The Concept of the human Soul is a religious concept, which has no basis in fact, and does not exist
-
ZurdoDev wrote:
I asked if you believe in the theory of evolution and your "answer" was "I don't need to." That is NOT an answer. There were only 2 possible answers and "I don't need to", is not one of them.
It is, even if you don't like it. I do not believe anyone, and have no need to.
ZurdoDev wrote:
When your wife asks, "do you believe we should do something to help out the kids?", your answer is "I don't need to." :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Precisely, 'cause I damned sure I don't have any kids. The idea that only y/n is valid is again nonsense, and you're abusing that notion to imply that one either believes in the theory or not. That's bullshit; evolution is fact, regardless of your belief :thumbsup:
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
I do not believe anyone,
I never asked if you believed a person. :doh: Geez, you can't seem to follow anything.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
I damned sure I don't have any kids.
Thank goodness. The fact that you can't pass on this crazy notion of "I don't believe anything" is good for the rest of society.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
evolution is fact
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
Falsify this: [Many-worlds interpretation - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds\_interpretation) (I have ten other fundamental theories after you finish with this one) :)
Not a quantum physicist, so I'll let them take point on that.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor
-
Not a quantum physicist, so I'll let them take point on that.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor
-
Nathan Minier wrote:
faith and science
Ironically, you have faith in science. :-D Faith is believing in something that can't be seen. You believe what science teaches you without actually verifying the results yourself, which means you are taking their word for it on faith. We ALL use faith every day in all that we do. It's not a bad thing nor just a religious thing.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
ZurdoDev wrote:
Faith is believing in something that can't be seen. You believe what science teaches you without actually verifying the results yourself, which means you are taking their word for it on faith.
So...science is a "their"? No, I am guilty of having faith in scientists, which is a fundamentally different thing. As a discipline, science is not predicated on faith.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor
-
I'm of course not religious. Just want to point out that science doesn't have all the answers at the moment. Our confidence in it is a bit exaggerated.
Claiming to have all the answers, "Knowing", is an article of faith. Didn't I already say that?
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor
-
I'm of course not religious. Just want to point out that science doesn't have all the answers at the moment. Our confidence in it is a bit exaggerated.
Urban Cricket wrote:
science doesn't have all the answers at the moment
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
-
I'm of course not religious. Just want to point out that science doesn't have all the answers at the moment. Our confidence in it is a bit exaggerated.
Urban Cricket wrote:
science doesn't have all the answers at the moment
The purpose of the scientific method is not to have all the answers but merely to prove or disprove a hypothesis. Because of this science can only be performed on a hypothesis which is able to be disproved which is why science does not explore the question of the 'soul', that question is really is more the realm of philosophy.
Urban Cricket wrote:
Out confidence in it is a bit exaggerated
I agree because many people and particularly many politicians really do not understand the scientific method. In particular, the area of probability which is not intuitive and vital to science is really difficult to grasp for many people.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
-
Claiming to have all the answers, "Knowing", is an article of faith. Didn't I already say that?
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor
-
No, but you claimed that science is falsifiable. Our most fundamental theories are not. String theory is another gem. That is why you will see Nobel prize winners to claim that they believe in one theory or another.
Anything that is scientifically approached is falsifiable provided new information. I don't care how fundamental it is, nor does science. Any "scientific theory" that is not falsifiable in the face of new information is simply not a scientific theory. In the case of quantum physics, they're often predicated on mathematical constructs that fit the circumstances. Again, not a quantum physicist so I can't say which ones that is the case with, but that's also why I don't wander around full of certainty about parallel realities where differences are measured in the spin and strangeness of quarks. Any scientist that "believes" a scientific theory is either using shorthand to say that it has not yet been falsified, or has the same basic disconnect between fact and belief that so many people in this community are demonstrating.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor
-
Anything that is scientifically approached is falsifiable provided new information. I don't care how fundamental it is, nor does science. Any "scientific theory" that is not falsifiable in the face of new information is simply not a scientific theory. In the case of quantum physics, they're often predicated on mathematical constructs that fit the circumstances. Again, not a quantum physicist so I can't say which ones that is the case with, but that's also why I don't wander around full of certainty about parallel realities where differences are measured in the spin and strangeness of quarks. Any scientist that "believes" a scientific theory is either using shorthand to say that it has not yet been falsified, or has the same basic disconnect between fact and belief that so many people in this community are demonstrating.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor
there is a brilliant summary of the current state of affairs in fundamental science: [Shut up and calculate](https://www.queensu.ca/connect/grad/files/2015/02/Dibujo20140531-david-mermin-shut-up-and-calculate.png) The problem is that we may never be able to obtain the necessary experimental information to prove one way or another the current theories. The infinite parallel realities are just a hint of the desperation for some interpretation that doesn't contradict itself.
