₦airaland Forum

[quote author=Mr_Anony]You would have to establish that the conflicting people were christians first. God has made Himself manifest as Jesus Christ. As I said, if you follow Him, you can't go wrong.[/quote]So davidylan and Oladegbuu are not christians, abi? What goshen and frosbel? They aren't christians abi?. . .What about enigma and pastor joagbeje?. . .Pastor kuns and seyibrown etc. . .You keep asking very useless questions, from one useless question to another. . .Christians disagree all the time and all of them claim they follow jesus and yet the disagree, even here on nairaland people like frosbel claim to follow only jesus but spend the entire time berating and criticizing other christians like goshen for not following the true teachings of jesus. . .

Those that believe that women should teach and preach in the churches and those that are against it use the same bible and follow the same jesus, those that believe in hell as a permanent place of suffering and those that are against it also use the same bible, those that believe that christians are supposed to prosper and those that are against it all believe in jesus and read the same bible. . .Those that believe in trinity and those that do not, those that disagree on how salvation should or can be achieved all believe in jesus and read the same bible, no?. . .Stop asking useless questions if you have nothing to say. . .Many believe in jesus and to others they are wrong. . .It all depends on how you personally self project yourself as god and in which doctrine you were raised in. . .There is NO universally acceptable christian doctrine. . .Enough of your shenanigans. . .

debosky: Interesting - I particularly was intrigued mazaje's post on this matter.

Yes - there is an element of 'preferential' reading amongst Christians, but that is simply a reflection a difference in emphasis, not a difference in the constitution/character of God as revealed in the bible.

Back to your example - while Ola may lay emphasis the justice/punishment characteristic of God, he does not deny that God is loving, and vice versa for Jesoul.

Now back to the general theme of 'twisting' - I posit that these are largely the grains of sand (areas of differing opinion/interpretation) amid the pebbles (main elements/central tenets of the Christian faith).

Yes, human beings (including Christians) can spend an unbelievable amount of time splitting hairs or discussing/disputing minor details, but that doesn't necessarily mean the central tenets are not agreed upon or clearly stated.

All Christians believe God created the earth and the universe, they believe Jesus came to die for our sins and was resurrected, they believe God spoke through the prophets, through the priests, through Israel till the time of Jesus. They believe there will be a final reckoning, a judgement.

These central tenets (and a few others I haven't mentioned) are what establish the Christian faith.

These tenets are the core issues, not whether Mark is in the 'old' or 'new' testament, not whether Jesus 'taught'/'supported' tithing or not, not whether God is a 'trinity' or a 'unity', not whether 'priests' should have wives or not, not whether Christians should drink alcohol or not, not whether only unleavened bread should be used for the Lord's supper or not, not whether you should 'celebrate' Christmas, not whether you should cross your legs in church, pray with your head covered/uncovered or any other 'controversy' or 'twisting' you can come up with.

Human beings like to focus on 'differences', but this doesn't change the core beliefs of Christians. Atheists love to ask close ended questions to 'prove' the 'twists' and 'contradictions' in the word, but the central tenets cannot be 'twisted' - they hold true - as long as the focus remains on these, we will remain on track.

Most of what you have written is NOT true. . .Many christians do NOT agree on the basic nature of who Jesus is. Some agree that Jesus is god and god's son at the same time, others agree that is he is only the son of god. The road to salvation itself is not agreed up on by all, while some agree that all christians are saved others agree that you still have to do some work to get saved. Even the bible it self is in dispute, catholics have their own bible that contains more books than the 66 books of the pentecostal bible. . .

You talked about god creating the universe, but even christians do not agree on how and when he created it, while some take a literal reading of the bible(Young earth creationist) others claim it is an allegory(old earth creationist), some believe that adam was the first man while others believe that there was a pre adamite world. . .Some believe that hell is a permanent place of torture, while others do not agree that it is a place of eternal torture. . .

To claim that there is a central tenet is false. . .There is no acceptable universal christian doctrine. . . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]In red - you can always show yourself does not mean that if you choose not to, you lose the ability.
In green - how are you so sure?[/quote]When people keep sending mixed messages using my name, it is my DUTY to come and and stop the confusion and make things clear to them especially when it comes to something as important as their relationship with me. . .For the part in green, when was the last time your god appeared to any group of conflicting christians and solved their issues?. . .

christemmbassey: @mazaje, logicboy et al. the gospels of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John are not part of the new testament. But you guys are not Christians why worry? Oh i see, the BIBLE is so sweet, so irresistable, even the devil can not do without. Guys stop peeping through the key hole in the window, plz come in the door is wide open no gate fee. JESUS CHRIST -THE WAY THE TRUTH THE LIFE

