Forums → WEPR → Theism and Atheism

Speaking for myself, I can easily say that you're forgetting the possibility that people can say "I don't know, I don't believe in this, but I'll just wait to ****ing find out."

Now proove me that despite and against all evidence, there actully is an immaterial consciousness independent of the physical body.

So... what? :P
I just answered your question then, right?

I'm pretty sure he didn't mean it on a serious level.

Because if he did, he would be an idiot. :P

[quote]However, I'm not asking you to prove that there is none.

I'm asking you to prove that when we die there is a complete loss of consciousness, and the only remnant of ourselves is a rotting body in the ground

But I never claimed that as my belief.

That was to express what I said earlier; at that moment, the burden of proof falls on the believer again.

And that is the answer to my question, which is why you believe what you do

Not necessarily. What about reincarnation, which doesn't require the belief of any God? I'm not saying that's what truly happens, and I'm not trying to get in a debate of the plausibility of reincarnation, I'm merely asking why you jumped to the opposite extreme of an afterlife.

It's not jumping to the opposite extreme to say something that no one has seen doesn't exist and the attributes they are giving it were made up since no one has been able to observe what attributes that something has. That's why your analogy failed.

You are focused on polarization of the issue, on the disproving of an afterlife, and seem to assume that's what proves your theory. Disproving one theory does not make any other correct.

Why do you automatically assume that there is nothing after death, rather than accept all possibilities?

There is no evidence proving or disproving the existence of a soul, and thus, based on what seems to be your doctrine of logic based on evidence, I fail to see how you can justify your claim of nothing after death besides faith that the soul does not exist.

Then why did Jesus doubt God before he died? I don't remember the verse, and don't really want to look it up, but it was something like, "Oh Father, why have you abandoned me!"

hasn't that been done like 500 times the last month alone?

The thing with the weighting of the soul, I think, has already been talked over at least once here on AG. We have no proof that the lost of weight can be attributed to a soul; in fact thsoe are most probably just gases escaping from the corpse.

I just read the second link, about the soul.. First off, "scientists say souls exist" is a plain lie; at least concerning most scientists.

What is your consciousness? Your nervous system, your brain mainly.

There is no need to explain personality with souls since we can do without

And your really good at avoiding the question

FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! You were given answers to your question multiple times in this thread!

What evidence we do have, which has been provided to you a number of times indicates it all just ceases.

"First define what is consciousness, how it works. It's basically your brain receiving, processing and sending information. Evidence that there isn't much more to it, is shown in cases of neurological pathologies/malfunctions of certain areas, who influence people's consciousness to a certain degree. Conclusion: when the whole brain shuts down, you shut down. End."

Mainly - yes, but not entirely. I have already asked to provide an entirely materialistic explanation of a human consciousness, and received none - obviously.

You can do what exactly? Can you explain how people dream/daydream? Can you explain a case of Buridan's asinus?

They all are. MGW avoided any and every question I threw at him last time.

And still you are ignoring evidences I provide, that there is afterlife.

HahiHa's response is basic, and he stated that. There is evidence of something still active in case of a flat EEG, and other evidence of a dead brain, yet consciousness is still active. So there is a counter-evidence to this "End." statement.

and other evidence of a dead brain, yet consciousness is still active

They all are. MGW avoided any and every question I threw at him last time.

i am prouid of it i am atheist i am free in mind and i don´t need religion to live. sorry for my opinion but i think catollic religion is the most covered with the lies and secrets but it´s just my opnion don´t attack me.

And by reciting this they don't doubt God, so He did not as well.

First, if you inflate a balloon with air that's warmer than the outside, and place it on the scale in absense of wind, it will weigh less than if deflated, due to Archimedian force applied to volume of heated air. Second, that body was warm enough to be above room temp, so any gases that escape the body will also be warmer, therefore in this case the body will weigh more after release of gases than before.

Agreed here, but the link states that no common source of known brain alerations on molecular and cellular levels is verified as a generator for NDEs. This in turn means that your (MGW's at least) attribution to NDE as an anoxia-generated is disproven. So, NDEs are open for you to disprove again, unless you will attribute them to a kind of experience of a human that is independent of the body. MGW, please read this too.

Scientific explanation

The relative similarities of NDE accounts imply a biological origin. Viewed as a scientific phenomenon, the NDE is of great importance to medicine and psychiatry. Hypotheses advanced by researchers include neurochemical as well as psychological explanations. Obviously the calming effects of NDE's would have physical as well as emotional benefits to an individual who was close to dying.
Aspects of NDE's indicate that the temporal lobe is involved. Electrical stimulation of the temporal lobe has been shown to induce the dissociation that is associated with OBE's. Endorphins and serotonin may also play a part. Additionally some of the elements of NDE's can be reproduced with anesthetics.
NDE'ers have been associated with a rather specific psychological profile including sleep/dream patterns and positive coping styles. The tendency for individuals to experience OBE's can be predicted by somatoform dissociation, the failure to process somatic experiences. Elements such as tunneling, light, and telepathic communion with a god may be a reactivation of birth memories.
Some elements of NDE's may represent the incorporation of stimuli sensed subconsciously, for example via "anesthesia awareness" during surgery. The ability to later describe events taking place during an OBE may be the result of easy guesses or leading questions or unintentional information given by the interviewer. Keith Augustine quotes Dr. Susan Blackmore that "'rior knowledge, fantasy and lucky guesses and the remaining operating senses of hearing and touch,' plus 'the way memory works to recall accurate items and forget the wrong ones' is sufficient to explain out-of-body imagery in NDEs."[4]
Testimonials may reflect what one has heard or expects based on the testimonials of others. In addition NDE research likely suffers from the "file-drawer problem," cherry picking only those testimonials that help advance the researcher's hypothesis.
Other notable explanations include that NDE's are the result of telepathic communication from medical staff or that they are a trick of Satan.
It should be noted that, due to the complexity of NDE's, a particular scientific hypothesis of their cause need not explain all possible experiences.
[edit]Ketamine
Based on his research, Dr. Karl Jansen notes that "Recent advances in neuroscience are bringing us closer to a brain-based understanding of the NDE as an altered state of consciousness."[5] Jansen also determined that the effects of an NDE can be induced with ketamine, a hallucinogenic, dissociative anesthetic related to PCP. Jansen explains, "Ketamine administered by intravenous injection is capable of reproducing all of the features of the NDE which have been commonly described."
Regarding ketamine, Jansen quotes Doctors Grinspoon and Bakalar that "The dissociative experiences often seem so genuine that users are not sure that they have not actually left their bodies."[6] Jansen quotes Dr. Leary that ketamine use represents "experiments in voluntary death."[7]
Jansen's explanation of why ketamine and a near-death condition will cause similar effects is summarized as follows:
NMDA receptors in portions of the brain are important in cognitive processing and other functions. The same region of the brain plays a role in epileptic events and others in which cell (neuron) damage may occur due to the presence of glutamate (neurotransmitters). The use of ketamine prevents such damage. The brain might possibly release a neuroprotective counter-flood to glutamate similar to ketamine during catastrophic events. It is known, for example, that endopsychosins and magnesium and zinc ions naturally bind to the same (drug binding) sites as ketamine (the PCP receptor of the NMDA receptor). The hallucinogenic effects of ketamine are due to an NMDA receptor blockade.
Thus Jansen concludes "Near-death experiences (NDE's) can be reproduced by ketamine via blockade of receptors in the brain (the N-methyl-D-aspartate, NMDA receptors) for the neurotransmitter glutamate."[8] Most of this explanation is based on well-understood observations of neurological processes.
When a NDE is induced by ketamine administered by an anesthetist, it is known as "emergence phenomena" or &quotsychic emergence reaction."
Like NDE's, ketamine use has therapeutic after-effects.

Additionally subjects' testimonials of clarity of thought is presented as evidence of the reality of NDE's. However, consider Jansen's finding that "...30% of normal subjects given ketamine were certain that they had not been dreaming or hallucinating, but that the events had really happened." By its definition a hallucination seems real. In fact drunk drivers commonly admit perceiving clarity of thought. Jansen asserts, "A personal conviction of the 'reality' of an NDE does not invalidate scientific explanations."

I have already asked to provide an entirely materialistic explanation of a human consciousness, and received none - obviously.

And still you are ignoring evidences I provide, that there is afterlife.

As a matter of fact you did. You said that when we die, our body is put into the ground, and that's it. So now I'm asking you to prove it.

I would recommend learning the spelling and grammar, and in fact the meaning of many words in the English Language before you begin insulting anyone.

ave been asking someone, specifically Partydevil, to back up his claim that a body loses all consciousness and rots, which is not necessarily the only other possibility.

You said that when we die, our body is put into the ground, and that's it

I dont know why an atheist would try to talk a christian out of his faith...