Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Biff the unclean · 06-05-2003, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AJ113
When I was a theist I used to to employ similar tactics. I can assure you it is a clear indication that the theist is well and truly backed into a corner and has no way out other than to focus on alleged accusations and victimisation.

:boohoo:

Sounds good. Maybe I should try that the next time my colleagues back me into a corner.
"No, Dr Biff, you're dead wrong about that because you didn't take into account facts "A," "B," and "C." And your argument was based on a fallacy."
"Ahhhh, you're picking on me. There's no way you can know what I think!"
"But you just told us what you think."
"You're mean and closed minded. A decent person accepts fallacies out of respect for other people. You are bad."

Yeah, that's pretty good. There's no way I would win the argument but I'll bet everyone would agree that it was time for me to take a vacation. Kauai is very nice, maybe the north shore around Hanalei. I could rent a beach house.

AJ113 · 06-05-2003, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Biff the unclean
Sounds good. Maybe I should try that the next time my colleagues back me into a corner.
"No, Dr Biff, you're dead wrong about that because you didn't take into account facts "A," "B," and "C." And your argument was based on a fallacy."
"Ahhhh, you're picking on me. There's no way you can know what I think!"
"But you just told us what you think."
"You're mean and closed minded. A decent person accepts fallacies out of respect for other people. You are bad."

lol lol lol. Nice.

Yeah, that's pretty good. There's no way I would win the argument but I'll bet everyone would agree that it was time for me to take a vacation. Kauai is very nice, maybe the north shore around Hanalei. I could rent a beach house.

Aren't you being a bit selfish? You already live in an island fortress........

Biff the unclean · 06-05-2003, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AJ113

Aren't you being a bit selfish? You already live in an island fortress........

Did you ever see the movie South Pacific? Bali Hai was played by the Makana side of Hanalei Bay on Kauai. I know this painter who lives there who rents out a one bed room house on stilts that over looks the ocean on one side and taro ponds on the other. Horses graze under the coconut palms, trade winds blow across the lani, orchids bloom on the road side...

You bet I'm selfish

Nowhere357 · 06-05-2003, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Biff the unclean

It is not the brain itself, it is the functioning of the brain.

A product of the functioning of the brain.

Quote:

Some wag once wrote that the brain secretes thoughts like the liver secretes bile.

I like the analogy of the flame from the match.

Quote:

The function of producing these thoughts is a physical one. This can easily be demonstrated by mixing a small amount of alcohol into the blood stream.

This indicates the mind doesn't exist in the same way as dousing a match with water shows that flames don't exist.

Quote:

Although we call alcohol "spirits" it is only chemicals. It causes a chemical reaction that effects the functioning of the brain and again the persona is changed.

Of course and I agree. Notice the persona exists TO be changed.

Quote:

You've been hearing these primitive myths about "souls" all your life and don't realize that your statement is a non sequitur.

Actually I was pointing out a non sequitur. And I have heard all kinds of things - I don't see how that shows my statement doesn't follow.

Quote:

Since you can demonstrate that the "self" is affected by physical means through the physical brain you can demonstrate that what we call "the mind" is being produced by this organ.

I agree, although I would say the mind seems to be produced by the brain. It is a fact that physical changes to the brain lead to changes to the mind, and it is a fact that changes in the mind lead to changes to the brain.

Quote:

It has never been demonstrated that a "mind" exists independently of the brain (and central nervous system)

I haven't said otherwise, and I would never dream of claiming such a thing.

Quote:

What would make you believe that a persons thoughts/personality were eternal? What makes you believe that thoughts would continue to be produced in the absence of a brain?

I don't think they are, and don't think they would. What makes you jump to such conclusions?

Quote:

Would urine continue to be produced in the absence of a bladder?

Well, Biff the unclean, you have compared the mind with bile, and now urine. I don't know what to do with this observation.

Quote:

You'll notice that in all the primitive myths about souls (and in Thorne Smith's wonderful book Topper too) that they can see and hear and feel (and according to Smith booze it up).

I don't know the book. Fiction?

Quote:

But they don't have eyes or ears or nerves.

Okay, because eyes etc are physical. This doesn't imply that souls can't see, etc - blind people may still see in their dreams, for example.

Quote:

If a soul didn't need these physical organs to see and hear after they are dead how is it that there are blind and deaf people before they are dead? Don't they have the same "eternal" soul?

I dunno. But if they do, and the soul is hooked up to a defective brain/body, of course some of the souls abilities may not be able to manifest normally.

But I don't see it that way. The mind seems to emerge from the body, so no body, no mind. But I could be wrong. After all, a single match can start a forest fire.

Biff the unclean · 06-05-2003, 05:53 PM

I like the analogy of the flame from the match.
Perhaps a bit less humble than bile. I take it that the oxidation of the match would be the works of the brain and the heat and light given off would stand for the mind.

