ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old Yesterday, 10:16 AM   #1321
Waterman
Thinker
 
Waterman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 242
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Do you guys think that you experience the same thing/process that religious people call the "soul"?
It is my position that all humans have similar experiences of self-awareness. Where we differ in interpreting how they manifest and the source.

In the materialist view the self-awareness is the result of a continuing process of biology and memory that gradually shifts with time which allows for a feeling of continuity. Trauma or drugs can radically alter this process. When the body is no longer functioning in a manner to allow this process to continue, self-awareness is either suspended (sleep or coma) or ceases (death or vegetative state). This is supported by the available evidence.

In the Big Three (Christian, Judaism and Muslim) the general view self-awareness is due to a soul which is a separate entity that occupies the body and will go to an afterlife with its memories intact to continue new existence. The soul’s station in the afterlife is based on the points accrued in life. There is no evidence to support this view point.

In Hindu they believe that something in you is reincarnated based on points accrued in life and can move up and down the karmic ladder and ultimately graduate. I don’t know if there is any memory or self identification retention posited. There is no evidence to support this view point.

I have heard of the concept of life force being eternal but indistinct in identity. When you die your energy melds with the universal ‘oneness’ and eventually will be incorporated into other beings. While this is a concept of reincarnation, there was no memory or self-identity retained. There is no evidence to support this view point.

So we do have the same sort of experience… but that does not mean that anyone can come up with a preferred theory behind it and call it equally logically consistent and supported.

I see no evidence to posit any idea other than on going process of biology and memory. The Soul, Karma and 'life energy' are believed by many but unsupported by science.
__________________
So that is how you do this...
Waterman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:48 AM   #1322
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,758
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Do you guys think that you experience the same thing/process that religious people call the "soul"?
Who cares? We all agree with have an experience of self. That's what we're discussing. These constant postings about what other people call it are irrelevant. They don't change the facts or the nature of the discussion, especially since we're discussing H.

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Do you guys think that you experience the same thing/process that reincarnationists think comes back to life?
Stop asking the same question over and over. You have your answers. Stop acting as if you're still setting up your argument. It's been five years. No one is fooled.
__________________
"Yes. But we'll hit theirs as well. We have reserves. Attack!"

Last edited by Argumemnon; Yesterday at 10:49 AM.
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:51 AM   #1323
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,758
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- I'm not sure what you're saying. My best guess is that you're saying that you're not sure to what "self" reincarnationists are referring.
You know exactly what he's saying.

Now: do you have any evidence that you are immortal? Is there any reason to believe that there are "potential" selves?

The answer to both those questions is obviously "no", since you've never answered them.
__________________
"Yes. But we'll hit theirs as well. We have reserves. Attack!"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 11:01 AM   #1324
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 28,797
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Do you guys think that you experience the same thing/process that reincarnationists think comes back to life?

Do these "reincarnationists" think that it is a thing or a process?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 11:20 AM   #1325
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 13,622
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Do these "reincarnationists" think that it is a thing or a process?
And do they consider that such a thing as they believe could arise under materialism? Or must they invoke their particular beliefs? The question is extremely important because we are still under the auspices of P(E|H), which cannot require anything not allowed in H. It's one thing to ask materialists if they "believe the same thing" as reincarnationists. It's another thing to ask reincarnationists if they believe materialism is adequate to explain their particular beliefs. Clearly not. Thus it seems reasonable to propose that neither materialists nor reincarnationists would agree that P(E|H) is being computed correctly in Jabba's model. Both would likely agree that elements not from H are required to make that model work, thus the model is invalid.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 11:47 AM   #1326
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 15,701
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Do these "reincarnationists" think that it is a thing or a process?
Both. Another flaw in the Jabbaverse. Reincarniloons of various flavours claim both. It is a separate thing or it is an ongoing process across lifetimes or something.

What is most interesting is that these groups avoid each other like the plague. I have only seen such competing baloney collide twice in my lifetime. Wow. I can disagree with anyone and that is all good, but that level of vitriol is something else. I have never seen anything like it.

That said, what is it that Jabba is proposing? So far, we have fundy buddhism, fundy christianity, hinduism, jainism, wicca, voodoo, all things paranormal, the list goes on.

Yet we have the shroud threads where Jabba endorses hard RCC.

Can anyone be sure at this point what Jabba really believes? Can Jabba be sure what he believes himself?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 12:02 PM   #1327
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 21,721
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Can anyone be sure at this point what Jabba really believes? Can Jabba be sure what he believes himself?
I doubt it. He has no definition for soul. He keeps punting to whatever reincarnationists believe, and then hoping we'll fill in the blanks in his definition for him. He can't say what he means, and he can't say what the reincarnationists mean. It's no surprise he can't prove... whatever it is.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 01:43 PM   #1328
Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
 
Hokulele's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Biggest Little City in the World
Posts: 29,430
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
In case your question was not rhetorical, it's obvious that Jabba's argument needs to maintain the unwarranted conflation between self-awareness as the proper result of a process in materialism, and self-awareness as the soul in his model. An entity and a property are in no way the same thing. But absent his ability to prove it, he must keep up this linguistic abomination in order to press home his attack and ignore the extremely important distinction that he must know by now is a fatal error in his proof.

Well, yes, I agree in that I believe this is exactly what he is trying to accomplish. I mostly wanted to see if he is aware that that is what he is doing, and that some of us aren't fooled in the slightest. By highlighting that particular bit of dishonestly, whether he is deliberately promoting it or not, I was hoping to focus on the core issue with his belief, and how he is attempting to support it.

Not that he is likely to ever acknowledge this...

Maybe instead of posting leading questions, hoping they further the discussion, I should type out a full exposition of my point for the "neutral audience" so Jabba has yet another excuse for not addressing the flaws in his assertions.

__________________
"Oh god...What have you done, zooterkin? WHAT HAVE YOU DONE?!?!?!" - Cleon
Hokulele is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 02:02 PM   #1329
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,838
Originally Posted by Hokulele View Post
Well, yes, I agree in that I believe this is exactly what he is trying to accomplish. I mostly wanted to see if he is aware that that is what he is doing, and that some of us aren't fooled in the slightest. By highlighting that particular bit of dishonestly, whether he is deliberately promoting it or not, I was hoping to focus on the core issue with his belief, and how he is attempting to support it.

Not that he is likely to ever acknowledge this...

Maybe instead of posting leading questions, hoping they further the discussion, I should type out a full exposition of my point for the "neutral audience" so Jabba has yet another excuse for not addressing the flaws in his assertions.

Except that his neutral audience doesn't exist, just like his Shroud neutral audience didn't exist. He plans to build such an audience as soon as he can, but his progress the last 5+ years is zero.

Jabba prove me wrong. You convinced no one in your shroud thread, and you have convinced no one in this thread. It's not looking too good for you.
__________________
Credibility is not a boomerang. If you throw it away, it's not coming back.
John Jones is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 02:43 PM   #1330
Jabba
Illuminator
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,744
Originally Posted by godless dave View Post
I don't think all people who believe in reincarnation believe in the same kind of self. I'm pretty sure Buddhists believe the self is an illusion.
I am confident we are all experiencing the self in pretty much the same way, although the nature of subjective experience means there's no way to actually know, just as nobody can be sure that everyone perceives colors the same way.
I think what I'm saying is pretty clear. But since the way The Sparrow said it is even more clear, I will just quote The Sparrow:
Dave,
- So far, I feel sure that we (including Buddhists) are all talking about the same experience -- we just disagree about its nature. I think that Buddhists think that that experience is a delusion.
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Et tamen salsus est ratio plerumque recta ad unum." Jabba's Razor
Jabba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 02:49 PM   #1331
Jabba
Illuminator
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,744
Originally Posted by Waterman View Post
It is my position that all humans have similar experiences of self-awareness. Where we differ in interpreting how they manifest and the source.