You are funny. . .The gospels are not part of the new testament, eh?. . .Hmmmmmm. . . .Another new one. . .Christianity is evolving everyday. . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Lol, I am sure that if we pick any two of your friends at random, they will have two different opinions of who you are and two varied descriptions of the exact nature of your personality. Wouldn't it therefore also be fair to say that the only true mazaje is a SPAGed one?[/quote]You have just confirmed what I have written about christians and their god. . .In my case I can always come and speak for my self to make it clear in the case where people do not seem to understand me or my position. . .In the case of your god it is always people self projecting themselves as him. He can never show himself and defend his positions because he is the people that are self projecting themselves as him. . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Good questions you raise here but they are also raised as question 9 so I'll respond to them as we move further down.[/quote]OK. . .

So your answer here is that the brain is the man i.e. the brain has a will, a personality and an intelligence on it's own and at the core of these are chemical reactions resulting in direct response to external stimuli. Is this a fair representation of your stance? If so, let us proceed to the next question. If not, clarify.

As I aforementioned, personally I will like to believe that the mind is different from the brain but so far all the evidence I have seen suggested other wise, so I will go with the evidence. I remember the first time my friend's late dad was involved in an accident that left him brain damaged. . .He could not remember his name, could not speak, could not read or remember his wife and kids. . .Hmmmmm. . .It was so bad then. . .If he had a mind that was different from his brain, how come he lost everything after his brain was damaged. . . Mundane activities like talking became a big problem. . . .Hmmm. . .I just want to follow the evidence and so far I think it all points to the brain, a lot is yet to be discovered about the brain and how it functions, but I personally believe the brain is the mind based on all the available evidence. . .If the mind exist on its own then it should be able to do things independent of the brain. . .For now I will go with what I have stated that the man is the brain. . .

Secondly, I am very interested in that discovery channel study. Please see if you can find me a link.

Its a documentary I saw on TV(discovery science) but will look it up and drop some links if I can find. . .

The gospels not part of the new testament or new covenant?. . .That's a new one, never heard that before, any way the bible is a book that you can make what ever you want to make out of it. . .

cyrexx: Interpreting scriptures with scriptures?

LMAO

sounds like using harry potter books to interprete harry potter in order to confirm some harry potter facts



The bible is nothing but a bunch of verses that encompass almost any sort of view or prejudice you care for. And you can just harvest it for whatever supports what you alreadywant to believe, and ignore or rationalize away the rest.

This is called self projecting yourself as god(SPAG). . .It is the phenomenon through which believers, when trying to ascribe a personality and wishes to their chosen god, tend to arrive at something that is oddly similar to what they themselves think and feel. The bible contains a lot of paradoxical statements, conflicting accounts that cannot be unraveled and many contradictions. It also has commands that some christian do not wish to obey and descriptions of god that the some christian do not want to worship so the christian will now have to formulate a way to accpet the bible without rejecting it completely because of the very strong indoctrination that was imposed on him/her. . . .What each Christian is telling you in her or his own way, is that he or she is god because christians can’t reject the bible entirely.

Here is how it goes. . . .

OLADEGBUU believes god is a judging and harsh god. He searches the scriptures and finds evidence of this god and so evaluates those scriptures that back up his belief as more important doctrinally than those scriptures that do not espouse this view point.

Jesoul believes god is a caring and loving "mothering" type of god. She finds scriptures that support her supposition and considers those scriptures more important than all others in a doctrinal sense. Her view of god is supported by scripture but also by her own view of "who god should be" and "what behavior god should exhibit".

Both OLADEGBUU and Jesoul believe that their view is correct. They believe that god is the way he is because it is the type of god they have "sought out" of the scripture. In actuality they have SPAGed or self-projected as god. They have put their own desires and values onto their deity. They then have found "evidence" of this type of god in whatever holy book they think is accurate.

This is proved by looking at what type of church people choose to attend. No one goes to a church with which they disagree. Everyone goes to the type of church that they most agree with. A church where the pastor and most members SPAG in a similar way to themselves.

This is the only "true" god. The SPAGed one. It (god) exists within the imagination of the god-believer. Thus the many christians who claim others (who don't have a similar doctrine to theirs) are not true christians while other christians (who do believe similarly to them) are in fact, true christians.

