Total Posts:28|Showing Posts:1-28
Jump to topic:

Why can't consciousness survive death?

Outplayz
Posts: 1,262
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/14/2015 11:45:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I really don't see a reason why consciousness couldn't survive death. Yeah, i get the part about the brain being testable, as in, if you damage one part you can lose everything. Is that information really gone though ... the pathways are disturbed/damaged.

I'm far from religious, but i do believe in an immortal consciousness. I think if you look at the consciousness as being able to be immortal raises some interesting questions that you can back up with what we know/observe here.

If I look at consciousness this way it also makes things on earth make sense. But, to start, if the consciousness is immortal then does it go to another body or stay as "pure" (without body) consciousness. I will start with pure consciousness, so next question would be: Did our immortal consciousness chose to come to this world or did it have no choice? I will go with option A for the sake of not writing to much.

I have come to the point of thinking that we are pure consciousness, and we chose to come to this world. I think are brains are how they are so we don't remember we are pure consciousness (what we know in this form would drive us mad in a mortal body), so we can have a human experience. This is why the effects of damaging your brain are what they are. But, to take it deeper, i think we chose what we want to be on this planet...that is the twist i believe to be true. i truly think we are what we create by imagination as mortal and immortal, and there are a lot of personalities if you think about it like that, which is why good and bad makes sense too...would evil really be evil in an immortal form, i don't think so. It needs this type of world "death" to even exist.

what are some opposing points so far? and, i guess what are some additions from those that think this may be true.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2015 12:21:29 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/14/2015 11:45:15 PM, Outplayz wrote:
i get the part about the brain being testable, as in, if you damage one part you can lose everything. Is that information really gone though ... the pathways are disturbed/damaged.

Outplayz, information isn't abstract, but material. It's stored in the configuration of matter, and transmitted via some modulation of energy. There's not really a constructive definition of information outside that.

If you want to say that it's not stored in the configuration of matter, then you'd have to store and retrieve information some other way, and nobody has ever done that.

And if you want to argue that some form of psychosocial identity is storable outside matter, then that's an additional step, and you'd additionally have to say which psychosocial identity is stored (since these things change through our lives and at the moment of death we're often not at our intellectual best), and whether it's static (like a CD) or dynamic -- and if so, how it changes, and what preserves it.

Or, you might decide that's all too complicated and conclude that belief in afterlife is just a specific kind of denial by the anxious and bereaved. If you did, you might also take heart from the realisatio that in not existing, said hypothetical afterlife is therefore not full of rampaging mongols, fascist Nazis, zealous Roman Catholic Inquisitors, little-loved aunts, any deceased members of 4-chan and other sociopathic afterlife trolls. :)

It's not all downside, this permament, irrevocable death caper. :)
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2015 12:36:51 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/14/2015 11:45:15 PM, Outplayz wrote:
I really don't see a reason why consciousness couldn't survive death. Yeah, i get the part about the brain being testable, as in, if you damage one part you can lose everything. Is that information really gone though ... the pathways are disturbed/damaged.

I'm far from religious, but i do believe in an immortal consciousness. I think if you look at the consciousness as being able to be immortal raises some interesting questions that you can back up with what we know/observe here.

If I look at consciousness this way it also makes things on earth make sense. But, to start, if the consciousness is immortal then does it go to another body or stay as "pure" (without body) consciousness. I will start with pure consciousness, so next question would be: Did our immortal consciousness chose to come to this world or did it have no choice? I will go with option A for the sake of not writing to much.

I have come to the point of thinking that we are pure consciousness, and we chose to come to this world. I think are brains are how they are so we don't remember we are pure consciousness (what we know in this form would drive us mad in a mortal body), so we can have a human experience. This is why the effects of damaging your brain are what they are. But, to take it deeper, i think we chose what we want to be on this planet...that is the twist i believe to be true. i truly think we are what we create by imagination as mortal and immortal, and there are a lot of personalities if you think about it like that, which is why good and bad makes sense too...would evil really be evil in an immortal form, i don't think so. It needs this type of world "death" to even exist.

what are some opposing points so far? and, i guess what are some additions from those that think this may be true.

I wish you would start with defining consciousness. If it is self awareness, well a lot of things exhibit some level of self awareness. I certainly think there is a nature of us humans and some animals that is instinctual, natural desires or even socially instilled desires. I think many people walk around as biological machines in that respect. So I don't measure "spirit" or "mind" with metrics of intelligence and or reactions to stimuli.

