If you reject the existence of the soul then you are an Animist? (page 14)

Seraphim23

I did before with terminal lucidity. I also am waiting for answers to my questions already posed.

Finkelstein

Could you copy and paste your findings to this page due to all the lengthy postings on this thread.

Seraphim23

This was from the second page.

Scotoma that is true and a valid point! There is no doubt that when the physical object that is the brain is affected or damaged then there are corresponding effects in what is experienced by the person whose brain it is. What might be less clear however is what is doing the experiencing of those effects? Is it a part of the brain, the whole brain or something apart from the brain? Some think the brain is more like a transceiver, in that it picks up and sends signals which would constitute consciousness as opposed to the brain creating consciousness. If it is the brain creating it though does that mean consciousness is a process itself, or as a product of such a process? How on earth can a process be something more that itself though, or if the process is creating consciousness as though it is a product, what is that product and is it physical?

When people fall asleep it is assumed that consciousness becomes unconsciousness but what does that really mean? The brain state changes for sure, but that doesn’t mean that whatever it is that experiences things is in the brain. Whatever that thing might be, it may only be experiencing the differing brain states while not being in the brain itself. Thus in a sense it may be possible for consciousness to experience unconsciousness. People do dream and experience those dreams while they are having them but have no memory of the dream after they wake. This also doesn’t mean they were not having a conscious experience while the brain was unconscious.

Even more bizarrely it has been noted by hospice staff , nurses and relatives of dying patients a phenomenon that sometimes occurs called `near death lucidity`. Cases of terminal dementia and other brain altering conditions have been seen to seemingly reverse near the end of the patient’s life. So a few hours for example, before so and so dies, they sit up and suddenly recognise and talk to their relatives and loved ones as though their dementia damaged brain were healed and memories restored, despite its destruction long ago. In such cases was it the brain or a signal to the brain that was responsible?

Perhaps the soul doesn`t have a hole in it at all!

Finkelstein

In any case terminal lucidity is still confined by physiological study and observation, not as a supporting ideology of spiritual soul observation.

Human brain malformation and the activity of such can create observable unusual activities but do those unusual activities support the appearance of

a spiritual soul ?

The answer to that question can be weighed upon how much intellectual honesty one offers.

So a few hours for example, before so and so dies, they sit up and suddenly recognize and talk to their relatives and loved ones as though their dementia damaged brain were healed and memories restored, despite its destruction long ago. In such cases was it the brain or a signal to the brain that was responsible?

Your talking like this happens quite often which is being quite intellectually dishonest.

On a very rare occasion there has been noted observations, most likely to the lower of blood pressure to the area of the brain

resulting in appending the activity to that specific area of the brain. ( not a neuropsychologist )

This doesn't make an argument that a spiritual soul is about to disembark that individual.

Seraphim23

For a start I’m not trying to make the argument that the soul leaves the body but that consciousness is non-local to the brain. Also I’m not being intellectually dishonest as I never said terminal lucidity happens all the time. However Rudolph Tanzi who is a professor of neurology at Harvard University indeed does say that cases happen all the time even with dementia patients. He is a professor and does believe in what he calls collective consciousness. I don’t know if I believe that or not, but I do know he knows more about the brain than you and I do. So make of that what you wish.

Finkelstein

You state that you have evidence that consciousness is non-local to the brain,

but the evidence you presented is illogical and irrationally weak to say the least.

One should never mix beliefs with practical evidence, particularly if your confinined

yourself within the parameters of intellectual honesty.

If you reject the existence of the soul then you are an Animist?

Share this