Thats the fact about the bible and whatever interpretion people are giving it.[/quote]

[quote author=Mr_Anony]What does the soul make our bodies do? Everything. If you recall, I said earlier that the soul is the real person while the body is the 'container' so essentially, it is the soul who is reasoning, dreaming, thinking e.t.c through the body. It is because we have a soul that our bodies have a conscious life. Without a soul, our bodies are just mere lifeless matter.[/quote]Ok, but the problem with these claim is that it has no scientific backing and it has no evidence to back it up. I will like to think of the mind as completely different from the brain but all studies show other wise. . .All studies have shown that the brain is the man since it controls everything from voluntary to involuntary actions, and we can't do anything without it. . .If it is true that the soul controls the brain and some how leaves the body after the brain dies then it is very possible for us to detect that IMO. . .But the problem is that there are very good reasons to believe it is not true. . .When you damage certain areas of the brain faculties are lost. . .If a person has a major physical change to their brain (due to injury, surgery, disease or oxygen starvation), it will often bring about a major change to their personality. Many people who suffer accidents that cause brain injury also undergo a personality change. It used to be common practice to lobotomise (surgically remove the frontal lobes of the brain) dangerously violent people as this brought about a dramatic change in their personality - they became much more subdued and docile.

There have been several cases where a person went into hospital for an operation, something went tragically wrong, perhaps with the anaesthetic, and the person suffered massive brain-damage as a result. Healthy, thinking, reasoning person before the operation, and a vegetable afterwards. What happened to the soul? Did the material drugs damage the immaterial soul? Does a person with a brain damage suffer a damaged soul?. . .A person with a damaged brain loses to recognize faces, can't get the words out, loses his ability to remember languages and words, body metabolism changes in some cases etc. . .Why is it that when you damage on part of the brain subjectivity is lost?. . .You can damage more and everything will be lost, yet we are told to believe that if you damage everything at death all our faculties will be back and we will remember our lost friends and relatives because we have a soul. . .If we truly have a soul why does the same soul loses its ability to remember anything when the brain is damaged but the same soul is said to be able to do same after we die?. . .

I hope you do realize that by saying this, you are giving the brain a personality of it's own i.e. the brain itself is learning and choosing to do stuff and consequently making the body do stuff.

The brain is the man and the man can do nothing without it. . .

First of all I don't know how you know that infants cannot think for themselves but what is funnier is that you follow it up by saying that they can only speak to themselves (what are they saying to themselves if they cannot think?). Even funnier is that you promptly follow that up by saying that they grow up to internalize this speech (I would have thought that internalized speech is a way of speaking to oneself). My friend, you confuse me.

I saw it on the discovery science channel, they conducted some experiments and came to the conclusion that infants can't really think internally but develop the ability to do so as they grow up after their brain is able to store memory and gain knowledge. . .

Basically, you are saying that your brain is you and it has a will of it's own i.e. at the core of your person, it is all chemical reactions upon chemical reactions happening in grey matter. Are we in agreement?

The brain is the person because without your brain you will not be able to think or reason. . .I can have all my organs and systems intact and functioning perfectly but once the part of my brain that is responsible for consciousness is damaged I will be in a vegetative state. When part of it is damaged I will not be fully conscious or aware of my environment, I can lose all my memory completely, or my behavior can be altered completely depending on the extent of damage to my brain. . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]You and I both know that there is a world of difference between a concept and the symbols that represent it.

Let's proceed:

Which of the two above do you want me to expand upon?[/quote]So what does our soul make our body do?. . . Is it our soul that make us reason, think, dream, display emotion etc?

It appears that you still missed the question I was asking even after I gave a small essay to explain my question. I was asking a question of the will however you have answered a question of mechanism. My question wasn't about how these chemical reactions start to work but why they begin to work in a certain way in the first place.

Ok.. . . .

Let me use your illustration to show you what I mean...

For instance, you seem to be of the view that when you listen to rap music there is a chain of events which trigger certain responses and then based on previous responses to music, you decide whether you like it or not. The way you answered the question seems to suggest that it is the stimuli itself that determines whether you will want to listen to it again.
So just to be clear, are you saying that once you listen to a rap song, you will have no other choice than to press the replay button as long as you have a particular music history?
Or are you still in control of how you respond to the stimuli i.e. can you still choose not to replay the song even if you like it?

Basically my question is who is in control of your thoughts? is it you (i.e. your will) or are your thoughts merely a chemical response to random stimuli and therefore can happen no other way? Where does the autonomy lie?

In short: Can you choose what you want to think about and proceed to think about it?

Thought is something that develops with time based on stored memory and knowledge which have everything to do with the brain, the will to think I believe is a function of stored memory and knowledge which is all initiated in the brain. . .Infants who have no knowledge of anything or stored memory in their brains are unable to think for themselves, they can only speak to themselves. . . .As we grow and store more memory in our brains and gain more knowledge, we develop the ability to internalise this speech, and can eventually have a purely internal monologue. . . .So my answer to you question is yes, you can chose what you want to think about and go ahead to think about it. . .The thinking all involves different mechanisms in the brain. . .The will to think I believe is all initiated in the brain. . .