In the materialist view the self-awareness is the result of a continuing process of biology and memory that gradually shifts with time which allows for a feeling of continuity. Trauma or drugs can radically alter this process. When the body is no longer functioning in a manner to allow this process to continue, self-awareness is either suspended (sleep or coma) or ceases (death or vegetative state). This is supported by the available evidence.

In the Big Three (Christian, Judaism and Muslim) the general view self-awareness is due to a soul which is a separate entity that occupies the body and will go to an afterlife with its memories intact to continue new existence. The soul’s station in the afterlife is based on the points accrued in life. There is no evidence to support this view point.

In Hindu they believe that something in you is reincarnated based on points accrued in life and can move up and down the karmic ladder and ultimately graduate. I don’t know if there is any memory or self identification retention posited. There is no evidence to support this view point.

I have heard of the concept of life force being eternal but indistinct in identity. When you die your energy melds with the universal ‘oneness’ and eventually will be incorporated into other beings. While this is a concept of reincarnation, there was no memory or self-identity retained. There is no evidence to support this view point.

So we do have the same sort of experience… but that does not mean that anyone can come up with a preferred theory behind it and call it equally logically consistent and supported.

I see no evidence to posit any idea other than on going process of biology and memory. The Soul, Karma and 'life energy' are believed by many but unsupported by science.
Waterman,
- I agree with everything you said except for your evaluation of the evidence -- there is evidence for the religious concepts, it's just quite questionable.
- Gotta go to dinner.
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Et tamen salsus est ratio plerumque recta ad unum." Jabba's Razor
Jabba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 02:55 PM   #1332
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Deputy Admin
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 38,104
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Waterman,
- I agree with everything you said except for your evaluation of the evidence -- there is evidence for the religious concepts, it's just quite questionable.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
zooterkin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 03:25 PM   #1333
The Sparrow
Muse
 
The Sparrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Central Canada
Posts: 998
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
... I think that Buddhists think that that experience is a delusion.
Wrong again.
The Sparrow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 03:27 PM   #1334
The Sparrow
Muse
 
The Sparrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Central Canada
Posts: 998
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Waterman,
.... there is evidence for the religious concepts, it's just quite questionable.
....
Then by definition it is not evidence.
The Sparrow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 03:40 PM   #1335
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Prosperity, AZ
Posts: 27,759
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Waterman,
- I agree with everything you said except for your evaluation of the evidence -- there is evidence for the religious concepts, it's just quite questionable.
- Gotta go to dinner.
Evidence for all religious concepts? Or are you picking just the ones you favor?
RoboTimbo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 04:02 PM   #1336
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,758
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Waterman,
- I agree with everything you said except for your evaluation of the evidence -- there is evidence for the religious concepts, it's just quite questionable.
Given your inability to present said evidence, that's now a lie.
__________________
"Yes. But we'll hit theirs as well. We have reserves. Attack!"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 04:15 PM   #1337
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,838
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- So far, I feel sure that we (including Buddhists) are all talking about the same experience -- we just disagree about its nature. I think that Buddhists think that that experience is a delusion.
Who is "we", kemosabe?
__________________
Credibility is not a boomerang. If you throw it away, it's not coming back.
John Jones is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 04:39 PM   #1338
Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
 
Hokulele's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Biggest Little City in the World
Posts: 29,430
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
I think that Buddhists think that that experience is a delusion.

How many Buddhists have you spoken to on the matter, or how much of the Buddhist canon have you read?
__________________
"Oh god...What have you done, zooterkin? WHAT HAVE YOU DONE?!?!?!" - Cleon
Hokulele is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:02 PM   #1339
JoeBentley
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeBentley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 7,265
Jabba at this point you are functionally having this "debate" in your head.

I ask again why we are even necessary for your "Patented debate."
__________________
Hemingway once wrote that "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part.
JoeBentley is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 06:00 PM   #1340
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 13,622
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
So far, I feel sure that we (including Buddhists) are all talking about the same experience
Third time in two days trying to equivocate your soul's passage into E via these unilaterally foisted agreements.

