Atheists... Your life is pointless

Mesquite Wrote:

Quote:

MA,

Soundness of the mind can be a very ambiguous term. It is easy to understand the reason ancients interpreted mind and personality as a separate essence apart from the body, but as with many other areas, modern science has provided new information and understanding of how the brain functions.

We now know how that chemical imbalances in the brain can severely affect what is perceived as personality. Many mental disorders are just that, and can be treated as such.

We can pinpoint areas of the brain where different functions are located such as emotions, memory, motor control etc.

In the example of the injured soldier, he may be fully functional and sound, just different, with missing memories and likes or dislikes varied from before.

As with all scientific knowledge, each answer provides more questions, but the existance of a soul separate from the physical body is looking mighty slim indeed IMO.

Mesquite,

Do you ever tire of analyzing words the way you do? Do you ever just take anything at face value? I am very curious about this.

I assumed that you would understand what I meant by sound mind. Didn't think it necessarily had to be a long, drawn out thing.

Death is a process. You are not dead just because your heart stops temporarily. I agree that if the brain is dead, the person cannot see or hear anything, but they can also never be revived from that state.

It is your choice to refuse to acknowledge current work in the field of consciousness and believe in magical souls that defy the dictates of science. Ah, the comforts of arrogant ignorance.

Idea for a new thread....

"Theists, Your point is lifeless"

Even if there is brain activity, but the person is clinically dead, there is NO way they could have seen something that happened around them. You cannot explain this away.

I have nothing against science. I just don't worship it like you. Like I said, the brain is simply a piece of matter. You cannot prove that there is no soul that retains consciousness after the physical body dies.

I understood what you meant by a sound mind. I was trying to get you to think outside your comfort zone and bring a little dose of reality (Iraq) at the same time. Many soldiers will come home from that conflict changed men or women. Some from physical trauma, others from mental trauma, but forever changed they will be.

So do whatever you want.

John Creasy wrote:

Even if there is brain activity, but the person is clinically dead, there is NO way they could have seen something that happened around them. You cannot explain this away.

If clinically dead is defined as having no heartbeat it doesn't take any explaining, brainfunctioning could go on for a while still on already present oxygen. No reason for brainfunctioning to immediately cease.

Quote:

I have nothing against science. I just don't worship it like you. Like I said, the brain is simply a piece of matter. You cannot prove that there is no soul that retains consciousness after the physical body dies.

Even you will have to admit at least that we have determined that consciousness relies heavily on the brain based upon the extent to which we can manipulate it by screwing around with the brain. What is there to suggest that consciousness can be maintained without a funcioning brain to rely on? Just think what powerful drugs hampering the functioning of your brain does to your consciousness, that is nothing compared to death. (cell death, not cesation of heart functioning)

You must realise that your proposition of a persevering consciousness, with no evidence to back it up, is a far fetched one.

John Creasy wrote:

So do whatever you want.

What if I want to care about other people? What if I want to be good rather than bad? You apparently assume that humans are a bunch of sociopaths by inclination, and that they wouldn't respect other people's life, liberty and property if they hadn't been told so from inside a burning bush. That seems like a cynical and mean-spirited attitude to me, one that is flatly contradicted by my everyday experience. Most of the people I meet want to be friendly and helpful, whether they believe in god or not.

Caring for others is partially instilled in your upbringing of though. If you don't teach a child right from wrong, he just acts on his impulses and urges without concern for others.

I've always wondered why people that are so adamant about the non-existence of God, debate morals and what is right and wrong. If there is no God and this world is truly just a cosmic fluke, than your life and everything that happens in it are of no consequence whatsoever. Why not just do whatever you want and not care about others. After all, survival of the fittest is the name of the game right? Love of others is just some accidental emotion that means nothing. So do whatever you want. Your life, your children's life, and your children's children's life will all be over soon and nothing will be remembered.

agrote, It sounds rather fresh to me, but I don't always read all the posts that I get involved in. "Survival of the fittest" sounds as plausable as any I've heard before.

Mesquite Wrote:

Quote:

I understood what you meant by a sound mind. I was trying to get you to think outside your comfort zone and bring a little dose of reality (Iraq) at the same time. Many soldiers will come home from that conflict changed men or women. Some from physical trauma, others from mental trauma, but forever changed they will be.

You wanted to bring me a little dose of reality (Iraq)? This is:

1. Not the appropriate thread.
2. Not necessary.
3. And an issue I promise that you don't want to get into with me.

And please, tell me why, why do you want me outside of my comfort zone? So I can then be as comfortable as you are? I like my comfort zone just fine, thank you.

Momma Angel wrote:

Mesquite Wrote:

Quote:

I understood what you meant by a sound mind. I was trying to get you to think outside your comfort zone and bring a little dose of reality (Iraq) at the same time. Many soldiers will come home from that conflict changed men or women. Some from physical trauma, others from mental trauma, but forever changed they will be.

You wanted to bring me a little dose of reality (Iraq)? This is:

1. Not the appropriate thread.
2. Not necessary.
3. And an issue I promise that you don't want to get into with me.

Is that a challenge? Name the time and place. :wink:

Momma Angel wrote:

And please, tell me why, why do you want me outside of my comfort zone? So I can then be as comfortable as you are? I like my comfort zone just fine, thank you.

It was simply an effort to try to get you to think. Nothing sinister intended. The same sort of thing that the pro-lifers do in the abortion thread with the graphic descriptions of abortions, incessant ranting about aborting 1 minute before birth etc. You know, the sort of thing you cheer on over there.

John Creasy wrote:

Caring for others is partially instilled in your upbringing of though. If you don't teach a child right from wrong, he just acts on his impulses and urges without concern for others.

That's true, but I think you neglect two points: First, people are born with consciences. They make them feel ashamed when they do wrong, proud when they do something right. That provides people with pretty strong impulses and urges to have concern for others, whatever their metaphysics are. Adam Smith, whose Wealth of Nations you might have heard of, spends a whole book expounding on this. I highly recommend this book, titled The Theory of Moral Sentiments.

Second, teaching a child right from wrong is not the same as teaching them to believe in god. My father is an agnostic, my mother a very moderate Lutheran. They did teach me what's right and what's wrong, but neither used religion as a foundation for teaching it. That contradicts the point you made in your initial post.

Thomas,
Who teaches the parents right and wrong? Whose standard is this based on? Also, people are not necessarily born with a concience. What about the people who do wrong and go against everything that a normal society consider right? These people do not think they are doing wrong. Where is their concience?