Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 4 of 20 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 14 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 393
  1. #61
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    First of all. Sorry for the tone of the last couple of posts but you really have to stick to what you said. To not do so makes dialog difficult and if your whole point is to dishonestly retract true statements about your own position then let’s stop.
    I believe that I've made it clear that I am sticking to the definition provided in the OP. So any questions about what I mean are answered that way. If you think I said something different, it is retracted and not because I am backtracking but because you have misinterpreted my statement so whatever incorrect understanding you have of my argument is null.

    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    The reason I am pursuing you is NOT to have you do the work for me but to force you to understand my point that the idea is nonsensical. The universe of possibilities aren’t really massive so we will quickly get to the point where the idea of the soul has no meaning beyond wishful thinking supported by fantasy.
    Okay. But then it is your burden to show that. Your argument seems to be:

    "I hold the concept of the soul is nonsensical. So explain it to me in a way that makes sense. Oh, you are unwilling to do it? So that shows that you are incapable of doing. And that means that no one can explain it in a way that makes sense and therefore it is indeed nonsensical." That is a seriously flawed argument.'

    1. If shifts the burden from you support that the concept of the soul is nonsensical to me supporting the opposite conclusion.

    2. Holding that if you can't find a description of the soul that makes sense means that no such description exists is classic argument from ignorance fallacy.

    3. I have directly stated that I am not going to try to explain the concept to you because I feel that it is an attempt to shift the burden. So your claim that I am unwilling to do it because I cannot do it instead of the reason that I stated is not supported. Unless you can support that my motivation is X instead of Y, you can't make the case that my motivation is indeed X and it proves your point.

    4. You have provided no criteria for when a concept does make sense. From what I can see, you are basing it solely on your own personal satisfaction with the answers given. And that is not a valid criteria. Things don't make sense or not make sense just because you think they do or don't. So for something to OBJECTIVELY not make sense, there needs to be a solid criteria for when it makes sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    The thing is I don’t know what immortal means - that’s my point! Immortality is a nonsensical term that has no meaning since the universe isn’t even infinitely old: so how can anyone even make such a statement!
    And yet the word exists and is used all of the time by other people and they seem to know what it means.

    You unwillingness or inability to make sense of the word does not make the word nonsensical. You have no special authority to declare words nonsensical. So at best you can say that think the word is nonsensical. But you just thinking something does not make it so.



    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    To your point though, if the soul is embued into the body at birth, there still has to be the question as to what happens to it after death: where does it go? What does it carry with it - memories and experiences and reflexes from the brain? Do animals have souls too? Or plants and other living things? These have to be answered when claiming that said soul is supposed to be taken seriously, and depending on your religious viewpoint, you’d have an opinion on the matter. So what is your religious tradition?
    To avoid taking the debate in an unproductive direction and also to avoid what appears to be an attempt to shift the burden, I am strictly abiding by the definition of "soul" that is provided in the OP. The OP's definition says nothing about where the soul goes after death or whether it resides in animals so I have no answer to such questions.



    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    I didn’t mistake anything - I hate that you appear to be holding a neutral position on something which you’re not willing to explain, in which case, there can be no dialog. It is through dialog that the idea of the soul is exposed as fantastical and poorly thought out. If you have no thoughts on it then you cannot have a position, for, against or neutral!
    Which might be a problem for me if I had the burden of supporting some position here. But I don't.

    The argument under discussion is "The soul does not exist" and putting any burden on me to support an argument before you've supported your "soul does not exist" argument is shifting the burden.

    And I don't need to have any particular belief of my own to maintain the position. I could even be an atheist and observe that you've not supported your position. Using my personal characteristics (such as my agnosticism) as the basis for attacking my arguments is to engage in the ad hom fallacy.

    If I knew you were going to attempt to use such personal things as part of your attack, I never would have shared them in the first place.



    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    I’m glad we agree that consciousness resides in the brain. So where does it go when the brain is no longer there? As Dio hilariously pointed out, why can’t there be the equivalent of digestive tracts processing imaginary food after death?
    I don't know if there is or isn't. Again, the only conceptualization of the soul that I am abiding by is what the OP says and it says nothing about a digestive tract. Likewise for this debate, I am limiting my knowledge of the soul to what the OP says. So if you ask me anything about the soul that is not covered in the OP, my answer is "I don't know".