I think the soul and body are entwined and one goes with the other always. I think "Spirit" is like a personal power supply, dimension, or medium in which soul and body can unite in on common ground.

I agree if we look at people who have suffered brain damage, I think it is akin to a driver trying to drive a car with a tire missing or something else broken. The car is the whole of the body (to include the brain) and even tho driver hasn't suffered any debilitating effects the car is still difficult to drive.

Reversely we know people who suffer non-material injuries. They suffer from trauma or deep depression and the result is often eventual damage to the body. psychosomatic responses.

I like to equate the body to an beast inside us all. It reacts to the surroundings it senses. We can either let that beast roam and drag us along for the ride or we tame it and ride the beast as we like.

I think we are born with neurological and bodily substratum that derive from environmental factors like prenatal and early child hood nutrition and stimuli, and also come from genetic sources. But I think then we have souls that can influence this substratum and offer "choice" as a competing influence to environment vs. genes.

"Choice" for me is the defining characteristic of mind. By choice I mean decision making that is not instinctual but derived from introspective reasoning.

If someone holds the view that we are nothing but biological machines then there is nothing to say that any of their thoughts are rational thoughts but just chemical calculations of a result that are by consensus correct. It is this world view that denies free-will except defined as being "having other options". And It's a view I reject.

I think one of the greatest strengths a person can endeavor to grow is will-power. I have seen people over come addiction, pain, suffering, and more just through will-power. I accept these experiences and observations and even my own small victories with will-power as evidence that there is a "mind" or a "soul".

A biological machine of determinable interactions between firing neurons can not have real choice or will-power to go against it's nature and programing.

Now is this "mind" immortal? I hope so. But I think for that to happen it will need a new body. Is the "spirit" immortal? I think the spirit is a natural universally moving thing and not bound to our personal mind or body. I think the power and energy of the spirit moves on and I'm really not sure how much of me moves with it. Maybe a residual impression but not really me.

Sorry for the long post but you did ask what I thought. I think your own view is a lot like some reincarnation scenarios.
Gentorev
Posts: 2,869
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2015 12:38:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
The brain is a blank slate when the body in which "YOU" the mind develops as the controlling godhead to that body, is born. "YOU" the spirit=mind, a potential child of God, develop within that physical womb, and "YOU" do not cease to exist, when that physical womb is returned to the universal elements from which it was formed.

The root to the word "BRAHMAN" originally meant "SPEECH", much the same as the "LOGOS" is said to mean "WORD," but both are in fact, the gathered genetic information of every universal body throughout all eternity. Both Brahman and Logos, should be seen as the essential divine reality of the universe the eternal spirit from which all being originates, and to which all must return.

You are body, soul and spirit. Your body is made up from the universal elements, and it is activated by the universal soul, which is the animating principle that pervades the entire universal body, activating everything within the universe, from the wave particles to the subatomic particles that make up the atoms which are the building blocks of the molecules from which the universal body is created. It is to the universal soul=LIFE-FORCE that all information = SPIRIT is gathered.

"YOU" the mind, are spirit. The body in which you, [The mind] are developing as the supreme head and controller of that body, is made up of the universal elements, which is activated by the soul [Animating life force] to which all the spirit [gathered information] of all your ancestors, human and prehuman, has been gathered in the evolution of whatever was in the beginning to become who you are, and that parental spirit dwells behind the veil to the inner most sanctuary of its earthly tabernacle=tent, which is your body.

If that body in which your parental spirit dwells, were born without the sense of sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch, etc, then no information whatsoever could be taken into the brain, and "YOU" who are spirit [Gathered information] could never have begun to develop and the living body, in which the parental spirit dwells, would soon die, never having developed a personality = "CONTROLLING GODHEAD" to that body.

Then of the Thee in Me who works behind
The veil, I lifted up my hands to find
A lamp amid the Darkness; and I heard,
As from Without__ "The Me within Thee is blind.".... By Omar Khayyam.

