Message 50 of 148 (184176) 02-09-2005 5:44 PM

Reply to: Message 45 by robinrohan 02-09-2005 5:07 PM

I think the things that transend are Faith Hope and Love (maybe some others too). This doesn't meant that the physical pleasures are bad, and I don't think you get punished for sinning, but if thats what you're relying on, when you die your gonna be screwed. I also don't think that heaven is some reward for good behavior. You just gotta know how to get spiritual happiness.

My thoughts on this subject come from feeling my soul. I think there's something inside me that isn't physical and I can feel it. It doesn't seem like my mind is playing tricks on me. I think you body is required for your soul to develop and interact with others. I think as your body grows your soul grows, and your mind (not brain) is the connection between them. Other ideas come from the teachings of Jesus. I think if you weren't very intellegent or didn't think deeply about afterlives and such, but you followed the teachings of Jesus, then your afterlife would be heavenly.

Please respond with your thoughts or questions.

This message has been edited by Catholic Scientist, 02-09-2005 16:46 AM

Message 52 of 148 (184202) 02-09-2005 7:07 PM

Reply to: Message 51 by robinrohan 02-09-2005 6:04 PM

If you never got much happiness from the sensual adventures then that blandness would have little affect on your afterlife. You wouldn't miss it, but you might miss spiritual happiness if your sensual adventures weren't coupled with the transendencese I spoke of.

I wouldn't call them wicked, do all the drugs and sex that you want just realize that they will be gone and you should suplement those feelings with ones that can be worth something in the afterlife. And also realize that the more sex and drugs you do the more you'll rely on them for happiness and take time away from the better things.

Now, this question of mitigating the sensuality...

I don't really understand what you mean or how you can cancel something you previously enjoyed by disliking it now...but then your question says that you never enjoyed them inthe first place so whats the point of canceling it?
This does make me think of something I hadn't thought of before. Instead of mitigating the things you liked, what if your life was filled with physical pain and suffering and contained no transedent happiness, when you died and were freed from the pain, perhaps the afterlife would be heavenly-ly numb...but still without the transendent happinesses I think your afterlife would be vauge and bland, like the concept of pergatory.

Speaking of purgatory...I think if your physical body and your mind don't develop, then your soul doesn't develop either. So when babies die they experience the afterlife much like they experienced the physical world, unaware, or in purgatory. Likewise, if someone is physically developed but not mentally developed, their sould will only know what their mind has been able to communicate to it. A severly mentally undeveloped person would experience the afterlife like a severly physically undeveloped person would.

It takes the growth of your body and the encouters it faces, to develop your soul through communication with your mind. The mind is the physical/spiritual link between the soul and the body.

I'm tired of typing and am leaving work so maybe I can respond later tonight.

Please resond with questions/comments.

Message 57 of 148 (184333) 02-10-2005 2:33 AM

Reply to: Message 53 by nator 02-09-2005 9:15 PM

Do you not believe that things exist which are not detect/demonstrate-able?
Also, I think the soul IS the equipment that allows the body to feel non-physical sensations.

When I'm afraid of the dark and then I realize that nothing is there, I feel like my mind played a trick on me. Also, when I use conscious expanding drugs, some mind tricks become apparent.

As far as the my soul is concerned...any, do you have some of that evidence?

It comes from the brain AND the soul, its a connection between the two.

su�per�fi�cial ( P ) Pronunciation Key (spr-fshl)
adj.
Of, affecting, or being on or near the surface: a superficial wound.
Concerned with or comprehending only what is apparent or obvious; shallow.
Apparent rather than actual or substantial: a superficial resemblance.
Trivial; insignificant: made only a few superficial changes in the manuscript.
Being or affecting or concerned with a surface; not deep or penetrating emotionally or intellectually

I think you're wrong about Jesus. His teachings were about deep emotional and intellectual morals that were far from the 'surface' of this physical existance. Could you please reiterate you the point you were making with these statements?

Message 58 of 148 (184334) 02-10-2005 2:35 AM

Reply to: Message 54 by nator 02-09-2005 9:22 PM

Physical pleasures are useless in the long run. Post-death, i mean.

Message 83 of 148 (218494) 06-21-2005 6:24 PM

Now, if you go tampering with the brain and try to induce a religious experience I think it would seem very real. I don�t think the person would be able to tell the difference. Smells, visions, body movements and other emotions could stimulate intense religious feelings as well. I still don�t think that this rules out that other, lets say �true�, religious experiences are cause by the soul. It makes sense to me that because the soul is connected to the brain, via the mind, that effects on the brain could seem like effects coming from the soul. But because this is possible, does not rule out the soul, IMHO, as the cause for �true� religious experiences.

