₦airaland Forum

tchaik: It baffles me how you Religious people use the term 'Agnostic' so wide!!

Agnosticism "is not about belief in god but about knowledge — it was coined originally to describe the position of a person who could not claim to know for sure if any gods exist or not.

Thus, it is clear that agnosticism is compatible with both theism and atheism. A person can believe in a god (theism) without claiming to know for sure if that god exists; the result is agnostic theism. On the other hand, a person can disbelieve in gods (atheism) without claiming to know for sure that no gods can or do exist; the result is agnostic atheism."


But if you are using Agnosticism here as somebody who doesn't give a horse sh!t about unna god, abeg brother, How do you argue with such a person? A real "agnostic" can never be seen arguing about god!

Good point!

tchaik: It baffles me how you Religious people use the term 'Agnostic' so wide!!

Agnosticism "is not about belief in god but about knowledge — it was coined originally to describe the position of a person who could not claim to know for sure if any gods exist or not.

Thus, it is clear that agnosticism is compatible with both theism and atheism. A person can believe in a god (theism) without claiming to know for sure if that god exists; the result is agnostic theism. On the other hand, a person can disbelieve in gods (atheism) without claiming to know for sure that no gods can or do exist; the result is agnostic atheism."


But if you are using Agnosticism here as somebody who doesn't give a horse sh!t about unna god, abeg brother, How do you argue with such a person? A real "agnostic" can never be seen arguing about god!

Good point!

I think Christians qualify as agnostic theist.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]I think this is inaccurate. Everything within spacetime is considered physical while anything transcending spacetime is non-physical. You are commiting the blunder of defining a qualifier as part of the quality it defines.

I'll show you what I mean with this question: Are Madagascar's boundaries considered Madagascar or the Indian ocean? Neither. The boundary defines the extents of both madagascar and the Indian ocean. Consider spacetime as such a boundary that defines the extents of the physical and the non-physical.[/quote]So space-time is neither physical or non physical, so what's it? It is definitely of some substance. And your analogy didn't help. Madagascar is to the extent of its borders.

Sometimes you people just miss the target by a thousand miles.

Uyi Iredia: Here goes. My favourite proof is the Cosmological Argument.

* Anything the begins to exist has a cause

* The universe begins to exist

* Ergo a necessary, non-contingent cause called God.

I presented the argument very simply and would like to see the OP's rebuttals if there are any.

Invalid conclusion.

It ought to be *Hence it has a cause* not hence the cause is God.

Deep Sight: I dont mean "damaged" as in someone has taken an axe and broken the brain. I simply mean its faculties of self-perception are malfunctioning in one way or the other.

Faculties of self perception? Would those play the role of the Soul?

Deep Sight: Now since you have asked these questions I will just give my view. I straightaway confess that in this view I am influenced by several writings which have found resonance with me, and I think, with reason.

Man is at core, a non physical being. This fact is very evident if only you will stop for a moment and consider your life and existence. Everything that makes sense to you as a being is non-physical. Your thoughts are non-physical. You have admitted as much in an old discussion with me. What exactly are thoughts? You say they are chemical reactions. If indeed they are merely chemical reactions, then they should have only a chemical result: i.e: X chemical interacts with Y chemical and you have XY chemical, period. Mere chemical reactions cannot give rise to living concepts, ideas and notions[/b] which is what your thoughts are, not to speak about living notions and ideas such as those that dominate human minds - love and hatred, family and community, ambition and achievement, career and success, government and law, economy and commerce, not to speak of higher ideas within the human mind such as spirituality and philosophy, et al.

It takes alot of blind faith, even radical fanaticism, for a human being to believe that these living ideas which govern his existence are just a bunch of chemicals randomly and purposelessly moving around with their own motivations. Surely that is unreasonable. What motivates them? For what? For why?

The only sensible conclusion is that man is indeed a being by himself, and these physical processes are tools by which he apprehends and processes physical reality.

