John_Mann

Joined

• started 11 topics
• posted 1,225 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by John_Mann

• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  John_Mann

  In any event, I'm baffled that a devout Catholic like you views contacting demons as BS when the Catholic church is infamously known for its legendary exorcisms.

  Exorcism is not communication.

  What's the point of God creating an immaterial soul that does the same thing as the brain? Why the duplication?

  Not necessarily duplication but enhancement. And the process is broken we don't know exactly how it meant to be. Probably it was not meant to be any duplication in the original plan.
  

  How are you able to distinguish what your brain does from what your immaterial soul does?

  The first step is to check out the animal behaviour in other species and see differences and similarities.

  Non human animals don't have immortal souls.
  
  
  

  
  
  
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  John_Mann

  Well, I guess if an AI ever does develop consciousness it would settle the debate, though I'm sure theists would still find a way to argue against it. That is if the AI doesn't wipe us all out.

  Maybe I'm wrong but I can't think of how to argue against Al's consciousness.

  This would settle the debate.

  But something much stranger would be if this AI says to have a spiritual soul too.
  
  
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  John_Mann

  This is not true. I am sorry, but I have to say that you are being dishonest.
  The Bible texts regarding spiritism (not all were included in my comments above) are very clear, unambiguous, unequivocal and explicit regarding the dangers of and penalties for engaging in spiritism.

  For instance you interpret these events like being communication with the dead. But there's an interpretation this event is about communication with demons. And a lot more theological interpretations. These particular events say nothing to me.

  BTW, where does your reason come from? Your immaterial soul or your brain?

  Both if you mean reason as intellect.

  But the ability to decide, the will, comes entirely from the soul.
• 
  19

  The Evolution of Morality - Jonathan Haidt

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  the question of how humans came to have a moral sense is one of the more interesting challenges offered by believers against unguided evolution.

  even informed christians who accept the reality of evolution feel a need to add an additional step where god imbued man with a conscience.. non-supernatural explanations of the origin of morality usually focus on simple examples of reciprocal altruism and the ability to empathise with fellow creatures.

  secular moral systems most often rest on the single foundation of the effects actions have on the well-being of conscious creatures.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  John_Mann

  Slightly off-topic but Haidt's research shows that the liberal left are losing ground because they appeal mostly to the first of those moral intuitions, the concern about care/harm.
  The right appeals to all six moral "taste buds", some of which the left don't even view as virtues.

  Interesting.

  I think the political left is very crazy.
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  John_Mann

  However you have totally failed to address the OP.

  This is very subjective, cofty.

  
  
  
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  John_Mann

  The physical and spiritual world would have to be connected by immaterial means?

  Probably. But we don't have any idea how. There's no satisfactory view about this. But Saint Aquinas talked about an intermediate mortal soul. He just not made clear if this mortal soul is physical or spiritual. This mortal soul (anima) can be the link of the brain and the immortal soul.

  Therefore, it might be possible that the scientific method could, at some point in the future, be used to study this immaterial connection between the physical and spiritual/non-physical, if such a connection exists at all.

  I know what you mean. You are talking about scientific falseability about some metaphysical entity.

  Well there's a way to test the causation of consciousness.

  When we reach the exascale computing we will have, in theory, the same capacity of the brain (this exascale is predicted to be reached between 2025 and 2040).

  Combining the exascale computing with the brain simulation in the ongoing Blue Brain Project, we can try to run a virtual brain and see if a consciousness (strong artificial intelligence capable to pass the Turing test) emerges from it.

  This would be the ultimate experiment.

  I bet a consciousness will not arise. But I'm not sure about the birth of Skynet. Lol

  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exascale_computing

  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Brain_Project

  
  
  
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  John_Mann

  Matter and energy are not the same

  Of course not!

  Physical in scientific language = material + immaterial.

  Energy is physical.

  Spiritual is immaterial too but is not physical it's metaphysical.
  
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  John_Mann

  According to the Bible it isn't.

  The Bible texts you mentioned can be interpreted by several ways and I can't use my reason to select the best interpretation. I don't need to accept things that are not clear in the Bible. These particular events were meaningful to the people directly involved (private revelation) but not necessarily meaningful to me.

  I don't have a Sola Scriptura view about the Bible.
  

  Actually I think Sola Scriptura is BS too.
  
  
• 
  19

  The Evolution of Morality - Jonathan Haidt

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  the question of how humans came to have a moral sense is one of the more interesting challenges offered by believers against unguided evolution.

  even informed christians who accept the reality of evolution feel a need to add an additional step where god imbued man with a conscience.. non-supernatural explanations of the origin of morality usually focus on simple examples of reciprocal altruism and the ability to empathise with fellow creatures.

  secular moral systems most often rest on the single foundation of the effects actions have on the well-being of conscious creatures.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  John_Mann

  The question of how humans came to have a moral sense is one of the more interesting challenges offered by believers against unguided evolution.

  I keep an open mind about this but I think evolution is unguided.
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  John_Mann

  No, I do understand the scientific method. The issue here seems to be that either we have different definitions of "physical," or you don't understand energy. I would define physical as anything which exists materially. Energy is immaterial, therefore not physical.

  You have no idea what scientific method is. You can cry a river but energy is physical.

  My God this is basic science...

  
  

  I have enjoyed our debate, I believe that debate has value in its ability to make one think and refine their own ideas. I will do my best to examine your arguments, but as things stand now I still see no way for metaphysics or philosophy to prove the existence of a soul, creator, or life after death. I believe that philosophy and metaphysics are tools for introspection, therefore they will only tell you more about who you are as a person, not about the nature of the Universe.

  I like your thinking. Just remember: philosophy is a universal tool but the scientific method is not.