Is belief in God a belief in Magic?

[Thought Criminal]

That's news to me, because most of what I've seen is that scientific research is demonstrating more and more that it's very unlikely that a non-material soul exist independently of the body.

Indeed. The evidence reinforces our understanding of the mind existing solely in terms of the action of the brain. It is the software on the hardware, not a magical ghost in the machine that can fly away to an equally magical ghostland in the sky.

TC

 

[John D]

Christian God - No ( (allegedly supernatural method to dominate natural forces): thaumaturgy, conjuring, sorcery, witchcraft - Wiki)
It is forbidden in this sense

Wiki again -A ritual associated with supernatural magic or with mysticism. -
The pathway to God - (Using the Word - Jesus Christ, is magical but not in the sense of the "forbidden" way - It is the garden of Eden all over again. The choice between the "mystical walk with God at sunset" or the fruit of "Knowledge of good and evil".)

 

[nonbeliever_92]

If scientific research is able to prove that humans have a soul, then the logical question to think about is where does it come from, and where does it go after death?

Yes, "if." But it hasn't, so there's no need to pursue the follow-up questions.

 

[nonbeliever_92]

I love when someone's response to a question about god is "Well there are a lot of things out there that we don't know and science can't investigate, and I believe in [insert diety or religion or whatever] because the universe is complicated." In fact a Christian friend said this to me the other day and I found it humorous because I think it's essentially saying 'Well the world's very hard to understand, so it must be magic!'

Note, I don't criticize the religious for being religious, I generally criticize the reasons or lack thereof behind the matter. Although sometimes people tell me things that are just plain laughable.

 

[sandandfoam]

. The evidence reinforces our understanding of the mind existing solely in terms of the action of the brain.

I've read that view described as degenerate Cartesianism. I disagree with it.
At the very least mind is a property of the human. The human is more than brain. For starters most have arms legs....
Heideggers distinction between corporeal things and body is also useful. Does the sense of embodied selfhood we have necessarily coincide with the limits of corporeal body?
My own experience of boxing with my daughter on Wii suggests to me that my sense of embodied selfhood can extend beyond my corpoeal body.

 

[nonbeliever_92]

Yes, the sense can, doesn't mean that "you" actually do. The perception does not make the man, the man makes the perception.

 

[footprints]

That's news to me, because most of what I've seen is that scientific research is demonstrating more and more that it's very unlikely that a non-material soul exist independently of the body.

To the best of my knowledge, no empirical testing has been done on the soul per se. Not that it is impossible to test for this, we do have the knowledge and we do have the technology, but for simple virtue of the fact, that to test directly for a soul/spirit whatever you like to call it, is illegal in every country that I know of. This doesn't mean to imply or suggest that it is against the law to test for a soul, just that the tests which would need to be done to gain empirical evidence are illegal.

Most evidence to date is supported by logic, based on the observation of the null hypothesis compared to the alternative hypothesis. That is; If the null hypothesis is correct, then the alternative hypothesis must be false and vice versa.

It is one of the basic flaws in scientific method which inhibits critical reasoning, leaving only a this or that scenario, nothing else will be looked into position.

 

[Thought Criminal]

I love when someone's response to a question about god is "Well there are a lot of things out there that we don't know and science can't investigate, and I believe in [insert diety or religion or whatever] because the universe is complicated." In fact a Christian friend said this to me the other day and I found it humorous because I think it's essentially saying 'Well the world's very hard to understand, so it must be magic!'

Note, I don't criticize the religious for being religious, I generally criticize the reasons or lack thereof behind the matter. Although sometimes people tell me things that are just plain laughable.

Argument from ignorance.

TC

 

[Thought Criminal]

I've read that view described as degenerate Cartesianism. I disagree with it.
At the very least mind is a property of the human. The human is more than brain. For starters most have arms legs....
Heideggers distinction between corporeal things and body is also useful. Does the sense of embodied selfhood we have necessarily coincide with the limits of corporeal body?
My own experience of boxing with my daughter on Wii suggests to me that my sense of embodied selfhood can extend beyond my corpoeal body.

The rest of the body is just life-support for the brain. Move your brain into a jar, supply it with oxygenated blood, add nutrients, remove waste. Your consciousness will survive this.

TC

 

[Thought Criminal]

To the best of my knowledge, no empirical testing has been done on the soul per se. Not that it is impossible to test for this, we do have the knowledge and we do have the technology, but for simple virtue of the fact, that to test directly for a soul/spirit whatever you like to call it, is illegal in every country that I know of. This doesn't mean to imply or suggest that it is against the law to test for a soul, just that the tests which would need to be done to gain empirical evidence are illegal.

Most evidence to date is supported by logic, based on the observation of the null hypothesis compared to the alternative hypothesis. That is; If the null hypothesis is correct, then the alternative hypothesis must be false and vice versa.

It is one of the basic flaws in scientific method which inhibits critical reasoning, leaving only a this or that scenario, nothing else will be looked into position.

This is pure idiocy.

TC

 

[Riverwolf]

To the best of my knowledge, no empirical testing has been done on the soul per se. Not that it is impossible to test for this, we do have the knowledge and we do have the technology, but for simple virtue of the fact, that to test directly for a soul/spirit whatever you like to call it, is illegal in every country that I know of. This doesn't mean to imply or suggest that it is against the law to test for a soul, just that the tests which would need to be done to gain empirical evidence are illegal.

Most evidence to date is supported by logic, based on the observation of the null hypothesis compared to the alternative hypothesis. That is; If the null hypothesis is correct, then the alternative hypothesis must be false and vice versa.

It is one of the basic flaws in scientific method which inhibits critical reasoning, leaving only a this or that scenario, nothing else will be looked into position.

Testing for a soul is illegal? That's also news to me.

Got any support?

 

[footprints]

Testing for a soul is illegal? That's also news to me.

Got any support?

I specifically went to great lengths to say that it wasn't the testing for a soul which was illegal, but the tests needed to test for it. Perhaps you missed that part.

The support to prove what I said, is Winthrop Kellogg. I have no support to support what you thought, despite the evidence offered.

 

[Riverwolf]

I specifically went to great lengths to say that it wasn't the testing for a soul which was illegal, but the tests needed to test for it. Perhaps you missed that part.

The support to prove what I said, is Winthrop Kellogg. I have no support to support what you thought, despite the evidence offered.

Whatever. I found nothing of any interest under the name you provided.

What kinds of tests would be needed to test for the soul?

 

[footprints]

Whatever. I found nothing of any interest under the name you provided.

What kinds of tests would be needed to test for the soul?

Science testing was changed due to Winthrop Kellogg. After the debacale with Kelloggs son, humans were no longer allowed to be guinea pigs and why testing is primarily done on animals these days. I am surprised you didn't find that.

What type of tests would be needed to test for a soul? Real life ones. Animals cannot talk to us, so therefore cannot tell us what is happening. I will not be more specific, this is the internet, not a place to release such information.

 

[Riverwolf]

Science testing was changed due to Winthrop Kellogg. After the debacale with Kelloggs son, humans were no longer allowed to be guinea pigs and why testing is primarily done on animals these days. I am surprised you didn't find that.

What type of tests would be needed to test for a soul? Real life ones. Animals cannot talk to us, so therefore cannot tell us what is happening. I will not be more specific, this is the internet, not a place to release such information.

I really don't follow you at all. Why would such information be inappropriate to the internet? Unless it violates a rule here, I don't see any reason not to release whatever information you want.

I didn't find anything really on Kellogg, other than something to do with humans and chimps.

Animals are real life, so I don't understand. Are you saying that a human being would have to die?

 

[vq40mastiff]

Someone asked me this and I thought I should share. So whatdyah think, is it?

yes, if you believe in unicorns, talking snakes and donkeys, flame spitting sea dragons, resurrections, ascensions, multiplications of foods, raining fire and sulfur, heavenly creatures eating food and banging women, 9 foot tall men, men who live close to 1000 years, men who dont eat or drink for up to 40 days, seas parting, the ground opening up to swallow people and then quickly closing back, a man surviving inside a fish for 3 days unharmed. miraculous healings such as restoration of sight, walking on water, floating/flying through the air, telling the sun and moon to stop/or stopping earths rotation, hands writing on walls. etc. yes, you believe in magic

 

[Riverwolf]

yes, if you believe in unicorns, talking snakes and donkeys, flame spitting sea dragons, resurrections, ascensions, multiplications of foods, raining fire and sulfur, heavenly creatures eating food and banging women, 9 foot tall men, men who live close to 1000 years, men who dont eat or drink for up to 40 days, seas parting, the ground opening up to swallow people and then quickly closing back, a man surviving inside a fish for 3 days unharmed. miraculous healings such as restoration of sight, walking on water, floating/flying through the air, telling the sun and moon to stop/or stopping earths rotation, hands writing on walls. etc. yes, you believe in magic

Except that's all mythology. Religion is not dependent of literalistic interpretations of mythology. (Although they do go hand in hand.)

 

[vq40mastiff]

thats true, but im talking from my own upbringing and the people i know (mostly christians). they all believe these myths to have literally happened, with the exception of a few.

 

[Buttons*]

Someone asked me this and I thought I should share. So whatdyah think, is it?

I don't think the two are mutually exclusive

 

[Riverwolf]

thats true, but im talking from my own upbringing and the people i know (mostly christians). they all believe these myths to have literally happened, with the exception of a few.

In my experience, I really can't say which group is larger: literalists or non-literalists. (Or anything in between.)