Now you talked about how this works. I don't know if you have ever stood close to a dead body before. A dead body of someone you were close to. I have. When my father passed away in 1995 I went with my elder siblings to the morgue to see his corpse.

My brother, sometimes there are things that words and arguments cannot explain. You only need to be in that situation for one second to recognize that the piece of matter you are looking at is not the human being that you knew. I know I am waxing intuitive here, but that is the reality: it is a dead piece of matter: complete with all the parts that made it but, but the life is not there. That life, that living being, that is what the person was. That is what we refer to as the soul.

Now the very fact that the soul was there, and then at death is not there, is enough simple reason to see that something has departed from that body. This is so simple that I don't know why it has to be debated.

Now in terms of how the soul is "attached" to the body; I am not God: I do not know, and perhaps I can never know. However there are writings that suggest that the soul's very fine non-physical threads find attachment and rest at the base of the cerebellum, where the cerebellum attaches to the frontal brain. I do not know and cannot know if this is the case: but all that remains evident is that at death, there is life which departs the physical body. Also if you view a corpse you will more properly understand that it is just a tool - like a cloak, some sort of spacesuit - an intricately designed one for that matter, that a living being was dwelling in. No more no less. That living being is what is called the soul.

Now it is the impressions from that living being that are processed by and through the brain for apprehension in the physical world.

The foregoing is not intended as an argument. This is the simple and commonsensical way that I see human existence based on my walk in this life.

The mystery of the physical. Spacetime isn't matter nor energy, and neither can it seen or touched or felt. Yet its considered physical.

Deep Sight: Let us not fall into error. You do not have a soul. You are the soul. (In saying this, as we are at such an elementary stage of conditional consensus only, I will for now make no distinction between soul and spirit).

You are in fact that soul, not that you have one. This is why you exercise control over your brain. This is why you take decisions such as deciding to stand up now and take a few steps towards the door. This is a decision that you make, and which is processed through, and implemented by your brain. It is not a decision that the brain just by itself conjures for its own purposes to satisfy itself. This is the only way to sensibly regard your proprietary control of your brain. Because it shows that your brain is a tool, an organ, which enables you to apprehend and process physical reality.

As such, your question is upside down. The soul is not serving a function for the body. The body is serving functions for you - the soul. The body is enabling you to live, dwell in, apprehend and process the physical realm.

Simple.

That's less accurate and too simple view of consciousness. I think we rather have a projection of an intricate concept of self, which is an integration of our senses, thoughts, memories, emotions and ideas. "I" is the result of contemplation. The soul seems to stand independently of the vitality of "I". It doesn't explain the importance of memory or of qualia (which is our representation of sensual outputs). An individual without any memory is as well a void!

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Alas.....here we go again.


By subjective thoughts I mean how three people can come upon the same information, their brains go through the same process to interpret it and yet these three people have three different meanings of it.

Three different CPUs presented with the same information will result in three instances of the exact same outcome. Get what I mean now?[/quote]Key word: LIKE. To stress the importance

Desmond Tutu is an inspiration, in the manner he weighs issues and speaks out. Despite being an atheist, I really admire him and his honest gestures.

Strong point too, religion is like a knife. Sometimes a chest to keep our values.

I find most Christians prejudicial, they are unwilling to interact ppl outside their faith or even denomination.

[quote author=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.[/quote]I didn't get what you meant by subjective thought

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

I wouldn't presume a purpose, rather I will talk about its effect. And its YOU

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.

But a man can't boil water by placing his kettle on a box of ice!

Kay 17: Whenever I want to dispose a piece of paper, I design it in a very disorganised and rough sphere.

But if another man walks past and see this roughly rounded piece of paper he can easily conclude it is man-designed.

But why?!

Familiarity with designed object. Everyone old enough know that a roughly rounded piece of paper is man made.

Watches, cars, planes are known to be man made with a purpose oriented towards man. Likewise natural structural complexities. Man himself is one. Mountains, hurricanes, the ocean, rivers, snowflakes etc.