Quote:
we just disagree about its nature.
No, we disagree about its cause. You think it's caused by the presence of an immortal soul, and you've claimed you could prove mathematically that this is the case. You obviously can't, but you won't let go of that belief and given your critics their due for suffering you for years.

Quote:
I think that Buddhists think that that experience is a delusion.
It's either an experience or a delusion. It can't really be both. But yes, Buddhism would be one of those concepts in ~H that your model doesn't account for. Buddhists don't believe in a soul or in any thing that reincarnates. But because they're not materialist, they aren't H.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 06:17 PM   #1341
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 13,622
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
-- there is evidence for the religious concepts, it's just quite questionable.
Then, as we have said, it's not evidence. Number 4 in the list of individually fatal errors in your argument is that you don't understand what evidence is. We have had three full threads previously in which you attempted to shove your concept of evidence down people's throats, and have thereby demonstrated that you simply don't have any clue how to make an evidentiary case.

We start with your Shroud thread, in which you attempted to enter into evidence speculation and gossip. When your critics rightly rejected that, you threatened to stall the thread until your critics changed their minds. Because of the inherent flaw in your reasoning, you had to try to invent a new concept of "supportive" which served only to unsuccessfully hide your tactic of begging the question.

This led to your circumstantial evidence thread, which was your first attempt to sever the question of evidence from the way in which you were trying to use it. It ended in your dismal failure to grasp the concept of consilience of evidence, and to elevate your argument (once again) above begging the question. It featured such entertaining howlers as your inability to formulate an argument -- in your paradigm -- that could distinguish between "cat" and "not-dog."

Then there was your second attempt at severability, your anecdotal evidence thread. Despite your desperate efforts to equivocate between the different ways people think about anecdotes, once people saw what you were trying to do they completely disagreed with you and you abandoned the thread.

In line with that last failed attempt to discuss evidence intelligently, you have posted anecdotal attributions of near-death experiences and reincarnation. As you are well aware, none of that rises to the level of evidence. They are stories told among the faithful to keep the faith. Recently you attempted to argue that there was scientifically tenable evidence for reincarnation. But when your critics thoroughly analyzed that evidence, you were unwilling to even participate in the discussion. It is clear you either had not read the evidence or had no answer for your critics. Your "evidence" was therefore properly refuted.

When you dispute the lack of evidence for religion, you are simply lying. There's no other way to say it.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 06:38 PM   #1342
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,758
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
It's either an experience or a delusion. It can't really be both.
Well yes, it can. Delusions are experiences, too.
__________________
"Yes. But we'll hit theirs as well. We have reserves. Attack!"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:08 PM   #1343
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 13,622
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Well yes, it can. Delusions are experiences, too.
Only if it has four legs.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:08 PM   #1344
sackett
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Detroit
Posts: 4,918
Buddhism? Stale stuff. Jabba, try Taoism.

"The self that can be called the self is not the true self."
__________________
Fill the seats of justice with good men; not so absolute in goodness as to forget what human frailty is. -- Thomas Jefferson

What region of the earth is not filled with our calamities? -- Virgil
sackett is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:36 PM   #1345
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 13,622
Originally Posted by sackett View Post
"The self that can be called the self is not the true self."
Right, it's a "potential self."
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:15 AM   #1346
sackett
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Detroit
Posts: 4,918
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Right, it's a "potential self."
Thank you for not helping one bit.
__________________
Fill the seats of justice with good men; not so absolute in goodness as to forget what human frailty is. -- Thomas Jefferson

What region of the earth is not filled with our calamities? -- Virgil
sackett is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:34 AM   #1347
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 21,721
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- So far, I feel sure that we (including Buddhists) are all talking about the same experience -- we just disagree about its nature.
Time after time, it's been shown that you are talking about the experience and the nature together, trying to traduce agreement on experience into agreement on nature. It's the begged question at the heart of your claims about H.

Plus, given your track record, it's likely that you have no clue what Buddhists are actually talking about.

Plus, what Buddhists are talking about is irrelevant to this discussion. All that matters is what you're talking about. Which you can't explain, and you can't define. You appeal to the Buddhists, or the reincarnationists, or anyone else, and hope we'll supply our understanding of *their* definition, so that you are saved from having to actually define your own idea yourself.

Last edited by theprestige; Today at 09:40 AM.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 10:13 AM   #1348
Toontown
Philosopher
 
Toontown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,883
Originally Posted by sackett View Post
Buddhism? Stale stuff. Jabba, try Taoism.

"The self that can be called the self is not the true self."
Actually, what they say is "The Tao that can be described is not the true Tao."

Maybe Jabba has found the true Tao. And can't describe it.
__________________
"I did not say that!" - Donald Trump
Toontown is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 10:38 AM   #1349
Jabba
Illuminator
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,744
Originally Posted by Toontown View Post
Actually, what they say is "The Tao that can be described is not the true Tao."

Maybe Jabba has found the true Tao. And can't describe it.
Toon,
- I don't know if you were being serious or not -- but, that is at least sort of where I think I'm at.
- I perceive the self as something that the vast majority of us take totally for granted when it's really the very last 'thing' we should take for granted. I think that scientifically speaking it's a total miracle. So far, I think it simply defies science.
- I had run into Taoism back in college and sort of fell in love, but hadn't consulted it since, and couldn't remember why I thought so highly of it back then. Thanks for reminding me.
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Et tamen salsus est ratio plerumque recta ad unum." Jabba's Razor
Jabba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 10:58 AM   #1350
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 13,622
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
I perceive the self as something that the vast majority of us take totally for granted when it's really the very last 'thing' we should take for granted.
Asked and answered. People are not somehow unenlightened for not thinking about self-awareness the way you do. Further, your personal emotional response to being self-aware is not evidence that you have a soul. It is not evidence that self-awareness is not a property of the organism under materialism. Do not substitute awe and wonderment for evidence, please.

Quote:
I think that scientifically speaking it's a total miracle.
No. Science doesn't allow for miracles. When you say "scientifically speaking," you never know what you're talking about. You are not scientifically literate. So as a courtesy to your critics, some of whom are actual professional scientists, don't claim to speak for science. You're being very rude about this; please stop it.

Quote:
So far, I think it simply defies science.
You tried this nonsense before. This is what you say as a lame excuse for why you have no scientifically tenable evidence for anything you claim. You just say that "whatever" it is you believe can't be seen by science, and therefore your beliefs can't be refuted by science. If it defies science then it stands to reason it should defy mathematics too. Where does that leave your proof? You keep trying to have your cake and eat it too.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 11:38 AM   #1351
The Sparrow
Muse
 
The Sparrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Central Canada
Posts: 998
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Toon,
- I don't know if you were being serious or not -- but, that is at least sort of where I think I'm at.
Ah, dodge # 678. Language is inadequate to describe the soul (which isn't a soul but is) that you are talking about.


Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I perceive the self as something that the vast majority of us take totally for granted when it's really the very last 'thing' we should take for granted. I think that scientifically speaking it's a total miracle. So far, I think it simply defies science.
ah, dodge #213, the soul is special and magic and science can't explain it, ergo science is wrong about the soul, ergo presto immortal.

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I had run into Taoism back in college and sort of fell in love, but hadn't consulted it since, and couldn't remember why I thought so highly of it back then. Thanks for reminding me.
ah dodge #412, "Hey you all are like me, we are all just learning stuff together in this thread and we are all buddies who are having our ideas challenged, and we're all learning new things together.
The Sparrow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 11:46 AM   #1352
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Prosperity, AZ
Posts: 27,759
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I perceive the self as something that the vast majority of us take totally for granted when it's really the very last 'thing' we should take for granted.
In H, it isn't a 'thing' so you can't refer to the process that way when trying to disprove H.

