Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Mageth · 02-10-2003, 09:22 AM

I mean look at that ass!

Do you think I would look at anything else? Virgin Mary Got Back

Radorth:

The only people who badly need to believe something here are atheists- they badly need there to be no life after death. The implications are quite unbearable to most of their worldviews.

Baloney. I'd be delighted if there was "life after death." But wishin' so don't make it so.

There are thousands of after-death experiences, and proofs of their happening.

Umm, they're called near-death experiences, because obviously the people who recount them didn't actually die, but were "clinically" dead for a period (i.e. their heart stopped and thus blood flow to the brain stopped) and then resuscitated. They could just as well be referred to as "near-life experiences."

I doubt anyone here will dispute that NDEs happen.

Carl Jung had an extensive one, particularly interesting. Atheists either don't like to talk about them, or end up mumbling about oxygen deprivation or ketamine, which even Janssen decided were to simplistic to explain all the experiences. Or they start saying "Well some of them didn't see Jesus." So what.

On the contrary, as exhibited by this thread, atheists do like to talk about NDEs, and seldom mumble when doing so.

IIRC, less than 20% of those resuscitated from clinical death recount any NDE at all. Most remember little or nothing of the experience. What would be the explanation for this if NDEs were some universal experience of the soul?

Very similar experiences to NDEs can be induced by certain drugs and even by temporal lobe epilepsy. This supports the assertion that NDEs are a neurochemical phenomenon, and not some "spiritual" phenomenon.

Also note that while accounts of NDEs often share one or more similar core experiences, there is quite a bit of variation in the descriptions of these core experiences, and the accounts are often flavored by the subject's culture/religious views, and perhaps even of their having read or heard accounts of others' NDEs (similar to the way most accounts of alien encounters describe similar aliens - because that description has become the "accepted" description of ETs!). The best explanation for this is that NDEs are a neurochemical phenomenon, and not some universal spiritual phenomenon.

BTW, do you mean Jansen, as in Dr. Karl Jansen?

We don't simply cease to exist, at least not all of us. I suppose it is possible some do, but I doubt it.

As I said earlier, the subjects that report NDEs didn't die as they lived to recount their experiences. There is absolutely no evidence that NDEs are any kind of spiritual experience, and considerable evidence that they are a neurochemical phenomenon. Thus, I find it a very weak argument that NDEs are evidence of life after death.

Marduk · 02-10-2003, 09:31 AM

I'm with you Mary. I just think that is how the Universe works, we go from 0 (off) to 1 (on) all the time. birth death birth death... till whenever. it's a closed system, no where else to go.
As Doug Adams once said; after you die you may wake up to find yourself an alien apartif.

The problem is you lose your frame of reference, as well as your memories. A billion years may go by, or a trillion, you will never know, you have no perception of time or space in 0 state. You may be born on Earth again or on another planet in another universe, in the future or the past.

I also like the one where a flower falls from the sky, turns into a hippo and says "oh no, not again!"
or something like that, haven't read Hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy in a while.

Mageth · 02-10-2003, 09:32 AM

I didn't think a "doctor" would stoop to that mindless analogy, especially one who goes around trolling for logical fallacies. But hey, when rational argument fails and faith is on the line, whaddya gonna do.

I think the point is that the fact that there are "thousands of reports" of NDEs is not necessarily evidence of their existence. I agree, but think NDEs do happen. But note that the fact that there are "thousands of reports" of NDEs in no way supports the assertion that they are evidence of life after death.

Where "rational argument" fails, IMO, is when one takes NDEs as "proof" or even strong evidence of an afterlife without carefully considering the facts, which strongly indicate that there are naturalistic explanations for NDEs. One who wishes to use NDEs to support their presuppositional view of spirits and afterlife should, in light of the naturalistic explanations, admit that NDEs are inconclusive evidence at best.