    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    And it all makes no sense because the ONLY manifestation of consciousness, digestion and blood flow is within a physical living body. Without the body, if you’re speculating that such activity can operate outside of the body, you are bound to explain what and how - otherwise, you’re not providing basic support to what you’re purporting to be agnostic to!
    And if I had such a burden, that might be a problem for me.

    But again, the burden is yours.

    So you claimed that the only manifestation of consciousness is within a physical living body.

    So I Challenge to support a claim. you to SUPPORT OR RETRACT that the only manifestation of consciousness is within a physical living body.

    And to be clear, once you are challenged as such the only options you have are:

    1. Support your assertion with some kind of evidence and/or logic
    2. Retract the claim (and not repeating it will suffice).

    So either support that claim or cease forwarding it.




    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    Other than arguing from ignorance here - the only scientific theories are restricted to the material mind: there’s nothing else that has been shown to exist so you’re appealing to theories that literally don’t even exist. If that’s all you have then you have failed to support your position of agnosticism.
    When I make a thread that starts with my claim that agnosticism is correct, then I will worry about supporting agnosticism. Or I might even consider supporting it in this thread AFTER you meet your burden of supporting your initial argument.

    But at this point, asking me to support ANYTHING before you've supported that the soul does not exist is shifting the burden.


    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    You’re weighing the potential for some magical scientific theory to appear versus the magical poorly thought out ideas from the world’s religions. How about sticking with what we know to hold a position rather than holding out for something that is unlikely to materialize!
    I'm not holding out for anything. I'm asking you to support your position that the soul does not exist.

    I have no burden to support any differing conclusion until you support you assertion.



    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    You don’t have evidence though! You’re literally ignoring the actual evidence of the material mind and holding out for some pretend evidence that you cannot even explain!
    To ignore the evidence that consciousness exists exclusively in the mind I first have to be presented with such evidence. You have provided no such evidence so I haven't had the opportunity to ignore it. So no, I've not ignored it.


    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    You’re deliberately skewing your thinking by pretending to be scientific and assuming that at some point some WHOLE universe of existence that will be rigorously proven. Is it really rocket science to see that you’re engaging in a massive fantasy that has zero chance of happening?
    I didn't say that science will eventually discover everything. But I am saying that there is nothing in particular that science, given enough time and progress, can't learn the truth about. Science is essentially studying and learning about our reality. And while I do think that the human race won't last forever and therefore time will run out before we learn EVERYTHING, there is nothing in particular that science cannot learn about given enough time.
    Last edited by mican333; February 24th, 2019 at 09:05 AM.

  2. #62
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,274
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    I believe that I've made it clear that I am sticking to the definition provided in the OP. So any questions about what I mean are answered that way. If you think I said something different, it is retracted and not because I am backtracking but because you have misinterpreted my statement so whatever incorrect understanding you have of my argument is null.
    Well I think I'd rather take a break from you at this point now that understand your strategy is to back off as soon as you've realized you've made a tactical mistake. I cannot rely on you to hold to the words you took the trouble to say twice in the same response. I suspect it will just end up being an exercise in frustration for both of us.

    I am not suggesting that you have redefined anything but you were stating the reason that you are an agnostic on the matter. If you *won't* explain your own position in the debate and treat additional questions as a trap then I find it hard to trust anything you say.

    Maybe I'll come back to this but for now we're on pause.
    Last edited by SharmaK; February 24th, 2019 at 06:03 PM.

  3. #63
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    Well I think I'd rather take a break from you at this point now that understand your strategy is to back off as soon as you've realized you've made a tactical mistake. I cannot rely on you to hold to the words you took the trouble to say twice in the same response. I suspect it will just end up being an exercise in frustration for both of us.

    I am not suggesting that you have redefined anything but you were stating the reason that you are an agnostic on the matter. If you *won't* explain your own position in the debate and treat additional questions as a trap then I find it hard to trust anything you say.

    Maybe I'll come back to this but for now we're on pause.
    Is this a thread created by me that has as it's central argument why I'm an agnostic? NO!

    This is thread created by YOU that is directly titled "The soul does not exist".

    The FIRST burden in this thread is YOUR burden supporting your claim that the soul does not exist. Asking me to support or explain anything I've said before you've supported your central argument is SHIFTING THE BURDEN.

    If I haven't made it clear already, I think you asking me to support anything that I've said is a shifting the burden tactic and therefore I am generally refusing to do that as I don't intend to help you shift the burden and AVOID SUPPORTING YOUR ARGUMENT WHICH, AGAIN, YOU HAVE THE BURDEN OF SUPPORTING BEFORE I HAVE THE BURDEN TO SUPPORT ANYTHING.

    So if this is where we are leaving it, fine. You have yet to support your primary argument that the soul does not exist and therefore you argument fails for lack of support. So we can leave it at that.

  4. #64
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,274
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post

    So if this is where we are leaving it, fine. You have yet to support your primary argument that the soul does not exist and therefore you argument fails for lack of support. So we can leave it at that.
    Then by the same token since you refuse to support your own stated position then you have failed too!

  5. #65
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    Then by the same token since you refuse to support your own stated position then you have failed too!
    Fail at what exactly? Fail to convince you that I'm actually an agnostic? I don't care if you believe me when I say I'm an agnostic or not so I certainly didn't fail at doing anything that I needed to do. In fact, by refusing to answer your questions about my agnosticism I COMPLETELY SUCCEEDED in not letting you drag the debate off-topic and away from the actual issue of whether the soul exists.

    So I didn't fail at doing anything that I sought to do.

    But you have failed to support your claim that at the soul does not exist.
    Last edited by mican333; February 25th, 2019 at 04:06 PM.

  6. #66
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,274
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Fail at what exactly? Fail to convince you that I'm actually an agnostic? I don't care if you believe me when I say I'm an agnostic or not so I certainly didn't fail at doing anything that I needed to do. In fact, by refusing to answer your questions about my agnosticism I COMPLETELY SUCCEEDED in not letting you drag the debate off-topic and away from the actual issue of whether the soul exists.
    As I pointed out, this DOESN'T drag the debate off-topic - it is exactly on topic because I can show that your position of agnostism is based on the same ideas that soul-believers - after all, you have to be agnostic about *something*. In examining your *own* twice-stated goals, we would discover *together* that the idea of the soul doesn't make much sense after all. And we will joyfully walk off in the sunset.

  7. #67
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    As I pointed out, this DOESN'T drag the debate off-topic - it is exactly on topic because I can show that your position of agnostism is based on the same ideas that soul-believers - after all, you have to be agnostic about *something*. In examining your *own* twice-stated goals, we would discover *together* that the idea of the soul doesn't make much sense after all.
    First off, I did not say that I am agnostic. I said that I am taking the agnostic position in this debate regarding the soul. If I ever said that I personally was an agnostic, I retract that position immediately and therefore it is now indeed off-topic in regards to the debate. But again, I am taking the agnostic position in this debate.

    And to state it more clearly (and this IS my position)

    I hold that maybe it exists and maybe it does not exist.

    As far as what "it" is, it is specifically what you described in the OP.

    Which is:

    1. An immaterial “essence”
    2. Immortal
    3. Provides the animating force behind a person’s actions.

    So I hold that maybe that exists and maybe it doesn't exist. As far as why I hold that position, it is because no one has presented any support that it does exist and no one has provided any support that it does not exist.

    So there is my agnostic position.

    If you want to try to use it to support that the soul, as described in those three points, does not exist, have at it.
    Last edited by mican333; February 25th, 2019 at 07:04 PM.

  8. #68
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,274
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    And to state it more clearly (and this IS my position)

    I hold that maybe it exists and maybe it does not exist.

    As far as what "it" is, it is specifically what you described in the OP.

    Which is:

    1. An immaterial “essence”
    2. Immortal
    3. Provides the animating force behind a person’s actions.

    So I hold that maybe that exists and maybe it doesn't exist. As far as why I hold that position, it is because no one has presented any support that it does exist and no one has provided any support that it does not exist.

    So there is my agnostic position.

    If you want to try to use it to support that the soul, as described in those three points, does not exist, have at it.
    What do you mean by “essence”?



    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

  9. #69
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    What do you mean by “essence”?
    What did you mean by "essence" when you forwarded in the OP? You used the word when you defined what a "soul" is so I assume you know what the word means.

  10. #70
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,274
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    What did you mean by "essence" when you forwarded in the OP? You used the word when you defined what a "soul" is so I assume you know what the word means.
    We’re currently carrying on from your last declaration as to what *you’re* being agnostic on. That is what I am asking.

  11. #71
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    I am agnostic on whether the soul, as defined in the OP, exists.

  12. #72
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,274
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    I am agnostic on whether the soul, as defined in the OP, exists.
    Which, to your understanding of the OP, is what?

  13. #73
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    A consciousness that animates the living body but still exists after the body dies.

  14. #74
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,274
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    A consciousness that animates the living body but still exists after the body dies.
    That’s just repeating the OP’s definition of soul. I’m asking what do you mean specifically by “essence” itself - what does that word mean to you?

  15. #75
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    That’s just repeating the OP’s definition of soul. I’m asking what do you mean specifically by “essence” itself - what does that word mean to you?
    Something that is immaterial and yet still exist.

  16. #76
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,274
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Something that is immaterial and yet still exist.
    That too is in the definition. I’m asking by “essence”, what do you understand by it - just that word: the essence of what and also what is that essence? Do you mean the atoms or the configuration of the atoms in the brain?

  17. #77
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    That too is in the definition. I’m asking by “essence”, what do you understand by it - just that word: the essence of what and also what is that essence? Do you mean the atoms or the configuration of the atoms in the brain?
    I mean “it exists despite being immaterial”. While the word “ immaterial” is already in the definition, the “it exists” part isn’t. So that’s what I think is meant by “Essence”. It’s something that exists even though it has no material component.

    And since atoms are not immaterial, essence is clearly not based on an arrangement of Atoms.

  18. #78
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,274
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    I mean “it exists despite being immaterial”. While the word “ immaterial” is already in the definition, the “it exists” part isn’t. So that’s what I think is meant by “Essence”. It’s something that exists even though it has no material component.
    Well, existence is what we’re debating so to put it in the definition moves the debate to “how does it exist”? What the discussion is right now is trying to agree as to what we’re talking about; namely this “essence” in the first definition of the soul.

    And since atoms are not immaterial, essence is clearly not based on an arrangement of Atoms.
    I agree with the former but not the latter. A *configuration* absolutely is immaterial - you surely can’t be disagreeing about that? Or how about, since we are talking about neural nets, the triggering value to make a node fire?

  19. #79
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    Well, existence is what we’re debating so to put it in the definition moves the debate to “how does it exist”?
    It was in the definition all along so I didn't just put it there. And I have no burden to explain to you how it exists. I don't even have a burden to make the case that it does exist (since that isn't even my position) let alone come up with a way for it to hypothetically exist. I was just answering your question about the definition of that word so I could see if you could make your case that the definition doesn't make sense. It looks like you are dropping that argument if you are moving the debate elsewhere.

    If you want to argue that "essence" does not exist, you can move the argument there instead. But the burden is still yours so you will first need to support that it doesn't exist before I have any burden to counter that notion.


    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    I agree with the former but not the latter. A *configuration* absolutely is immaterial - you surely can’t be disagreeing about that?
    But a configuration of atoms is not immaterial. That's what I'm saying. A configuration of immaterial stuff would indeed be immaterial.

  20. #80
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,274
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    It was in the definition all along so I didn't just put it there. And I have no burden to explain to you how it exists. I don't even have a burden to make the case that it does exist (since that isn't even my position) let alone come up with a way for it to hypothetically exist. I was just answering your question about the definition of that word so I could see if you could make your case that the definition doesn't make sense. It looks like you are dropping that argument if you are moving the debate elsewhere.

    If you want to argue that "essence" does not exist, you can move the argument there instead. But the burden is still yours so you will first need to support that it doesn't exist before I have any burden to counter that notion.
    [
    Existence is on me but we have to discuss what it is that exists - this “essence”.


    But a configuration of atoms is not immaterial. That's what I'm saying. A configuration of immaterial stuff would indeed be immaterial.
    A configuration of atoms is absolutely immaterial. Or rather it’s both material and immaterial. It’s just like counting them - the idea of there being 10 atoms is immaterial. Right? Since counting is just an idea and doesn’t necessarily have to be physical to exist, right? It’s just an abstract concept.

 

 
Page 4 of 20 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 14 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. What is the 'soul' ? do you have one?
    By isaone in forum Religion
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: May 11th, 2008, 08:07 AM
  2. Soul To Soul
    By Vivacious Brat in forum Writing Club
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: September 8th, 2007, 04:30 PM
  3. The Soul
    By Trendem in forum Religion
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: July 15th, 2007, 11:21 PM
  4. What is the soul?
    By Meng Bomin in forum Religion
    Replies: 254
    Last Post: February 1st, 2006, 09:31 AM
  5. What is a soul, and do we have one?
    By AntiMaterialist in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: September 29th, 2004, 11:31 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •