Mr_Anony:
Lol, as I said he won't grasp it.

Seriously?


Do you have any shame?

Oh, wait! You wouldnt since you engage in Anonyism everytime

Logicboy03: Deepsight,


All you have done is engage in Anonyism. You are asking questions to try and get the atheists to say "I dont know" after which you will insert a "soul of the gaps"

If the brain can not do this or explain this, therefore the soul. You have tried and failed with feelings and emotions in the brian. You have tried and failed with consciousness and now you are trying to use the the mind to create a a dilemma-
-"how do we think to use the brain when we use the brain to think in the first place?

The answer to the question or non-answer doesnt prove the soul.

mke a positive argument fron the soul, please

My friend, I have not participated in this thread until this page as you know. I am not here to argur with you about the soul's existence. I simply point out to you that every single word and sentence you yourself and others have used, shows clearly and evidently that the brain is an organ being used by a being. That being is what I understand the soul to be. You have repeatedly used the words - "My brain" - - - Whose brain please? That in itself is a proprietary phrase. It indicates ownership, just as when you say "my car". This means that you recognize that you are a being that owns a brain. You also said that "we use" the brain. This indicates use. If you use something, then you do stand apart from it as it's principal. This matter is glaringly simple.

Deep Sight:

Lol. As though the brain is not also an organ in same body.

Abeg.

So, it controls all other organs. . .Controls thoughts, hormone secretion, everything. . .What exactlt does the soul do and control on its own? How can I know that I have a soul that exist independently of my brain?

Deep Sight:

My friend, I have not participated in this thread until this page as you know. I am not here to argur with you about the soul's existence. I simply point out to you that every single word and sentence you yourself and others have used, shows clearly and evidently that the brain is an organ being used by a being. That being is what I understand the soul to be. You have repeatedly used the words - "My brain" - - - Whose brain please? That in itself is a proprietary phrase. It indicates ownership, just as when you say "my car". This means that you recognize that you are a being that owns a brain. You also said that "we use" the brain. This indicates use. If you use something, then you do stand apart from it as it's principal. This matter is glaringly simple.

How can I know that I have a soul that is independent of my brain? What exactly does the soul do in my body?

mazaje:

So, it controls all other organs. . .Controls thoughts, hormone secretion, everything. . .What exactlt does the soul do and control on its own? How can I know that I have a soul that exist independently of my brain?

Look at the bold above.

What do you mean by "MY"?

What is that "self" in you that owns the brain, such that you can say " my" with respect to the brain?

Deep Sight:

It just gets funnier. You say that I can reason to bypass MY brain.

Shocking you do not see the wholesale concession in this.



So why then are you a human being. What is the being in you, if you say the mind is not a being?

Ol boy, I no get your time.

There is a dichotomy which you are trying to play into a false dilemma.

When I said that I an bypass my brain, I am differentiating between the organ of the brain and consciousness/mind(the brain working with the body as a conscious whole?) to answer the false dilemma of why we can think of using the brain when we use the brain to think in the first place.


I am colour blind. My brain will never process the colour red properly even though there is nothing wrong with my eye.

Now, I have to reason that when I see an odd colour of green/brown it is 9/10 times red. How did I do that?

This is where the dichotomy bewteen the brain as an organ and our mind/counsciousness as a product of the brian working within the body.

Logicboy03:







There is a dichotomy which you are trying to play into a false dilemma.

When I said that I an bypass my brain, I am differentiating between the organ of the brain and consciousness/mind(the brain working with the body as a conscious whole?)

Well you at least accept your mind to be different from your brain, and non-physical.

That's a start.

We will take it from there some other time.

Deep Sight:

My friend, I have not participated in this thread until this page as you know. I am not here to argur with you about the soul's existence. I simply point out to you that every single word and sentence you yourself and others have used, shows clearly and evidently that the brain is an organ being used by a being. That being is what I understand the soul to be. You have repeatedly used the words - "My brain" - - - Whose brain please? That in itself is a proprietary phrase. It indicates ownership, just as when you say "my car". This means that you recognize that you are a being that owns a brain. You also said that "we use" the brain. This indicates use. If you use something, then you do stand apart from it as it's principal. This matter is glaringly simple.