Those of you that are derailing the thread should pls keep off. . .Why wuna wan spoil the show na?. . .Make wuna no vex abeg. . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]I am afraid you are just pulling us back and forth and wasting our time.......we both know you haven't given us a clear answer.

In order to proceed however, I'll take it that for you somehow, physical chemical reactions cause your non-physical thoughts.

P/s: your statement that you can only think of physical things is not only irrelevant to the non-physical nature of thoughts, it is also false. I am sure you can think of abstracts e.g numbers[/quote]Numbers are represented by symbols. . . .

Let's proceed:

Question 3: How is this soul affixed to the body while you are alive?

My answer: Since we have already established that the soul is a non-physical entity, asking how it is affixed to a physical body is irrelevant. It is like asking "how is software affixed to a disk?"

There is a way that soft ware is affixed to a disk and it is well explained here

If however your question really means how the soul came to be associated with the body, then my answer is that God made us and formed our bodies to 'house' our souls. In a similar way you can create information and put it 'in' a disk.

So what does our soul make our body do?. . . Is it our soul that make us reason, think, dream, display emotion etc?

My question: If your non-physical thoughts are a result of chemical reactions, are these chemical reactions random or can you tell me exactly who controls them i.e Can you choose to think of a particular thing or are these thoughts(chemical reactions) just randomly happening?

You don't have to respond to the following, it is just added so that you can get an understanding of the sort of question I am asking:

They are not random. The brain is made up of cells called neurons. These cells have nerve endings called synapses and dendrites. Nerve endings release chemical and electrical stimuli to communicate with each other. This brain communication forms neuro-pathways in the brain and is the basis for how the brain works. Lets take the temporal lobes for example. . .When I listen to rap music for example, my brain responds through the activity of these lobes. At the top of each temporal lobe is an area responsible for receiving information from my ears. The underside of each temporal lobe plays a crucial role in forming and retrieving memories, including those associated with rap and other types of music on general. They have a working process and are not random. . .

davidylan: the above in highlights doesnt really make much sense. If neural circuits are not the sole determinants of thoughts and reasoning then how can ALL our thoughts and reasoning be a result of neural circuits? that is circular argument if i ever say one.
Its like saying sunlight is not the sole determinant of photosynthesis but ALL photosynthesis is as a result of sunlight.

What you are arguing above is what i agreed with... neurotransmitters do modulate mood but they do not formulate thought and reasoning. Animals possess the exact same neurotransmitters as man, does a goat possess the same thought pattern of a human?

Diet and nutritional state? what has that to do with anything? Is the child with kwashiokor any less able to formulate thought processes like a well-fed child?

You seem to me to have a poor grasp of your own argument.

I asked a simple question - can you create a thought by injecting a neurotransmitter to the brain of a mouse?

I think you are not completely getting what I am saying. . .I just gave an example of how the brain functions using the neural circuits, other parts of the brain like the occipital lobes also help in processing thoughts. . .For example when I look at the words and images on this page, two areas at the back of my brain are at work. These lobes, process the words and images on this page from my eyes and link that information with images stored in my memory which help in forming my thoughts. . .I was just giving him and example about how the brain processes thoughts based on the question he asked. My point to him is that all thoughts and reasoning come from the brain without which we can not even think or reason at all. . .As for diet I believe you know the simple point I was making. . .I said diet and nutritional state can also have a profound effect on the brain's chemistry and things like dreaming etc. . .

And they have succeeded in ruining the thread with meaningless talks about mysticism. . . .This thread was opened SPECIFICALLY for anony. . .What the hell is all these brouhaha all about?. . .

hisblud: its not divertion, but to start from the known - brain = thoughts = soul. Since its established that thoughts are non physical, the possible question might be "where" is it coming from... Lets wait for kwetion 3 enjoy

It has NOT been established that thoughts are non physical; since the entire process that brings about thoughts is a physical process and you can not think about immaterial things, just because I agreed with anony that thoughts are non physical does not follow that souls exist. All thoughts come from and are processed in the brain without which a person can not think. . .

Logicboy03: Why are we even talking about thoughts? This is Anony's plan to divert the question.


The fact is simple. Souls do not exist. Our consciousness depends on the brain. Dead brain, no consciousness.

A good question for soul believers is; Where is the soul of a person in a brain dead coma?