When the body in which you [the mind] are being formed, dies, [This is the first death] and your body: "skin, flesh, muscle, blood, bone, brain matter etc, etc," has returned to the universal elements from which it was created, all that remains, is a shadow or rather, a facsimile of YOU = the mind=spirit, that has been imprinted into the universal life force=soul, from which it will be resurrected in the next cycle of universal activity. Unless of course, the information=spirit that is "YOU" is divided from the universal life-force, which is the second death. For the spirit=information that is you, can be divided from the universal soul----------"For the word of God is alive and active, sharper than any two edged sword. It cuts all the way through to the division of the soul and spirit."
'
The term, "THE WORD OF GOD," pertains to the sense that is identical to the term "LOGOS" or the mold. The mold by which the whole sense of a thing is given. In other words, the very plan from the outset. In Sanskrit the similar meaning is given in the use of the word 'vach.' Vach means word. But in Sanskrit teachings of the Sanatana Dharma, vach has many levels. Including where the word is first considered as being in the mind as a thought, not as the spoken word or speech.

We humans, may express in our spoken words, all the information that has been gathered through the senses of our bodies in the creation of the invisible minds=spirits that are "WE". Our word is the expression of "Who we are." Your words are the spirit that is "YOU" the mind.

But the "LOGOS=WORD" and BRAHMAN=SPEECH" who are the gathered information=spirit of the aeons, express the information that has been gathered to the universal soul as another universal body, which is in the image and likeness to the previous universe, [The Resurrection] in which the eternal Spirit=mind has and can continue to evolve.
The tongue, the sharp two edged sword that divides the spirit from the soul.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2015 12:40:20 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Forgot to add I think we choose what influences us not necessarily what our actions are, or how we think about things. Which is why choosing good influences is so important.
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2015 5:11:32 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/15/2015 4:42:51 AM, bulproof wrote:
Provide an occasion where it has.

The body you had as a baby is no longer, all the atoms have been replaced, that body has been destroyed, and you have a new body, yet you the same person still exist.
bulproof
Posts: 25,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2015 5:32:13 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/15/2015 5:11:32 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 2/15/2015 4:42:51 AM, bulproof wrote:
Provide an occasion where it has.


The body you had as a baby is no longer, all the atoms have been replaced, that body has been destroyed, and you have a new body, yet you the same person still exist.

Provide an occasion where it has.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2015 5:36:15 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/15/2015 5:32:13 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 2/15/2015 5:11:32 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 2/15/2015 4:42:51 AM, bulproof wrote:
Provide an occasion where it has.


The body you had as a baby is no longer, all the atoms have been replaced, that body has been destroyed, and you have a new body, yet you the same person still exist.

Provide an occasion where it has.

The body you had as a baby is no longer, all the atoms have been replaced, that body has been destroyed, and you have a new body, yet you the same person still exist.
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2015 5:56:42 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
You have the same body you are born with, it just develops as you grow. Without a brain, which dies when you do, consciousness can't survive death, imo.
dee-em
Posts: 6,443
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2015 7:24:28 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/15/2015 5:11:32 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 2/15/2015 4:42:51 AM, bulproof wrote:
Provide an occasion where it has.


The body you had as a baby is no longer, all the atoms have been replaced, that body has been destroyed, and you have a new body, yet you the same person still exist.

Do you really think you are exactly the same person as when you were a baby?

Your statement is false anyway. Neurons in your brain are not replaced:

http://askanaturalist.com...
bulproof
Posts: 25,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2015 7:48:37 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/15/2015 5:36:15 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 2/15/2015 5:32:13 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 2/15/2015 5:11:32 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 2/15/2015 4:42:51 AM, bulproof wrote:
Provide an occasion where it has.


The body you had as a baby is no longer, all the atoms have been replaced, that body has been destroyed, and you have a new body, yet you the same person still exist.

Provide an occasion where it has.

The body you had as a baby is no longer, all the atoms have been replaced, that body has been destroyed, and you have a new body, yet you the same person still exist.

So tell me how often you've died then?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
dee-em
Posts: 6,443
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2015 7:55:55 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/14/2015 11:45:15 PM, Outplayz wrote:
I really don't see a reason why consciousness couldn't survive death.

I can feel an argument from ignorance coming up.

Yeah, i get the part about the brain being testable, as in, if you damage one part you can lose everything.

No. The brain is not a computer hard drive. It depends what is damaged, the extent of the damage and what function it serves.

Is that information really gone though ... the pathways are disturbed/damaged.

Yep, an argument from ignorance.

When synaptic connections are lost there is no getting them back. Where would that information be kept do you think? A backup disk? Lol.