Yawn.


See the cop out? Trying to evade after I nailed your failed tactics of asking irrelevant questions to insert a soul of the gaps. You were here to join the soul believers not to inspect my grammar.


Mtchew

Deep Sight:

Well you at least accept your mind to be different from your brain, and non-physical.

That's a start.

We will take it from there some other time.

Run away when I have destroyed all your attempts to fit in a soul of the gaps.



Muskeeto et al, this is how you deal with Anonyism/Dinesh D'souza tactics

mazaje:

Only that there is NO non physical entity that is responsible for anything in the human body, your soul theory remains a myth. . .From your defination of the soul you have already defined it as NOTHING. . .Non physical thing that lives in a body?. . .You have just said the soul is nothing. . .

And how is your definition of thought - non-physical thing that comes from a brain - not equally nothing?

So why are you fixated on it?. . .

Not me but you

I gave you and example before. . .When I read the words mazaje, for example, the photons associated with the patterns of the letters hit my retina, and their energy triggers an electrical signal in the light-detecting cells there. That electrical signal propagates like a wave along the long threads called axons that are part of the connections between neurons. When the signal reaches the end of an axon, it causes the release of chemical neurotransmitters into the synapse, a chemical junction between the axon tip and target neurons. A target neuron responds with its own electrical signal, which, in turn, spreads to other neurons. Within a few hundred milliseconds, the signal has spread to billions of neurons in several dozen interconnected areas of my brain and I have perceived the words mazaje. That's a summary of how it functions, but its more complicated than that. The fact that I am then able to convert the perception of these shapes into symbols, language, and meaning is a whole other story and a good indication of the complexity of neuroscience.

The bolded is precisely what the question is about. How come the same "repeatable" experiment with the same stimulus results in multiple varied meanings? If it was purely scientific, the same process should only be able to end in the same result shouldn't it?

You can control your thoughts sometimes and you can not be able to control your thoughts sometimes, if you take some drugs you lose your ability to control your thoughts. . .

Who is the "you" that is controlling thoughts?

Self awareness is a function of the brain because you will not be self aware without a brain or if the part of your brain that is responsible for consciousness is damaged. . .

Without self awareness, there is no "you" there is only an "it".

So soul creates non physical thoughts, eh?. . .How does the soul creates thoughts? pls show me how the soul creates thoughts. . .

Your brain creates thoughts? care to tell us how a physical brain creates non-physical thought?

Thoughts are not entirely non physical because you can only think about, events, symbols, images etc. . .You can not think about non physical things. . .

This isn't much different from saying that the soul exists through a physical body

So because thoughts are non physical means soul, right?. . .You claim that there is this elusive non physical part of the body that controls the body, this is actually not true because a non physical things can not control physical things. . .

How come a physical brain according to you controls non-physical thought? why the double standard?

When we study the body every thing that controls it is physical. . .

Really in other words non-physical thoughts do not control your actions?

The soul has no role and does not exist any where only in arguments but not in reality. . .

Really?

Logicboy03:



Run away when I have destroyed all your attempts to fit in a soul of the gaps.



Muskeeto et al, this is how you deal with Anonyism/Dinesh D'souza tactics

Well if you, as usual, completely ignore the points I made about the proprietary nature of your description of your brain, and the several other simple and short points I made, I guess there is nothing more I can say, Sir logicboy, R.E.R. Do think on it though. You make the brain a self-centred independent being by itself with its own motivations. Do think on it.

Enough has been said to show you the fallacies in your line of thinking.

Logicboy03:



Seriously?


Do you have any shame?

Oh, wait! You wouldnt since you engage in Anonyism everytime

Lol, you never cease to amuse me.

