I don’t think I can add anything more to this discussion. I have enjoyed meeting all of you. Thank you ALL for making me welcome.
Keep thinking!
Other than a few unclever “anecdotes” on YOUR page, I’m not aware of any evidence you’ve offered.
I’m also aware that I can get you to stop dissociating… I just don’t want anyone else loosing money and time to the NDE myths…
If you can produce a much more level source for your citations, you’d find me a bit more of a willing audience. A good citation would be someone who’s look into it closely and had no real agenda when they looked - other than a desire to know.
Again… not that I could ever get you to stop dissociating.
What of those that die for a while and yet have no memory of their death nor anything after? Particularly those with actual time of death? I’m sure some of them merely… ceased and restarted…
With no continuous “I”.
If you will read the material you will find all of the researchers went in unbelievers out of curosity. They all became believers when they found the evidence to convince themselves NDEs are real spiritual experiences. Some of them gave up their practices to spend full time in the research. This research is the most important research of this century. I don’t think there is anything that could convince you save a personal experience of your own. And as for the continued name calling or belittling, seems by now you would understand it has no effect whatsoever. My experience took away my fear of death and life, without fear name calling has no targets.
I think people know how to spend their money without consulting you.
Odd… I think that’s mostly what I just said. In the spirit of people-know-how-to-spend-their-time/money-without-consulting-you - can you give me a fully reputable scientist and the name of some study? I really don’t have the time or inclination to weed through your site.
I did not call you names, I did, however, state what you are doing. You inferred what I didn’t imply.
Make a good case though… i plan on actually looking at it.
There’s a word for being a half-step out of reality. There’s a word for willfully ignoring perfectly sensible arguments. In fact, your dissociation leaves you looking passive aggressive and condescending at times…
Please, argue on the merits, don’t make assertions you can’t back up - and listen to the fully reasoned arguments that are being made by some very credible people.
As, I think, evidenced by my OP, I wanted a few more free thinkers in the discussion - that DOES NOT remove the onus of proof or citation. I categorically WILL NOT go reading through your site to find proof of “the spirit.” I will work from empirical evidence…
Thus far, your empirical evidence has largely been “but it’s on my website” - either you can do better, or you will be pitted again. Or leave the thread… it’s your choice, but I weary of your obfuscations, distractions, condescension, and quite honestly disassociation.
Something OTHER than your site. Something credible - empirical. Something concise - hopefully.
A yes would have worked…
This is the stuff that’s really starting to annoy me.
When you wish to discuss the subject at hand and not me, let me know and I will join you.
So… no citation?
Because a citation WOULD be on topic.
the PC apeman provided us with a whole bunch of cites for scientific papers arguing that conscience has a physical basis. If the ‘spiritualists’ in this thread cannot reciprocate, then let’s just ignore them. They have nothing to bring to the table. I’m tired of **lekatt’s ** cowardly evasions. Let it be noted that **lekatt ** was challenged, refused to meet the challenge, and so should no longer be regarded as a participant in this discussion, because he is not willing to participate in good faith.
A perfectly reasonable place to stand. I agree.
Except that I meant ‘consciousness’ instead of ‘conscience’. Doh! Rookie error.
I think that is a very good idea also, just ignore everything that opposes your theories. There is not one iota of physical evidence showing consciousness is produced by the brain, not one. No memory cells, no thoughts, or emotions have any physical basis and the only one thing “brain mapping” that scientists love to hold up is not reliable. It’s different from measure to measure. The big question is how do you know the electrical activity of the brain is coming from the brain, no proof of that either. But it’s ok, everyone will experience the eternal “I” sooner or later.
The cites are about consciousness. He just mistyped, and you made the rookie error of mocking him for it.
Every glass of beer is an iota of physical evidence showing consciousness is produced by the brain. And yes, there is not one glass of beer out there.
And that’s all I have to say about that. You may now repeat your story again, ignoring this post, and the gallons of physical evidence against your position, as you always do.
You jest, alcohol works on the brain, destroying brain cells, and poisoning the body which makes it difficult to walk among other things. It does not alter who you are or lessen the eternal “I” nor change your mind or personality beyond the temporary effects of spoiling the spiritual interface. Show me physical evidence of memory or any other thing the brain is supposed to hold or manufacture. The brain does not create who you are.
Wrong.
Wrong.
Wrong.
Wrong.
Cite.
Wrong.
Cite.
This post is nearly 100% ignorance. You need to educate yourself on the subjects you claim so much knowledge of before you attempt to discuss them again. Please note that your education is not our responsibility. This post is so lacking that simply giving you web sites to ignore is insufficient, it’s clear that you need more basic understanding.
If you think the thing that makes you ‘you’ is not in your brain, then explain Alzhiemer’s disease. If you’ve ever seen it, then you’ll know that damage to the brain can make people change, quite drastically.
Are you capable of reading your own cites? From the very article which you link to on your web page:
This paragraph *from your own website * pretty much undermines everything you just said. Not that you will recognize or acknowledge this point.
So I have participated in good faith. I have read your citation which was supposed to convince me of…something. Now you reciprocate and take a look at **the PC apeman’s ** articles.
I have read many articles on the brain and pretty well know what the current materialist thinking about it consists of.
Now, let’s read the post again. It says that brain activity can be measured, nothing more. Brain activity is not physical. One can’t look into an area of the brain and determine what is going on there. No physical evidence. Spirituality is about electrical activity also. It can be measured by ghost hunters. Can you say for certain that the activity measured in the brain is being generated by the brain or does it come from a non-local source. The brain is not hard-wired, we know that because people with brain damage can learn to use other parts of their brain to restore bodily functions lost by the damage. I repeat, there is no physical evidence anywhere in the brain that can be called consciousness. Some think there is a kind of computer program running in the brain that is “us.” This falls apart when someone asks who wrote the program. Explain how we are created by our brains. Then explain how some children can know music, play piano, and compose symphonies without any training at six years old. If you want to know about consciousness it is necessary to read about people and what they can do early in life.
http://www.mysteries.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/6,2.htm
http://www.mysteries.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/6,2.htm
I say this respectfully, the educational system does not educate anymore. A real education consists of the best literature, poetry, music, humanities, art, religion, and numerous other subjects. This is the real world we live in. Science is not greater than, nor more intelligent than any other subject. All subjects lead to enlightenment. If you know only science, you have been cheated out of an education.
I would like to point out that while most of the citations on that page are to scientific research, there are also a few references to philosophers of mind. It would be disingenuous for someone to cherry-pick David Chalmers while overlooking John Searle, Daniel Dennett, and Thomas Metzinger. Actually, all the philosophers together make up only a small proportion of that page. The scientific articles, being the bulk of the page, were [post=9593811]offered[/post] by me to demonstrate that the overwhelming majority of reliable data is coherent with physicalism.
PC
http://www.plim.org/2idiots.html
Second link should have been the above.
Why, yes, of course, I’m jesting. Nobody ever has drunk to dull mental anguish, nobody has ever had a blackout, forgetting their actions of the prior evening, and certainly no one has ever even heard of the term “angry drunk”. These are all things that I made up, just to joke with you.
In fact, there’s not even any such thing as alcohol! I made it up. Hee hee!
Sorry, I don’t have time for that, I’m too busy sweeping all the leftover icons out of my computer case. They’re really piling up in there.