0
   

Passage ...... Where do you go after you die

 
 
Terry
 
  0  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 08:49 am
Gelisgesti wrote:
Mind, people, body and soul ..... if the four of them were in a car that smashed head on into a wall, which would be more likly to survive.
Why would you want to restore a pea to it's pod after the pod has served it's purpose?

Since we know of many instances where the body survives but the mind dies, and no instances of mind existing without body, I would have to say that the body is more durable. If there are people in the car, the ones wearing seatbelts have the best chance of survival. Smile What makes you think that "souls" exist indepently of bodies? Yes, I know about NDEs, but from what I've read I suspect that they are hallucinations induced by brain trauma.

The pea pod analogy does not apply here. Can a rainbow exist without raindrops (or other physical means such as a prism) to diffract the sunlight?

Quote:
If I had a clone it would not be my brother, it would be a copy of me.

Clones are not "copies," they are individuals. A clone has exactly the same genetic parents you do, and would therefore be your brother.

Quote:
DNA would make an exact duplicate of my brain ..... my sul is an entirely different recipie, who knows?

No, a clone would not have an exact duplicate of your brain. Environmental influences affect the development of the brain and some processes cannot be specified exactly by the DNA, such as the development of fingerprints and neural connections.

Brain development
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 08:52 am
Gelisgesti wrote:
Gelisgesti wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Gelisgesti wrote:
kerver wrote:
Yes, I do believe in life after death.
Excellent, an answer that isn't couched.


Interesting that you should characterize Kerver's statement that way.

Actually -- the statement is couched.

By saying he "believes" there is life after death -- he is actually saying "I do not know, but my guess is that there is life after death."

The truly "uncouched" version would be a simple: "I do not know."

Hey Frank, why do you insist on re-writing peoples words. How should she have written "Yes, I do believe in life after death" so that you would interpret her as saying "Yes, I do believe in life after death"?



Can't come up with an answer to my question eh?



You gotta learn to read, Ge'. I already answered that question up above.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 09:51 am
Frank Apisa wrote:
Gelisgesti wrote:
Gelisgesti wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Gelisgesti wrote:
kerver wrote:
Yes, I do believe in life after death.
Excellent, an answer that isn't couched.


Interesting that you should characterize Kerver's statement that way.

Actually -- the statement is couched.

By saying he "believes" there is life after death -- he is actually saying "I do not know, but my guess is that there is life after death."

The truly "uncouched" version would be a simple: "I do not know."

Hey Frank, why do you insist on re-writing peoples words. How should she have written "Yes, I do believe in life after death" so that you would interpret her as saying "Yes, I do believe in life after death"?



Can't come up with an answer to my question eh?



You gotta learn to read, Ge'. I already answered that question up above.


Like pulling teeth.
I read everything again but failed to find an answer, could you point it out for me please?
0 Replies
 
InTraNsiTiOn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 10:10 am
I wonder if Kerver likes being thrown around?
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 10:37 am
Gelisgesti wrote:
Like pulling teeth. I read everything again but failed to find an answer, could you point it out for me please?


Okay, let me do this slowly for you, Ge'.

You and Kerver were going back and forth -- and at some point, she said:
Quote:
Yes, I do believe in life after death.


To which you replied:
Quote:
Excellent, an answer that isn't couched.


To which I responded:
Quote:
Interesting that you should characterize Kerver's statement that way. Actually -- the statement is couched. By saying he "believes" there is life after death -- he is actually saying "I do not know, but my guess is that there is life after death." The truly "uncouched" version would be a simple: "I do not know."


And that prompted you to ask"
Quote:
Hey Frank, why do you insist on re-writing peoples words. How should she have written "Yes, I do believe in life after death" so that you would interpret her as saying "Yes, I do believe in life after death"?


Essentially what you are saying here is that the answer I gave up above -- about what she was actually saying -- is not the answer you wanted.

It is my opinion that the response "I do believe in life after death" is a "couched" way of saying -- "I do not know." I guess one could go so far as to say, it is a couched way of saying "I do not know, but my guess is that there is life after death" ... but in either instance, I consider it couched.

You are, of course, free to disagree with that opinion.

(Kerver, this has nothing to do with you or with your response, which I consider adequate and expressive of your feelings. This really has to do with disagreements that go back several years between Ge' and me.)

Anyway, Ge', as I said -- I gave my answer earlier. I've given my answer a second time now -- and if you have trouble with the answer, deal with it.