The brain is capable of self-repair though, rewiring itself around a damaged area. This is a long slow rehabilitation process and any function that was lost has to be relearned. None of that points to an immortal consciousness as you might naively wish.
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2015 12:54:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/15/2015 7:24:28 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 2/15/2015 5:11:32 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 2/15/2015 4:42:51 AM, bulproof wrote:
Provide an occasion where it has.


The body you had as a baby is no longer, all the atoms have been replaced, that body has been destroyed, and you have a new body, yet you the same person still exist.

Do you really think you are exactly the same person as when you were a baby?

Your statement is false anyway. Neurons in your brain are not replaced:

http://askanaturalist.com...

Well it's always handy to read the comments,
Obviously a naturalist web site would claim the opposite.

I think there is some confusion about cells vs. atoms. There was a study done at Oak Ridge Lab. by Paul C. Aebersold in 1953 that found that 98 percent of all the atoms in a person"s body change out every year, and that within five years all the atoms had changed. Even cells that are not replaced, in the brain for example, must carry out some sort of activities and energy exchanges or they would die. Part of those processes results in the complete replacement of every atom in the cell. I found your article by accident while looking for a copy of the 1953 study. I found a copy, but do not want to pay the $32 for the right to read it. I did find a 1954 article from "Time" about the report. I posted the link below. And an unsourced quote from another article about the 1953 study I found on a blog.
Unsourced quote from

http://www.reddit.com...

Studies at the Oak Ridge Atomic Research Center have revealed that about 98 percent of all the atoms in a human body are replaced every year. You get a new suit of skin every month and a new liver every six weeks. The lining of your stomach lasts only five days before it"s replaced. Even your bones are not the solid, stable, concrete-like things you might have thought them to be: They are undergoing constant change. The bones you have today are different from the bones you had a year ago. Experts in this area of research have concluded that there is a complete, 100 percent turnover of atoms in the body at least every five years. In other words, not one single atom present in your body today was there five years ago.

URL for the Time article
http://www.time.com...
Outplayz
Posts: 1,262
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2015 3:40:14 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/15/2015 7:55:55 AM, dee-em wrote:

" When synaptic connections are lost there is no getting them back. Where would that information be kept do you think? A backup disk? Lol."

How do you know we don't have some sort of "backup disk." I agree with all your points. It is clear that when the brain is damaged that things will go, but i am just stating that i feel not everything goes. I am saying that certain things that you would want to take from this world are being held somewhere. Plus, all in all i am also saying a person chooses to come into a life that may bring them to the point were they will lose everything at some time. Some might just want to come here to live until they are ten and so on. Although i am still philosophizing on that last idea (free will is an illusion), I just don't see any proof that our brains cannot store information. Maybe i don't know something, so that's why i am asking and i look forward to your corrections.
Outplayz
Posts: 1,262
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2015 3:54:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/15/2015 12:21:29 AM, RuvDraba wrote:

"If you want to say that it's not stored in the configuration of matter, then you'd have to store and retrieve information some other way, and nobody has ever done that."

I'm not saying that this stored information is something we know of, i'm saying it's something we don't know and are not aware of for a reason. I don't think it affects our normal selves at all. I think we are here to record specific information to take with us after death. We use this information with whatever purpose we have for it. So, i am basically saying that we are recording within ourselves with a purpose. I think this body is a vessel for something bigger that is still us, but a more advanced form of us. This pure consciousness knows exactly what it is doing, bc it is still us. Some people will reach a point were they go senile but i think that is bc that specific person wanted it like that. I am, i guess in a way, saying we are all "god" but our own bc the pure consciousness knows everything and exactly what it wants/ kind of destiny it wants everywhere it creates itself.
Outplayz
Posts: 1,262
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2015 4:35:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/15/2015 12:36:51 AM, Mhykiel wrote:

"I wish you would start with defining consciousness."

I usually don't define the term bc it could be so different from individual to individual. I guess the best way i can define it is something that can "reason" or has "Intelligence" but then there might be consciousness without either. I guess an extreme analogy i can use to describe what i am saying is a cartoon scenario. Let's say you die from this life and you realize you can create yourself into another world, and you choose to be a main character from your favorite cartoon show. What would you have to do to your main "pure" consciousness that knows everything about you to be able to have that experience. You would have to create some kind of sentient form that can accept that type of reality, so in turn you would have to block all of the knowledge you had as a human on earth, especially seeing that cartoon show. I think there are all types of consciousness on this planet, but the ones more self aware have different destinies. You have some cool points:

"I like to equate the body to an beast inside us all."

