To avoid derailing the Terry Schiavo thread any further, here it is: a place to take any attempts at discussion that spiral too close to the singularity that is this particular subject.
To start:
Lekatt, as you can see, my argument specifically catered to your belief in the spirit.
If the spirit exists, and possesses some link with the human body that allows it to control and sense the body, do you agree that this link is via the brain?
And if so, do you agree that destroying the brain would sever this link?
I can’t agree because I don’t know how the consciousness is connected to the brain. I have said the brain is an interface for the spirit. But just how this takes place I don’t know. That is why some people “wake up” after being dead for hours and others never wake up. During near death experiences many experiencers are sent back to their bodies to finish their lives. This can happen after the doctors have given up any hope for them.
Her brain was not totally destroyed, but even if it was, there are no limitations in the spirit world. It would not be the first time someone survived a fatal accident.
If we posit the existence of another non-physical plane of being, then we must analyze the mechanism by which this plane of existence can interact with our physical plane. Typically, the mechanism is held to be the consciousness of an entity, and as far as we can tell, this mechanism is mediated by neural activity. If neural activity is unavailable, then how can the posited non-physical plane interact?
That is, without a brain, how can a spirit be attached to a body and ‘animate’ it?
So if the brain is gone, as in the case of Terri Schiavo, there is nothing connecting this hypothesized “spirit” to the physical world? Then why were you so dead-set on keeping her body artificially alive?
I don’t think we’re going to get much more than “I don’t know how or why, but I know I’m right because the soul is real. I know because I know” from lekatt. People like this remain unconvinced regardless of the mountain of evidence contrary to their opinions. Belief in the supernatural allows one a convenient response to any challenge, viz.,
“The spirit world is not bound by your scientific instruments and ‘experts’. The soul cannot be measured, so of course it will appear as if there is nothing there but the most basic life-sustaining brain tissue. But the soul is there, so it doesn’t matter.”
Okay, it may be fun to teaseout** lekatt**'s opinions, but don’t expect it to go anywhere.
lekatt, please answer this simple question: if doctors are not qualified to determine when a patient is dead, shouldn’t we continue to offer medical care until the body is obviously decomposing?
You actually also don’t know that there is a spirit. There is zero evidence for anything that silly, yet you still believe it. Why is that?
Someone was lying to you when they told you that.
In a world of billions, someone will survive after a doctor has written them off.
There isn’t a spirit world. It’s a fantasy you’re pretending is real. Basing public policy on fantasies isn’t a good idea. What if someone has their head sheared off by a helicopter blade? Should we keep them on a heart-lung machine… you know, in case their spirit decides to re-animate their body?
You owe it to yourself to look up the word fatal before you make such an embarrassing assertion again.
If you thought there was hope of her waking up before they removed the feeding tube, why isn’t there still hope of that now? I mean, if her soul is all that matters, and that’s still intact, mightn’t her remains wake up and crawl out of her coffin or urn or wherever she is?
Not my evidence. The evidence of dozens of scientific researchers working at a dozen or more universities. Yes, they are doctors, and yes their finding have been published in scientific journals. Strickly by the books.