I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

General philosophy discussions. If you are not sure where to place your thread, please post it here. Share favorite quotes, discuss philosophers, and other topics.

Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby davidm on February 11th, 2019, 6:27 pm 

…(without the attitude that his view is unassailable and every other view is wrong)…


I’ve never said or implied that my view is unassailable. This is pure projection your part. You unassailably believe in fairy tales. As for me, show me some evidence for an after life or “spirit mediumship” (lol) and I will revise my views.

The problem with cynicism is that it's a vicious circle. I've talked to dozens of cynics and they all have one thing in common: they don't really know their subject. They've decided something is nonsense so, obviously, it's not worth investigating, so they stay where they are... It's a vicious circle.


Complete and utter crap. I am not a cynic. I am a skeptic. There is a huge difference. I do NOT decide in advance that “spirit mediumship” or anything else is nonsense. Rather, I demand evidence for such claims. Every single claim for talking to the dead that has ever been investigated has been demonstrated to be fraudulent, including the claims of the charlatan John Edward.

But I've lived long and hard and met hundreds of people. I can guarantee that almost every single person has had some kind of other-worldly experience. Either yourself, or your family, or friends, or someone they know, will have some kind of story to tell.


I’ve never had any such experience. But the fact that people claim to have such experiences means nothing. Anecdotes are not evidence of anything. People who claim to have such experiences may be lying, may be deluded, or may be sincerely mistaken. The brain can play tricks on you. The brain dreams, it hallucinates, it discerns faces where there are none. We know that the brain does these things. We have no evidence whatsoever of talking to the dead, and, as noted above, every such claim that has been investigated has been debunked. Not a good track record.

ETA: It simply is not true that "almost every single person has had some kind of other-worldly experience." In fact I, personally, don't know anyone who has claimed to have had such experiences. Maybe I run in the wrong crowd! I guess I should hang out with people who open a conversation by asking, "What's your sign?" (I don't hang with people like that.)

I've known mediums and people who from childhood were psychic.


Evidence?

But because there's fraud doesn't mean all of it is untrue or false. It isn't. When science starts testing these things it all seems to go wrong. I'm as aware of this as you are but there are reasons for it.


And what do you think those reasons might be?

Most of this stuff isn't something you can turn on or off like a tap. It depends a great deal on atmosphere, quietude, motive. I'm NOT discussing frauds. Those with some kind of esp may not function properly, and it may never happen anyway, under the microscope and the pressure of a lab test. And probably they shouldn't volunteer for it in the first place.


Of course, ad hoc justification for the failure of the paranormal to stand up to rigorous scientific scrutiny. Scientists are such bullies, the psychic realm is intimidated by their pushiness and cynicism. It can’t be that paranormal claims are total bullshit — oh, no, not that!

Assume for a moment that the spirit world does exist. If they come through, with or without a medium, their motive is to comfort, to help, not to convince a sceptic of their existence. Just consider it a moment. They're not interested in tricks and proof and all that. Especially when, if there is a positive result, some other person will come along and promptly rubbish it. It's all a circus. This is so obvious.


You must be joking. If the spirit world existed and wanted to comfort and help, the surest way to do that would be to make its existence obvious to everyone! What’s actually happening, of course, is that “sprit medium” frauds are preying upon the bereavement of people to make a quick buck.

Good lord, there are perfectly normal families (quite often people who don't believe in any of this) who've been forced to leave their homes because things started flying around!


Oh, noez! Stuff flying around! Like in a movie or something! Image

But wait! I thought the spirit world desired to comfort and help people. So why the hell are the spirits pitching pots and pans at poor Aunt Polly and forcing her to run out of her house in her bloomers? The doesn’t sound very comforting or helpful!

They probably think they know, but they don’t.


No, you think you know, when you obviously don’t.

There is a reason you can’t talk to the dead, dude. It’s because they’re dead.
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 547
Joined: 05 Feb 2011
TheVat liked this post


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby charon on February 11th, 2019, 8:28 pm 

I’ve never had any such experience.


Exactly, that's why I think you should get out more :-)
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby davidm on February 11th, 2019, 8:41 pm 

charon » February 11th, 2019, 6:28 pm wrote:
I’ve never had any such experience.


Exactly, that's why I think you should get out more :-)


Or maybe you should talk to people who aren't idiots who ask for your sign when you meet them and then babble about how their Aunt Matilda can foretell your future by reading cockroach droppings.

