What option is there? The alternative is belief in magic, and belief in magic as such has never advanced our understanding of reality to any significant degree.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Six Questions about the Soul
- Thread starter blü 2
- Start date
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
False dilemma. I accept evidence and I also accept that it has limits. And I don't accept that these limits mean that everything, which can't be done with positive evidence, is magic.
Then, as friends may, we can agree to disagree.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
No, that is a belief in magic, because there is only evidence or beliefs in magic. We just believe in different magic. And I am honest about that.
And I am honest about disagreeing with you, as you are honest about disagreeing with me. On my side at least, no magic is involved at any point.
There is much said about the soul in the Baha’i writings but let’s perhaps begin with it being the power within us that discovers reality and the sciences. It can reflect, meditate, consult itself and get answers. I think it’s intelligence and emotional intelligence capable not only of discovering scientific realities but spiritual realities. So the soul can believe in a God and understand scientific and abstract things.
Here you are only talking about the physical manifestation of consciousness which all agree works through the physical brain. It's the radio receiver analogy that I want to make. If the radio has parts damaged then reception may suffer. In fact the radio can die completely but the transmitting station is not affected.
The radio never created the music we listen to but only created the physical expression we detect with our hearing sense.
Again, I would only say no brain, no physical expression of consciousness. At death I think the astral/mental body separate from the physical body and continue to experience consciousness without the clunky overcoat as we see claimed in Near Death Experiences where people can see and hear things from an outside the body perspective and even report details away from their physical body that should not have been reasonably known.
In fact, I think consciousness can even be physically acknowledged by others years after death through various types of spiritual contact which is another subject.
It's not a common term so I had to look it up on Wikipedia:
Global workspace theory (GWT) is a simple cognitive architecture that has been developed to account qualitatively for a large set of matched pairs of conscious and unconscious processes. It was proposed by Bernard Baars (1988, 1997, 2002). Brain interpretations and computational simulations of GWT are the focus of current research.
That might be all good work but I don't see that it is intended to address the Hard Problem of Consciousness.
The hard problem of consciousness (Chalmers 1995) is the problem of explaining the relationship between physical phenomena, such as brain processes, and experience (i.e., phenomenal consciousness, or mental states/events with phenomenal qualities or qualia). Why are physical processes ever accompanied by experience?
Last edited:
Thanks.
Homo sapiens sapiens is a gregarious primate whose particular development rewarded intelligence beyond the ordinary. I like this hypothesis by Eliezer Yudkowsky ─
[A book by Frans de Waal called Chimpanzee Politics] had described how an adult chimpanzee named Luit had confronted the aging alpha, Yeroen, with the help of a young, recently matured chimpanzee named Nikkie. Nikkie had not intervened directly in the fights between Luit and Yeroen, but had prevented Yeroen’s other supporters in the tribe from coming to his aid, distracting them whenever a confrontation developed between Luit and Yeroen. And in time Luit had won, and become the new alpha, with Nikkie as the second most powerful ...
... though it hadn’t taken very long after that for Nikkie to form an alliance with the defeated Yeroen, overthrow Luit, and become the new new alpha.
It really made you appreciate what millions of years of hominids trying to outwit each other – an evolutionary arms race without limit – had led to in the way of increased mental capacity.
[...] a human would have totally seen that one coming.
(The winner gets to do most of the fathering, of course, so such talents are in effect selected for.)... though it hadn’t taken very long after that for Nikkie to form an alliance with the defeated Yeroen, overthrow Luit, and become the new new alpha.
It really made you appreciate what millions of years of hominids trying to outwit each other – an evolutionary arms race without limit – had led to in the way of increased mental capacity.
[...] a human would have totally seen that one coming.
So I think human wit has an earthly explanation, whether precisely the one above or something else or both.
And it involves both IQ and EQ because the scene is within the tribe, essentially social.
If that were correct, then everyone everywhere in every age would hear very much the one message and there'd only be one religion ─ or at the least, only one outline for a religion ─ no? But instead we have hundreds of thousands of religions and a great many outlines of what a religion is.
The cousin of a good friend of mine had an NDE when he crashed his light aircraft at night and managed to crawl clear of the wreck. He saw the tunnel and the light, had the sense of invitation, and experienced the awareness of a choice to go back (so he says). So I'm inclined to think the phenomenon is real in the sense of being experienced, and the question is, what brain processes account for the experience.
For example, it remains the case that the number of authenticated cases where a subject returns from an NDE or OBE with new remote information about reality is still zero.
A work in progress, like so many aspects of the brain. But we indeed continue to make progress.
(I don't understand the fuss about 'qualia'. If you saw the first Terminator you may recall Arnie as the android assessing information about his environment as a stream of rolling numbers (on a red background) as though in his vision. Qualia are simply biochemical responses giving rise to feelings carrying out much the same function as Arnie's numbers.)