Mageth · 02-10-2003, 09:34 AM

The problem is you lose your frame of reference, as well as your memories. A billion years may go by, or a trillion, you will never know, you have no perception of time or space in 0 state. You may be born on Earth again or on another planet in another universe, in the future or the past.

The problem I have with this is that, if true, what "comes back" would not be you, in any normal sense of the word.

christ-on-a-stick · 02-10-2003, 09:45 AM

Radorth -

Quote:

The atheist on the other hand will be a living fool, especially the ones who went around noisily asserting how foolish Christians are and presumptiously calling themselves "Christ on a stick."

Not sure exactly what you mean by "living fool", unless this is some kind of weirdly indirect implication that my "life after death" will be a roasty-toasty one made even more toasty by my blasphemous choice of handles.

All in all though that sounded kinda like a redux of Pascal's Tired Wager to me.

beyelzu · 02-10-2003, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mary and Mike

Actuallyit is the opposite way around. Mike just said to me "If someone could prove that there is a god then he woud believe." He saus he can not prove or disprove there is a god, and that there is a lot of things that man just doesn't know. Next thought, it would be very difficult to sway him even with some types of "proof". Example: Bible.

Me on the other hand, No amount of anything could prove to me that there is a god, but I believe that there is somewhere we go when we die. I definitly do not allow that a god could exist. I once told someone " As much as you have faith that there is a god, I have faith that there isn't."

Mary [/B]

damn, I really dropped the ball on that one.

well the definitions of weak and strong atheism still stand. My brother is an atheist who believes kind of like you that there is something after this world. I just dont see any proof of that. I have never experienced a ghost or any othr supernatural phenomena.

beyelzu · 02-10-2003, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Radorth
No, because even if there is no LAD, there are no serious ramifications for the Christian. S/he doesn't know any different and won't care. S/he will be a dead fool I suppose. It would make little difference unless s/he lived only for "pie in the sky" which I don't. Jesus gave us a greater gift than that to enjoy here, and he told us how to have heaven on earth anyway.

The atheist on the other hand will be a living fool, especially the ones who went around noisily asserting how foolish Christians are and presumptiously calling themselves "Christ on a stick."

Rad

I dont know how you managed to miss her sarcastic point. A xian needs to believe in heaven and an afterlife thats why they are xian. Fear of hell is the other main reason.

by the way christonastick,

I think that rad is demonstrating a classic example of projection with a healthy dose of narrow mindedness and tunnel vision as well.

but thats just my opinion I could be projecting myself

Mary and Mike · 02-10-2003, 10:12 AM

__________________________________________________ _
Originally posted by christ-on-a-stick
Mary

I also forgot to ask in my first post to you, have you and your husband both been "lifelong" atheists or has one (or both) of you "deconverted" (and if so, which one or both of you)?

Thanks and I hope you are enjoying your discussions here so far.

Lauri

*Edited to add that I think you will find some interesting discussion on this topic in the Science and Skepticism forum - you may have to do a search or look through the "back" pages but I know there have been several threads on the subject.
__________________________________________________ _

We both de-converted. I was Baptist before I de-converted, was even Baptisted when I was 15...soon after that I stopped believing. I think being so young I didn't have a word for it, I didn't even know what "athiest" meant. When I hit about my early 20's I then figured out the word and have been using it ever since.

Mike was raised Baptist also. He stopped believing when he was in some kind of group home setting once and they were big on religion. He said he felt like it was just a cult, people believing in something that they couldn't prove. Kind of like AA, Like some superior being is going to help you, he said he helped himself. I believe in that too, you only help yourself.

Thanks for the tip on the other section I will look it up over there.

And I am enjoying my time here so far, wonderful people here.

Mary

Mary and Mike · 02-10-2003, 10:22 AM

__________________________________________________ __
Originally posted by marduck
I'm with you Mary. I just think that is how the Universe works, we go from 0 (off) to 1 (on) all the time. birth death birth death... till whenever. it's a closed system, no where else to go.
As Doug Adams once said; after you die you may wake up to find yourself an alien apartif.

The problem is you lose your frame of reference, as well as your memories. A billion years may go by, or a trillion, you will never know, you have no perception of time or space in 0 state. You may be born on Earth again or on another planet in another universe, in the future or the past.

I also like the one where a flower falls from the sky, turns into a hippo and says "oh no, not again!"
or something like that, haven't read Hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy in a while.
__________________________________________________ __

Wow, I haven't read that book in a long time either! Need to re read it sometime.

I wonder about the on/off thing only cause I have read the Out of Body experience thing quite a few times. Havne't ever had it happen but what if it did, how could I explain that as just on/off if my "soul/spirit/consousness can go somewhere where my body isn't?

Mary

HaysooChreesto! · 02-10-2003, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Radorth
The only people who badly need to believe something here are atheists- they badly need there to be no life after death. The implications are quite unbearable to most of their worldviews.

If there is existence after death, that doesn't mean that the whole Heaven and Hell bit is valid. No one can say for sure, but at least the atheist is honest when pushed for an answer. The only thing I can say in regards to an afterlife is "I don't and can't know if there is one". At least I don't have to make shit up or hope that the word of barbarians long dead is the truth.

Pascal's Wager gets a lot of run in these parts, but it's usefulness is very limited in that it's an Xtian-only proposition.
If there is a creator (which I don't believe there is), I can't imagine that it goes about damning souls it created for all eternity.

There is almost nothing in life that is purely black or purely white. To consider that to be the case when speaking of a supernatural existence is well, it just doesn't make any sense.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-10-2003, 09:22 AM	#21
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	I mean look at that ass! Do you think I would look at anything else? Virgin Mary Got Back Radorth: The only people who badly need to believe something here are atheists- they badly need there to be no life after death. The implications are quite unbearable to most of their worldviews. Baloney. I'd be delighted if there was "life after death." But wishin' so don't make it so. There are thousands of after-death experiences, and proofs of their happening. Umm, they're called near-death experiences, because obviously the people who recount them didn't actually die, but were "clinically" dead for a period (i.e. their heart stopped and thus blood flow to the brain stopped) and then resuscitated. They could just as well be referred to as "near-life experiences." I doubt anyone here will dispute that NDEs happen. Carl Jung had an extensive one, particularly interesting. Atheists either don't like to talk about them, or end up mumbling about oxygen deprivation or ketamine, which even Janssen decided were to simplistic to explain all the experiences. Or they start saying "Well some of them didn't see Jesus." So what. On the contrary, as exhibited by this thread, atheists do like to talk about NDEs, and seldom mumble when doing so. IIRC, less than 20% of those resuscitated from clinical death recount any NDE at all. Most remember little or nothing of the experience. What would be the explanation for this if NDEs were some universal experience of the soul? Very similar experiences to NDEs can be induced by certain drugs and even by temporal lobe epilepsy. This supports the assertion that NDEs are a neurochemical phenomenon, and not some "spiritual" phenomenon. Also note that while accounts of NDEs often share one or more similar core experiences, there is quite a bit of variation in the descriptions of these core experiences, and the accounts are often flavored by the subject's culture/religious views, and perhaps even of their having read or heard accounts of others' NDEs (similar to the way most accounts of alien encounters describe similar aliens - because that description has become the "accepted" description of ETs!). The best explanation for this is that NDEs are a neurochemical phenomenon, and not some universal spiritual phenomenon. BTW, do you mean Jansen, as in Dr. Karl Jansen? We don't simply cease to exist, at least not all of us. I suppose it is possible some do, but I doubt it. As I said earlier, the subjects that report NDEs didn't die as they lived to recount their experiences. There is absolutely no evidence that NDEs are any kind of spiritual experience, and considerable evidence that they are a neurochemical phenomenon. Thus, I find it a very weak argument that NDEs are evidence of life after death.

02-10-2003, 09:31 AM	#22
Marduk Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: the 10th planet Posts: 5,065	I'm with you Mary. I just think that is how the Universe works, we go from 0 (off) to 1 (on) all the time. birth death birth death... till whenever. it's a closed system, no where else to go. As Doug Adams once said; after you die you may wake up to find yourself an alien apartif. The problem is you lose your frame of reference, as well as your memories. A billion years may go by, or a trillion, you will never know, you have no perception of time or space in 0 state. You may be born on Earth again or on another planet in another universe, in the future or the past. I also like the one where a flower falls from the sky, turns into a hippo and says "oh no, not again!" or something like that, haven't read Hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy in a while.

02-10-2003, 09:32 AM	#23
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	I didn't think a "doctor" would stoop to that mindless analogy, especially one who goes around trolling for logical fallacies. But hey, when rational argument fails and faith is on the line, whaddya gonna do. I think the point is that the fact that there are "thousands of reports" of NDEs is not necessarily evidence of their existence. I agree, but think NDEs do happen. But note that the fact that there are "thousands of reports" of NDEs in no way supports the assertion that they are evidence of life after death. Where "rational argument" fails, IMO, is when one takes NDEs as "proof" or even strong evidence of an afterlife without carefully considering the facts, which strongly indicate that there are naturalistic explanations for NDEs. One who wishes to use NDEs to support their presuppositional view of spirits and afterlife should, in light of the naturalistic explanations, admit that NDEs are inconclusive evidence at best.

02-10-2003, 09:34 AM	#24
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	The problem is you lose your frame of reference, as well as your memories. A billion years may go by, or a trillion, you will never know, you have no perception of time or space in 0 state. You may be born on Earth again or on another planet in another universe, in the future or the past. The problem I have with this is that, if true, what "comes back" would not be you, in any normal sense of the word.

02-10-2003, 10:12 AM	#28
Mary and Mike Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: In reality Posts: 21	__________________________________________________ _ Originally posted by christ-on-a-stick Mary I also forgot to ask in my first post to you, have you and your husband both been "lifelong" atheists or has one (or both) of you "deconverted" (and if so, which one or both of you)? Thanks and I hope you are enjoying your discussions here so far. Lauri Edited to add that I think you will find some interesting discussion on this topic in the Science and Skepticism* forum - you may have to do a search or look through the "back" pages but I know there have been several threads on the subject. __________________________________________________ _ We both de-converted. I was Baptist before I de-converted, was even Baptisted when I was 15...soon after that I stopped believing. I think being so young I didn't have a word for it, I didn't even know what "athiest" meant. When I hit about my early 20's I then figured out the word and have been using it ever since. Mike was raised Baptist also. He stopped believing when he was in some kind of group home setting once and they were big on religion. He said he felt like it was just a cult, people believing in something that they couldn't prove. Kind of like AA, Like some superior being is going to help you, he said he helped himself. I believe in that too, you only help yourself. Thanks for the tip on the other section I will look it up over there. And I am enjoying my time here so far, wonderful people here. Mary

02-10-2003, 10:22 AM	#29
Mary and Mike Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: In reality Posts: 21	__________________________________________________ __ Originally posted by marduck I'm with you Mary. I just think that is how the Universe works, we go from 0 (off) to 1 (on) all the time. birth death birth death... till whenever. it's a closed system, no where else to go. As Doug Adams once said; after you die you may wake up to find yourself an alien apartif. The problem is you lose your frame of reference, as well as your memories. A billion years may go by, or a trillion, you will never know, you have no perception of time or space in 0 state. You may be born on Earth again or on another planet in another universe, in the future or the past. I also like the one where a flower falls from the sky, turns into a hippo and says "oh no, not again!" or something like that, haven't read Hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy in a while. __________________________________________________ __ Wow, I haven't read that book in a long time either! Need to re read it sometime. I wonder about the on/off thing only cause I have read the Out of Body experience thing quite a few times. Havne't ever had it happen but what if it did, how could I explain that as just on/off if my "soul/spirit/consousness can go somewhere where my body isn't? Mary

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.