-
ZurdoDev wrote:
Faith is believing in something that can't be seen. You believe what science teaches you without actually verifying the results yourself, which means you are taking their word for it on faith.
So...science is a "their"? No, I am guilty of having faith in scientists, which is a fundamentally different thing. As a discipline, science is not predicated on faith.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor
Nathan Minier wrote:
I am guilty of having faith in scientists,
Exactly.
Nathan Minier wrote:
science is not predicated on faith.
Exactly
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote:
It is true that over the human history the main explanations of the origin of the 'soul' came from religions and other philosophical materials, but it is still true that we have a - rather complex - part of our existence we do not understand...
There's no need to make up a story to fill the gaps. After dissecting, we never found a soul. When studying bacteria, we did not find a soul. It has as much chance at existing in your body as a nuclear fission-reactor existing in your body, and equal the amount of proof.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
Come on! What have you read?! Try and read my comment this time...
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge". Stephen Hawking, 1942- 2018
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
I do not believe anyone,
I never asked if you believed a person. :doh: Geez, you can't seem to follow anything.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
I damned sure I don't have any kids.
Thank goodness. The fact that you can't pass on this crazy notion of "I don't believe anything" is good for the rest of society.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
evolution is fact
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
ZurdoDev wrote:
I never asked if you believed a person. :doh: Geez, you can't seem to follow anything.
Anyone also includes groups. So again, a non-victory.
ZurdoDev wrote:
:laugh:
You, my dear friend, are being ignorant.
Many scientists and philosophers of science have described evolution as fact and theory, a phrase which was used as the title of an article by paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould in 1981. He describes fact in science as meaning data, not absolute certainty but "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent". A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of such facts. The facts of evolution come from observational evidence of current processes, from imperfections in organisms recording historical common descent, and from transitions in the fossil record. Theories of evolution provide a provisional explanation for these facts.[1]
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
Soul has nothing to do with religion. Soul describes all the things we do not understand inside the human being we are, and for that it is only a word, that you can replace... It is true that over the human history the main explanations of the origin of the 'soul' came from religions and other philosophical materials, but it is still true that we have a - rather complex - part of our existence we do not understand... And no! We do not know better than a few thousands years before, what it is and what made of, and what for... As for today the most scientific explanation of the 'soul' is as good - or bad - as any, a religion came up with... The day someone will actually understand and explain it, the sticker 'Machine Learning' will turn into something real... And that one will became a deity in large parts of the world... :-)
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge". Stephen Hawking, 1942- 2018
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote:
Soul describes all the things we do not understand inside the human being we are, and for that it is only a word, that you can replace...
So where does that lack of understanding go when we die? If it just disappears, does that mean that there is more understanding after someone has died, at least in relative measure? Does it mean that the dumber the deceased person was, the better off the world is after his death? Or from the other end of the line: If you give birth to several kids, does that dumb down the world with lack of understanding, compared to living your life without having your own children?