And I don't think intelligent design answers why there is something rather than nothing.

There is another way to see it:

Poor sex education, disrespect to reproductive rights, poor lawsm

Whenever I want to dispose a piece of paper, I design it in a very disorganised and rough sphere.

But if another man walks past and see this roughly rounded piece of paper he can easily conclude it is man-designed.

But why?!

Homosexuality is a counterpart to heterosexuality, so both have to be treated with the same lens. If you can categorise homosexuality to murder, like heterosexuality.

Mcdugull: DAVID MARK and ALL THE SUPPORTES OF THIS BILL, MAY THE ALMIGHTY CONTINUE TO BLESS AND PROTECT YOU FOR THIS WONDERFULL EFFORT YOU ARE ALL MAKING TO KEEP NIGERIA ON THE RIGTH DIRECTION! AND MAY YOU '' DAVID MARK '' be the PRESIDENT OF THIS COUNTRY ONE DAY!..........FINALLY MAY HOLY GHOST FIRE HAMMER AND FIRE THOSE ASSSSS MOTHRE4UKERS

This is the main sentiment for the bill, there is a religious agenda that is barely covered in a secular state!!

How would you feel if you were living under islamic laws?!

okeyxyz: Simple!! Sacrifice means giving up something of value with the hope of getting another of greater value.
This is a christian principle and this same rules every profit oriented effort. Whether studying for exams, being in a relationship, investing in business, etc.

No difference btw investment and sacrifice to you?? Is there a greater opportunity cost in a sacrifice?

kcclink: How on earth will a man catches anoda man and bore his ass, shiit dis is immorality. Pls someone should remind aMeRiCa and bRitain wat happened to sodom and gomora. Ah nigeria is taking Over the world power if those u.s & britain are doomed. Gej be on alert,. [color=#000099][/color]

Some people don't understand what secularism means. What does Sodom and Gomorrah got to do with a non Christian??

Alsp considering that the anti tattoo law was Mosiac law. Which says much about the Christian God's mind

[quote author=Mr_Anony]......and that is where you miss it. Christianity is not based on our "good works" but on the grace of God towards us. It is a loving relationship with Christ.[/quote]The grace of God covers atheists too, cos it requires zero efforts in terms of belief and conviction, also deeds.

If matter can be intelligent, doesn't that point therefore to an intelligent creator?

Owed to the dynamicism of matter. Matter constantly changes, interacts and changes.

And more to think about

Maybe the only true Christian died on the cross. Cos no man can the perfect reflection of perfect Christ.

Matter is intelligent, man is the example. Higher animals such as apes, octopuses, advanced life in general is intelligent.

In furtherance of my op, yes God does construct a legal spiritual structure for his creation to follow; however God is the uncommanded commander and by virtue of being an absolute monarch, he is exempted from the application of his laws. He is the lawgiver/source and the his instructions are directed at his creation.

I don't mean to be spiteful or derogatory towards the Christian Faith, however Christianity SEEMS to rest on a dilemma, the value of Jesus' sacrifice on the Cross and the Nature of God.

God being the most powerful substance in Christian worldview, is omnipotent. He is equipped with the power of all doing, of doing doing everything and anything. With such power, God isn't compelled by necessity to sacrifice Jesus.

If Jesus's sacrifice isn't necessary to us and God, if it isn't more important than animal sacrifice, then the whole message of Christianity falls apart.

Anglicians trying to reconcile the principles of love and salvation with discrimination.

@mr anony

I don't think Christianity changes that chaotic and nihilistic/sadist background you give to life. Its like the Christian God and his son are an extension of the nightmare who dish out shell moral values held up by simply pure coercion. Its the same if morality is handed down by gods or kings or village chiefs.

@uyi iredia

Start by defining morality. And explain an "apparent contradiction" in your slogans that matter isn't moral nor intelligent, yet Life experiences morality!

I have forgotten what slavery means.

Probably a bisexual.

If one's senses and reason can't understand NDE, then what's the epistemological basis??