11
   

SHOUD PEOPLE BE DEEMED HUMAN WITHOUT A MATERIAL BODY?

 
 
Reply Sat 10 Oct, 2009 07:00 pm
SHOUD PEOPLE BE DEEMED HUMAN WITHOUT A MATERIAL BODY?

I wonder; when u get out of your deciduous body, do u lose your humanity?
I doubt that u have human DNA when u are free from that body.
Shoud that be the defining criterion?

Before our deciduous bodies existed, before the embryo,
were we less than human? I 'm sure that most of u will think
that we did not then exist, but most of u confuse your selves with your material bodies.
U r not less of a man after a haircut, nor after u bleed.

I understand that toward the end of Thomas Edison 's life,
he took an interest in the essence of life and ventured to hospitals
where he put the beds of patients who were approaching their final Earthly moments
upon scales of weight, where he allegedly found a loss of weight at the moment of expiration.

I 'd love to see that experiment replicated.
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Sat 10 Oct, 2009 08:45 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
The last gaseous emanations and exudates from the body upon expiry are breath, farts, urine and defecation. The sum weight of these are Edisons measurable differences and not some spiritous form of humanity.
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Sat 10 Oct, 2009 08:59 pm
"deciduous" bodies? We lose all our leaves every fall? who knew?
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Oct, 2009 09:05 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

The last gaseous emanations and exudates from the body upon expiry are breath, farts, urine and defecation.
The sum weight of these are Edisons measurable differences and not some spiritous form of humanity.

The experiment was (purportedly) not of the decedent
standing on a bathroom scale; rather, his bed was put upon
a scale of weight.

Let the record indicate that the 100s & 100s of Earthly deaths
that have occurred duing human history did not characteristically
include decedent imitating someone trying to blow up a balloon,
nor is death determined by a sound issuing from the other end
of the alimentary canal.

Do u challenge this ?
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Oct, 2009 09:11 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:

"deciduous" bodies? We lose all our leaves every fall? who knew?
Yeah; the whole thing FALLS, not just the teeth.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Oct, 2009 09:13 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
How many have you personally witnessed? Youll find that "terminal exudates" are quite common. They just rarely speak of it. EG Elvis died on the can and was found by a pile of excrement (on the floor, possibly syn mortem.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Oct, 2009 09:14 pm
@MontereyJack,
falling off or shed at a particular season, stage of growth, etc., as leaves, horns, or teeth.
3. not permanent; transitory.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Sat 10 Oct, 2009 09:14 pm
@farmerman,
I cannot believe that Im actually arguing this.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Oct, 2009 09:16 pm
@farmerman,
As I said,
its a good experiment to replicate.

Sometimes with experiments, its a good thing to actually see what happens.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Oct, 2009 09:18 pm
@farmerman,
Is it good to ASSUME the results of an experiment before running it
and then to cancel it on the basis of your assumption ?
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  3  
Reply Sat 10 Oct, 2009 10:09 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

I cannot believe that Im actually arguing this.


Highly jocular.
0 Replies
 
oolongteasup
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Oct, 2009 10:44 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
in the name of lavoisier

please experiment
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Sat 10 Oct, 2009 11:04 pm
David, so if something leaves the body after death causing the weight to change (need I tell you that that is totally unproved--far as I can tell the whole Edison thing is an urban legend), then it has to be something material that's leaving. If it is nonmaterial it's not gonna have weight. So you are postulating a material soul. What do you suggest that material soul actually is? Does that sound in any way credible? Do you really think a scale is going to find a weighty soul? That seems to me to be a complete waste of effort. If you want to fund it, from your years of lawyer's fees, go ahead.

The existence of a nonmaterial soul, and some sort of nonmaterial existence of a human being or the existence of a human being in some form after death or before birth is also non-demonstrable. All the evidence points to the "person" being gone when the brain is gone, like Terry Schiavo, your subjective near-death experience not counting as an exception. Find us a non-material bodied human being and the question will be debatable. Until then it's a bit like debating whether the Mad Hatter was real.
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Oct, 2009 01:04 am
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:

Until then it's a bit like debating whether the Mad Hatter was real.


Oh, my!
0 Replies
 
aidan
 
  2  
Reply Sun 11 Oct, 2009 01:13 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
SHOUD PEOPLE BE DEEMED HUMAN WITHOUT A MATERIAL BODY?

No, because if they don't have a body - they're no longer people- human or otherwise.
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Oct, 2009 01:15 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Who would have thought it? At the exact moment of death, you, me, and everyone else, will lose precisely 21g in weight. Just like that. Gone. I know because it says so on the poster for Alejandro González Iñárritu's new movie called, as it happens, 21 Grams and starring Benicio del Torro, Sean Penn and Naomi Watts.

21 Grams
Production year: 2003Country: USACert (UK): 15Runtime: 125 minsDirectors: Alejandro Gonzalez InarrituCast: Benicio Del Toro, Naomi Watts, Sean PennMore on this film

The movie's promotional blurb moves quickly to quash those tempted to guestimate how much body fluid and gas one might expel in a parting gesture to cause a 21g drop in weight by inquiring: "Is it a person's soul that constitutes those twenty one grams?" (Quick answer: no.)

"I've been dealing with death for 45 years and I can say with some confidence there's nothing in it," says Robert Stern, a pathologist at the University of California, San Francisco.

So where does the 21g assertion come from? Who are the "they" who say we lose this amount as soon as our hearts squeeze their final beats and the electrical storms in our brains flicker and fade?

The origin of the 21g figure can be traced to Duncan MacDougall, a doctor working in Haverhill, Massachusetts in the early 1900s. MacDougall had a keen fascination with death and spent part of his career on an almost obsessive hunt for evidence of the soul. He thought that if humans had a soul, it must exist in the body as some kind of material. And that material must weigh something.

MacDougall set out to test his theory with what was an excruciatingly bad experiment. In 1907, the year Einstein applied the laws of gravity to his special theory of relativity, MacDougall published his findings in American Medicine.

MacDougall's paper reveals as much about the author as it does about the quality of work that could get into medical journals at the time. MacDougall describes how he set about converting a hospital bed into a rudimentary balance so he could measure a patient's weight change as they died. The bed balance was sensitive, so to prevent his soon-to-be-dead patients from messing up his data, MacDougall hunted around for people who were dying of tuberculosis. As he noted: "It seemed to me best to select a patient dying with a disease that produces great exhaustion, the death occurring with little or no muscular movement, because in such a case, the beam could be kept more perfectly at balance and any loss occurring readily noted." In other words, there was to be no flailing around that could upset the scales.

In all, MacDougall managed to recruit a mere six dying people for his study, four of whom had tuberculosis. In turn, each was tucked up in his modified bed and their weight monitored until some minutes after their death. Any bowel movements or urination at death were fine, at least so far as the experiment was concerned, as it all stayed on the bed.

With a nod to best scientific practice, MacDougall then repeated the study with 15 dogs, which according to his religious beliefs, were not blessed with souls. It's not clear how MacDougall managed to get his dogs to die without rocking the bed, but some scientists suspect a nasty cocktail of drugs was used.

At the end of his foray into science, MacDougall declared that humans lost up to three-fourths of an ounce upon death, a figure that doesn't have quite the same ring as 21g, the metric equivalent. The dogs, he said, lost nothing. What else might it be if not the weight of the soul departing, he asked.

Before going public with his findings, MacDougall wanted to make sure that his patients' last breaths were not skewing his data, so he clambered on to the bed, (presumably once the last patient was removed and the sheets had been changed) and spent a few minutes exhaling. He then got a colleague to do the same thing. Neither managed to shift the balance enough to account for the weight loss MacDougall reported.

Despite the poor accuracy of his scales, the huge variability in his data, and the all-too-few people studied, MacDougall's experiment was also frustrated by the tricky skill of pinpointing the exact time of death. He was repeatedly challenged as to why the weight change on death appeared to take longer in some patients than others. To rebut the doubters, MacDougall wrote: "The soul's weight is removed from the body virtually at the instant of the last breath, though in persons of sluggish temperament, it may remain in the body for a full minute." He declared later in the paper: "Here we have experimental demonstration that a substance capable of being weighed does leave the body at death."

MacDougall's work was written up in the New York Times, which also covered his hope, some years later, to take a photo of the soul using x-rays. Despite being recorded in the paper that gives us all the news that's fit to print, his work is viewed with palpable embarrassment now. "It's simply not taken seriously," says Stern.

Gruesomely, Stern points out that dead bodies lose a lot of weight over time. Minute, intercellular structures called lysosomes release enzymes that break the body down into gases and liquid. "That's why, when you have mass graves, you can get explosions because of all the gas build-up," he says. "Just think if our bodies didn't break down. Everyone who had ever lived on the face on the Earth would still be here." Now, that would make a good movie.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2004/feb/19/science.science
Ceili
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Oct, 2009 01:21 am
There are three stages to the human body. Foetus, human, human remains. The soul remains debatable. If you are without a human form, I can't see how you would be called a human. A spirit, a presence, memories, legacies,theories, thoughts, history and fortunes... the fruit of ones loins are traces of a persons humanity. But I think, in order for anything to be deemed human, it must be alive with a beating heart, pumping blood, a sparkle in the eye and humanesque form, otherwise, why bother with the word at all?
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Oct, 2009 01:24 am
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
Quote:
David, so if something leaves the body after death causing the weight
to change (need I tell you that that is totally unproved--far as I can tell
the whole Edison thing is an urban legend), then it has to be something material
that's leaving. If it is nonmaterial it's not gonna have weight.
Maybe u r right.
Do recognize Dr. Michio Kaku ?
This evening, I heard him say that a flashlight weighs less
by the weight of the light that has shone forth from it.
I think that 's on point with your question.

Possibly, there might be a mixture of material together with non-material substance.
I acknowledge your point.
Pure consciousness probably has no weight,
but I 'm just shooting in the dark about that.



MontereyJack wrote:
Quote:
So you are postulating a material soul.
I am mentioning an alleged experiment
and opining that its replication woud be interesting.





MontereyJack wrote:
Quote:
What do you suggest that material soul actually is?
Does that sound in any way credible?
Do dispute the quantum physicists who assure us that common sense
has no place in the world of the microcosm?





MontereyJack wrote:
Quote:
Do you really think a scale is going to find a weighty soul?
I really think it doesn 't hurt to find out.







MontereyJack wrote:
Quote:
That seems to me to be a complete waste of effort.
If you want to fund it, from your years of lawyer's fees, go ahead.
That sounds like u think its expensive to put beds on scales.
I 'll take your word for it.






MontereyJack wrote:
Quote:
The existence of a nonmaterial soul, and some sort of nonmaterial existence
of a human being or the existence of a human being in some form after death
or before birth is also non-demonstrable.
It has been demonstrated to those of us
who have had out-of-body experiences.




MontereyJack wrote:
Quote:
All the evidence points to the "person" being gone when the brain is gone,
WHICH evidence is this that u have in mind ?





MontereyJack wrote:
Quote:
like Terry Schiavo, your subjective near-death experience not counting as an exception.
R u arguing that she was dead
when her deciduous body became (substantially) dysfunctional ?






MontereyJack wrote:
Quote:
Find us a non-material bodied human being and the question will be debatable.
We are debating it now.


0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Oct, 2009 01:25 am
@aidan,
aidan wrote:

Quote:
SHOUD PEOPLE BE DEEMED HUMAN WITHOUT A MATERIAL BODY?

No, because if they don't have a body - they're no longer people- human or otherwise.
How do u figure ?
aidan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Oct, 2009 01:31 am
@OmSigDAVID,
I have to get ready to go to work, but I do find this subject interesting so I'll think about it and order my thoughts and try to communicate what I think cohesively. Talk to you later - have a nice Sunday David.
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » SHOUD PEOPLE BE DEEMED HUMAN WITHOUT A MATERIAL BODY?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 04/25/2024 at 01:42:18