Deep Sight:

Well if you, as usual, completely ignore the points I made about the proprietary nature of your description of your brain, and the several other simple and short points I made, I guess there is nothing more I can say, Sir logicboy, R.E.R. Do think on it though. You make the brain a self-centred independent being by itself with its own motivations. Do think on it.

Enough has been said to show you the fallacies in your line of thinking.

Yawn.


For once in your life, would it kill you just to admit that I'm intelligent? Arrogant and annoying at times but intelligent?

Didnt you see how I gave you a knock out punch with the "colour blind" explanation? Or how I closed your esacpe route of "soul of the gaps"?

Logicboy03:


Yawn.


For once in your life, would it kill you just to admit that I'm intelligent? Arrogant and annoying at times but intelligent?

Didnt you see how I gave you a knock out punch with the "colour blind" explanation? Or how I closed your esacpe route of "soul of the gaps"?

Oh my God! Someone is really self-deluded. Lololol. You really believe that you have displayed intelligence here?

Logicboy03:


Yawn.


For once in your life, would it kill you just to admit that I'm intelligent? Arrogant and annoying at times but intelligent?

Didnt you see how I gave you a knock out punch with the "colour blind" explanation? Or how I closed your esacpe route of "soul of the gaps"?

Unfortunately I do not regard you as intelligent. Not even remotely. You have difficulty with simple thought sequences. I would be very interested in seeing an I.Q test for you. I am certain you might be quite dissapointed with the results.

It is not possible for me to regard anyone as intelligent when that person has difficulties with simple thought sequences. And this is a difficulty you have shown a massive amount of times on this forum. I often wonder why anyone bothers with you. I guess its just collective boredom and entertainment.

To be honest, you are actually one of the dumbest lads to have graced this forum. I do not mean any offense: I speak truth to you. Take some time and go through the older posts in this forum. You will recognize how far behind you are. Even for atheists. Look for the posts of these atheists: Toneyb, Kag, Purist, and others. Then you will have a vague idea where you stand, R.E.R.

Tata!

Deep Sight:

Unfortunately I do not regard you as intelligent. Not even remotely. You have difficulty with simple thought sequences. I would be very interested in seeing an I.Q test for you. I am certain you might be quite dissapointed with the results.

It is not possible for me to regard anyone as intelligent when that person has difficulties with simple thought sequences. And this is a difficulty you have shown a massive amount of times on this forum. I often wonder why anyone bothers with you. I guess its just collective boredom and entertainment.

To be honest, you are actually one of the dumbest lads to have graced this forum. I do not mean any offense: I speak truth to you. Take some time and go through the older posts in this forum. You will recognize how far behind you are. Even for atheists. Look for the posts of these atheists: Toneyb, Kag, Purist, and others. Then you will have a vague idea where you stand, R.E.R.

Tata!

This guy cant even joke with me.


Why the hate? Did I butthurt you?


Is it Jealousy? I heard that you were one of the deep thinkers before I came along but now you are moved to the back burner.

Mr_Anony:
Oh my God! Someone is really self-deluded. Lololol. You really believe that you have displayed intelligence here?

I'll deal with you later.

Logicboy03:



This guy cant even joke with me.


Why the hate? Did I butthurt you?


Is it Jealousy? I heard that you were one of the deep thinkers before I came along but now you are moved to the back burner.

Stop thinking I hate you. I actually enjoy and admire your enthusiasm. I am confident that it will grow and grow and provoke more and deeper thoughts in you as time goes along. I certainly prefer your rebellious spirit to that of the majority who do not bother to question anything.

Everything I have told you is simply as I see it.

Logicboy03:

I'll deal with you later.

yawn, would you have grown up by then?

Deep Sight:

Stop thinking I hate you. I actually enjoy and admire your enthusiasm. I am confident that it will grow and grow and provoke more and deeper thoughts in you as time goes along. I certainly prefer your rebellious spirit to that of the majority who do not bother to question anything.

Everything I have told you is simply as I see it.