If you do, you are telling fibs.
RoboTimbo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 11:54 AM   #1353
godless dave
Great Dalmuti
 
godless dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,945
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Do you guys think that you experience the same thing/process that religious people call the "soul"?
Several people have answered this question. Are you going to respond to any of them?
__________________
"If it's real, then it gets more interesting the closer you examine it. If it's not real, just the opposite is true." - aggle-rithm
godless dave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:02 PM   #1354
Loss Leader
Would Be Ringing (if a bell)
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 23,067
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
I perceive the self as something that the vast majority of us take totally for granted when it's really the very last 'thing' we should take for granted.

Then define it.
__________________
I have the honor to be
Your Obdt. St

L. Leader
Loss Leader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:44 PM   #1355
Jabba
Illuminator
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,744
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
Then define it.
LL,
- I've tried multiple times. That's why I tried to denote self as that which reincarnationists think comes back to life, or that which would be looking out two sets of eyes if it were actually duplicated.
- How about the barer of consciousness? The 'thing' that recognizes or experiences existence. Whatever it is that is aware.
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Et tamen salsus est ratio plerumque recta ad unum." Jabba's Razor
Jabba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:59 PM   #1356
The Sparrow
Muse
 
The Sparrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Central Canada
Posts: 998
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
....
- How about the barer of consciousness? The 'thing' that recognizes or experiences existence. Whatever it is that is aware.
Hey, sounds like the description I gave a few posts back and that you either ignored or plagiarized.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...postcount=1190


Anyway, what of it?

Why wouldn't a perfect copy of a person produce a second distinct observer.
The Sparrow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 01:00 PM   #1357
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Prosperity, AZ
Posts: 27,759
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- How about the barer of consciousness? The 'thing' that recognizes or experiences existence. Whatever it is that is aware.
Oh, you mean the brain. I'll grant that the brain exists.
RoboTimbo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 01:02 PM   #1358
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator
 
jsfisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 20,644
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
LL,
- I've tried multiple times.
You could just say 'soul' then you would be done.

Be that as it may, how would that get you any closer to an estimate for P(E|H) where E is your sense of self and H is the materialistic hypothesis?
__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group.

"He's the greatest mod that never was!" -- Monketey Ghost
jsfisher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 01:05 PM   #1359
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 9,193
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
LL,
- I've tried multiple times. That's why I tried to denote self as that which reincarnationists think comes back to life, or that which would be looking out two sets of eyes if it were actually duplicated.
- How about the barer of consciousness? The 'thing' that recognizes or experiences existence. Whatever it is that is aware.
We call it consciousness and believe it's an ever changing process generated by the brain, you call it a soul and believe it's an unchanging entity that can be separated from the brain.

Now what?

When are you going to prove it's immortal?
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 01:06 PM   #1360
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 13,622
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
I've tried multiple times.
No, you haven't. You've admitted several times that you can't for lack of language skills, and even a few times expressed doubt that it can be done at all by anyone. If you can't even define what you're trying to prove exists, you lose right away.

Quote:
That's why I tried to denote self as that which reincarnationists think comes back to life...
That just defers the problem to defining "reincarnationists," which you similarly cannot do. Even now you're struggling with Buddhism, which believes in rebirth but not in a soul. After five years you still cannot get past the preliminaries that every successful proof must start with, so it's time to concede. You've wasted enough of your critics' time.

Further, it's highly disingenuous to define "the self" as something which is necessarily soul-like, such that you can just define your way to success. That's as beggy as a question can get. The observation, E, is that we are self-aware. The observation is not that we have a soul.

Quote:
...or that which would be looking out two sets of eyes if it were actually duplicated.
This "looking out of two sets of eyes" phrase you keep falling back to is essentially meaningless. You're trying to define a soul in terms of what you think would happen in some hypothetical situation. For that reason it's twaddle, and we've asked you to stop using it in favor of more precise language. But it's clear at this point you have no more precise language. You literally don't know what you're trying to prove exists.

Quote:
How about the barer of consciousness? The 'thing' that recognizes or experiences existence. Whatever it is that is aware.
Under materialism that's clearly the brain. Do you agree that's what materialism places in this role?

Last edited by JayUtah; Today at 01:28 PM.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:38 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.