They will never answer.

greatgenius: the truth that we are all one is not only a metaphysical truth but a physical one as well... you dont have to die or go to the spiritual realm to know and undrstand that we are all connected and one.. the soul is that which connects and contains us all and everything in the universe.. we are one. there is only one soul that individuated into the many..

The scientific evidence for this postulation is what?

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Why then was it so hard for you to simply agree when I said this:



So have you now agreed that there is an aspect of you that is non-physical? Can we move on to question 3 now?[/quote]I will accept that the chemical reactions in my brain are responsible for thoughts which are non physical. . . .The entire process is a physical process because thoughts are simply memories that depend solely on physical things, you can only think about physical and material things. . . .

greatgenius: yes i believe in the soul.. And no the mind is not the soul..you are a tripartite bieng. mind/body/soul/...your soul is that which houses or contains your body. it is in, through and around your body. it is every where.. the mind is in each cell of your body and not your brains alone..

can we reason for example without our brains? well we dont reason with our brains we do with the mind..the brain is more of a transformer or receiver...

What evidence do you have to show that I am a trip-ate being?. . .Here is what one of my favorite posters here on nairaland wrote about the soul. . .It is pertinent to this discussion and will drop his words as my reply to you here. . .

All empircal evidence shows that the "person" is defined by the brain, no magical "soul" involved at all. It can be empirically shown that the brain is the source of all thought and emotions. It can be empirically shown that there is no effect of the brain that goes on after death. It can be empirically shown that every kind of knowledge and everything people do can be mapped onto the regions of the brain. Everything we do is explained by brain activity and we can do nothing without it. It can be empirically shown that the brain is nothing more than a complex biochemical machine. Sure scientist are still learning about the details of the brain, but we know all of what I said and more. Without question, scientifically we can categorically state that there is no soul or spirit in a human all these are ancient constructs of medieval men.

It cannot be shown that there is any way for a consciousness to exist outside of a brain of some kind. Immaterial things can be empirically shown to have no consciousness of any sort and cannot have any such thing. Spirits have never been detected anywhere at any time. People who tell you otherwise are selling something or they are delusional. People can fool themselves and can have hallucinations and dreams that they interpret as spiritual meetings or revelations. These can be induced in the laboratory and personally with drugs. They are effects of the physical brain and nothing more.

The idea of a soul can be traced to ancient superstitions and ignorant ideas simple nothing more nothing less. . Every scrap of evidence points to the brian as the center of all thoughts and imaginations and nothing can be demonstrated otherwise. As much as we can know anything, we know that there is no such thing as a soul. It is no more than a poetic reference to the essence of a person which is all in the brain and dies with the body.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Wow, it seems we are going to be spending a lot of time on question 2.

You said that there is no non-physical aspect of you. I am still waiting for you to tell me exactly how physical chemical reactions whose spatial properties can be measured happen to result in thoughts with no physical properties. ("it is complex" is not an answer in the same way I am sure that you won't be satisfied if I merely said "the soul is complex" )

You cannot have it both ways; it is either your thoughts can be physically measured or your thoughts cannot be physically measured in which case they won't be an aspect of you since no aspect of you is non-physical.

Please answer clearly so that we can move on to your next question[/quote]I said acknowledged that my thoughts are non physical but without my brain I can not have them since they are chemical reaction in the brain, that is a scientific fact, do you dispute that fact?. . .My thoughts are non physical and as such can not be measured. . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Ok good let us proceed. I will assume that for this thread mazaje is interested in truth more than unnecessary empty arguments.

1. My answer: Yes. However, the it is more like a soul having a body than the other way round. For the intents and purposes of this thread, I will define the soul as the non-physical essence of a man i.e. the real person is the soul while the body would be his 'container'. (note: this is a rather simplified description of what the soul is but it will do for now)[/quote]Here are my comments with regards to your soul having a body i.e the body houses the soul. . .

There is nothing like the soul that exist in the human body everything begins and ends with the brain. All thoughts and actions are controlled by the brain.

It is a common belief among theists (of many religions) that when you die, your soul exits your body and continues on its journey (to Heaven, Hell, or where-ever).
Many people also believe that the soul is the "real you" - your Id in a perfect world. This line of thinking leads people to believe that, for example, when a baby dies it's "real" self will live on, not as a baby but as an adult mind. This makes sense, otherwise all babies that die and go to heaven would still be babies there, which wouldn't be much use, really - knowing practically nothing and not being able to communicate or interact with other souls except by screaming and crying. It seems that no matter what state of development you were in at the moment of death, be it a helpless infant, a severely mentally handicapped person, or an eighty-year old with advanced Alzheimer's Disease, up in heaven you magically acquire all the mental faculties and knowledge you would have had as person in the prime of mental health.

