• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Spirituality and the brain

Lursa said:
?? That does not answer my question. Please try again:

Who, specifically?
Click to expand...

Are you getting philosophical with me?

I'm an existentialist you know and now you hurt my feelings.

I'm just trying to make a joke about me as a professor and we being me and anyone who comes into this class and reads and takes in to this deluded philosophy.

We, like god don't exist right? So this is what you are trying to say?

We means a sentient being.
 
Exquisitor said:
Are you getting philosophical with me?

I'm an existentialist you know and now you hurt my feelings.

I'm just trying to make a joke about me as a professor and we being me and anyone who comes into this class and reads and takes in to this deluded philosophy.

We, like god don't exist right? So this is what you are trying to say?

We means a sentient being.
Click to expand...
Ah...then you are wrong.

Since I am a sentient being, well educated in science, and I know what I believe and I dont believe what you are claiming.

Your 'we' is some subset of people with religious or other philosophical beliefs and as such, "require" no actual proof to support those beliefs...so that makes it easy to claim whatever you want. You just make stuff up and build pseudo-scientific folderol around it to make it sound like it's reality.
 
Lursa said:
Ah...then you are wrong.

Since I am a sentient being, well educated in science, and I know what I believe and I dont believe what you are claiming.

Your 'we' is some subset of people with religious or other philosophical beliefs and as such, "require" no actual proof to support those beliefs...so that makes it easy to claim whatever you want. You just make stuff up and build pseudo-scientific folderol around it to make it sound like it's reality.
Click to expand...

Like what's reality?
 
Lursa said:
Ah...then you are wrong.

Since I am a sentient being, well educated in science, and I know what I believe and I dont believe what you are claiming.

Your 'we' is some subset of people with religious or other philosophical beliefs and as such, "require" no actual proof to support those beliefs...so that makes it easy to claim whatever you want. You just make stuff up and build pseudo-scientific folderol around it to make it sound like it's reality.
Click to expand...

Yes, the subset that will listen to you, that have place for god in their philosophy, I'm speaking to the class that's listening, I guess you would object in a conversation as well and have this same discussion.

See, I don't know what I believe.

Everyone needs something to believe in, so I believe I'll have another beer, Jah is my god.

I believe matter and energy are pathways of the godhead.

I believe three activities often produce manifestation.

There are sevens and fours etc.

I've got to go to work now, so later.
 
Exquisitor said:
Like what's reality?
Click to expand...

That is a philosophical question, so you are proving my point.

I did not question reality. I questioned your claim as to who the 'we' is that supposedly believes as you claim. And I seem to have proven you wrong.
 
Exquisitor said:
Yes, the subset that will listen to you, that have place for god in their philosophy, I'm speaking to the class that's listening, I guess you would object in a conversation as well and have this same discussion.

See, I don't know what I believe.

Everyone needs something to believe in, so I believe I'll have another beer, Jah is my god.

I believe matter and energy are pathways of the godhead.

I believe three activities often produce manifestation.

There are sevens and fours etc.

I've got to go to work now, so later.
Click to expand...

?? I am a practicing Christian and still see only BS and equivocation in your posts. Nothing of substance to prove anything.

I listen to God's Word all the time. He has nothing to prove and as such, has not provided proof...you are making 'proof' up. I dont know why tho. Why is it so important to you to "prove" God's existence?

I believe in God on faith and faith alone. He has nothing to prove...and science proves pretty much all that needs scientific explanation.
 
TrueScotsman said:
What facts point to intelligent design?
Click to expand...

Do you know how the identify who built a bomb. If not let me explain and it works on engineered systems as while. Anything designed by anyone as design finger prints. A design finger print is something that the designer uses over and over in all there designs. Now with this in mind let’s look at our solar system and a atom. If you look at them and don’t see the design finger print your blind. That’s just one point that shows intelligent design. Now I don’t claim to know who designed our universe. It very well may have not be the Christian god. It maybe someone we have never even heard of.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Exquisitor said:
Even though we can't prove so-called god exists, we still know he does exist and his existence can be used to prove other theories.
Click to expand...