Here I think you are misunderstanding what I was saying with the radio analogy. Each physical brain is tuned in to its own individual soul/mental/astral body. Hence everyone is receiving input from a mental source that i significantly shaped by the culture and time it experienced. It seems like you were thinking every radio is turned to the same station.
Information about the environment while out of body is a common part of many stories. Knowing what people were wearing and conversations heard even in another room is a fairly common report. These are called Veridical Near Death Experiences.
A determined materialist has no choice but to deny these veridical experiences really ever occur. Well, I have combed the data and it becomes unreasonable to think the cases collected are not overwhelming evidence for the phenomena.
Yes, I thought you were saying that consciousness was a single thing, and that each brain is attuned to it. But that only puts the question at one further remove:
Why can't the individual sources of these consciousnesses agree on what's actually out there? What has happened that would make, say, a Christian becomes a Buddhist? A Muslim becomes an unbeliever? A follower of Krishna becomes a Shintoist?
The question with NDEs is not whether subjects can be aware of their surroundings despite having no vital signs. The question is whether they can bring new accurate information about remote reality. I'm not aware of any such claimed report that has withstood skeptical scrutiny. If you know of any, grateful for a link or reference.
As for OOBs, they can be duplicated in the lab. And they too have never resulted in new remote information about reality that has withstood skeptical scrutiny, so far as I'm aware.
Not really clear how you are viewing things. We get our religious views through our thought processes and those are influenced by our culture. Some people are content with their cultural religion and others change religions or accept no religion. Each person is unique and responds differently to the world.
The link I provided was intended to do exactly that; showing verifiable knowledge of things not reasonably known through normal processes.
I think the key phrase is 'withstood skeptical scrutiny'. Who is the determiner if a case has withstood skeptical scrutiny as I've heard cases with multiple witnesses involved. As people don't have NDE's in a controlled laboratory the best researchers can do is record and interview people. I feel the cumulative weight of all the cases I've heard seems overwhelming.
I can present more cases of veridical near death experiences all day but if you choose you can hold to the claim that none have 'withstood skeptical scrutiny'.
Last edited:
Thanks for the clarifications.
I seem to have misunderstood your concept of consciousness. I had taken it that consciousness in this case was linked to religious belief, but you say that's not the case, which is interesting.
As for OOBs and NDEs, all we need is an unambiguous instance of a person returning from the experience with new remote information about reality, information that it was not possible to gain by ordinary material means.
You'll be aware of the experiment in an English hospital last century, which I believe has been repeated elsewhere since, in which two doctors placed signs face up on top of cupboards and other high fittings such that they could only be read from above, asking the subject to report their sighting of the sign. The experiment was discontinued after many years because it had produced zero results.
What is it that you say leaves the body and travels, and by what means do you say it's able to perceive reality at all?
Consciousness is not a religious thing but it's basically just our ability to be aware of anything.
You are missing my point here too. I am claiming the above has already happened many times over. Veridical Near Death Experiences
If you want to claim none of these cases studied by professional researchers stand up to skeptical scrutiny then we disagree. There are too many cases to be explained away as lucky guesses, bad memory, lying, etcetera materialist explanations. Read enough strong cases and decide for yourself.
Well studying unexpected dying in controlled conditions is a tricky thing to do. How would a dying person know to take notice of a certain sign? Eventually it might happen though one day.
OOBE where an unexpected death-like condition is not at hand might be a better area for controlled testing as the person beforehand could be made to understand the goal.
One of the first researchers to perform laboratorial experiments on the OBE was psychologist Dr. Charles Theodore Tart (1937 - ). In 1966, he invited a young projector to participate in a series of experiments in the sleep laboratory of the University of California - Davis. The historical projectiological experiments took four nights in which the projector - "Miss Z" - was to lay down and try to exit the physical body, while connected to a series of devices that measured her physiological conditions. The objective of the experiments was the identification of a quasi-randomly generated five-digit number, approximately 1.5 meters above her head (impossible to be physically observed).
From Monday to Wednesday, the projector reported having seen the clock while floating out of body. At the times informed by her, the devices demonstrated unusual brain-wave patterns. An absence of rapid-eye movements (REM) was also observed. On Wednesday night, Miss Z identified the target number: 25132. The brain-wave pattern during conscious projection was different from the patterns during waking state, sleep and other altered states of consciousness (an expression proposed by Tart himself).
I am saying the normally interpenetrating astral/mental body separates from the physical body and can travel independently. (It is composed of astral matter on the astral plane of nature outside our familiar three-dimensions)
The astral body has astral senses that allow it to perceive things about the outside world.