You would say that what I call �true� religious experiences are a result of self-delusion, to which I would say that I am convinced that they are not delusions. And then you would say that being deluded means that you don�t think you really are deluded, and then I say yeah, I could be all wrong and actually be deluded, but I still think I �know� that I�m not, so I guess there is no way for me to find out, and I�m gonna go with my gut on this one.

This seems to go with the whole brain/computer analogy. When you damage the brain, you damage the mind. And behavior and temperament changes would be expected.

Well, I�m not satisfied with the most simple explanation with the fewest assumptions because of the religious experiences I�ve had and the feeling of a soul that I have. That explanation seems incorrect to me, and I�ve realized that science cannot touch the subject because of its inability to detect/demonstrate the subject.

These are also possibilities and I wouldn�t be able to tell if it were one of these or if it was my soul. But I do think that something is �influencing and guiding our minds seperately from our bodies�. I don�t just pick soul randomly, a lot of my beliefs come from Jesus.

A lot of this seems off topic, but IIRC I did say what I believe heaven or hell would be like and I believe that they exist because I believe I have a soul. This post shows why I believe in the soul which is why I believe what heaven and hell are like, so, I guess that it is on topic.

Message 85 of 148 (218732) 06-22-2005 4:40 PM

Reply to: Message 84 by nator 06-21-2005 11:40 PM

I think that it is up to the individual. Some people think they are having religious experiences all the time ('God brought us here today'...:rolleyes:...). Some think their religous experience is a delusion. Some feel nothing, some feel a little, some feel a lot.

You just gotta decide for yourself if it is real or not. And if someone claims to have had a religous experience and you don't believe them, so what?

A baseball was flying towards my head and at the last second I saw it and ducked. God tapped me on the shoulder and saved me, see he's really really real. Yeah right. Just as lame is, I used the force and saw it comming before I saw it comming. How about my reflexes kicked in that have naturally evolved and nothing extraordinary happened.

While we're speculating..., If we damaged that "religious experience" part of the brain and the person can still experience religious feelings, then that would suggest that the feelings can come from somewhere else as well, perhaps the soul.

I must not be typical. I can easily determine fantasy from reality.

What kind of fantasies are you talking about, besides religious experiences, that easily fool the brain?

Definately. Alot of people believe way too much without even thinking about it. I'd recommend the same remedy that Bill Hicks did: a psychedelic experience. "It makes you realize that everything you've learned is in fact learned and not neccessarily true."

Message 87 of 148 (218791) 06-22-2005 7:57 PM

Reply to: Message 86 by nator 06-22-2005 7:20 PM

In the same way, you cannot tell if you are not being deluded.

But, if the delusions produce consistent outcomes then they could be considered useful, or if outside confirmation of the delusion is consistent, then it doesn't matter if it is a delusion.

WRT the soul, it is only an internal/personal delusion and not useful outside of the body. But, the 'outcomes' of my soul are consistent and, though outside confirmation is impossible, inside confirmations are consistent with what I feel and believe. I fell no more deluded about my soul than I do about my existance. I am as sure of my soul as much as I am sure of my existance.

So did Mother Teresa.

Or how about when a baseball player steps up to the plate and makes the sign of the cross/says a little prayer, man that pisses me off.

of course, and I have. But it is inconsistant with what I feel, think, and believe.

Oh, I didn't know you were including optical illusions and special effects in fantasy. I was thinking more 'internal'. So an optical illusion is a delusion?

What about this one:

http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~roweis/images/optical-illusion-wheels-circles-rotating.png

Now, it looks like the image is moving when I look at it, but I know that it isn't. Am I deluded? I know they are not moving and I don't believe that they are moving, but it looks like they are moving. I've determined the reality from the fantasy.

I think if I were deluded then I would think/believe that they are actually moving.

No.

Message 89 of 148 (218871) 06-23-2005 1:54 AM

Reply to: Message 88 by nator 06-23-2005 12:37 AM

ABE: In addition to moving on I hope you also address mesage 87

This message has been edited by Catholic Scientist, 06-23-2005 12:55 AM

Message 92 of 148 (218943) 06-23-2005 11:24 AM

Reply to: Message 91 by nator 06-23-2005 9:12 AM

No, I wasn't going that far with that statement. I was thinking more in the context of a conversation, with emphasis on the claim. I don't think claiming to have a personal religious experience(PRE) has much affect, it is what you do about that experience, what actions you take. But, I wouldn't blame a PRE for the actions that sometakes outside of that experience. I doubt the 9/11 terrorist were having a PRE while they were hijacking the airplane.

I'm out of time. Will continue later.

What about optical illusions and false memories?