), but may be as many as four,

1. true
2. false
3. unknown between true or false
4. being unknowable (among the first three).[1]

No. I dismiss the entire idea in the exact same way and for the exact same reasons as I, and like you to, dismiss bigfoot, the lochness monster, life generating pixies, .......

That only applies to the physical body.

Indeed. It doesn't apply to souls and life generating pixies.
Which is consistent with the idea that only the body exists, and not any soul or pixies.

There is evidence that the soul lives on whether you LIKE that evidence or not.

So far, all I have seen are bare assertions and beliefs.
Where is this "evidence"?

That is actually true. This physical life is precious because it ends and it is our only opportunity to enjoy physical things. It is also precious because it is our only opportunity to prepare for the next life. That is why there are so many warnings in scriptures, like this one:

40: O MY SERVANT! Free thyself from the fetters of this world, and loose thy soul from the prison of self. Seize thy chance, for it will come to thee no more. The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 36

What "next life"?

sayak83 · Jun 17, 2021

actsfourthirty said:
Science proves man is a hybrid, body and person.

According to the scientific law of change, man is a hybrid body and person, according to the law of change the body changes all through life, but the person does not change, you are always the same person, so man must be a hybrid!

Your body is physical and sense perceptible, or known by the senses.
What is the origin of your body, it is according to science the result of natural conception.

Your person is not physical, not sense perceptible, therefore not physical, so there must be some non-physical reality, or spiritual reality!
A supernatural reality, superior to physical nature, with intellect and will.

What is the origin of your person, it is not physical so it does not result from physical natural conception, at one time you did not exist, now you do exist, the only logical conclusion is????

thanks

Actually the neural structures of the brain change extremely slowly if at all after childhood. And a person does change a lot in character, behavior, personality with time. So what we call a person is more like connected causal pattern that flows through time... like a river. The water is always changing, but we call it the same river because the flow is strongly connected over time.

Clara Tea · Jun 17, 2021

actsfourthirty said:
Science proves man is a hybrid, body and person.

According to the scientific law of change, man is a hybrid body and person, according to the law of change the body changes all through life, but the person does not change, you are always the same person, so man must be a hybrid!

Your body is physical and sense perceptible, or known by the senses.
What is the origin of your body, it is according to science the result of natural conception.

Your person is not physical, not sense perceptible, therefore not physical, so there must be some non-physical reality, or spiritual reality!
A supernatural reality, superior to physical nature, with intellect and will.

What is the origin of your person, it is not physical so it does not result from physical natural conception, at one time you did not exist, now you do exist, the only logical conclusion is????

thanks

Change, yet remain the same (aka hybrid).

(infant=bald, toothless, short)(old=bald, toothless, short)....Hardly much change between the endpoints, yet, between infancy and old age we made spectacular changes.

Special relativity slows time at fast speeds. But slows speed far less at slower speeds. Nonetheless, any motion changes time to some extent. If you rotate your arm, keeping your elbow still, the tip of your fingers will age less than your elbow. Ironically, your fingers and elbow are still connected by your arm, even though you know that they exist in different time zones.

It is also ironic that a changing mind (one that learns) is still connected to a body that changes in a different way.

Question for Atheists

Member

Member

Avatar in flux

Grēne Mann

"Truth" isn't a thing...

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Grand Hat

Grand Hat

Grand Hat

Veteran Member

Ontological Naturalist

Ontological Naturalist

Ontological Naturalist

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member