Pam Reynolds and the Dutch nurse are explicable (as I said) in terms of perception, including auditory perception, persisting in the absence of vital signs. The one about Maria's Shoe was debunked at more than one level by a team of enquirers whose report I remember reading, though it was many years ago. Since I know about that report, why isn't its existence mentioned, indeed linked, on that site? You'll agree it gives the impression that unfavorable material is edited out, or that research is sloppy, or both, no?
If the astral plane is outside our spacetime continuum, how can it perceive events within it?
These last two imply that the astral plane is simply an extension of existing physics. It seems (at the least) odd that physicists can't be persuaded by evidence and repeatable experiment to agree,no?
PS I think >this< is the article on Maria's shoe. It was open access back then.
By ancient human assumption, souls don't lie in our realm. In modern science, this advocate means souls don't lie in our spacetime. While our science doesn't have a concept on how things possibly work in another spacetime as science is experiment-based and we can't go to such a spacetime to establish experiments. So all left is all about philosophical speculations.
That said. In Christianity or Judaism soul represents one's true identity. Speculation is that soul is needed because it represents the real you independent of your body. Humans need a body as our image for us to recognize each other. It is so because humans are designed not only to live in a physical world but also that their lives are staged, say, the earthly stage and heavenly stage and with our body dies and decays in the first stage (at least). So the only thing which can continue to represent the real you (along with the decay of your old body) permanently is your soul.
Your spirit on the other hand is used to store stage-dependent information. For example, your earthly affections are stored in your spirit such that on earth you have the affections for your parents, children, soulmate, and so on. These affections will be gone along with your physical death. It is thus said that your spirit will return to God on your death.
The soul is also closely tied to the Final Judgment. It is to make sure that it is "you" who is under the judgment in court instead of "a clone of you". If only your body is resurrected, you can argue that the resurrected body is not you but a clone of you and thus should not be judged. However in the presence of a soul, as reckoned by the witnesses (chosen saints and angels), you are the "you" who should stand the trial.
For one, the Pam Reynolds case was certainly during a time when no higher brain functioning was occurring. In fact I recall she even had her eyes taped. She should have no memory of the experience. Maria's shoe has no materialist explanation beyond her somehow seeing it on the roof when wheeled into the hospital. Hardly a theory worth mentioning in my opinion.
But the thing is when it comes to veridical NDE and OOBE the determined materialist must find a way by hook or crook to dismiss all of them. I could provide ten more stories of veridical claims that would produce only more entrenched opposition from the determined materialist. So that game becomes a waste of time on a merry-go-round.
We each have to be honest with ourselves and form our own best judgment. I'll move on with my best assessment.
Nobody said it was outside our spacetime continuum. It is within our space time continuum but outside the three-dimensions of our physical senses and instruments.
I agree that the astral can be looked at as an extension of existing physics. However at this point in time it must remain theoretical as it cannot yet be directly observed by our three-dimensional perceiving senses and instruments.
You might next ask next how can we know about it and my answer would be through those gifted with clairvoyant senses through their astral bodies, so it must remain theoretical to current science.
I could not access the article as I need to be a member. I have learned not to have much respect for the Skeptical Inquirer as a purveyor of balanced information. Remember a true skeptic should be skeptical of the skeptics too as they may have their own personal prejudices.
After all this time I forget the details, but the "Maria's shoe" story was debunked thoroughly, including the proposition you mention that the shoe couldn't otherwise be seen.
So I repeat the point I made ─ either the research at the site you linked is outright sloppy (since I found the article again with just a simple google) or it doesn't publish views that don't support its position. That is NOT how skeptical enquiry works ─ there, if you disagree with another point of view, you specify it and the parts you disagree with, and present your counter-argument. You DON'T pretend the disagreeing view doesn't exist.
It's not a faith exercise. It's a search for the truth, the making of accurate statements about reality.
And the authentic seeker after truth, as distinct from the authentic seeker after reassurance, must honestly assess all credible critiques, and not pretend they don't exist. And be prepared to change his or her view depending on the evidence.
All critiques should be considered but if the critique seems weak then it doesn't carry much weight with me.
For example if the skeptical argument is that she noticed such a thing on the roof when she was being taken into the hospital having an almost fatal heart attack then it just doesn't carry much weight.
That short link I sent you was not intended to be a thorough discussion of the Maria's shoe story or any particular case. It was just one of a few short examples of what veridical claims look like.
And then it went on to mention NDEs of those who became blind at some point in their life having veridical visual descriptions of details.
Again, I am interested in hearing skeptical challenges. The lack of convincing ones at this point is one reason I am a believer in veridical NDEs.
By further googling I've found >this site<. It contains summaries of the results of skeptical enquiries into Pam Reynolds, Maria's shoe, and more. The tone is unbecomingly aggressive in places, but the reports assert as factual matters that anyone arguing the contrary needs to specify and to deal with ─ unlike the site you linked.