This indicates the mind doesn't exist in the same way as dousing a match with water shows that flames don't exist.
Except that no one has said that the mind didn't exist. Just that the mind was created and supported by the brain. When the match runs out of fuel the flame ceases to exist. When the brain quits functioning the mind ceases to exist also.

Notice the persona exists TO be changed.
It exists to be changed? Are you just confirming that it exists or are you implying that it has an agenda?

I don't see how that shows my statement doesn't follow.
Where did you get the claim of the mind being "eternal" if not from mythology?
I haven't said otherwise, and I would never dream of claiming such a thing.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
What would make you believe that a persons thoughts/personality were eternal? What makes you believe that thoughts would continue to be produced in the absence of a brain?
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't think they are, and don't think they would. What makes you jump to such conclusions?

I'm not sure I'm jumping to conclusions because you wrote
I don't see how it follows that a persons "self" is not some eternal "soul". Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding what you meant.

Well, Biff the unclean, you have compared the mind with bile, and now urine. I don't know what to do with this observation.
I'm trying to remove the "mind" as far away from mystery and magic and associate it with body functions as I can do in only a few words

I don't know the book (Topper). Fiction?
Yes and very funny. They made a movie of it (a series actually) in the 30's with Cary Grant as one of the ghosts and a TV show in the 50's with Leo G. Carrol as Topper.
It's in paperback, and well worth a look.

Okay, because eyes etc are physical.
As are brains
This doesn't imply that souls can't see, etc - blind people may still see in their dreams, for example.
Except they aren't actually seeing. Seeing requires the eye and the optic nerve and associated bits and pieces. Dreams are projections of the imagination and not sight or hearing

I dunno. But if they do, and the soul is hooked up to a defective brain/body, of course some of the souls abilities may not be able to manifest normally.
If you check late Neolithic early Bronze Age mythology you'll find that we have both a soul and a spirit. Both thought to be magic. A spirit is only your breath. Note in some translations of Gen:1 it says that God's spirit was upon the waters and in others his breath. Then God blows on a pile of dust to give it life. It's ridiculous of course, but you can't really blame the authors because no one knew the first thing about respiration. They thought it was magic. Your soul or your psyche was thought during this same time period to be magic also. But it is olny your mind that they were talking about

The mind seems to emerge from the body, so no body, no mind.
I don't see how it could be different

Nowhere357 · 06-06-2003, 03:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Biff the unclean

Except that no one has said that the mind didn't exist. Just that the mind was created and supported by the brain. When the brain quits functioning the mind ceases to exist also.

I'd say that's the default position.

Quote:

It exists to be changed? Are you just confirming that it exists or are you implying that it has an agenda?

The former. But I suppose it may have an agenda, since it seems to manifest as a motivating, life-sustaining force.

But I just made that up. lol

Quote:

Where did you get the claim of the mind being "eternal" if not from mythology?

Yes, I understand the point.

But the idea occurs to people from all cultures through all of our history. It seems to be a normal, human thing to do. So I think it's more likely we ceated the myths because we have these feelings, and not the other way around.

Quote:

Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding what you meant.

That the mind is affected by the body does not indicate a non-eternal soul.

You mis-assumed this means I believe in a non-eternal soul.

Quote:

I'm trying to remove the "mind" as far away from mystery and magic and associate it with body functions as I can do in only a few words

Well, good job, keep it up. We all know there is too much mystery and magic in the world.

Quote:

Except they aren't actually seeing. Seeing requires the eye and the optic nerve and associated bits and pieces. Dreams are projections of the imagination and not sight or hearing

Seeing also requires a mind. So the part of the mind which is aware of the input from the optic nerve, is what I'm talking about.

This part of mind "sees" in a dream just fine, no optic nerve needed. So "seeing", in this sense(!), is a quality of the mind. Perhaps "visual" is a better word here.

The point is that changes in the brain leading to changes in the mind (and vice-versa) indicates nothing about the eternal or non-eternal nature of the mind.

Quote:

A spirit is only your breath. But it is olny your mind that they were talking about

I'm aware of the evolution of mythology. And I'm aware that mythology is a reflection of our minds.

The mind seems to emerge from the body, so no body, no mind.

Quote:

I don't see how it could be different

Well, there's the forest fire. There's the drop of water returning to the ocean. There's the animating spirit.

There's also genetic memory. Which is magically mysterious, imo.

Sabine Grant · 06-06-2003, 04:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Biff the unclean
Drop the personal nagging and come back to the reality that you again attribute to my mind motives and thoughts I may not have.
I make my comments based on what you write. Since you claim to be persecuted by everyone who doesn't agree with you (a number of whom have contacted me to cheer me on) then choosing to debate on a forum whose stated intent is so diametrically opposed to your own seems a strange, and a stressful, thing to do.

A certain majority have noticed that you start whining and becoming paranoid only to evade topics and not because of any inherant nobleness of character.

Please quote my words expressing that " I am persecuted by everyone who does not agree with me". It is time to substantiate your claims about my supposed claims.
The certain majority has been challenged to not attribute thoughts I may not have. I do not see the point of discussing arguments based on personal assumptions. I made that point very clear to you. I will answer to what I claim and state to be my beliefs and opinions. Not to what you wish to attribute to be my beliefs and opinions.
You were asked politely and clearly to respect that mode of communication. It is your choice to dismiss it and pursue your assuming tactics.

AJC113 : I will be able to devote time responding to the verses you quoted this evening. There is a lot to say about those verses. I did not forget....a bientot.

AJ113 · 06-06-2003, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sabine Grant
I will answer to what I claim and state to be my beliefs and opinions. Not to what you wish to attribute to be my beliefs and opinions.
You were asked politely and clearly to respect that mode of communication. It is your choice to dismiss it and pursue your assuming tactics.

But it is also your choice, too Sabine, isn't it? Or doesn't it count if you are a christian?

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...39#post1021739

BadBadBad · 06-06-2003, 07:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sabine Grant
It is time to substantiate your claims ...........

Yes it certainly is, and we are still waiting.

"I believe that God has knowledge of what choices a person will make. But He does not control those choices."

"The choice to believe or not believe is not imposed by God. There is no fate factor involved in that choice. The choice remains personal. The cause for faith is not a telepathic act from God on human beings. "

Please substantiate your claims.

Biff the unclean · 06-06-2003, 04:26 PM

LOL LOL LOL
Sabine, poop or get off the pot.
Nobody has been fooled by you. Your demand to see exactly where you are claiming to be persecuted so that you can evade answering questions IS part of a blurb when you moan about how picked on you are and evade the topic.
Now either deal with the topic or get out of my face. Your martyr act has worn thin.

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

06-05-2003, 05:53 PM	#135
Biff the unclean Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: an inaccessible island fortress Posts: 10,638	I like the analogy of the flame from the match. Perhaps a bit less humble than bile. I take it that the oxidation of the match would be the works of the brain and the heat and light given off would stand for the mind. This indicates the mind doesn't exist in the same way as dousing a match with water shows that flames don't exist. Except that no one has said that the mind didn't exist. Just that the mind was created and supported by the brain. When the match runs out of fuel the flame ceases to exist. When the brain quits functioning the mind ceases to exist also. Notice the persona exists TO be changed. It exists to be changed? Are you just confirming that it exists or are you implying that it has an agenda? I don't see how that shows my statement doesn't follow. Where did you get the claim of the mind being "eternal" if not from mythology? I haven't said otherwise, and I would never dream of claiming such a thing. quote: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ What would make you believe that a persons thoughts/personality were eternal? What makes you believe that thoughts would continue to be produced in the absence of a brain? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ I don't think they are, and don't think they would. What makes you jump to such conclusions? I'm not sure I'm jumping to conclusions because you wrote I don't see how it follows that a persons "self" is not some eternal "soul". Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding what you meant. Well, Biff the unclean, you have compared the mind with bile, and now urine. I don't know what to do with this observation. I'm trying to remove the "mind" as far away from mystery and magic and associate it with body functions as I can do in only a few words I don't know the book (Topper). Fiction? Yes and very funny. They made a movie of it (a series actually) in the 30's with Cary Grant as one of the ghosts and a TV show in the 50's with Leo G. Carrol as Topper. It's in paperback, and well worth a look. Okay, because eyes etc are physical. As are brains This doesn't imply that souls can't see, etc - blind people may still see in their dreams, for example. Except they aren't actually seeing. Seeing requires the eye and the optic nerve and associated bits and pieces. Dreams are projections of the imagination and not sight or hearing I dunno. But if they do, and the soul is hooked up to a defective brain/body, of course some of the souls abilities may not be able to manifest normally. If you check late Neolithic early Bronze Age mythology you'll find that we have both a soul and a spirit. Both thought to be magic. A spirit is only your breath. Note in some translations of Gen:1 it says that God's spirit was upon the waters and in others his breath. Then God blows on a pile of dust to give it life. It's ridiculous of course, but you can't really blame the authors because no one knew the first thing about respiration. They thought it was magic. Your soul or your psyche was thought during this same time period to be magic also. But it is olny your mind that they were talking about The mind seems to emerge from the body, so no body, no mind. I don't see how it could be different

06-06-2003, 04:26 PM	#140
Biff the unclean Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: an inaccessible island fortress Posts: 10,638	LOL LOL LOL Sabine, poop or get off the pot. Nobody has been fooled by you. Your demand to see exactly where you are claiming to be persecuted so that you can evade answering questions IS part of a blurb when you moan about how picked on you are and evade the topic. Now either deal with the topic or get out of my face. Your martyr act has worn thin.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.