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 15 of 15 FirstFirst ... 5 11 12 13 14 15
Results 281 to 288 of 288
  1. #281
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    West / East Coast
    Posts
    3,484
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    Being around a long time just means that organized religions have co-opted the idea; just as Christianity co-opted other religions.
    Since “the early Christian philosophers adopted the Greek concept of the soul’s immortality” would that mean you believe great thinkers like Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and Pythagoras were also scam artists?

    Souls, per my op, are made up.
    You have yet to support this claim, except to say people’s direct experience of the soul is not real. I would like to point out that, that’s a personal opinion and it has been noted.

    You’re overly fixated on the word “controversy” and conflating trying to understand real-world practical effects with spiritualists using already debunked ideas.
    1. You made the claim that the practice of acupuncture is controversial in the American health care system.
    2. I did not argue against that, but I pointed out that there are many controversial issues in health care and supported that along with how the practice has been approved The American College of Physicians.
    3. If you are making the claim that the practice of acupuncture, which has been approved by the American College of Physicians and is being recommended by doctors across America to their patients for pain relief is a debunked idea – please support that using a reputable medical website.

    Can you not quote from the reader’s digest!
    Readers Digest references The Journal of Pain in the article. I’m citing Lonnie Zeltzer, MD, the director of the pediatric pain program at the Mattel Children’s Hospital in Los Angeles and professor at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA. People with chronic pain often experience a “snowball effect.” Meaning, the longer the pain persists, the harder it is to treat. That’s why she recommends acupuncture to most patients, among other methods. “We don’t know exactly how it works, but it has been found to increase levels of feel-good brain chemicals like serotonin and endorphins, and it may also deactivate parts of the brain involved with pain perception.”

    "Although factors in addition to the specific effects of needling at correct acupuncture point locations are important contributors to the treatment effect, decreases in pain after acupuncture cannot be explained solely in terms of placebo effects."

    But let’s not pretend that they have much credibility outside of their bubble.
    Many of our current theories started out in a bubble. For that matter, many of our greatest inventions started out with a few, what might some call crazy people, in a garage or basement.

    True - but at the same time, imagining spiritual and supernatural worlds seems a little unnecessary.

    And how does that make the second element a magical thing?
    There is no reason today to believe that the universe is a closed system. If we just look at the past hundred years, it looks like we live in a mental universe. As far as the implications of that, we’ll have to wait and see; that’s an interesting debate topic. As always, I think man will adapt.

    The Mental Universe

    The only reality is mind and observations, but observations are not of things. To see the Universe as it really is, we must abandon our tendency to conceptualize observations as things.

    Historically, we have looked to our religious leaders to understand the meaning of our lives; the nature of our world. With Galileo Galilei, this changed. In establishing that the Earth goes around the Sun, Galileo not only succeeded in believing the unbelievable himself, but also convinced almost everyone else to do the same. This was a stunning accomplishment in ‘physics outreach’ and, with the subsequent work of Isaac Newton, physics joined religion in seeking to explain our place in the Universe.

    The more recent physics revolution of the past 80 years has yet to transform general public understanding in a similar way. And yet a correct understanding of physics was accessible even to Pythagoras. According to Pythagoras, “number is all things”, and numbers are mental, not mechanical. Likewise, Newton called light “particles”, knowing the concept to be an ‘effective theory’ — useful, not true. As noted by Newton’s biographer Richard Westfall: “The ultimate cause of atheism, Newton asserted, is ‘this notion of bodies having, as it were, a complete, absolute and independent reality in themselves.’” Newton knew of Newton’s rings and was untroubled by what is shallowly called ‘wave/particle duality’.

    The 1925 discovery of quantum mechanics solved the problem of the Universe’s nature. Bright physicists were again led to believe the unbelievable — this time, that the Universe is mental. According to Sir James Jeans: “the stream of knowledge is heading towards a non-mechanical reality ; the Universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine. Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter... we ought rather hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter.” But physicists have not yet followed Galileo’s example, and convinced everyone of the wonders of quantum mechanics. As Sir Arthur Eddington explained: “It is difficult for the matter-of-fact physicist to accept the view that the substratum of everything is of mental character”.

    In his play Copenhagen, which brings quantum mechanics to a wider audience, Michael Frayn gives these words to Niels Bohr: “we discover that... the Universe exists... only through the understanding lodged inside the human head.” Bohr’s wife replies, “this man you’ve put at the centre of the Universe — is it you, or is it Heisenberg?” This is what sticks in the craw of Eddington’s “matter-of-fact” physicists.