Interesting how you didn't respond to a single one of my points or rebuttals. A sure sign of yet another charlatan.
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 547
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby TheVat on February 11th, 2019, 9:16 pm 

I find the whole "scientists spoil the vibe" justification of null results to be intellectually dishonest. And really, if the dead can toss teacups, they can surely get around an attitude and deliver the comfort.


I will only add Carl Sagan's famous maxim: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
User avatar
TheVat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 7184
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby charon on February 11th, 2019, 10:08 pm 

Sorry, I'm afraid you don't understand the subject, either of you.

I'll tell you one thing. Once a person has got entrenched in the sceptical, disbelieving, cynical frame of mind it's extremely hard to get out of it. No one doubts it when one sees how a religious believer sees everything in the light of their beliefs. Any study of psychology will tell us how our beliefs and attitudes shape how we see things. It's just the same with scepticism, it's a frame of mind that can colour everything one touches.

I'm not talking about healthy, intelligent scepticism. Of course one shouldn't be gullible or naive, which a lot of us are. But there's also unhealthy, negative scepticism. It's cynical, it sneers, it puts up a wall of noise against anything that challenges it. It's impossible to talk to and woe betide anyone who decides to try to convince it it's wrong. The more you try the worse it gets. They've got an answer to everything and when they run out of subject matter they'll start on you!

I've been on forums for years and years and encountered every kind of cynic, as I said. Also in real life. They're all the same. They use the same phrases, the same arguments, the same insults, the same conclusions, the same quotes from the same sources. It's so predictable it's laughable.

If you think for one minute I'm going to try to deliver 'evidence' (always the last refuge of the scoundrel) for what I say and then watch it being sneered at, torn apart, and all the rest of the tricks, it's not going to happen.

David has complained - boo-hoo - that I haven't answered any of his points. I could, but I'd be very foolish to even consider it. He's made up his mind and that's that. But his information, as I keep saying, is incomplete. Actually hopelessly incomplete, but it doesn't matter, it's too bad.

I'll point one thing out, and for god's sake do look at it intelligently. He said:

People who claim to have such experiences may be lying, may be deluded, or may be sincerely mistaken. The brain can play tricks on you. The brain dreams, it hallucinates, it discerns faces where there are none. We know that the brain does these things.


All that is very true (I've said all that myself) but he's left one thing out... that they might actually be telling the truth.

But that, of course, is not an option. See how sad that is. And if you understand just that one thing you'll have understood a great deal.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby davidm on February 11th, 2019, 10:30 pm 

Of course they may think they are telling the truth -- or they may in fact be telling the truth! That there really is a spirit world, that people can talk to the dead, and all the rest of it!

Then, fine. Show us the evidence.

Like all nutters, you slander scientists and skeptics. We are not cynics, we do NOT dismiss claims out of hand. We merely ask that one provide evidence for such claims, and NOT anecdotes, ad hoc and post hoc rationalizations, wishful thinking, confirmation bias and the like!

Of course you won't answer my points, because you can't! So instead you make up a bogus reason for refusing to do so -- that I am the problem, and not you.

But you give away the game when you proclaim that evidence is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

So asking for evidence is the act of a scoundrel, according to you?

Go run off to some forum that caters to nutters.
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 547
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby charon on February 11th, 2019, 10:51 pm 

But you don't want real evidence, David, you want something you can destroy.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby davidm on February 11th, 2019, 11:34 pm 

charon » February 11th, 2019, 8:51 pm wrote:But you don't want real evidence, David, you want something you can destroy.


I would say that lying is the last refuge of a scoundrel, not a request for evidence.

Or course I want real evidence! Trot it out and let's take a look at it!

But what is real evidence? I guess, according to you, science can't get real evidence of your spirit world because the spirits are such snowflakes in the presence of proper scientific testing protocols that they just can't perform! Maybe it's like a guy who can't perform in bed because he has had too much to drink? Are the spirits all drunk when scientists run tests to see if they exist?

How about those spirits who throw pots and pans at Aunt Polly and chase her out of her house? Are they drunk? I thought, according to you, spirits were comforting and helpful! :-D

You've no "real evidence." You've got nothing but bullshit, and, like all nutters, you personally attack and slander those who point out that your claims are empty.
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 547
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby TheVat on February 12th, 2019, 12:07 am 

I'm not talking about healthy, intelligent scepticism....


