Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,904 Year: 4,161/9,624 Month: 1,032/974 Week: 359/286 Day: 2/13 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Psychology Behind the Belief in Heaven and Hell
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 191 of 410 (533372)
10-30-2009 12:38 PM


From a cursory glance it appears this topic has been officially derailed. Admins?

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams

Replies to this message:
 Message 192 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-30-2009 12:42 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 194 of 410 (533393)
10-30-2009 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by onifre
10-30-2009 1:00 PM


EMA (if we have understood each other) is claiming that thoughts (and ergo) freewill is seperate from physical existence and therefore seperate and independent of god. So we as freewilled beings make our own choices independent god.
My position is that thoughts are an accumulation of physical processes functioning in the brain (known as cognition), are in fact real in the physical sense and because they are (IMO) if god is all of existence and created the mechanism for cognition, then he is as much responsible for our thoughts as we are, and should not punish us for his work.
The position sounds baseless because there would be no real way of knowing either way with certainty. If we are shot in the head and the brain damage is so severe that we die, do our thoughts cease?
Scientifically it would appear that way, but there seemingly is no way to know for sure. Are thoughts connected with the brain? Scientifically it certainly seems that way, but there is no real way to discount empirically whether or not we can think beyond the grave.
Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by onifre, posted 10-30-2009 1:00 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 195 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 10-30-2009 4:42 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 196 by onifre, posted 10-30-2009 5:24 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 197 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-30-2009 6:42 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 202 of 410 (533470)
10-31-2009 6:24 AM
Reply to: Message 196 by onifre
10-30-2009 5:24 PM


It seems like you are saying there's a margin of error that might show that we are completely wrong about our thoughts ceasing after we get shot
I think you misunderstand. We are in agreement. I am taking EMA's vacuous point and patronizing it.

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by onifre, posted 10-30-2009 5:24 PM onifre has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 204 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-31-2009 2:29 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 209 of 410 (533716)
11-02-2009 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 204 by Dawn Bertot
10-31-2009 2:29 PM


Perhaps you would like to take a shot at what I am asking to be demonstrated. My guess is that you will be able to do no better than ONI, but by all means knock yourself out
Sure, I'll play along. Ask me your question.

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 204 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-31-2009 2:29 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-03-2009 10:43 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 216 of 410 (533892)
11-03-2009 12:57 PM
Reply to: Message 211 by Dawn Bertot
11-03-2009 10:43 AM


show me the actual substance of the idea or the dream as it is represented in the brain. if its all physical and a physical process, the substance of the dream or idea or contemplation should have substance to be reproduced, correct?
you see an image in a dream, what is its actual physical substnace if its all a physical and verifiable reality?
Whoa, you totally lost me. I don't understand the question. Can you please expound?

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-03-2009 10:43 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 222 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-03-2009 2:24 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 228 of 410 (534006)
11-04-2009 9:50 AM
Reply to: Message 222 by Dawn Bertot
11-03-2009 2:24 PM


If your not being facetious
I wasn't being facetious, seriously.
When you take a picture it takes physical properties and translates them to physical properties in the form of an image
Physical in the sense of your brain processing what the eye sees, yes.
but the essence of the picture no longer has the substance it originally possesed. It has no real substance except the chemical process which it now possess. It is for all intents and purposes, no longer exists, except in its image. is only a non-existent image to its original substance.
Are you referring to a mental image or taking a picture from a camera?
The brain does the samething with stimuli, it translates properties and images into something with no real substance, from its original form, atleast they appear to have no verifiable substance. the brain however, it seems, can even produce ideas that are of thier own origin, that is not necessarily dependent on constant stimuli., ie thoughts extrpolated from limited stimuli
All right, so what was your question along these lines?

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 222 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-03-2009 2:24 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 243 of 410 (534207)
11-05-2009 6:28 PM


From A to B
EMA, what exactly is the greater point you are trying to make? I agree that if I see a rock, the rock is not actually in my brain (obviously) but rather brain interpreting what I'm seeing. But what is your point?

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-06-2009 1:33 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 248 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-07-2009 10:52 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 259 of 410 (534502)
11-08-2009 7:57 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by Dawn Bertot
11-07-2009 10:52 AM


Re: From A to B
god is not responsible for our thoughts because they are a product of freewill, a choice made by a rational mind, initially this is the principle. I further made the comment that God was not responsible for our thoughts because they are a nonexistenct thing, of no substance, therefore not attributable or a part of him.
There could be no true freewill with an omniscient being as the sole creator of all things, logically speaking.
As you said earlier "logically there could be nothing that eixsts outside of God." That being the case it stands to reason that sin and evil is directly attributed to God. He doesn't merely condone it, or allow for it while not condoning, but he is responsible for its creation.
Even God in the scriptures claims to create just that.
So now we have sin that God created and gave us a desire to sin, yet instructs us not. But no man can fully resist sin, also supported by scripture.
That means that every human being that has lived, is living, and will live is going to sin against God no matter what they do. There are none that are righteous, no, not even one, said David and reiterated by Jesus.
So lets do the math.
God creates sin, then he gives us a desire for sin, and makes it so that we cannot fully escape sin no matter how hard we try.
Yet, we have "freewill." That is self-refuting and self-defeating.
Furthermore, if God knows all things he knows everything that we do. That he knows what we will do, and knew from the very beginning what we would all do, means that there is no freewill and that we are predestined to do whatever he thinks we will do.
You said it yourself, nothing exists outside of God. And because of that nothing passes without his expressed permission.
Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-07-2009 10:52 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-10-2009 10:24 AM Hyroglyphx 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