Nope.
Do you think extra-dimensional unicorns or undetectable dragons or gravity regulating pixies or alien abductions are plausible or possible? I'm guessing you don't. Yet, there is no evidence against them.
Once again, the plausibility / possibility of a claim isn't assessed by the lack of evidence
against them, but by the existance of the evidence FOR them.
Which isn't relevant at all to the point being discussed.
Indeed. There is zero evidence for such, thus we have no reason to believe or think they exist.
The human collective.
Off course I can, in this context.
No human has valid evidence for the existance of non-material beings.
Not me, not you, not the pope or anyone else.
Sure, there's quite a lot that I don't know.
Doesn't matter. What matters to the point, is that such evidence does not exist.
If emotions are not functions of a material brain, then what are they and what is your evidence in support of that?
Yes.
And emotions. And through experiment and research, neurologists figure out which part of the brain is responsible for what. The scan posted, shows the parts responsible for love.
How the Brain Processes Emotions
No.
Well, yes. They have the same evidence in support of them (none) and you insist that your claims not being disproven means that they are plausible. Undetectable dragons can't be disproven either.
Que?
So you just determined that I'm unable to love?
No. To me love is an emotion. Like hate, anger, happyness, depression, jealousy, etc.
That they occur in the brain, is just the explanation thereof. It doesn't take away its value or reality.
If there were valid evidence, you'ld be able to share it. So please do.
In the words of Bill Nye (the science guy): "
Do you believe in ghosts? well... no.... however, I would love to see one. So bring it on!"
But nobody ever does.......
Indeed. This is exactly what confimation bias is.
So by your own acknowledgement, I was right in that evaluation. It means that your reasons for belief are fallacious. Confirmation bias is not a good thing, when the goal is to hold as many true beliefs as possible and the least false beliefs as possible...
Those that are supported by valid evidence.
Not at all. If you wish to know what my beliefs are concerning gods and why, you should ask me instead of just guessing.
So the answer isn't simply a resounding "no"?
Owkay then.
So really... you are just gullible then I guess...
Let's go a step further.
Do you believe in Allah and mohammed as his prophet?
Do you believe in Lord Shiva and Krishna?
Do you believe in Lord Xenu and your inner thetan (scientology)?
All these have the same amount of evidence as alien abductions and bigfoot.
So, you believe them all?
Not the same thing. Crimes and indefensible beliefs aren't the same thing.
One deals with real-world behaviour with real-world immoral consequenses and real-word societal organization for the sake of real-world societal well-being and safety.
While the other deals with mere beliefs and indefensible, unsupportable claims of unsupportable consequences.
If you can't see the difference between "there will be consequences if you engage in robbery" on the one hand and "you need to believe this indefensible, unsupportable claim or great undemonstrable calamity will befall you", then I can't help you.
Yep. You happily and proudly acknowledge that you operate through confirmation bias.
Nope.
If something is invisible and undectable, then it isn't detectable to anyone by definition.
Neither are you. Neither is the solar system. Neither is the milky way even.
The entire milky way can disappear tomorrow and the universe would be virtually the same.