The soul, apparently, must be somehow separate from the brain. There are a number of gaping flaws in this idea (as is often the case with religious pseudo-science). The most obvious one is this: If a person has a major physical change to their brain (due to injury, surgery, disease or oxygen starvation), it will often bring about a major change to their personality. Many people who suffer accidents that cause brain injury also undergo a personality change. It used to be common practice to lobotomise (surgically remove the frontal lobes of the brain) dangerously violent people as this brought about a dramatic change in their personality - they became much more subdued and docile.

There have been several cases where a person went into hospital for an operation, something went tragically wrong, perhaps with the anaesthetic, and the person suffered massive brain-damage as a result. Healthy, thinking, reasoning person before the operation, and a vegetable afterwards. What happened to the soul? Did the material drugs damage the immaterial soul?

Sometimes a baby is starved of oxygen during birth, and suffers irreparable brain-damage because of this. Is this evidence that God, for some reason, installs a "damaged" soul into the baby, coincidentally at the same time that the baby's brain is being starved, or is it evidence that your mental state is inextricably related to the physical state of your brain?

This begs the question: how can a change to a person's physical being have such a large effect on that person's non-physical being - their soul / personality?

Maybe the brain is just the soul's connection to the physical world? That is, the soul floats along inside our heads and use the brain the drive all the various muscles etc. that express the soul's desires and feelings. In that case, why do we have such a large brain? Mice and other small mammals get along quite well with a brain the size of a pea, so why can't humans? A mouse has a similar set of bodily organs and muscles to a human. Many dinosaurs had large bodies and tiny brains, so a big brain is not required to move big muscles. Why do we, with our average-sized body, have such a disproportionately large brain? Does a complex soul require a large brain to connect it to the physical world, or is our intelligence due to the hundreds of trillions of neural connections inside our heads?

Are memories stored in the brain or the soul? Some people partially lose their memory when their brain is injured. This implies that the brain stores memories, in which case how does your soul remember anything after brain-death? Does it take a copy of your memories and store them somewhere? If so, why can't it do this before death, giving us all perfect memories throughout our lives? What happens to those memories that are forgotten or lost? Does the soul somehow retrieve them so that you have a complete memory of every single second of your life, or does it only get those things that your conscious mind can normally remember?

If the brain is the soul's connector, why do other animals have brains at all? Do they have small, simple souls? Many religions teach that only humans have souls, and yet many animals are able to express their desires and feelings quite adequately (ask any cat-owner at feeding time). If a soulless animal can obviously express happiness or fear, is this caused purely by its brain or by some sort of mini-soul acting via the brain? If animals have some sort of soul, do they go to Heaven when they die, or is their existence simply extinguished (just as if their personality was indeed caused by the brain)?

If the brain is simply a link-point for the soul, then how can drugs affect the state of the soul? If you take some mind-altering drugs, the chemical balance in your brain will be altered, but how can chemicals have any effect on the immaterial soul floating along with the brain? How do antidepressant drugs stop a nonphysical soul from feeling depressed? Why do souls need sleep? Why does your soul cease to be aware while your brain slumbers? The answer is quite simple, and not to the liking of theists. Your personality is a direct product of that physical organ in your head, your brain. If your brain is altered, your personality (your "soul" is altered). When your brain dies, your soul dies with it.

Nothing else makes sense and, as usual, the theistic explanations only raise more problems than they solve.


Link

greatgenius: wrong the mind is not the brain. the mind exists in every cell of your body.

I believe you know what I am talking about. . .Do you believe in the soul?. . .Is the mind the soul?. . .Can we reason for example without our brains?. . .

greatgenius: ok i dont want to really get involved here but i want to state that not all thoughts originate from the brain cells alone but from every cell of the body... in fact thoughts do not originate from the brain but from the mind...the mind is energy,it is thoughts. and thoughts is an energy not an object..

The brain is an object... It is a physical, biochemical mechanism..the largest, most sophisticated, but not the only mechanism in the human body, with which the body translates, or converts, the energy which is our thought into physical impulses..it is a transformer so to speak but so is the whole body... we have little "tranformers" in every cell.. evry cell has a mind of its own..for instance biochemists have often remarked at how individual cells like blood cells, for instance
seem to have their own intelligence. the truth is they do.

thoughts seems to originate from the brain becuase it has the biggest conglomerate of cells and thus has alot of activity going on there....

False, brain science has shown that the mind does not exist separate from the brain. The brain is the mind because the brain determines thoughts, feelings, and actions. . .

davidylan: You are being too simplistic here. Of course the neural circuitry affects brain function but they are not solely responsible for thoughts and reasoning. If that was the case then what accounts for the vast difference in thought patterns? Can we merely create thoughts in the lab and inject ourselves with it?