    Discussing the play, John H. Marburger III, President George W. Bush’s science adviser, observes that “in the Copenhagen interpretation of microscopic nature, there are neither waves nor particles”, but then frames his remarks in terms of a non-existent “underlying stuff ”. He points out that it is not true that matter “sometimes behaves like a wave and sometimes like a particle... The wave is not in the underlying stuff; it is in the spatial pattern of detector clicks... We cannot help but think of the clicks as caused by little localized pieces of stuff that we might as well call particles. This is where the particle language comes from. It does not come from the underlying stuff, but from our psychological predisposition to associate localized phenomena with particles.”

    In place of “underlying stuff ” there have been serious attempts to preserve a material world — but they produce no new physics, and serve only to preserve an illusion. Scientists have sadly left it to non-physicist Frayn to note the Emperor’s lack of clothes: “it seems to me that the view which [Murray] Gell-Mann favours, and which involves what he calls alternative ‘histories’ or ‘narratives’, is precisely as anthropocentric as Bohr’s, since histories and narratives are not freestanding elements of the Universe, but human constructs, as subjective and as restricted in their viewpoint as the act of observation.”

    Physicists shy from the truth because the truth is so alien to everyday physics. A common way to evade the mental Universe is to invoke ‘decoherence’ — the notion that ‘the physical environment’ is sufficient to create reality, independent of the human mind. Yet the idea that any irreversible act of amplification is necessary to collapse the wave function is known to be wrong: in ‘Renninger-type’ experiments, the wave function is collapsed simply by your human mind seeing nothing. The Universe is entirely mental.

    In the tenth century, Ibn al-Haytham initiated the view that light proceeds from a source, enters the eye, and is perceived. This picture is incorrect but is still what most people think occurs, including, unless pressed, most physicists. To come to terms with the Universe, we must abandon such views. The world is quantum mechanical: we must learn to perceive it as such.

    One benefit of switching humanity to a correct perception of the world is the resulting joy of discovering the mental nature of the Universe. We have no idea what this mental nature implies, but — the great thing is — it is true. Beyond the acquisition of this perception, physics can no longer help. You may descend into solipsism, expand to deism, or something else if you can justify it — just don’t ask physics for help.

    There is another benefit of seeing the world as quantum mechanical: someone who has learned to accept that nothing exists but observations is far ahead of peers who stumble through physics hoping to find out ‘what things are’. If we can ‘pull a Galileo,’ and get people believing the truth, they will find physics a breeze. The Universe is immaterial — Mental and Spiritual. Live, and enjoy!

    Richard Conn Henry, Professor in the Henry A. Rowland Department of Physics and Astronomy, The Johns Hopkins University,
    Last edited by eye4magic; March 25th, 2019 at 01:16 PM.
    "The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.” --"The Mental Universe” | Nature
    [Eye4magic]
    Super Moderator

  2. #282
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,003
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic View Post
    In the tenth century, Ibn al-Haytham initiated the view that light proceeds from a source, enters the eye, and is perceived. This picture is incorrect but is still what most people think occurs, including, unless pressed, most physicists. To come to terms with the Universe, we must abandon such views. The world is quantum mechanical: we must learn to perceive it as such.
    Photons/light does have a source and the eye perceives light in a manner that the brain can make some sense of. If this was not the case, as in the mind is actually perceiving:
    1. why would eyes exist at all? they would only have an aesthetic quality for the "living", nothing more.
    2. we can show a source emitting light and a detector receiving it just as an eye would/does.

    Your source is long on saying the universe is only of the mind, which brings questions:
    1. how does one mind share the same reality of another if each makes up reality in totality?

    but short on support/how this could actually be realized or even possible...

  3. #283
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    West / East Coast
    Posts
    3,484
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Your source is long on saying the universe is only of the mind, which brings questions:
    I agree, the article raises some interesting questions for most of us who have been raised understanding Newtonian principles. But questions are good. They have the potential to move us forward.

    . how does one mind share the same reality of another if each makes up reality in totality?
    What does "each makes up reality in totality mean"?


    but short on support/how this could actually be realized or even possible...
    Possibly by getting to a point of greater (more) awareness.
    "The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.” --"The Mental Universe” | Nature
    [Eye4magic]
    Super Moderator

  4. #284
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,003
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic View Post
    What does "each makes up reality in totality mean"?
    Sorry, didn't mean to be cryptic...

    I meant if:
    1. a (as in one) mind is what causes reality to exist, how do other minds get involved in that same created universe?
    2. If more than one mind is what causes reality to exist, how can they accomplish this collectively without being unconnected in some way?
    2a. If it is more than one mind that creates reality, why doesn't reality change as people die/are born?
    3. How would a human mind come up with the dramatic complexity that we observe in our reality when we so far can't even understand how it works?

  5. #285
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    West / East Coast
    Posts
    3,484
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    1. a (as in one) mind is what causes reality to exist, how do other minds get involved in that same created universe?
    If at the subatomic level everything is connected, it’s not too difficult to see the possibility of this. The how remains a question.

    2. If more than one mind is what causes reality to exist, how can they accomplish this collectively without being unconnected in some way? [/quote\
    Whose reality? Being unconnected from what?
    Not sure I understand this comment.

    2a. If it is more than one mind that creates reality, why doesn't reality change as people die/are born?
    Well, for the people who pass on, their reality (state of consciousness) most likely does change, assuming one considers that consciousness survives physical death.

    For babies who are born, their reality most likely changes when they enter the physical from the state they were in before physical birth.

    3. How would a human mind come up with the dramatic complexity that we observe in our reality when we so far can't even understand how it works?
    Why are you assuming the temporal human mind came up with the complexity that we observe? The finite human mind is most likely a small thimble against the backdrop of the majestic elegance, beauty and complex wonder of the universe. The human mind can be likened to a vapor that appears for a little while and then vanishes.
    "The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.” --"The Mental Universe” | Nature
    [Eye4magic]
    Super Moderator

  6. #286
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,003
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic View Post
    If at the subatomic level everything is connected, it’s not too difficult to see the possibility of this. The how remains a question.


    You said the mind basically creates reality. I am supposing the possibilities of one or more minds actually doing this.

    If one mind created reality, then there would not be other minds involved. At least not minds of the same "nature" (abilities etc). So that mind would basically be "alone" even if the mind created other life forms unless this mind can offer these created beings sentience. Further, that reality would cease when that mind ceased. A mind that lives "forever" is an infinite and I have never seen an infinite existing supported (save for in math those crazy kids).

    If more than one mind creates reality then "this" reality (I'm not currently speaking what reality the person that died would experience, if any) would change as people were born and died. I don't see any other alternative.?

    A "connection" at the subatomic level doesn't equate to a conscious mind creating reality.

    ---------- Post added at 05:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:45 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic View Post
    Why are you assuming the temporal human mind came up with the complexity that we observe? The finite human mind is most likely a small thimble against the backdrop of the majestic elegance, beauty and complex wonder of the universe. The human mind can be likened to a vapor that appears for a little while and then vanishes.
    I know you believe this passionately, and I am not trying to change your mind. More like exploring why you believe so.
    IOW, the support for this position is scant. What reason is there to believe this "majestic elegance"?
    Other than people have (seemingly) always believed a soul could exist?
    Last edited by Belthazor; May 13th, 2019 at 04:13 PM.

  7. #287
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    West / East Coast
    Posts
    3,484
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    You said the mind basically creates reality.
    Are you referring to this quote in the Nature article? BTW, I am not the author of the article.

    “The Universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine. Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter... we ought rather hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter.”


    I know you believe this passionately, and I am not trying to change your mind. More like exploring why you believe so.
    IOW, the support for this position is scant. What reason is there to believe this "majestic elegance"?
    It’s observable. “the Universe is immaterial — Mental and Spiritual.” That's elegant! Also, we can experience it.

    You might also be intereted in The Elegant Universe
    "The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.” --"The Mental Universe” | Nature
    [Eye4magic]
    Super Moderator

  8. #288
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,003
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The soul does not exist

    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic View Post
    Are you referring to this quote in the Nature article? BTW, I am not the author of the article.

    “The Universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine. Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter... we ought rather hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter.”
    Not at all. Let's go back to post #282 which you didn't really respond to, and that is why we are now at a misunderstanding:


    Originally Posted by eye4magic
    "In the tenth century, Ibn al-Haytham initiated the view that light proceeds from a source, enters the eye, and is perceived. This picture is incorrect but is still what most people think occurs, including, unless pressed, most physicists. To come to terms with the Universe, we must abandon such views. The world is quantum mechanical: we must learn to perceive it as such."

    I then responded:
    "Photons/light does have a source and the eye perceives light in a manner that the brain can make some sense of. If this was not the case, as in the mind is actually perceiving:...."

    I also noted your source was basically stating the human mind creates our reality which seems to contradict itself if it were realized.
    Last edited by Belthazor; May 14th, 2019 at 04:33 PM.

 

 
Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ... 5 11 12 13 14 15

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
  •