I think this is our very "soul" pure consciousness. It can block everything we know of its true self, but what it is will never go away. it promotes this kind of thinking for the purpose of us seeking it which will help develop a more accurate retention of info it wants (but, again, this is different for everyone). That's why everyone thinks there is something more on different levels ... at the pure self, everyone is different. Hence, different beliefs, views, wants, likes/dislikes etc. I enjoyed your post, so i hope you get back to me with some more comments/critiques, thanks.
dee-em
Posts: 6,443
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 7:07:37 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/15/2015 12:54:33 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 2/15/2015 7:24:28 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 2/15/2015 5:11:32 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 2/15/2015 4:42:51 AM, bulproof wrote:
Provide an occasion where it has.

The body you had as a baby is no longer, all the atoms have been replaced, that body has been destroyed, and you have a new body, yet you the same person still exist.

Do you really think you are exactly the same person as when you were a baby?

Your statement is false anyway. Neurons in your brain are not replaced:

http://askanaturalist.com...

Well it's always handy to read the comments,
Obviously a naturalist web site would claim the opposite.

Obviously. Because they are not interested in the truth. Obviously.

I think there is some confusion about cells vs. atoms. There was a study done at Oak Ridge Lab. by Paul C. Aebersold in 1953 that found that 98 percent of all the atoms in a person"s body change out every year, and that within five years all the atoms had changed.

A 60-year old study, really? First issue is they didn't look at every single cell type. They concentrated mainly on the skin and body organs and were in no position to make a definitive statement about all the atoms in the body. The atoms in the ceramic of your teeth do not have any turnover for example.

Secondly, replacement of atoms is not an issue. All atoms are identical unless the replacement happens to be an isotope and even then it wouldn't normally affect the functioning of the cell.

Thirdly it doesn't matter what percentage of atoms or cells are replaced In the body. We are interested only in the mind/brain. That is where identity and memory resides. The cells in the cerebral cortex are never replaced. The other 98% of cells/atoms in your body being replaced is irrelevant.

http://www.livescience.com...

Even cells that are not replaced, in the brain for example, must carry out some sort of activities and energy exchanges or they would die. Part of those processes results in the complete replacement of every atom in the cell.

An in-line atom replacement, even if it occurs in neurons, won't affect the cell. As long as the synaptic connections are maintained, that is all that is important.

I found your article by accident while looking for a copy of the 1953 study. I found a copy, but do not want to pay the $32 for the right to read it. I did find a 1954 article from "Time" about the report. I posted the link below. And an unsourced quote from another article about the 1953 study I found on a blog.
Unsourced quote from
http://www.reddit.com...

Studies at the Oak Ridge Atomic Research Center have revealed that about 98 percent of all the atoms in a human body are replaced every year. You get a new suit of skin every month and a new liver every six weeks. The lining of your stomach lasts only five days before it"s replaced. Even your bones are not the solid, stable, concrete-like things you might have thought them to be: They are undergoing constant change. The bones you have today are different from the bones you had a year ago. Experts in this area of research have concluded that there is a complete, 100 percent turnover of atoms in the body at least every five years. In other words, not one single atom present in your body today was there five years ago.

See above. The 'you' that is you has nothing to do with your skin, liver, stomach lining or bones.

URL for the Time article
http://www.time.com...
dee-em
Posts: 6,443
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 7:26:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/15/2015 3:40:14 PM, Outplayz wrote:
At 2/15/2015 7:55:55 AM, dee-em wrote:

" When synaptic connections are lost there is no getting them back. Where would that information be kept do you think? A backup disk? Lol."

How do you know we don't have some sort of "backup disk."

Because brain damage can, and usually does, result in memory loss.

I agree with all your points. It is clear that when the brain is damaged that things will go, but i am just stating that i feel not everything goes.

Fill in the blank.

A little brain damage causes a small impairment to brain function.
Severe brain damage causes extensive impairment to brain function.
Total death of the physical brain causes ______________________________.

I am saying that certain things that you would want to take from this world are being held somewhere.

Assertions without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Plus, all in all i am also saying a person chooses to come into a life that may bring them to the point were they will lose everything at some time. Some might just want to come here to live until they are ten and so on.

