Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Man raised back to life in Jesus' name
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 271 of 300 (277405)
01-09-2006 1:20 AM
Reply to: Message 255 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
01-08-2006 9:45 PM


What does this explain?
I'm suggesting a theory that human souls might be detectable with the hypothesis that they produce a Casimir effect. In other words, I'm suggesting a theory that human souls can produce a 'vacuumn tension' effect. I also think that this hypothetical soul effect will someday be linked with a human consciousness that can exist independantly of its own brain.
You haven't answered any of my questions, though. Exactly what does your hypothesis purport to explain? Where's the necessity? And how, in your model, does a human body generate a soul effect? Sex generates human bodies; how does sex generate a soul?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-08-2006 9:45 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 276 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-09-2006 8:58 AM crashfrog has replied

Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 1327 days)
Posts: 712
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 272 of 300 (277406)
01-09-2006 1:24 AM
Reply to: Message 268 by sidelined
01-09-2006 12:29 AM


Re: Ghost limbs
If our universe indeed emerged from another universe, then something was happening before the Big Bang.
Even if time-space breaks down at the singularity level -- and even if the hypothetical universe from which some speculate our own universe emerged from had different laws governing time-space -- something was still happening before our universe came about.
Many people say that the singularity is the point from which time began. But others suggest that the singularity is the point from which an infinite time broke through and created our universe. A leek from another universe for example.
In other words, the Big Bang could be a decelleration from infinite time-space. The singualrity wouldn't necessarily mark where time began -- because time already was before this time. Rather the singularity would simply be a marker from which our universe defines it's own time-space geometry.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by sidelined, posted 01-09-2006 12:29 AM sidelined has not replied

Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 1327 days)
Posts: 712
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 273 of 300 (277408)
01-09-2006 1:25 AM
Reply to: Message 270 by crashfrog
01-09-2006 1:17 AM


Re: Yellow Alert - No Advancement
We'll discuss this more when the moderators here at EvC address it in the other thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 270 by crashfrog, posted 01-09-2006 1:17 AM crashfrog has not replied

nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 274 of 300 (277413)
01-09-2006 1:36 AM
Reply to: Message 269 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
01-09-2006 1:05 AM


Re: Mind and matter
But the assumption that the impulse overode the "volitional control" part of the brain is what I question.
What is the "volitional control" part of the brain?
You've got me there. I'm a theoretician, not a biologist.
There are areas of the brain that are particularly active during thinking, and these are what I was referring to. But I don't know brain anatomy well enough to identify them.
Our knowledge of how the brain works is far from complete. As far as I know, it is not currently possible to use electrical stimulation to fully control conscious decision making.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-09-2006 1:05 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 275 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-09-2006 1:41 AM nwr has replied

Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 1327 days)
Posts: 712
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 275 of 300 (277415)
01-09-2006 1:41 AM
Reply to: Message 274 by nwr
01-09-2006 1:36 AM


Re: Mind and matter
Hmmm...It would be interesting to start a new thread where we all pool our resources together to see what information is available.
I'm not totally against the idea of there being some part of the brain where total volitional control is produced. I just haven't seen or read any evidence for it yet.
Like I said, the evidence I've seen seems to indicate otherwise.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by nwr, posted 01-09-2006 1:36 AM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by nwr, posted 01-09-2006 9:34 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied

Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 1327 days)
Posts: 712
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 276 of 300 (277487)
01-09-2006 8:58 AM
Reply to: Message 271 by crashfrog
01-09-2006 1:20 AM