Exactly...any "Christian" who says otherwise is not a Christian, by definition...
 
Babykat said:
Do you know how the identify who built a bomb. If not let me explain and it works on engineered systems as while. Anything designed by anyone as design finger prints. A design finger print is something that the designer uses over and over in all there designs. Now with this in mind let’s look at our solar system and a atom. If you look at them and don’t see the design finger print your blind. That’s just one point that shows intelligent design. Now I don’t claim to know who designed our universe. It very well may have not be the Christian god. It maybe someone we have never even heard of.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Self-evident design, yeah pretty sure evolution disproves that sufficiently. Organisms are not bombs or clocks, they are the product of billions of years of reproductive processes uninterrupted up to your existence.
 
TrueScotsman said:
Self-evident design, yeah pretty sure evolution disproves that sufficiently. Organisms are not bombs or clocks, they are the product of billions of years of reproductive processes uninterrupted up to your existence.
Click to expand...

I didn’t say anything about organisms. I talked about about an atom and the solar system. What does that have to do with organisms. Plus who is to say the creator didn’t use evolution as a tool. Isn’t it the goal of everyone that is working on A.I. to develop a program that adapts and evolves on its own. Why wouldn’t a being advanced enough to creator us also use this technology. But back to my first point the atom and the solar system. Explain that please.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Babykat said:
I didn’t say anything about organisms. I talked about about an atom and the solar system. What does that have to do with organisms. Plus who is to say the creator didn’t use evolution as a tool. Isn’t it the goal of everyone that is working on A.I. to develop a program that adapts and evolves on its own. Why wouldn’t a being advanced enough to creator us also use this technology. But back to my first point the atom and the solar system. Explain that please.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Solar systems/Galaxies were created by the quantum fluctuations after inflation that unevely distributed matter across the universe such that gravity then coalesced that matter into stars. As large stars began to super nova, the remnant nebula began to form into solar systems with planets.

Regarding the atom, I think this is an obvious evolution from Quantum scale level structures, the hadron made up of Quarks and Leptons and held together by Gluons.

None of these things require a designer, it just seems so to your mind because you want it to be but have no concrete evidence that such is the case.

If a naturalistic explanation is sufficient, then why posit a historically oriented question of god which is really just a legacy explanation for the same phenomenon that has been supplanted. All the progress of science is the erosion of theology.
 
TrueScotsman said:
Solar systems/Galaxies were created by the quantum fluctuations after inflation that unevely distributed matter across the universe such that gravity then coalesced that matter into stars. As large stars began to super nova, the remnant nebula began to form into solar systems with planets.

Regarding the atom, I think this is an obvious evolution from Quantum scale level structures, the hadron made up of Quarks and Leptons and held together by Gluons.

None of these things require a designer, it just seems so to your mind because you want it to be but have no concrete evidence that such is the case.

If a naturalistic explanation is sufficient, then why posit a historically oriented question of god which is really just a legacy explanation for the same phenomenon that has been supplanted. All the progress of science is the erosion of theology.
Click to expand...

That’s fine you explain how it happened. But not why they are similar. That is the question. Let me put this out there. You can’t be truly a scientist if you one aren’t open to new ideas and two if you don’t accept the fact that all you know could be wrong. Where we would be if the great minds of the past didn’t challenge what they knew. I see this kind of thinking all the time (I’m right, this are the facts) and no one willing to challenge them. It’s very small minded. I accept the fact I maybe wrong and I’m willing to look at things from any prospect I can. Open your mind to new ideas. Don’t just stick with what you believe to be right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Babykat said:
That’s fine you explain how it happened. But not why they are similar. That is the question. Let me put this out there. You can’t be truly a scientist if you one aren’t open to new ideas and two if you don’t accept the fact that all you know could be wrong. Where we would be if the great minds of the past didn’t challenge what they knew. I see this kind of thinking all the time (I’m right, this are the facts) and no one willing to challenge them. It’s very small minded. I accept the fact I maybe wrong and I’m willing to look at things from any prospect I can. Open your mind to new ideas. Don’t just stick with what you believe to be right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I'm open to evidence, there are a million and one ideas under the sun, and evidence is the only thing that makes any of them valuable. I happen to think it is small minded to assert things you could have no means of possibly knowing. What a privilege that we even have the knowledge that we have, and yet you think it is small minded to constrain our assertions by what we can demonstrate?