We choose how long we live? Really?

Although i am still philosophizing on that last idea (free will is an illusion), I just don't see any proof that our brains cannot store information.

Of course our living brains store information in the neural connections between brain cells which constitutes our memory. However, that information is lost when those cells die and decompose.

Maybe i don't know something, so that's why i am asking and i look forward to your corrections.

Good. At least you are humble enough to ask questions.
Outplayz
Posts: 1,262
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 4:29:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 7:26:04 AM, dee-em wrote:

"Of course our living brains store information in the neural connections between brain cells which constitutes our memory. However, that information is lost when those cells die and decompose."

But, that's the thing though ... we don't know where the brain stores memories or if it can store it in different forms in other places. It has stayed a mystery bc scientists haven't been able to pinpoint it and when they think they have, some ones brain throws them a curve ball by being different. Are you making this assumption based off how the brain retrieves information? I'd like to know so i can look it up, thanx for your intelligent responses so far.
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 4:41:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
To say that consciousness can survive death means that you are proposing:
1) Dualism
2) That the immaterial can interact with the material (and vise versa)
3) That the mind is an example of something immaterial
4) That the mind can survive without a functioning brain

I see no support for any of these points.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 4:42:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 4:29:07 PM, Outplayz wrote:
At 2/16/2015 7:26:04 AM, dee-em wrote:

"Of course our living brains store information in the neural connections between brain cells which constitutes our memory. However, that information is lost when those cells die and decompose."

But, that's the thing though ... we don't know where the brain stores memories or if it can store it in different forms in other places. It has stayed a mystery bc scientists haven't been able to pinpoint it and when they think they have, some ones brain throws them a curve ball by being different. Are you making this assumption based off how the brain retrieves information? I'd like to know so i can look it up, thanx for your intelligent responses so far.

There are always a few individuals who's brains function differently but that does not even infer that their consciousness resides anywhere but in that wonderful electrochemical computer that is the seat of our reason and being. Without the machine, the program can't run and memory cannot be retained.
dee-em
Posts: 6,443
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:46:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 4:29:07 PM, Outplayz wrote:
At 2/16/2015 7:26:04 AM, dee-em wrote:

"Of course our living brains store information in the neural connections between brain cells which constitutes our memory. However, that information is lost when those cells die and decompose."

But, that's the thing though ... we don't know where the brain stores memories or if it can store it in different forms in other places.

Yeah, we do know. Whilst the process isn't perfectly understood, the fact that memories are stored in the brain as a whole by biological means isn't in doubt.

http://science.howstuffworks.com...

Go to pages 2 and 3 in particular.

It has stayed a mystery bc scientists haven't been able to pinpoint it and when they think they have, some ones brain throws them a curve ball by being different.

How does slight differences in brain wiring help your cause? There is still no doubt that we are dealing with a biological, cell-based system.

Are you making this assumption based off how the brain retrieves information? I'd like to know so i can look it up, thanx for your intelligent responses so far.

What assumption? That memories are stored in the brain? There is no dispute about that. The exact process is not perfectly understood, but the biological basis of memory is certain for the reasons I have previously given you.

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu...

Are you making some kind of veiled reference to extensions to memory which humans have developed such as books, libraries, film, Google and so on?
Outplayz
Posts: 1,262
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2015 7:48:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:46:16 PM, dee-em wrote:

How does slight differences in brain wiring help your cause? There is still no doubt that we are dealing with a biological, cell-based system.

I can see you are right. This is the most logical way to think about the whole process. It would be wrong for me to put everything on this one thing we don't understand, and i don't think i need to. I guess what i am truly trying to do is understand human consciousness/intelligence. Is it truly dependent only on biological components? I guess i'm not sure. Once we understand the brain more, we might get more clues to this question.

Are you making some kind of veiled reference to extensions to memory which humans have developed such as books, libraries, film, Google and so on?

Kinda. These are things i want to use to understand if my premise is correct in regards to we are "immortal". I guess bottom line what i am trying to do is less with the questions of "can it survive" and more towards, well if it did survive, what would that most logically mean. I look at death as four things: 1) It is something we never imagined. 2) it is something we made up as humans (religion) 3) you sleep (no dreams) 4) you sleep (with dreams). This is kinda how i categorize the what if question. If it is number one...well we are in for a surprise. If it is number two, i would say it is more logical for a random belief to be right than any major religion. Plus, we can put these religious ideas to scrutiny and i feel, with this analysis, it is clear man made it up. if it is three, then whatever ... right? we will be gone like the billions of years before our birth. If it is number four, (which with some bias on my part is what i believe) ... what does this really mean? if we are immortal ... what are the implications of this. To me, this would mean that everyone is right. Ultimately, you would become what you know. If you look at this collectively, there is a lot of difference between man. I feel whatever this intelligence is, beyond the mortal world, it knows what it's doing. So, when we look at this world ... what would that mean. I guess i would have to look again at what i am saying. Are we all individual immortals, or would we all just go back to one consciousness (we are all one). I like to think we are all individual "souls" but if we were all one ... well, it would still be the same as if we were individual souls in my opinion. But, if we are all ultimately our own character, then when you look at this world, that is kinda chaotic. What i am trying to do is find sense in this idea. I am an atheist/agnostic. I am just bored of the number 3 choice...really nothing more to think about with that. But, If we are immortal as well ... my question is what would be the most logical reality under that light? As i philosophize on this question, it is getting more interesting with the little things i notice in our world. Like, for one, it would make sense why there is so many different religions bc these are the worlds we created. Everyone views "paradise" differently. If we once lived in a "paradise", and came back to this world (reincarnation by choice, i think to just learn and other perks this world provides from mortality)... the alternative reality would still be with us...but, looking at the big picture again ... there are a lot of these alt. realities. That is why i think intuitively, we view a belief as true or not. I just want to make up an Atheists view on what the implications of immortality would really mean ... if it's true, then what would that mean to us...i think if we look into the premise, we might find some interesting conclusions. I look forward to your response, thanks for all the information so far too btw, it has been a good read.
Pase66
Posts: 775
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2015 8:59:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/14/2015 11:45:15 PM, Outplayz wrote:
I really don't see a reason why consciousness couldn't survive death. Yeah, i get the part about the brain being testable, as in, if you damage one part you can lose everything. Is that information really gone though ... the pathways are disturbed/damaged.

I'm far from religious, but i do believe in an immortal consciousness. I think if you look at the consciousness as being able to be immortal raises some interesting questions that you can back up with what we know/observe here.

If I look at consciousness this way it also makes things on earth make sense. But, to start, if the consciousness is immortal then does it go to another body or stay as "pure" (without body) consciousness. I will start with pure consciousness, so next question would be: Did our immortal consciousness chose to come to this world or did it have no choice? I will go with option A for the sake of not writing to much.

I have come to the point of thinking that we are pure consciousness, and we chose to come to this world. I think are brains are how they are so we don't remember we are pure consciousness (what we know in this form would drive us mad in a mortal body), so we can have a human experience. This is why the effects of damaging your brain are what they are. But, to take it deeper, i think we chose what we want to be on this planet...that is the twist i believe to be true. i truly think we are what we create by imagination as mortal and immortal, and there are a lot of personalities if you think about it like that, which is why good and bad makes sense too...would evil really be evil in an immortal form, i don't think so. It needs this type of world "death" to even exist.

what are some opposing points so far? and, i guess what are some additions from those that think this may be true.

I don't know what really happens, and I don't even take a position. I say, in the end, we all will find out.
Check out these Current Debates
It Cannot be Shown that The Qur'an is Revelation from God
http://www.debate.org...
ethang5
Posts: 4,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2015 8:16:35 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/15/2015 12:54:33 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 2/15/2015 7:24:28 AM, dee-em wrote:

The body you had as a baby is no longer, all the atoms have been replaced, that body has been destroyed, and you have a new body, yet you the same person still exist.

Do you really think you are exactly the same person as when you were a baby?

Your statement is false anyway. Neurons in your brain are not replaced:

http://askanaturalist.com...

John said "atoms" not "cells". The question is, whether it's cells or atoms, it is change. If our minds are so tied to the matter of our brains, how come the matter can change while the mind remains the same?

Well it's always handy to read the comments,
Obviously a naturalist web site would claim the opposite.