But just because I haven't given the answer you wanted, don't suppose you can come up with something like
Quote:
Can't come up with an answer to my question eh?


Frankly, there are no questions you pose that are that difficult to deal with -- even if you want to kid yourself into thinking there are.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 11:05 am
edgar, I don't see death as "rugged," but a natural end to life. Hoping for an afterlife is a useless goal, and a waste of time.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 11:12 am
Now that you have tried to spin it, try answering it .... Hint: Look for a question mark.

How should she have written "Yes, I do believe in life after death" so that you would interpret her as saying "Yes, I do believe in life after death"?
[/size]
0 Replies
 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 11:15 am
I'll probably regret this, but ...

I think Frank is pointing out that the word "believe", is just a softer way of saying "I don't know, but that it is my hope and best guess".

Play nice boys.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 11:36 am
DNA would make an exact duplicate of my brain ..... my sul is an entirely different recipie, who knows?[/quote]

Terry wrote:
Gelisgesti wrote:
Mind, people, body and soul ..... if the four of them were in a car that smashed head on into a wall, which would be more likly to survive.
Why would you want to restore a pea to it's pod after the pod has served it's purpose?

Since we know of many instances where the body survives but the mind dies, and no instances of mind existing without body, I would have to say that the body is more durable. If there are people in the car, the ones wearing seatbelts have the best chance of survival. Smile

Quote:
What makes you think that "souls" exist indepently of bodies?:
Why wouldn't they? Do you consider mind and brain to be the same?
[/b]

Yes, I know about NDEs, but from what I've read I suspect that they are hallucinations induced by brain trauma.

The pea pod analogy does not apply here. Can a rainbow exist without raindrops (or other physical means such as a prism) to diffract the sunlight?

Quote:


[quote]The 'pea pod. analogy pertains to:
"Do they really think that a mind ravished by disease/dementia will be magically restored to full functioning when the body dies?"
You left it off when you quoted me. Does the soul leave the body when the physical or shell dies?



Quote:
If I had a clone it would not be my brother, it would be a copy of me.

Clones are not "copies," they are individuals. A clone has exactly the same genetic parents you do, and would therefore be your brother.

Quote:
Human cloning is a form of asexual reproduction. A child produced by cloning would be the genetic duplicate of an existing person. If you cloned yourself, the resulting child would be neither your son or daughter nor your twin brother or sister, but a new category of human being: your clone.
[/b]

Quote:
DNA would make an exact duplicate of my brain ..... my sul is an entirely different recipie, who knows?

No, a clone would not have an exact duplicate of your brain. Environmental influences affect the development of the brain and some processes cannot be specified exactly by the DNA, such as the development of fingerprints and neural connections.

Quote:
From your link:
Before birth, nature is the dominant actor in brain development, although the environment also plays an important role. According to Dr. Pasco Rakic, a professor of neuroscience at Yale University, "The number of neurons and the way that they are organized is determined by heredity" (Jabs, 1996, p. 24). Scientists know that during the third week of pregnancy, a thin layer of cells in the developing embryo folds inward to create a fluid-filled cylinder called the "neural tube" (Berk, 1994, p. 99). It is in the neural tube where the production of neurons, the brain cells that store and transmit information, begins--at the rate of 250,000 per minute (Nash, 1997, p. 52).

By the end of the second trimester, the process of producing neurons is completed. No more neurons will ever be produced again in an individual's lifetime. Some neurons are programmed for specific functions such as breathing, controlling the heartbeat, regulating body temperatures, or producing reflexes. But, for the most part, neurons are not designated to perform specific tasks, and thus brain development is not complete at this point.
I will grant you that memories are not duplicated, but the brain is developed according to the gene's instructions.
[/b]

Brain development
SOURCE
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 11:56 am
Asherman wrote:
I'll probably regret this, but ...

I think Frank is pointing out that the word "believe", is just a softer way of saying "I don't know, but that it is my hope and best guess".

Play nice boys.


Hi Asherman and welcome back. That was Frank's misinterpretation of a simple statement. I asked a simple question:

How should she have written "Yes, I do believe in life after death" so that you would interpret her as saying "Yes, I do believe in life after death"?

I ask because I wanted to know, I don't understand his/her reluctance to a simple request. Unless he really dosen't have an answer.
Thanks for your input.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 11:59 am
Asherman wrote:
I'll probably regret this, but ...