I used to be a devout Christian who embraced many forms at different points of theistic intervention to create/design the universe. I'm not hearing your ideas for the first time, not even close. So please, some more robust evidence is needed to assert Intelligent Design, beyond question begging claims at it being self-evident.
 
TrueScotsman said:
I'm open to evidence, there are a million and one ideas under the sun, and evidence is the only thing that makes any of them valuable. I happen to think it is small minded to assert things you could have no means of possibly knowing. What a privilege that we even have the knowledge that we have, and yet you think it is small minded to constrain our assertions by what we can demonstrate?

I used to be a devout Christian who embraced many forms at different points of theistic intervention to create/design the universe. I'm not hearing your ideas for the first time, not even close. So please, some more robust evidence is needed to assert Intelligent Design, beyond question begging claims at it being self-evident.
Click to expand...

No one can either prove or disprove a creator. I said there was evidence that pointed to intelligent design. Would you agree that Biosphere 2 in Arizona, United States was intellectually designed. What about The Hidden Markov Models by Ruslan L. Stratonovich is that intelligent. How about The Mars rovers MER-A and MER-B are they intellectually designed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Babykat said:
No one can either prove or disprove a creator. I said there was evidence that pointed to intelligent design. Would you agree that Biosphere 2 in Arizona, United States was intellectually designed. What about The Hidden Markov Models by Ruslan L. Stratonovich is that intelligent. How about The Mars rovers MER-A and MER-B are they intellectually designed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Can you prove the flying spaghetti monster does not exist, or unicorns? I find little value in such assertions.

We are not talking about humans designing things, we are talking about evidence which you claimed you had concerning Intelligent Design concerning a divine being creating the universe. So far your argument had been, "well, just look at it!"
 
TrueScotsman said:
Can you prove the flying spaghetti monster does not exist, or unicorns? I find little value in such assertions.

We are not talking about humans designing things, we are talking about evidence which you claimed you had concerning Intelligent Design concerning a divine being creating the universe. So far your argument had been, "well, just look at it!"
Click to expand...

Can you prove evolution. Is there one species that we have recorded evolving. Let’s take the Brown tree snakes that was introduced to Guam. Now evolution says that a specie would adapt to the new abundant food supply. But as of yet it has no natural predator. Evolution is still called a theory because it still hasn’t been proven.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Lursa said:
That is a philosophical question, so you are proving my point.

I did not question reality. I questioned your claim as to who the 'we' is that supposedly believes as you claim. And I seem to have proven you wrong.
Click to expand...

It's not about beliefs.

Do you believe there is a tree in the forest?

Can you prove there is a tree in the forest?

Yet we can study a tree and study different species and we know what a tree is.
 
Lursa said:
?? I am a practicing Christian and still see only BS and equivocation in your posts. Nothing of substance to prove anything.

I listen to God's Word all the time. He has nothing to prove and as such, has not provided proof...you are making 'proof' up. I dont know why tho. Why is it so important to you to "prove" God's existence?

I believe in God on faith and faith alone. He has nothing to prove...and science proves pretty much all that needs scientific explanation.
Click to expand...

Faith?

Faith is an action of God and is really unnecessary to factually understand and use the existence of God.

Although to please him you must have faith (that He's good).

Faith is a very complex function and our material faith is motivated by self justification and condemnation of others.

Tribal instincts are often tangled up in this faith which is being purified.

Each Religion has a process for this purification and we transmigrate these births to gain knowledge of the body as a whole.

I cannot know what it is like to think as a Muslim, but I can use their Scriptures to better understand my God.

Neither can I think like the Seventh Day Adventists, their philosophy is all nonsense to me, I put all those icons in their right place in my mind already and they want me to go back and think like I used to.