Do chemicals in the brain modulate thought? Yes... Are they the sole determinants for thought and reasoning? No.

Sure, they are not the soul determinants of thought and reasoning. . .What am saying is that all our thoughts and reasoning are as a result of chemical reactions in our brains. . .Different neurotransmitters make us feel differently, hence the difference in thought patterns. . .The diet and nutritional state can also have a profound effect on the brain's chemistry. . .As you know what we eat (and how well it is digested and absorbed) can have a significant effect upon our brain chemistry. What we eat for dinner can influence our sleeping, our dreaming, and how we feel upon waking. The bottom line is our thoughts are chemical very complex activities that take place in our brains. . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]There is a reason I want us to be clear on this before moving on to the next question you asked me, I don't want to drag question 2 for too long. I just want us to be very clear on what you are saying.

On the one hand you say that you don't have a non-physical aspect to you, yet you talk of your brain as a property of yourself which in turn is a property of your brain's activities.
When you use the phrase "my brain", you lead me to think that there is a "you" that possesses a brain. It becomes confusing when the "you" that possesses a brain is also created by the same brain. This is a logical error because you cannot in any way be said to own/control something that is creating you. It cannot be "your brain" and "your thoughts" if at the same time the same brain creates the "you" in the first place.[/quote]I made a simple statement and the statement is that all my thoughts are reasoning are a function of the brain, without my brain I can not think or reason. Who said I am created by my brain? I simply said my thoughts and reasoning all are controlled by my brain. . .Again I ask are my thoughts my soul?. . .Is my non physical parts that is my thoughts and reasoning my my soul? Are you saying that my thoughts are soul?. . .Is just want a simple yes or a simple no. . .

Do you use your brain to think or is your brain creating both you and your thoughts (if we can still call them yours) by means of random chemical reactions. Are you thinking with your brain or is your brain 'thinking' you?
Essentially what I am trying to get at is what it means for you to think. Are you responsible for your thoughts or is it just chemical reactions upon chemical reactions i.e. in your case is it really a person thinking? is it a person causing the chemical reactions or the person itself is a result of chemical reactions and these chemical reactions in turn causes other chemical reactions?

I am responsible for my thoughts, but my thoughts are just chemical reactions in my brain and it has been empirically shown that thoughts are a mixture of chemical reactions in the brain, do you dispute that fact that thoughts are chemical reactions in the brain?. . .

Since you maintain that there is no non-physical aspect of you, then you must hold that all you really are is a bunch of chemical reactions happening in one small grey object somewhere (we won't even look at how these chemical reactions manage to maintain coherent meaning for now)

Do you dispute the fact that thoughts are chemical reactions in the brain?. . .

The little essay above was just to show you the difficulties I am having with what you are saying. As it is now, you can either say:

1. That there is a non-physical "you" which possesses a brain that you use for thinking (by saying this, you would have agreed with me as regards question 1) or
2. That you and your thoughts are merely a bunch of chemical reactions. by saying this, you will still have to answer my question 2. I'll rephrase it below:

What do you mean by that there is a non physical me?. . .What is the non physical me. . .There is no non physical me, again are my thoughts my soul?. . .My thoughts are chemical reactions that happen in the brain. . . .The chemical reactions within the brain are complex too, and very numerous. They also act within a complex and organized structure.

Now if all you are is a bunch of random chemical reactions, my question would still stand but will now be rephrased thus: What is the chemical reaction that is the thought of the word "mazaje"? Please express the thought as a chemical equation such that if the experiment is carried out in a lab, we will all result in the "mazaje" thought.

If all I am is a random? What are you saying? Again the chemical reactions within the brain are complex too, and very numerous. They also act within a complex and organised structure. Are my thoughts me are my thoughts my soul? Is that what you are saying? Whats the difference between my thoughts and my soul?. . .I am talking about my thoughts and you seem to equate my thoughts to "me". You are just begging the question. . .My thoughts are chemical reactions in my brain. . . Its not a chemical reaction that has an equation per say because it is not all chemical reactions that can be shown as an equation and you know that. . .My brain is composed of about 100 billion nerve cells (neurons) interconnected by trillions of connections, called synapses. On average, each connection transmits about one signal per second. Some specialized connections send up to 1,000 signals per second. which produces thought.
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.

Also tell us exactly how you came by your answer. Mind you, chemical reactions are a physical phenomenon and usually result in physical products - I have never seen a chemical reaction produce a non-physical thing - so you must still produce a "mazaje" thought that can be spatially measured and you must tell us the material it is made of or you tell us exactly how your physically measurable chemical reaction produced something that cannot be physically measured.

Chemical reactions result in non physical reactions as we have in the brain. . .The chemical reactions in the brain result in thoughts and reasoning. . .Thoughts are a function of neural circuitry in particular areas on the brain. Thoughts are not physical as such can not be measured, so I really do not know what you are talking about. . . .

p/s: I'll give you a lifeline here: In case you don't know exactly what the chemical equation of the thought of the word "mazaje" is, please feel free to give us the chemical equation of any other thought you know.
Or if chemistry is not your forte and you don't know any specific chemical equations, just tell us here that you don't know the specifics but you are sure that you are a bunch of chemical equations. I'll accept it as a profession of faith from you and then we can move on to question 3

What exactly do you mean by me?. . .Are my thoughts me?. . .Are my thoughts my soul?. . .Whats the difference between my thoughts and my soul. . .Pls answer. . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Good, now you've come up to speed. . . . .

The question you now have to answer as an atheist is: What is the logic behind losing your life because you insist that something is true? .... .. ... ... especially when you believe that death is the the ultimate tragedy and there is nothing to gain for insisting on it. Do you hate your life that much?[/quote]Many reasons. . .For justice to prevail. . .Nope but for the fact that you want justice to prevail and you want to contribute to the betterment of the world around you. . .It seems you don't have an idea of what disintrested goodness is. . .So the only reason you are good is because you expect reward when you die. . .Really?. . .Hmmmm. . .

Reyginus: The question he asked is completely different from your response. We know the brain is behind the moulding of thoughts and determines how everything is controlled. What he wants to know is the spatial measurement of this thoughts. You didn't answer that.

I didn't really get his question and acknowledged that. . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Just to get something clear before we move on to the next question:

You are accepting that there is an aspect of you that is non-physical however it is controlled by chemical reactions in a physical brain.

Is the above a fair representation of what you are saying?[/quote]Part of me?. . .My brain is responsible for my thoughts and without my brain I can not think or reason. . .Are my thoughts my soul?. . .Because my thoughts are the only a result of chemical reactions in the brain. . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]I think you should read down through the discussion and come up to speed.[/quote]ALL I have written are pertinent to the discussion. . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]From the reasons you gave, honesty is not of high moral value. The reasons you have given are reasons of convenience rather than principle. For instance, none of the reasons you gave will make a man insist on telling the truth even if he is going to get killed for telling it.
If a person is only being honest because it is convenient, how can such a person be trusted to always tell the truth no matter what?[/quote]But many atheist have told the truth even when it cost them their lives. . .If your assertion is true then religious people will be more truthful than atheist no?. . .NOTHING I know shows that. . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Good, now you will begin to appreciate the point he is making. . . . . . . .For most religious people, God makes it a must for them to be honest, fair, kind etc. For the atheist, there is no such authority mandating these things so he/she has neither incentive nor compulsion to adhere to them.[/quote]If this is true then theist will be more moral than atheist, the fact that theist are NOT more moral than atheist says your theory is false. . .The fear of authority(societal) and the penalty associated with crime is what makes people desist from crime. . .The benefits of fairness and honesty is what makes people people display such virtues. . .

Reyginus: Tell me this is not your answer? Please!

What's wrong with it?. . .What controls our thoughts beside our brains?. . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]2. My answer: The question doesn't follow because since the soul by definition is non-physical and is not described spatially and materially, it becomes irrelevant to ask for a specific physical location of it in the body.[/quote]There is no part of the human body that is non physical per say. . .Even our non physical thoughts are all controlled by the physical brain. . .It can be empirically shown that the physical brain controls all our non physical thoughts, without it we can not think or reason, reasoning and thoughts are all as a result of the chemical reactions that are occurring in the physical brain. . .Take the brain away and we can not think or reason even when every other part of our body remains intact. . .Unless if you are saying our souls are our thoughts. That also depends on the physical brain. . .

My question: Since you say that there is no aspect of you that cannot be defined comprehensively in terms of space, time and mass; could you please tell us the specific spatial measurements of the length, breadth and depth as well as the mass of your thought of the name "mazaje"?.....and tell us exactly how you came by those measurements so that we can recreate the same thought in our various homes if we input the same measurements.
Any additional details would be helpful such as it's velocity and movement pattern (if it moves) if it has a peculiar shape that we need to know of please tell us as well as the materials it is made of. Include detailed diagrams if necessary. Thank you.

Ok, I agree, I actually didn't get your question correctly. . .But as I have aforementioned our thoughts depend SOLELY on our brains without which we can't even think or reason. . .The material brain and its extension the spinal cord controls everything. . .