Creation using Evolution

[siegi91]

12 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

There are lots of things physics can't explain.

Again, that is not germain to what we are talking abuot.

 

No, you're wrong.  There is a realm of human existence, even in this world, that science simply can't address.   I realize you don't want to live in reality, but you need to join the rest of us in the real world.

I am sorry shiloh. I cannot possible take this hypothetical existence which is immune form physics seriously. I wish I could, but I cannot.

And believe me. It is not because I have an agenda, or I like it somehow. No, I would vastly prefer that me and my loved ones have a spirit that transcend the brutal laws of nature. I would love it if we had an immortal soul. I would love it to see my mother again when I die. 

But I cannot believe that. The evidence leads me towards a totally naturalistic explanation for mental processes. Ergo, for a total naturalistic explanation for what we really are. And to the conclusion that when that kilogram of matter in our skull ceases functioning, then we are no more.

siegi

 

 

Edited September 2, 2018 by siegi91

[Guest shiloh357]

2 hours ago, siegi91 said:

I am sorry shiloh. I cannot possible take this hypothetical existence which is immune form physics seriously. I wish I could, but I cannot.

There's nothing hypothetical about it.  Physics can't explain things like self-evident truth.  It can't explain things like honesty, heroism, equality, liberty, etc. 

It's too bad you can't live in the real world, in reality where most of us live.  You're really no different than people who go to the other extreme and think that everything has a spiritual explanation and that nothing is coincidence.

Life is made up of things we can't explain.  Understanding that is part of a balanced, intelligent understanding of the life we live and the world we live in.  

[siegi91]

16 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

There's nothing hypothetical about it.  Physics can't explain things like self-evident truth.  It can't explain things like honesty, heroism, equality, liberty, etc. 

 It's too bad you can't live in the real world, in reality where most of us live.  You're really no different than people who go to the other extreme and think that everything has a spiritual explanation and that nothing is coincidence.

Life is made up of things we can't explain.  Understanding that is part of a balanced, intelligent understanding of the life we live and the world we live in.  

Since honesty, heroism, equality, liberty, etc. are emerging properties of brains, I do not see why they could not be explained by naturalistic mechanisms. What makes you so sure that they will not ultimately be shown on a brain scan?

For instance, we know long term romantic love is a natural adaptation for our social species whose offsprings need a long time to become independent and therefore need stable parents. So, "til death set us apart" is mainly a biological imperative.

So why not the others? 

siegi

 

Edited September 2, 2018 by siegi91

[RockyMidnight]

4 hours ago, siegi91 said:

I am sorry shiloh. I cannot possible take this hypothetical existence which is immune form physics seriously. I wish I could, but I cannot.

And believe me. It is not because I have an agenda, or I like it somehow. No, I would vastly prefer that me and my loved ones have a spirit that transcend the brutal laws of nature. I would love it if we had an immortal soul. I would love it to see my mother again when I die. 

But I cannot believe that. The evidence leads me towards a totally naturalistic explanation for mental processes. Ergo, for a total naturalistic explanation for what we really are. And to the conclusion that when that kilogram of matter in our skull ceases functioning, then we are no more.

siegi

 

 

Please pardon the interruption Siegi91 and Shiloh357,

Siegi, If you would "vastly" prefer that you and your loved ones have a spirit that transcends the laws of nature, would love to have an immortal soul, and would love to see your Mother again, but can't believe that because the "evidence" leads you against it, perhaps it is because you are not open to ALL the evidence, just the scientific explanations derived from human "intellect". Consider however that there are billions of people that do believe what you wish you could and for far longer than any scientific evidence even existed. That has to count for something, even to a mindset like your own. The fact that there are so many believers and for so long a period of history should at the very least allow for the possibility you are wrong. After all, you believe we are all wrong, so why not allow that possibility for yourself? 

Cheers Siegi91 !!!

[Guest shiloh357]

11 hours ago, siegi91 said:

Since honesty, heroism, equality, liberty, etc. are emerging properties of brains, I do not see why they could not be explained by naturalistic mechanisms. What makes you so sure that they will not ultimately be shown on a brain scan?

They are not emerging properties of the brain.   If we operated only off of what emerges from the brain, we would live like animals, like savages.   If you raised a child without values, that child would a monster and unfit to live amongst the rest of humanity.

Things like honesty, integrity, fairness, justice, courtesy and so on are things that have to be taught.  They do not come from us or our biological make-up.  Mankind has a soul, an immaterial part of his existence and biology cannot  account for that.  You would not want someone coming to your home that acted solely off of what emanates from their brain.   I would also add that you are not accounting for the "mind" which is part of the soul.   The soul is the seat of man's will, and emotions.   The soul may have an effect on the brain, but much of what you claim comes from the brain, comes from the soul. 

You don't want to believe that, and you shield yourself from any evidence for it, by pretending that nothing  exists except what can be detected by science or biology or whatever.    But you don't live that way.  If someone broke into your house and stole your possessions, you would want some kind  of justice.  You would operate from a level of humanity that is not simply wrapped up in your brain.

Quote

For instance, we know long term romantic love is a natural adaptation for our social species whose offsprings need a long time to become independent and therefore need stable parents. So, "til death set us apart" is mainly a biological imperative.

No, I it is not a biological imperative.    Marriage is a covenant and  runs far deeper than romantic love.  Romantic "love" isn't true love.   Marriage cannot survive off  of a biological imperative.  It takes a love that runs, much, much deeper and stronger than romance if it is last more than three months.

[siegi91]

On 9/3/2018 at 3:12 AM, RockyMidnight said:

Please pardon the interruption Siegi91 and Shiloh357,

Siegi, If you would "vastly" prefer that you and your loved ones have a spirit that transcends the laws of nature, would love to have an immortal soul, and would love to see your Mother again, but can't believe that because the "evidence" leads you against it, perhaps it is because you are not open to ALL the evidence, just the scientific explanations derived from human "intellect". Consider however that there are billions of people that do believe what you wish you could and for far longer than any scientific evidence even existed. That has to count for something, even to a mindset like your own. The fact that there are so many believers and for so long a period of history should at the very least allow for the possibility you are wrong. After all, you believe we are all wrong, so why not allow that possibility for yourself? 

Cheers Siegi91 !!!

I know at least one billion of people who believe that a spiritual entity with the face of an elephant is a god in heaven. And that there is an assembly of such gods who prescribe that humans should be divided in castes defined at birth. This 1 Billions+ people are called Hindus.

Does the sheer size of people believing in such things add a iota to the plausibility of their claims? Of course not. Not one little tiny iota. Not even if they were 100 billions believing that.

So, now that we easily addressed the fallacy "many believe it, therefore it is worthy of consideration" let me ask you why I should let my feelings and emotions influence my rational analysis of how things are. True, I would love to see my mother again, but that is not a sufficient condition to adapt and modify my cold analysis of the facts because of my wishful thinking and emotions.

I believe we are the functioning of our brains, and when our brains stop functioning, then we are no more. A concept of a soul is completely unintelligible to me, apart from being also completely redundant and unnecessary to explain the things of the world. Its sole motivation does indeed seem to come from emotional human needs only.

BTW, suppose I do indeed change to see my mother. If I submit now to Jesus and do whatever it is required to be saved, will I see my mother again in heaven? I ask because she was an observing Jew who did not believe for a second that Jesus was Messiah, son of God, or anything of the sort.

What do you think? What does your rationality suggest I should do to see her again, then?

 siegi

 

Edited October 1, 2018 by siegi91