That's what I am offering. And so is DM, though you can't seem to see that.

When presented with a story of a ghostly encounter, an intelligent person who understands Ockham's razor can consider two possible explanatory paths. One is that physical death does not end a person's mind and ability to interact with the physical world and that they are communicating with the living. The other path is that humans are often prone to psychological states that induce visual and auditory hallucinations, often related to an intense emotional need to see something beyond death. Which explanation requires the fewest novel assumptions?

I'm not a cynic. I would like nothing better than to meet a ghost and receive information that promises another dimension of being beyond corporeal existence. But, again, this is an extraordinary claim that radically contradicts everything science has learned about what happens when a brain stops getting oxygenated blood. Really high quality evidence is needed. Evidence that rules out more mundane explanations. And you shouldn't assume people here, including myself, haven't researched this field extensively.
User avatar
TheVat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 7184
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby charon on February 12th, 2019, 6:53 am 

Vat -

There are several things to consider in your post. As your delivery seems to be a bit more rational I'll answer you.

When the sceptic asks for evidence he generally means scientific, right? He wants it lab-tested, peer-reviewed, repeated, all that stuff.

Most esp moments come uninvited. One hears or sees something, or something happens, and it's gone. Therefore, however extraordinary it was, all one has is an anecdote. But we don't admit anecdotes.

Most esp moments happen to quite ordinary individuals. No lab is ever going to hear about them. They might not even tell anybody except those in their own circle of family or friends. So nobody except them ever hears about it.

Also, the assumption is that such people need to prove it to others, especially sceptical people. Why should they? They don't, it's the sceptic without experience who wants proof. Why? It's nothing to do with them.

If someone like yourself or David wants evidence why do you ask me? Why don't you look for it yourselves? If I was interested in a subject I'd start googling it, or reading, or asking people, or doing something else.

If this wasn't the paranormal that's what you'd do. If this was an interest in Bavarian folk music, off you'd go and find out all about it. But with this you want someone else to do it for you. Why?

And if someone was idiotic enough to start posting links they'd be rubbished before they even got out the door. People would be accused of trickery, lying, delusion, god knows what. Why should anyone subject themselves to that?

Look at how you phrase things. I'm not having a go at you, I'm just trying to show you something.

When presented with a story of a ghostly encounter, an intelligent person who understands Ockham's razor can consider two possible explanatory paths. One is that physical death does not end a person's mind and ability to interact with the physical world and that they are communicating with the living. The other path is that humans are often prone to psychological states that induce visual and auditory hallucinations, often related to an intense emotional need to see something beyond death. Which explanation requires the fewest novel assumptions?


You're saying it's all a matter of belief, logic, probability, and so on. Who cares whether someone who wasn't there and wasn't involved believes it or not? It's up to them, not the person involved. They just say what happened.

I could tell you story after story, in fact I'm spoilt for choice. You'd say it was anecdotal and isn't proof. Of course, absolutely right. But imagine the amount of evidence that you're throwing out. These are sensible, honest people with a story to tell, and you won't consider it for a second because they might be lying, deluded, or fooled by their senses.

Quite right, but - to use Occam's, which you like - that's highly unlikely in most cases. Why would they bother? It's actually rather insulting to them. It assumes somewhat that the sceptic is the only one with any intelligence and the others are a bit dim, gullible, if not nutty. It's complete rubbish. Would you consider that? They tell an honest story, often supported by others, and they're ignored or dismissed.

So when you ask for evidence (which I understand) bear in mind that it may not be possible. Even if it was convincing you'd still wouldn't actually know one way or the other. Really the only thing that would convince you is personal experience. There are innumerable people who have changed their minds the moment it happened to them.

you shouldn't assume people here, including myself, haven't researched this field extensively.


Probably that means science, doesn't it? But science can't do this stuff for the very reasons I've just given. So maybe you're looking in precisely the wrong places. And when you ask for evidence you're asking for very specific evidence that may not be applicable.

I notice that when I told Brent his posts resembled fundamentalist tracts (which others thought too) you said I was being combative. Yet here is David screaming, shouting, swearing, insulting, but you've said nothing. His posts are so fired up, sparky and angry that I wonder if he was actually sober at the time. But, you know, I don't care, up to him.

Science, as we know it now, and as it is applied to these things, may not be the final arbiter at all and I think that should be borne in mind. It's a hard pill to swallow but there we are.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby TheVat on February 12th, 2019, 11:16 am 

A couple points...