Oh, so now, you give me the compliment?

Deep Sight:

Stop thinking I hate you. I actually enjoy and admire your enthusiasm. I am confident that it will grow and grow and provoke more and deeper thoughts in you as time goes along. I certainly prefer your rebellious spirit to that of the majority who do not bother to question anything.

Everything I have told you is simply as I see it.

Dude, I told you were wasting your time the moment you started engaging him. Logicboy has a talent for reducing the average IQ of a discussion by merely joining it

Deep Sight:

My friend, I have not participated in this thread until this page as you know. I am not here to argur with you about the soul's existence. I simply point out to you that every single word and sentence you yourself and others have used, shows clearly and evidently that the brain is an organ being used by a being. That being is what I understand the soul to be. You have repeatedly used the words - "My brain" - - - Whose brain please? That in itself is a proprietary phrase. It indicates ownership, just as when you say "my car". This means that you recognize that you are a being that owns a brain. You also said that "we use" the brain. This indicates use. If you use something, then you do stand apart from it as it's principal. This matter is glaringly simple.

I don't think proprietary context do or assist in understanding the mystery of our consciousness. The brain can't be effectively separated from a living body (within human experience) without losing consciousness.

Presently, the dynamics and the complexity of the human brain has given us insights to our understanding of languages, thoughts, awakening. More like our CPU. The biochemical explanations seem stronger and more practical than the soul explanation.

Mr_Anony:
Dude, I told you were wasting your time the moment you started engaging him. Logicboy has a talent for reducing the average IQ of a discussion by merely joining it

Dont worry, I am enjoying my discussion with Deepsight too much to care for your beef with me.

Kay 17:

I don't think proprietary context do or assist in understanding the mystery of our consciousness. The brain can't be effectively separated from a living body (within human experience) without losing consciousness.

Presently, the dynamics and the complexity of the human brain has given us insights to our understanding of languages, thoughts, awakening. More like our CPU. The biochemical explanations seem stronger and more practical than the soul explanation.

And what purpose does the biological construct serve? Itself, or a being called YOU?

Kay 17:

I don't think proprietary context do or assist in understanding the mystery of our consciousness. The brain can't be effectively separated from a living body (within human experience) without losing consciousness.

Presently, the dynamics and the complexity of the human brain has given us insights to our understanding of languages, thoughts, awakening. More like our CPU. The biochemical explanations seem stronger and more practical than the soul explanation.

There is something fundamentally different between a brain and a CPU which is subjective thought. I don't think that that can be explained by looking a the chemical/physical mechanism that correlates to thought.

Logicboy03:

Oh, so now, you give me the compliment?

Yes rebellion against convention is good to the extent that convention is stale and without provoking thought. However it is tedious when the person rebelling is not able to follow any thought sequences at all. That is your unfortunate dilemma son.

Mr_Anony:
There is something fundamentally different between a brain and a CPU which is subjective thought. I don't think that that can be explained by looking a the chemical/physical mechanism that correlates to thought.

GBAM!

Deep Sight:

Yes rebellion against convention is good to the extent that convention is stale and without provoking thought. However it is tedious when the person rebelling is not able to follow any thought sequences at all. That is your unfortunate dilemma son.

Whatever.

Mr_Anony:
There is something fundamentally different between a brain and a CPU which is subjective thought. I don't think that that can be explained by looking a the chemical/physical mechanism that correlates to thought.

Let me even add that the very term "Central Processing Unit", is indicative of the fact that something is being processed for someone.

Logicboy03:

Dont worry, I am enjoying my discussion with Deepsight too much to care for your beef with me.

I can assure you that neither I nor deepsight have beef for you. We are just amazed mildly amused at your inability to reason.

Mr_Anony:
I can assure you that neither I nor deepsight have beef for you. We are just amazed at you inability to reason.

That is it o.

G'nite fellas.

Deep Sight:

That is it o.

G'nite fellas.

Good nite man. E be like say me too go pack go. How far that our other thread na?