Re: What does this explain?
crashfrog writes:
Exactly what does your hypothesis purport to explain? Where's the necessity?
I thought I had made some of this clear already. The hypothesis purports to explain why consciousness appears to be able to continue on independantly from the brain.
crashfrog writes:
And how, in your model, does a human body generate a soul effect?
The human body probably most likely extends partially into other more compact dimensions via its soul. Therefore the human soul would be an extension of the human body which has a multidimensional component to it -- vacuum tension.
crashfrog writes:
Sex generates human bodies; how does sex generate a soul?
The intermingling of two souls at the point of conception probably creates the conduit which allows the new human soul to be linked with the body that is forming. Each time two souls connect, a new soul can be produced -- even more than one soul within one encounter if the condition are met (ie., twins).
This in my opinion captures a religious view that I have that sex is something sacred in the eyes of God. In other words having sex with your wife, for example, would be a form of worship which participates in the divine. This does not suggest that only people who are married can worship God in this way. Anyone can do it if the spiritual/biological conditions are correct.
However, even if those who are participating in this divine love/creation do not believe in God, they can still nonetheless receive children from God -- because children are a gift from God regardless of whether the people receiving the child believes in God or not.
This message has been edited by Mr. Ex Nihilo, 01-09-2006 08:59 AM
This message has been edited by Mr. Ex Nihilo, 01-09-2006 09:00 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by crashfrog, posted 01-09-2006 1:20 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 277 by nator, posted 01-09-2006 9:10 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied
 Message 278 by crashfrog, posted 01-09-2006 9:33 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied
 Message 280 by Coragyps, posted 01-09-2006 9:54 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2160 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 277 of 300 (277489)
01-09-2006 9:10 AM
Reply to: Message 276 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
01-09-2006 8:58 AM


Re: What does this explain?
quote:
because children are a gift from God regardless of whether the people receiving the child believes in God or not.
Was this child a gift from God?
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 01-09-2006 09:11 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-09-2006 8:58 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-09-2006 10:49 PM nator has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 278 of 300 (277496)
01-09-2006 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 276 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
01-09-2006 8:58 AM


Re: What does this explain?
The hypothesis purports to explain why consciousness appears to be able to continue on independantly from the brain.
But no explanation is needed for that phenomenon, because purely natural means can account for why some people mistakenly believe that consciousness can persist independantly from the brain.
So you still have a model that wants a purpose.
The human body probably most likely extends partially into other more compact dimensions via its soul.
I don't see how that answers my question. Where does the soul come from?
The intermingling of two souls at the point of conception probably creates the conduit which allows the new human soul to be linked with the body that is forming.
Why would the two souls mingle?
Each time two souls connect, a new soul can be produced -- even more than one soul within one encounter if the condition are met (ie., twins).
How do the souls know how many new souls to make? And how is it then that a woman can not know she's pregnant, or pregnant with twins, if her soul knows how many new souls it had to generate? If the soul is consciousness, then how can the soul know something her mind does not?
These are serious flaws in your model. Serious inconsistencies not just with your model, but with any conception of the "soul" - the existence of an eternal, indestructable soul is simply not consistent with our observations of the human life cycle. We know how new human beings are generated, and at no point during that process is a link to the initial conditions of the Big Bang created, because otherwise sex would be time travel.
So again, I ask - does all this malarkey really seem more reasonable to you than the entirely reasonable position that life and consciousness are entirely physical, material phenomenon? Because that's what the evidence indicates.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-09-2006 8:58 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied

nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 279 of 300 (277497)
01-09-2006 9:34 AM
Reply to: Message 275 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
01-09-2006 1:41 AM


Re: Mind and matter
It would be interesting to start a new thread where we all pool our resources together to see what information is available.
The field of cognitive science is still in its infancy. Theories of cognition are all over the map, ranging from theories based on quantum gravity, theories based on electromagnetic fields to theories that the brain is a kind of super-computer to theories of biological self-organization.
I'm not convinced that a thread on the topic would be all that informative.
Like I said, the evidence I've seen seems to indicate otherwise.
At present there is no knock down proof that you are wrong. However, most cognitive scientists believe that a fully naturalistic account will be found.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-09-2006 1:41 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied

Coragyps
Member (Idle past 725 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 280 of 300 (277503)
01-09-2006 9:54 AM
Reply to: Message 276 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
01-09-2006 8:58 AM


Re: What does this explain?
The intermingling of two souls at the point of conception
So Monty Python is right? Every sperm is sacred? They each have a soul?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-09-2006 8:58 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 281 by crashfrog, posted 01-09-2006 4:41 PM Coragyps has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 281 of 300 (277600)
01-09-2006 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 280 by Coragyps
01-09-2006 9:54 AM


Re: What does this explain?
So Monty Python is right? Every sperm is sacred? They each have a soul?
What I don't understand is how souls can mingle against their will, being that they are will.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by Coragyps, posted 01-09-2006 9:54 AM Coragyps has not replied

Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 1327 days)
Posts: 712
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 282 of 300 (277647)
01-09-2006 10:49 PM
Reply to: Message 277 by nator
01-09-2006 9:10 AM


Re: What does this explain?
Most certainly yes. As a person who has worked with disabled children (both physically and mentally) as a teacher assistant, and as a parent of a profoundly autistic son, I'm quite sure that these children are extremely blessed gifts from God.
Consequently, taking a double look at that picture, I'll note that this child (if it is a real skelleton) had two bodies merging at one head. Looking at the pattern emerging from the skull, it appears as if it was possible that two brains were joined together within one massive skull.
This raises and interesting point: if two brain are merged into one mass, does this mean that the children share the same consciousness?
I will note that there are modern day examples of people who have been joined together at the head -- even sharing brain matter. Yet each one joined together seems to perceive themselves as someone distinct from the other.
What does this explain?
Certainly, if the brain is the seat of one's consciousness, yet two different consciousnesses share the same brain, does this not once again indicate that one's consciousness is something which can work independently of the brain?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by nator, posted 01-09-2006 9:10 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 283 by crashfrog, posted 01-10-2006 12:38 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied
 Message 284 by nator, posted 01-10-2006 8:50 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 283 of 300 (277669)
01-10-2006 12:38 AM
Reply to: Message 282 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
01-09-2006 10:49 PM


Re: What does this explain?
Certainly, if the brain is the seat of one's consciousness, yet two different consciousnesses share the same brain, does this not once again indicate that one's consciousness is something which can work independently of the brain?
Why? Who says that one brain can't be the hardware that runs two minds? In fact doesn't the existence of multiple personality disorder prove that this can be the case?
My computer has no trouble running two different operating systems. Why should a brain have trouble running two different minds?
Why is it that the stuff you think proves the independance of consciousness doesn't prove anything of the sort to me? Do you deal with computers, much? You'd be surprised how independant-seeming software can be on an abstracted hardware layer, but the independance is just an illusion. Like, say, the operation of a Java Virtual Machine has nothing to do with the hardware it operates on - by design - but the JVM, like any other software, won't run when you turn the computer off.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-09-2006 10:49 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2160 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 284 of 300 (277710)
01-10-2006 8:50 AM
Reply to: Message 282 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
01-09-2006 10:49 PM


Re: What does this explain?
Well, what if that "gift" killed it's mother when it came out?
It couldn't have been too blessed, because it died at a very early age, didn't it?
Oh, and it most certainly is a real skeleton.
Tell me, do you think that babies born without a brain are "gifts from God?"
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 01-10-2006 08:53 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-09-2006 10:49 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1334 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 285 of 300 (283183)
02-01-2006 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by sidelined
01-07-2006 3:36 AM


Re: prove it how?
I wish I had caught this one earlier but I just have to ask. If a miracle occurs but there is never evidence for it then what evidence swayed you to think a miracle had occured?
heh, i guess i missed this one too.
why, the immutable truth of the eyewitness account, of course.
good question though. the only real answer, i guess, is a "god of the gaps" answer: something we cannot explain naturalistically.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by sidelined, posted 01-07-2006 3:36 AM sidelined has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024