I do ask David to be less insulting, and I will close the thread if there's any more of that.

Regarding...

"If someone like yourself or David wants evidence why do you ask me? Why don't you look for it yourselves? If I was interested in a subject I'd start googling it, or reading, or asking people, or doing something else.

If this wasn't the paranormal that's what you'd do. If this was an interest in Bavarian folk music, off you'd go and find out all about it. But with this you want someone else to do it for you. Why? "

False representation of my comments. The request for evidence is reasonable when evidence is found to be lacking. When I look for Bavarian folk songs, I find them, and their existence is not in question. The same cannot be said for ghosts and psychic phenomena. You really will find it useful to read our forum guidelines on providing evidence when challenged. At SPCF, failure to provide evidentiary citations when asked is considered nonresponsive and may end discussion. Strong challenges to theories is at the heart of SPCF. Again, and this is the last time I say this (as do our guidelines), the burden of proof and reasoned argument from evidence is ON THE PERSON MAKING EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS.

Finally, the passive-aggressive tactic of complaining that your evidence might be attacked (with your insulting imputation that someone questioning your data must be angry and emotionally clouded) is not acceptable here. As you seem to understand, personal anecdote is not sufficient (though it may suggest avenues of research, as it has done at Duke University, the PEAR group at Princeton, etc.), and certainly not when the hypothesis is of the existence of an immaterial incorporeal soul.

Simply saying, "well, I know it's real, because of my own personal experience, and you should believe me" just doesn't fly around here. Are there conclusive research studies from SRI or Duke or PEAR? That have withstood peer review? That should be the challenge you seek to answer to here.
User avatar
TheVat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 7184
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby charon on February 12th, 2019, 12:10 pm 

Vat -

The request for evidence is reasonable when evidence is found to be lacking


But it's not lacking, even online. Depends what you call evidence though!

But I've done all this before in other places. Whatever has been put up has been instantly dismissed by sceptics on grounds of trickery, falsification, delusion, hallucination, dodgy editing, lying, you name it. I wouldn't say it's a pointless exercise but it certainly comes close. As you say, it's not Bavarian folk music :-)

ON THE PERSON MAKING EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS.


But I haven't made any claims. I've only said I could relate stories.

personal anecdote is not sufficient


Well, given the subject matter, what would you accept?

Simply saying, "well, I know it's real, because of my own personal experience, and you should believe me" just doesn't fly around here


I didn't say that. I certainly never asked anyone to believe me. Show me where I said that.

I said my own experience of other people led me to believe that there was very little doubt in my mind that they were almost certainly telling the truth. But I admit it would be anecdotal. What else could it be?

Are there conclusive research studies from SRI or Duke or PEAR? That have withstood peer review? That should be the challenge you seek to answer to here.


But I've already answered that, Vat. I've discussed the very serious possibility that science in that sense can't answer it. It's in my last post, quite a lot of it. And it hasn't been addressed, has it? Not a single person here has discussed that except me.

I'm NOT evading providing evidence. But the question is whether it'll be accepted as evidence. So I ask again, what would you accept outside of traditional peer-review stuff because everyday folks don't come into that area. Nor would they want to, I expect.

They can't test for something that just comes and goes by itself leaving only an anecdote behind.

Is that point understood? Can you give me a clear answer to that one, please? I can't provide the impossible.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby charon on February 12th, 2019, 12:15 pm 

Vat -

There's one other point. This is a science and philosophy forum. There's a metaphysical folder in the philosophy section.

Are those sections separate? Or are the purely scientific sections open to philosophical debate? And must the philosophical/metaphysical sections justify themselves by passing science tests?

Could you answer that one too, please? I'd be obliged.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby TheVat on February 12th, 2019, 12:51 pm 

You are making a claim, or a sort of semi-claim, that you sorta are inclined to believe people on the existence of these paranormal phenomena. That's an implied empirical claim, in either science or philosophy. You want us to at least entertain the notion of spiritism on the basis of someone's empirical report. Science began as a branch of philosophy, and standards of logical proof and correspondence between assertions and reality remain with both disciplines. When philosophy concerns itself with empirical claims, then evidence for them is relevant. You can't have it both ways - you can't say, well, these personal anecdotes make a compelling case for my belief, but let's not get into evidence here.

'm NOT evading providing evidence. But the question is whether it'll be accepted as evidence. So I ask again, what would you accept outside of traditional peer-review stuff because everyday folks don't come into that area. Nor would they want to, I expect.

They can't test for something that just comes and goes by itself leaving only an anecdote behind.



I am a professional in the area of evaluation of evidence, and I have a good idea of what makes for solid evidence. You state that science doesn't study the doings or experiences of "ordinary folks," and yet there are entire fields, like medicine, neuroscience, social science, cognitive science, which do exactly that. And from those fields most parapsychologists come from initially. And paranormal phenomena are studied in labs, some of which I cited earlier. So your notion that science is somehow separated from paranormal phenomena is completely lacking in foundation. And peer-review is essential in all research. And all philosophy, really. Stuff from "outside of traditional peer review" is usually outside because it was so poorly done, so flawed in its procedures and documentation, that it is useless. All peer review means is that smart, capable, well-trained people looked at your data and your procedures and conclusions and made sure you didn't f--- up. As Richard Feynman said, it's very easy to fool ourselves. So peer review is vital, especially where researchers may be having a strong emotional desire to demonstrate something amazing and/or of great comfort to humanity.
User avatar
TheVat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 7184
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby TheVat on February 12th, 2019, 12:58 pm 

User avatar
TheVat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 7184
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby charon on February 12th, 2019, 1:31 pm 

Vat - Thanks, good post. And I acknowledge your profession.

spiritism


Not spiritism. There's a difference between spiritism and spiritualism although I am familiar with Kardek. I'd be interested to know if you've seen 'The Spirits' Book'. As far as I know, despite him and his books being called every name under the sun, nothing was ever proved against him in any way.

Incidentally, I'm neither a Spiritist, nor a Spiritualist, nor anything else.

there are entire fields, like medicine, neuroscience, social science, cognitive science, which do exactly that


Absolutely, but that's not what we're discussing here. As far as I know.

Stuff from "outside of traditional peer review" is usually outside because it was so poorly done, so flawed in its procedures and documentation, that it is useless.


I didn't mean other scientific endeavours. I meant, again, the experiences of ordinary people. I wish I could get this point over, that there are millions and millions and millions of people of every generation who can assert categorically that 'paranormal' things exist and are real. I absolutely agree that a percentage of them will be fooling themselves, maybe lying, etc etc. But ALL of them? And the detail they provide? And the effect it has on them? Only a fool could possibly ignore it. And the more one knows about it the more impossible it is to ignore.

However, I have found this. It took me about 2 seconds flat. I haven't seen it before. I'd call it popularist and fairly superficial but here it is. Don't forget, I cannot, and will not, speak for the website. I don't necessarily agree with everything on it. And I've also not read/watched it all the way through. I already know pretty well what it's going to say because I've seen each component in other places.

The most obvious critique of it is that none of these people are dead. If they were they wouldn't be here. However, the website acknowledges that, which is maybe good enough.

http://listverse.com/2014/02/15/10-reas ... afterlife/
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby charon on February 12th, 2019, 1:36 pm 

My answer to Randi is simple. Personally, I wouldn't touch him with a 10' pole. Ever.

We are having fun, aren't we? :-)

https://theothersidepress.com/james-ran ... xposed-654
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby PaulN on February 12th, 2019, 2:25 pm 

I didn't mean other scientific endeavours. I meant, again, the experiences of ordinary people. I wish I could get this point over, that there are millions and millions and millions of people of every generation who can assert categorically that 'paranormal' things exist and are real. I absolutely agree that a percentage of them will be fooling themselves, maybe lying, etc etc. But ALL of them? And the detail they provide? And the effect it has on them? Only a fool could possibly ignore it....


Millions of people of many generations have had a visit from, or had a vision of, the Virgin Mary. And they provide details - her hair, her clothing, her voice, the exact words she used when speaking to them. And these visitations had a profound effect on them. And yet so many of us, not fools, do not credit ANY of them and generally ignore blessed virgin anecdotes. For the reasons that Vat has so patiently laid out for us.

You keep making what appears to be an Argument from Numbers. It is a logical fallacy. It takes the form, "This odd thing has happened to many people, therefore the personal report must represent an objective reality." And yet millions of people with temporal lobe lesions experience a Presence when no one is there. Millions of people have seen angels. Millions of people had conversations with coyotes who were actually spirit guides. Millions of people used to see sprites and gnomes and fairies frolicking in their gardens, back when that was a craze in Victorian Britain. Strangely enough, when the craze died out, so did the sightings of the tiny creatures. Yet, the "effect" on those people was, no doubt, profound. Seeing a vision, even if it's an hallucination or hypnogogic state image, can have a profound effect on personal beliefs.

And what's all that personal anecdote? Garbage, I'm sorry to say.

I used to think deja vu might be truly mystical experience of a former life. Then neuroscience figured out that when you have an ordinary experience but your brain accidentally does something that treats incoming perception like an already existing memory, that experience suddenly feels like it happened before. And it turns out that explanation is supported by tons of neurochemical evidence, whereas the evidence for past lives is highly suspect, fraught with error, and requires a whole whole host of unwarranted assumptions about reality (there goes Wm of Ockham again!).
PaulN
 


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby davidm on February 12th, 2019, 3:12 pm 

PaulN » February 12th, 2019, 12:25 pm wrote:And what's all that personal anecdote? Garbage, I'm sorry to say.


Image
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 547
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby charon on February 12th, 2019, 4:02 pm 

Paul -

I know about all that, every example. I've done it all before. It changes nothing. By the way, how do you know they didn't see the Virgin Mary? Where's your scientific, peer-reviewed proof?

Anybody can trot out an opinion and cite OR, you know :-)
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby charon on February 12th, 2019, 4:32 pm 

So, I've provided a website with videos because the forum rules require it. I doubt if anybody's really looked at it because of the vicious circle syndrome. However, there it is, and you'll notice that quite a few of the videos are science-based.

I'd recommend No.8 in particular, a Dr. Grayson addressing the UN. He puts forward a good case for mind/consciousness being separate from body. The comments below are quite interesting too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_qBIw7qyHU

In short, as one commentator says, there's overwhelming evidence for it. And I'll tell you why it's important. Because if it's true that mind/consciousness is separate from body then it explains paranormal phenomena. It's that simple. If there are spirits or beings somewhere else, not in our physical world, then the whole thing becomes clear - poltergeists, mediums, visitations, healings, all of it.

So if the posters here want to refute the paranormal as nonsense or garbage then you'll have to provide serious proof that there's no way that mind/consciousness and body can be separate. In fact, the forum rules require it.

Off you go then, I've done my bit :)
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby davidm on February 12th, 2019, 6:11 pm 

charon » February 12th, 2019, 2:02 pm wrote:Paul -

I know about all that, every example. I've done it all before. It changes nothing. By the way, how do you know they didn't see the Virgin Mary?


How do you know Santa Claus doesn't exist?

You don't understand the concept of the burden of proof, do you?
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 547
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby davidm on February 12th, 2019, 6:15 pm 

In short, as one commentator says, there's overwhelming evidence for it.


Oh, noez! Overwhelming evidence!

But I thought, according to you, asking for evidence is the act of a scoundrel.

Oh, wait, I understand. Asking for real evidence is the act of a scoundrel; but using anecdotes to support one's claims is just fine and dandy!

rofl
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 547
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby TheVat on February 12th, 2019, 7:55 pm 

davidm » February 12th, 2019, 3:11 pm wrote:
charon » February 12th, 2019, 2:02 pm wrote:Paul -

I know about all that, every example. I've done it all before. It changes nothing. By the way, how do you know they didn't see the Virgin Mary?


How do you know Santa Claus doesn't exist?

You don't understand the concept of the burden of proof, do you?


It's been explained here at least twice. We don't dismiss unicorns because their existence is disproven, but rather because it's an odd and improbable hypothesis about the Equus genus for which there is zero evidence. And because it has basic conceptual problems that lead us to direct our inquisitive minds elsewhere. This is why being able to say "hey you can't DISprove this" is such a meager achievement. I also can't disprove that Brazil will cease to exist tomorrow. I can't disprove the only true God is Quetzalcoatl. So what?

I noticed that link Charon provided, the first one with the doctor, a paragraph starts with...

"Since 2008, he’s collected multiple accounts of near-death experiences (or, as he calls them, “after-death” experiences), which seem to have taken place when the subject’s brain was about as active as a loaf of bread." (bolded word mine)

Basically, he has personal reports from people who experienced brain trauma and the reported event's actual time cannot be verified. Nor is complete temporary brain death demonstrated. Residual activity was quite possible. Also, the NDE vision could have been dreamt or hallucinated later, as normal oxygenation resumed. The rest of that segment consists of opinions outside of Paenia's field (he's a resuscitation specialist, not a neurologist) and then notes...