I think Frank is pointing out that the word "believe", is just a softer way of saying "I don't know, but that it is my hope and best guess".

Play nice boys.


Thank you, Asherman.

That is precisely what I was pointing out.

That, in fact, is the reason I wrote:

Quote:
Interesting that you should characterize Kerver's statement that way. Actually -- the statement is couched. By saying he "believes" there is life after death -- he is actually saying "I do not know, but my guess is that there is life after death." The truly "uncouched" version would be a simple: "I do not know."


I am only tangentally commenting on Kerver's statement. My comment really is directed at Ge's characterization of what Kerver said as being "an answer that isn't couched."

I've pointed out that by putting what she was saying in the words she did (which of course is her right) it was couching.

I've now called that to Ge's attention three ...oops, four times -- and you once.

I wonder if he will finally get it -- or if he will continue to insist that because I have not given him the answer he wants, I have not answered his question.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 12:03 pm
Kerver, Please have patience, we will tell you what you said as soon as we iron it out. WinkWink
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 12:11 pm
Frank, you have not provided any answer to my question. OK, typing real slow ..... the question is ....

How should she have written "Yes, I do believe in life after death" so that you would interpret her as saying "Yes, I do believe in life after death"? [/size]
A simple question, really.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 12:14 pm
CI
I will type real slow - read my lips - I DON'T WANNA DIE. That's what makes it rugged.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 12:39 pm
edgarblythe wrote:
CI
I will type real slow - read my lips - I DON'T WANNA DIE. That's what makes it rugged.


Edgar, I think CI is thinking of a room full of rugs. Smile
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 01:31 pm
Gelisgesti wrote:
Frank, you have not provided any answer to my question. OK, typing real slow ..... the question is ....

How should she have written "Yes, I do believe in life after death" so that you would interpret her as saying "Yes, I do believe in life after death"? [/size]
A simple question, really.




You have your answer.

I've given it four times already.

You apparently do not like the answer -- or you would be dealing with it. So instead, you are going through these historonics and melodramatics to avoid doing so.

I must admit that I am enjoying the pretence; it truly is an amusing display. But it really isn't going anywhere -- and we both know that you will soon run out of colors to work with and that there is a limit to how large you can make your text, so...

...wouldn't it be better for you to give up the posturing and simply deal with the answer I have given?

Or, if you don't want to deal with it, just drop it.

I can't imagine any of this other stuff you are going through is selling!
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 02:12 pm
Frank Apisa wrote:
Gelisgesti wrote:
Frank, you have not provided any answer to my question. OK, typing real slow ..... the question is ....

How should she have written "Yes, I do believe in life after death" so that you would interpret her as saying "Yes, I do believe in life after death"? [/size]
A simple question, really.




You have your answer.

I've given it four times already.

You apparently do not like the answer -- or you would be dealing with it. So instead, you are going through these historonics and melodramatics to avoid doing so.

I must admit that I am enjoying the pretence; it truly is an amusing display. But it really isn't going anywhere -- and we both know that you will soon run out of colors to work with and that there is a limit to how large you can make your text, so...

...wouldn't it be better for you to give up the posturing and simply deal with the answer I have given?

Or, if you don't want to deal with it, just drop it.

I can't imagine any of this other stuff you are going through is selling!


OK, we'll play it your way .... what you are saying is that you 'believe' you have answered the question but what you really mean is 'I don't know, I'm just guessing' ............... that is good enough for me.

Quote:
I can't imagine any of this other stuff you are going through is selling!

How would you know, your only expertise is in telling people what they are thinking. A 'one trick' pony. I don't say anything that I can't reference .... can you say that?
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 10:18 pm
truth
Asherman, that IS what Frank means by believe. He just agreed with you on that. I think that most people mean by the term "I think I know, but I'm not certain." In religion, of course, the faithful often equate their belief with certainty.
0 Replies
 
kerver
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 10:40 pm
O.k, maybe i can help clear this mess up. What I meant by saying "I believe in life after death" was that I WILL be re-born again or I will become a ghost. So can we just drop this whole charade. Really, whats the point in carrying on. No one knows what happens when we die, and everyone has different beliefs on it, the only certain thing is that eventually we will all die. So please, don't we all have better things to be doing then arguing over something as silly as this?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2004 11:04 pm
Oh, gosh, edgar. I have real bad news for you! We're all gonna die.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 8.07 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 05:10:09