I think there is some confusion about cells vs. atoms. There was a study done at Oak Ridge Lab. by Paul C. Aebersold in 1953 that found that 98 percent of all the atoms in a person"s body change out every year, and that within five years all the atoms had changed. Even cells that are not replaced, in the brain for example, must carry out some sort of activities and energy exchanges or they would die. Part of those processes results in the complete replacement of every atom in the cell. I found your article by accident while looking for a copy of the 1953 study. I found a copy, but do not want to pay the $32 for the right to read it. I did find a 1954 article from "Time" about the report. I posted the link below. And an unsourced quote from another article about the 1953 study I found on a blog.
Unsourced quote from

http://www.reddit.com...

Studies at the Oak Ridge Atomic Research Center have revealed that about 98 percent of all the atoms in a human body are replaced every year. You get a new suit of skin every month and a new liver every six weeks. The lining of your stomach lasts only five days before it"s replaced. Even your bones are not the solid, stable, concrete-like things you might have thought them to be: They are undergoing constant change. The bones you have today are different from the bones you had a year ago. Experts in this area of research have concluded that there is a complete, 100 percent turnover of atoms in the body at least every five years. In other words, not one single atom present in your body today was there five years ago.

URL for the Time article
http://www.time.com...

Actually is is an old problem known as the persistence of identity.

http://www.iep.utm.edu...

and

http://plato.stanford.edu...
Identity Over Time
First published Fri Mar 18, 2005; substantive revision Thu Mar 17, 2011

Irving Copi once defined the problem of identity through time by noting that the following two statements both seem true but appear to be inconsistent:

If a changing thing really changes, there can't literally be one and the same thing before and after the change.
However, if there isn't literally one and the same thing before and after the change, then no thing has really undergone any change.

Traditionally, this puzzle has been solved in various ways. Aristotle, for example, distinguished between "accidental" and "essential" changes. Accidental changes are ones that don't result in a change in an objects' identity after the change, such as when a house is painted, or one's hair turns gray, etc. Aristotle thought of these as changes in the accidental properties of a thing. Essential changes, by contrast, are those which don't preserve the identity of the object when it changes, such as when a house burns to the ground and becomes ashes, or when someone dies. Armed with these distinctions, Aristotle would then say that, in the case of accidental changes, (1) and (2) are both false"a changing thing can really change one of its "accidental properties" and yet literally remain one and the same thing before and after the change.

Of course, this solution to the puzzle depends on there being a coherent distinction between accidental and essential changes, and between accidental and essential properties. Some philosophers find this distinction problematic and have developed other solutions that don't require this distinction. In what follows, we discuss these solutions to the puzzle, along with other puzzles that arise when considering the identity of objects over time.

Interesting topic.
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2015 8:18:06 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/17/2015 8:59:18 PM, Pase66 wrote:
At 2/14/2015 11:45:15 PM, Outplayz wrote:
I really don't see a reason why consciousness couldn't survive death. Yeah, i get the part about the brain being testable, as in, if you damage one part you can lose everything. Is that information really gone though ... the pathways are disturbed/damaged.

I'm far from religious, but i do believe in an immortal consciousness. I think if you look at the consciousness as being able to be immortal raises some interesting questions that you can back up with what we know/observe here.

If I look at consciousness this way it also makes things on earth make sense. But, to start, if the consciousness is immortal then does it go to another body or stay as "pure" (without body) consciousness. I will start with pure consciousness, so next question would be: Did our immortal consciousness chose to come to this world or did it have no choice? I will go with option A for the sake of not writing to much.

I have come to the point of thinking that we are pure consciousness, and we chose to come to this world. I think are brains are how they are so we don't remember we are pure consciousness (what we know in this form would drive us mad in a mortal body), so we can have a human experience. This is why the effects of damaging your brain are what they are. But, to take it deeper, i think we chose what we want to be on this planet...that is the twist i believe to be true. i truly think we are what we create by imagination as mortal and immortal, and there are a lot of personalities if you think about it like that, which is why good and bad makes sense too...would evil really be evil in an immortal form, i don't think so. It needs this type of world "death" to even exist.

what are some opposing points so far? and, i guess what are some additions from those that think this may be true.

I don't know what really happens, and I don't even take a position. I say, in the end, we all will find out.


Or not if we cease to be when we die.
Pase66
Posts: 775
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2015 9:04:54 AM
Posted: 1 year ago

Or not if we cease to be when we die.

True, true. We will all experience what will happen.
Check out these Current Debates
It Cannot be Shown that The Qur'an is Revelation from God
http://www.debate.org...