"Now, to be fair, Parnia stops short of actually endorsing any supernatural explanation."

That's because Parnia has found an interesting set of personal anecdotes and understands that the real science isn't there. Right now, it's just clickbait for the gullible.
User avatar
TheVat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 7184
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby charon on February 13th, 2019, 9:18 am 

Are you sure you're not practising scientism here? Looks that way.

The doctors have made it quite clear that at the time the patients reported what was happening in the surgery they were 'as near brain death as it's possible to be'. In other words they were deeply, profoundly unconscious.

Note: At the time. Not before or after, or when they were waking up. At the time. In other words they were in no fit state to notice anything let alone recall it in detail afterwards. Yet they do.

Not only that but they report leaving their body and report with astonishing accuracy events that happened in the surgery. People doing this and that, conversations, people coming in and out, people dropping things, and so on and on. At the time, not before or after. There's absolutely no way, as they were returning to consciousness, that they could possibly have been aware of this - yet alone seen it physically - because it was already over.

So the only deduction one can make is that they were functioning consciously when their brain was incapable of doing so.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby BadgerJelly on February 13th, 2019, 9:53 am 

charon » February 13th, 2019, 9:18 pm wrote:

So the only deduction one can make is that they were functioning consciously when their brain was incapable of doing so.


The ONLY one? I don’t think so.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5606
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby TheVat on February 13th, 2019, 10:35 am 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... of-heaven/

https://sciencebasedlife.wordpress.com/ ... after-all/

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/ar ... es/386231/

A key observation is that NDE is NEAR death, and the brain may be stressed by O2 deprivation but there is no evidence that all cortical function ceases. Which means it is possible to register a conversation, to interpret sounds of people moving around, etc. These cases are fascinating, and I'm not out to disprove exotic explanations (nor can anyone), but simply reminding that there are simpler ways to account for the tunnel, the white light, the OBE, and OR memories.

If you want to read just one of the 3 articles, the last one is a good intro to the whole topic. It includes the theoretical views of believers in a supernatural explanation and of those who are skeptical. It mentions red flags that cause scientists to question data, e.g.

Most of the interviews took place years after the fact, so memories might have been faulty. And most important, retrospective studies make it pretty much impossible to obtain reliable data on what was actually happening to the subjects’ bodies and brains while they felt their souls were elsewhere...


It mentions the famous "tennis shoe case," which I am familiar with, and presents some evidentiary problems. Enjoy.
User avatar
TheVat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 7184
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby TheVat on February 13th, 2019, 10:52 am 

https://www.salon.com/2012/04/21/near_death_explained/

Another fascinating article (a book excerpt) ,from a neuroscience professor who is more open towards the OBE-as-soul-travel conjecture. I do try to provide balance in my cites. :-)

Also mentions the tennis shoe case. There are a couple chain-of-evidence problems there - can you spot them?
User avatar
TheVat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 7184
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby charon on February 13th, 2019, 12:00 pm 

BadgerJelly » February 13th, 2019, 2:53 pm wrote:
charon » February 13th, 2019, 9:18 pm wrote:

So the only deduction one can make is that they were functioning consciously when their brain was incapable of doing so.


The ONLY one? I don’t think so.


Well, let's hear the others, then! Not guesses, they've got to fit the facts.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: I think I might know what the immortal soul is.

Postby charon on February 13th, 2019, 12:15 pm 

no evidence that all cortical function ceases


They never said it did, otherwise they'd be dead. But they said it was very, very, very limited. Certainly too limited to recall with clarity what they did. This is obvious.

Which means it is possible to register a conversation, to interpret sounds of people moving around, etc.


Not at that level. They're doctors, they know what they're talking about. Besides there are the out-of-the-body perceptions too. They're definitely more impressive.

Also mentions the tennis shoe case. There are a couple chain-of-evidence problems there - can you spot them?


I know about that but I'd rather stick to one thing at a time and not get diverted off. I mean, there are innumerable explanations as to how she knew the shoe was on the ledge but they really only apply if she was trying to be smart, get attention, and fool people, which I wouldn't consider seriously for a second. I'm all for doubt but there's stupid doubt too!
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


PreviousNext

Return to Anything Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests