Searching for GOD...

[Rhiannon]

Positive beliefs have similar physical effects. So do prayer/mediation/contemplation. I'm familiar with the Taize chants and they are very meditative in form.

As I have said many times already, it's mind over matter. All positive effects attributed to "God" are produced by the belief in "God" ... that's all.

It can be 'body over mind' too. For example, it's now thought many 'hauntings' are due to the effect infrasound has on the body - people experience anxious, cold feelings and get creeped out. Chanting will produce pleasurable feelings - uplifted emotions that could be put down to experiencing 'God's love', especially when a stage is set - a sacred building, candles, iconography, others singing. It's also believed that certain musical keys can gave a physical effect on the body.

[savillerow]

msg 2818 AB "believe in your soul" Just help me out a bit here. Can you define this "soul" for me.

[Leonard James]

Len,
You always manage to use your considerable intelligence to think up a logical explanation for whatever I put forward...

That's because there always is a logical explanation, but because you have convinced yourself that "God" exists, you prefer to ignore it.

...but the irony is that the free thought you use to construct this reply has in itself no logical explanation.

There is no logical explanation for what drives your free thoughts, nor what percieves them, nor what the thought is physically comprised of.

Nonsense, Alan! Even though I am ignorant of the exact course of events which evolution took in developing reactions to exterior stimuli, and which finally led to the nervous system and the human brain, I am aware that the whole process was one of mutation and natural selection. Tiny steps and time are all that is needed to climb the highest mountain.

Believe in your soul, for that is what you are.

If you want to call my brain my soul, that is fine by me, but don't try to tell me that it is something other than my brain, because you have no evidence to claim such a thing.

[Maeght]

Well, really, Alan! 

This man is just one of the very few people that gets pleasure from helping others without reward to himself ... other than the pleasure it gives him to do so. Why on earth do you think this ia a sign of "God" in him?

Len,
You always manage to use your considerable intelligence to think up a logical explanation for whatever I put forward, but the irony is that the free thought you use to construct this reply has in itself no logical explanation.

There is no logical explanation for what drives your free thoughts, nor what percieves them, nor what the thought is physically comprised of.

Believe in your soul, for that is what you are.

You haven't addressed the point being made though. How does your example demonstrate the existence of God rather than just the effect of belief in God or just that some people are nicer than others?

[torridon]

Well, really, Alan! 

This man is just one of the very few people that gets pleasure from helping others without reward to himself ... other than the pleasure it gives him to do so. Why on earth do you think this ia a sign of "God" in him?

Len,
You always manage to use your considerable intelligence to think up a logical explanation for whatever I put forward, but the irony is that the free thought you use to construct this reply has in itself no logical explanation.

There is no logical explanation for what drives your free thoughts, nor what percieves them, nor what the thought is physically comprised of.

Believe in your soul, for that is what you are.

I don't see that a 'soul' offers anything of real explanatory value. What 'drives the thoughts' a soul has, what are a soul's thoughts 'physically composed of' ?  It's a hallmark of a fantasy idea that there is little or no detail to be found when you scratch the surface.   If you were a neuroscientist building models of how brains make decisions you wouldn't get very far in your career if you remained fixated on this limiting notion that it is a soul really making choices overriding whatever the brain might be doing.

[torridon]

Positive beliefs have similar physical effects. So do prayer/mediation/contemplation. I'm familiar with the Taize chants and they are very meditative in form.

As I have said many times already, it's mind over matter. All positive effects attributed to "God" are produced by the belief in "God" ... that's all.

It can be 'body over mind' too. For example, it's now thought many 'hauntings' are due to the effect infrasound has on the body - people experience anxious, cold feelings and get creeped out. Chanting will produce pleasurable feelings - uplifted emotions that could be put down to experiencing 'God's love', especially when a stage is set - a sacred building, candles, iconography, others singing. It's also believed that certain musical keys can gave a physical effect on the body.

I like the musical allusion there. I often think of humans as being like tuning forks which can pick up a resonance in the air and replicate it in sound.  When you hear a groovy beat, your feet start to tap to the rhythm; you see someone laughing, it catches, and you start to laugh too; beliefs work like that too, when I see a christian, I see someone that resonates to the idea of a god incarnated into human flesh.

[Alan Burns]

I don't see that a 'soul' offers anything of real explanatory value. What 'drives the thoughts' a soul has, what are a soul's thoughts 'physically composed of' ?  It's a hallmark of a fantasy idea that there is little or no detail to be found when you scratch the surface.   If you were a neuroscientist building models of how brains make decisions you wouldn't get very far in your career if you remained fixated on this limiting notion that it is a soul really making choices overriding whatever the brain might be doing.

Neuroscience is making great progress in finding out how the wonderful brain machine works, but it does not define the driver.

[wigginhall]

torridon wrote:

I like the musical allusion there. I often think of humans as being like tuning forks which can pick up a resonance in the air and replicate it in sound.  When you hear a groovy beat, your feet start to tap to the rhythm; you see someone laughing, it catches, and you start to laugh too; beliefs work like that too, when I see a christian, I see someone that resonates to the idea of a god incarnated into human flesh.

I would change the word 'idea' there to 'symbol', as I think symbols operate at a deep level in humans, if you like, non-intellectual, or pre-intellectual. 

As to why the symbol of God-turned-man should have been so powerful in human history, well, there are many different views.   One obvious one is that it brings together the transcendent and the non-transcendent (ordinary life) into one symbol.   Don't ask me what the transcendent is.

But then, why has the symbolism faded?  I think symbols for humans are always being created, are fading, being destroyed, being recreated, and so on. 

[Alan Burns]

Alan, explain to me how it is that your religion has no evidence to differentiate it from any other?

Jesus

[Alan Burns]

msg 2818 AB "believe in your soul" Just help me out a bit here. Can you define this "soul" for me.

Soul has no material definition because material does not perceive and material does not make conscious choices.

[Maeght]

We've done the soul/consciousness thing to death on lots of threads - but you still haven't answered the point about whether you naccept that the example you gave demonstartes nothing about the actual existence of God.

[Alan Burns]

We've done the soul/consciousness thing to death on lots of threads - but you still haven't answered the point about whether you naccept that the example you gave demonstartes nothing about the actual existence of God.

Once we accept the reality of our soul, we have to accept that our soul did not originate from the material of this universe.  It came from God.

[Leonard James]

Neuroscience is making great progress in finding out how the wonderful brain machine works, but it does not define the driver.

It doesn't need a driver, it is a natural collection of matter that has evolved to operate itself.

[Leonard James]

Once we accept the reality of our soul, we have to accept that our soul did not originate from the material of this universe.  It came from God.

Accepting the "reality" of the soul is not on the table for people who like to believe things that there is evidence for.

[torridon]

msg 2818 AB "believe in your soul" Just help me out a bit here. Can you define this "soul" for me.

Soul has no material definition because material does not perceive and material does not make conscious choices.

Trouble is, your 'soul' has no definition at all, and that's a hallmark of a fantasy idea.  Give us some detail on a soul, and we can start to investigate it. It's just a placeholder for something that you cannot understand.

[Maeght]

We've done the soul/consciousness thing to death on lots of threads - but you still haven't answered the point about whether you naccept that the example you gave demonstartes nothing about the actual existence of God.

Once we accept the reality of our soul, we have to accept that our soul did not originate from the material of this universe.  It came from God.

That's not what I was asking you. The soul discussion has been done before. What I asked was whether you accept that the example you gave demonstartes nothing about the actual existence of God.

[torridon]

We've done the soul/consciousness thing to death on lots of threads - but you still haven't answered the point about whether you naccept that the example you gave demonstartes nothing about the actual existence of God.

Once we accept the reality of our soul, we have to accept that our soul did not originate from the material of this universe.  It came from God.

I don't think that follows.

But even so, we first need to establish that it exists at all; I'd feel on safer ground with this notion when we have some solid science around it, otherwise what is there to separate it from make-believe ?

[Alan Burns]

Even though I am ignorant of the exact course of events which evolution took in developing reactions to exterior stimuli, and which finally led to the nervous system and the human brain, I am aware that the whole process was one of mutation and natural selection. Tiny steps and time are all that is needed to climb the highest mountain.

For my PhD I developed methods of computer aided optimisation which involved investigating billions of combinations of discrete variables to find a feasible combination which was closest to the goal, identified as the objective function.  Initially the search began with randomly selected combinations with checks to verify feasibility and closeness to the objective function.  The method required intelligent manipulation of the variables, based on historical results in order to move incrementally towards the objective function.

I see many parallels between my methods of intelligent, manipulative searching and the process of evolution.  The process of evolution as understood by materialists does not have specific objectives or intelligent manipulation.  The end product of the materialist process is just a survival machine which has somehow been assembled by unguided events.  The human being has attributes which take us way beyond what is needed for survival, and is the end result of billions of beneficial events which have occurred in an otherwise hostile universe.  In this process I see the work of an intelligence beyond human comprehension.

[SusanDoris]

alan Burns

If this intelligence is 'beyond human comprehension', how come you profess to seem to know about it?

[floo]

In this process I see the work of an intelligence beyond human comprehension.


What we might not be able to comprehend now, we will probably be able to do so in time. The human thirst for knowledge has achieved remarkable feats and will continue to do so, imo.

[wigginhall]

How about gravity?  Nobody understands how it works, although we can describe its effects.  Does this mean that it is created by an intelligence beyond human comprehension? 

[Alan Burns]

How about gravity?  Nobody understands how it works, although we can describe its effects.  Does this mean that it is created by an intelligence beyond human comprehension?

Gravity shows no specific complexity in itself, so it can't be used as a pointer to intelligent design.

[Gordon]

How about gravity?  Nobody understands how it works, although we can describe its effects.  Does this mean that it is created by an intelligence beyond human comprehension?

Gravity shows no specific complexity in itself, so it can't be used as a pointer to intelligent design.

So, you are saying that gravity is not a consequence of intelligent design?

[Leonard James]

The human being has attributes which take us way beyond what is needed for survival, and is the end result of billions of beneficial events which have occurred in an otherwise hostile universe.

Indeed, and that is because many mutations take place which, while they are not needed for survival, they are not detrimental to it, and are passed on until a situation arises where they can be used for something other than necessity.

In this process I see the work of an intelligence beyond human comprehension.

I do not deny the possibility of that, but I vehemently oppose any claim to know anything about that intelligence, if it exists.

Nobody can possibly know anything about something that is beyond human comprehension.

[Alan Burns]

How about gravity?  Nobody understands how it works, although we can describe its effects.  Does this mean that it is created by an intelligence beyond human comprehension?

Gravity shows no specific complexity in itself, so it can't be used as a pointer to intelligent design.

So, you are saying that gravity is not a consequence of intelligent design?

No that is not what I said.
I said it could not be used as a pointer to intelligent design.