No, I'd go there, but I don't have a car.
 
Lursa said:
?? I am a practicing Christian and still see only BS and equivocation in your posts. Nothing of substance to prove anything.

I listen to God's Word all the time. He has nothing to prove and as such, has not provided proof...you are making 'proof' up. I dont know why tho. Why is it so important to you to "prove" God's existence?

I believe in God on faith and faith alone. He has nothing to prove...and science proves pretty much all that needs scientific explanation.
Click to expand...

I understand that you must protect your Icons and do with them as your group and cannot accept my perspective since your beliefs are based on faith rather than logic, which I am using not that it's any better or worse.

Thank you for the nice discussion.
 
Exquisitor said:
It's not about beliefs.

Do you believe there is a tree in the forest?

Can you prove there is a tree in the forest?

Yet we can study a tree and study different species and we know what a tree is.
Click to expand...

Exactly. You just made my point. I can prove there is a tree in the forest. You cannot prove there is some higher authority.

So I believe the tree exists because we can prove the tree exists.
 
Exquisitor said:
Faith?

Faith is an action of God and is really unnecessary to factually understand and use the existence of God.

Although to please him you must have faith (that He's good).

Faith is a very complex function and our material faith is motivated by self justification and condemnation of others.

Tribal instincts are often tangled up in this faith which is being purified.

Each Religion has a process for this purification and we transmigrate these births to gain knowledge of the body as a whole.

I cannot know what it is like to think as a Muslim, but I can use their Scriptures to better understand my God.

Neither can I think like the Seventh Day Adventists, their philosophy is all nonsense to me, I put all those icons in their right place in my mind already and they want me to go back and think like I used to.

No, I'd go there, but I don't have a car.
Click to expand...

Please source all you just wrote about faith. Because I call bull pucky. I have complete faith that God exists and it's nowhere near that complicated.

To me, your response was just one very wordy means to avoid answering. Please source your response regarding the entire complexity of faith and how it's unnecessary to believing in God?

You completely avoided answering my questions:

Why is it so important to you to "prove" God's existence?

(and from my other posts):

If God wanted His existence proven, why doesnt He provide the proof?

(Answer: because He expects and desires that we believe in Him based on faith)


But please...provide your own answers here.
 
Exquisitor said:
I understand that you must protect your Icons and do with them as your group and cannot accept my perspective since your beliefs are based on faith rather than logic, which I am using not that it's any better or worse.

Thank you for the nice discussion.
Click to expand...

I have no need to accept your perspective that your belief is based in logic. That is a weakness of faith that you are trying to shore up...for yourself and for others who question the existence of God. Why is it so important to you to PROVE that God exists? How does that affect your belief in God, or your practicing of Christianity in any way?

From all you write, it appears your faith is so weak that you must have proof in order to support your belief. And thus you seem to latch onto anything that could do so, even if invented from whole cloth and pseudo-science.

I believe in God on faith alone and that faith is unshakable. I swear, it's like you've never read the scriptures.
 
Lursa said:
Exactly. You just made my point. I can prove there is a tree in the forest. You cannot prove there is some higher authority.

So I believe the tree exists because we can prove the tree exists.
Click to expand...

There is no higher authority than gross matter.


Maybe you can't prove there is a tree in the forest, I don't know.

If I show you photograph of desert, there is evidence, I say, "See, no tree in forest."
 
Exquisitor said:
There is no higher authority than gross matter.


Maybe you can't prove there is a tree in the forest, I don't know.

If I show you photograph of desert, there is evidence, I say, "See, no tree in forest."
Click to expand...

I just wrote that we can prove the tree exists in the forest. (I'm guess that you'd consider the tree 'gross matter?') It's simple physical matter and biology...there is no higher authority involved.

Your picture of the desert makes no sense.
 
Exquisitor said:
Tell me, if you were the creator, would you leave evidence; so that someone like you or I could prove it?
Click to expand...

I would leave a way for only people of faith enough in me to prove I exist. The others can go to hell :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom