Atheism speak your mind about religion

There are LEGITIMATE conditions that medications can help and yes those LEGITIMATE conditions can cause people to act in certain ways BUT you still refuse to accept that the final decision in a person's actions (one without a medical condition) are that person's responsibility. At least, that is what I am gathering from your posts.

Of course, our experiences in life can, will, and do influence our decisions but the final decision is our own responsibility. One abused as a child person may grow up to do the same to another whereas another abused as a child person grows up to not do the same. The decision is theirs.

Scientific examination of their brain? I am sorry but to me that is rather laughable. What you are talking about is taking away the civil rights of others. Did you know you can't force a mentally ill person to take their medication UNLESS it is proven they are a danger to themselves or others? By the time they decompensate to that point, it's often too late. But you are advocating "dosing" people so they will make what...........the decisions you think they should?

If you didn't watch the original video that brought this up, you can view it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5QObhuLxso

As pertaining to the first part of your post, I suggest you jump to 22:05 and view until 22:42. As far as your mind, the mind is limited by the workings of the brain and the various portions of that. This is proven with various cases of brain damage (examples used in the film were Phineas Gage and Charles Whitman). With an unharmed, fully functioning brain, our mind would be able to "move freely" within the confines of those boundaries (as in the neurochemical interactions in the brain). As stated in the video, different portions of the brain and different neurochemicals within the brain influence our behaviors, these are the "barriers" that I was referring to. Now those barriers aren't immovable, but the stronger they are, the more they confine us and the harder they are to move. Our minds are never confined to the point where there's no free will or no "movement". With the case of Charles Whitman, he was "forced" into that agression and that fear, but he wasn't forced into climbing that tower in the middle of that campus and start murdering people. He could have gone to a local grocery store, sorting event, or even just left it at killing his wife and mother and then offing himself. There were many different options within those "confines", but that fact that he was "confined"reduces his responsibility for those actions.

As far as the second part of your post try viewing 22:50 to 23:46 (or longer if you prefer) in the video. There are different options other than just drugs, in which help deal with the root of the problem and is actually like a guide to push back those "barriers" and gives more "space" in to help influence people to make better choices and help to lessen or remove those influences. The reason I commented more on the drug aspect is because that seems to be where Arella Mae seemed confused and I also wanted to keep things shorted and more simplified without branching off into everything else that their is.

Your comment on my analogy means that you didn't understand it. I wasn't referring to the what, but the why. You used the analogy of the dandelion and the root, which is the same thing I was doing. I like how you just assume that I'm ignorant. I may not be knowledgable as to all the specifics with the particular field but I do know a great amount about the brain and mind. I majored in psychology and college and have studied the brain as a hobby extensively because I have epilepsy and the interworkings of the brain fascinates me. It's not the exact same thing, but there is a great amount of overlapping with the two.

Well, that is the materialistic viewpoint, isn't it? In short; reality is physical, it is material,and everything that is immaterial isn't really real. I am not denying that the chemicals in the brain of a depressed mind are different than in the brain of a happy person. I am just saying that this may not be the cause of sadness or happiness.

What would you say that the cause of sadness or happiness would be?

This is a very nice lady who has studied the brain more in depth than any of us!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzT0jHJdq7Q

Wow...I could say volumes about that and very, very little would be good. I'll just say that I disagree with that.

Please share with us your disagreements because this is how I learn! Thanks

Well about the only thing I feel comfortable commenting on, would be that her beliefs on the mind, soul and all that, are completely misconstrued almost to the point of being completely wrong. I prefer sharing my disagreements with people that can offer a rebuttal back because they may have just been something that was stated incorrectly and just needs to be clarified. The reason I comment this particular part however, was because I also researched her further and that seems to be a common part of her beliefs so I think I understand her meaning well enough through that additional research.

As far as 'my' belief on that "spooky stuff" (stupid term), is that it's just a conception. That "spooky stuff" is actually just immaterial things in which people attempt to convey in a materialistic way. They are the things that don't actually exist but that we explain in a physical sense. Science doesn't prove them wrong, just explains them in a different way. This...lady...even stated something similar with her correlation to light and emotions, I agree with her statement on light, but not on emotions. It might be a little forward for me to say, but if Mr. Churchlands "Mr. Man" was "up to par" she might not think that way...that lady needs her "world rocked"...

I do not understand because I would think that she would agree with you!

What part is it that I am not getting?


I hope that you don't think she should be stoned. lol

It seems as such, but with the ineffable, it's hard to explain any other way. They ignore what's there, while we can't explain it. Just about the only physical example I could think of, would be like saying the number 47 doesn't exist. It technically doesn't exist but you can't deny it. 47 is just a representation of something. It could be 47 carrots, ink/graphite on paper, etc. The idea of it exists, but the thing itself does not. She could also benefit from being "stoned"...just not in the biblical sense. lol.

Why is it that I have a sense that you are acting out emotionally, "like a Clergy that is not being intellectually honest with us?

I can only speculate as to why you may think that. My only conclusion is that I believe there should be a balance of both, but she's so far into the intellectual side, that I have to go further into the "emotional" side, in order to balance things out. I'm not really an emotional person. I think I'm more of a calculative, logial, and rational person, so that's where the confusion may lie.

As far as what you've quoted, I'm not certain as to whether you got the meaning or not, but I was referring to her needing to have"relations" as in intercourse...of the sexual kind. The reason that I stated this was because she seems to have a "stick up here rear"...metaphorically. Pretty much everything that she's denying is something that you have to experience first hand, you can't just read or hear about it and be expected to understand.

I am a loss maybe others can relate to you but I thought that if you really understand something well you would be able to teach it to your own grandmother to where she also could understand!

I'll list an example. Tell me how you feel with your most commonly felt emotion (happy, sad, etc.) without using any analogies. It would obviously be something that you are well aquainted with, but something that you cannot convey directly. Another example would be trying to express colors to someone who has been blind their whole life.

Ok so you say that she is wrong on many issues but you are not able to covey how she is wrong? I never heard of that before!

I am not saying that it is impossible but I would have thought that if you are able to covey something to yourself to be wrong that you would also be able to convey it to others as well!

It could be that I am not able to get it, maybe someone will come along and understand you completely and acknowledge what you are saying and share it with us all.

This reminds me of a time when I was at church and someone was speaking in tongues but luckily there was someone there to interpret it to us all!

I was originally planning on having a great deal written in response, but I thought better of it. I'll rephrase my last post into an easy direct question: How do you feel when you are happy, sad, angry, etc. You can pick any emotion that you want.

It can be many things. Expectations that aren't met can make you sad, angry etc, and expectations that are met can make you happy or satisfied. Good surprises, bad surprises... Anything can have an effect on a person's emotional state.
That emotional state can be measured in the brain as certain patterns pertaining to different moods.
And in some cases altering the patterns and chemical balances with medication can alter the emotional state of the mind. I am not arguing against that. I am just saying that there is no conclusive evidence that certain chemical "situations" in the brain cause depression. It may be that these chemical "situations" are an effect of being depressed. I know for a fact that it is possible to get out of depression merely by consciously working on one's own mindset. I know it for a fact because I have done it.
It may not be possible for everyone, and as you say, some biological deficiencies in a person's brain may cause a mindset that cannot be altered by cognitive therapy alone, where medication would be needed.

All I am saying, to repeat myself yet again, is that the mind causes the state of the brain just as much as the brain causes the state of the mind.

When I'm happy I feel happy, when I'm sad I feel sad, and angry when angry, etc.
I got one for you; What time is it when it's 7 pm?

But what does happy feel like? What you stated basically amounts to 1=1...but what is 1? And be mindful that I removed the restrictions against analogies.
As far as your question with 7pm, I'm not exactly sure what you're asking...is it party time? It could also be 1am? or 1pm?

I was just teasing you. "Happy" is a word that describes a feeling, so asking what I feel when I am happy is a bit like asking what the time is when it's 7pm..

I do understand what you mean however. When I feel happy it is easier to smile than when I am not. Food tastes better, sometimes if feels as if the blood is singing in my veins. When I am sad I sometimes feel like a stale beer that has been sitting on the bar untouched for a day in the warmth.

But all these are associations to the word "happy", and they describe the feeling less accurately and more artistically or perhaps poetically than the word itself.