-
Well Folks We all write programs. The question is: where do your efforts go, when halfway through a debug, your system locks up, and, the only way out is to re-start your computer. Your efforts evaporated, and, increased the entropy of the universe. The Human brain is an incredibly complex computer, which we have not yet mastered to fully understand. It is certainly not Binary. It has it's own system of messaging and information storage. We do not (yet) understand the precise details of the How, but, we can live with the concept. That magnificent but Ill understood Computer runs a program, that gives us our self awareness, our agency to make decisions, and, outside of our awareness, runs the power plant to keep us alive, the digestive system, etc. The concept of Information Technology is relatively New. Until recently, the concept of life with agency could only be explained by means of a Divine Spark of Life, given out by a God of local choice. Furthermore, that imagined spark of life would be eternal, and, Life should should go on somewhere after the demise of the body. A Heaven or Hell, dependent on the religion one practices. The concept of an 'Hereafter' goes back thousands of years. (and as Soul that somehow lives on beyond death) Well I would state that there is no such thing as a soul. When an individual dies, ultimately the Brain is Shut Down, and the information contained therein, goes to increase the enthrophy of the universe. The Concept of a Soul is a medieval construct to explain the things that at the time could not be understood. I think we are in a position to know better now. I for one am not afraid of dying. I will simply cease to exist. This has nothing to do with believing, it has to do with Knowing.
Bram van Kampen
Bram van Kampen wrote:
I for one am not afraid of dying. I will simply cease to exist.
That reflects my basic belief as well. But then I sometimes ask myself (and even others): If I am wrong, would be any great loss to me? Harp music for an eternity - I guess I'd be happy to avoid that. Some old fellow demanding that I surrender and kneel down, obeying him forever. Being told which sounds are forbidden to utter. Which food I cannot eat. Which partners I cannot have. Which thoughts I am not allowed to have. Which pleasures I am not allowed to have ... Sorry, you Christians: I do not find it attractive at all. Some other afterlives may be more attractive. I guess I'd prefer the Norse Valhalla to the world of that brute emperor of the Biblical afterlife!
-
ZurdoDev wrote:
I never asked if you believed a person. :doh: Geez, you can't seem to follow anything.
Anyone also includes groups. So again, a non-victory.
ZurdoDev wrote:
:laugh:
You, my dear friend, are being ignorant.
Many scientists and philosophers of science have described evolution as fact and theory, a phrase which was used as the title of an article by paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould in 1981. He describes fact in science as meaning data, not absolute certainty but "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent". A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of such facts. The facts of evolution come from observational evidence of current processes, from imperfections in organisms recording historical common descent, and from transitions in the fossil record. Theories of evolution provide a provisional explanation for these facts.[1]
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
He describes fact in science as meaning data, not absolute certainty
Yes, I understand that science has bastardized the meaning of the word fact. I don't fall for it. I have my own brain and came make my own decisions.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote:
It is true that over the human history the main explanations of the origin of the 'soul' came from religions and other philosophical materials, but it is still true that we have a - rather complex - part of our existence we do not understand...
There's no need to make up a story to fill the gaps. After dissecting, we never found a soul. When studying bacteria, we did not find a soul. It has as much chance at existing in your body as a nuclear fission-reactor existing in your body, and equal the amount of proof.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
After dissecting, we never found a soul. When studying bacteria, we did not find a soul.
Well that settles it. If you can't find it, it must not exist. :-D
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
Nathan Minier wrote:
faith and science
Ironically, you have faith in science. :-D Faith is believing in something that can't be seen. You believe what science teaches you without actually verifying the results yourself, which means you are taking their word for it on faith. We ALL use faith every day in all that we do. It's not a bad thing nor just a religious thing.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
ZurdoDev wrote:
You believe what science teaches you without actually verifying the results yourself
Ah, the #1 bullshit from religious people to try to convince us that science is faith. I look around me, I see science doings everywhere. As for God, no sign.
-
ZurdoDev wrote:
You believe what science teaches you without actually verifying the results yourself
Ah, the #1 bullshit from religious people to try to convince us that science is faith. I look around me, I see science doings everywhere. As for God, no sign.
Very Large Brain wrote:
he #1 bullshit from religious people to try to convince us that science is faith.
Nope. Once again your biased mind has deceived you. I never once said science is faith. That's pure stupidity.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
Very Large Brain wrote:
he #1 bullshit from religious people to try to convince us that science is faith.
Nope. Once again your biased mind has deceived you. I never once said science is faith. That's pure stupidity.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
You talked about faith in science in a previous. What were you meaning then?
