Total Posts:119|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

answer this, if you don't believe in soul.

lightseeker
Posts: 1,026
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 4:28:49 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
let's assume that it's year 2200. so, once upon a time, there was a criminal. he'd done something pretty bad, that brought him a death sentence. but he escaped justice and was captured after 10 years. during these years, due to some accidents and health issues, he'd lost his eyes, his brain, his hands, his legs, his heart, his kidneys, a lot of his blood, and pretty much all other parts of his body in one time or another, but since he had money, he was able to replace them all with new parts.

so when this guy is captured, will he be held accountable for the crime he'd committed 10 years ago, or not?
distraff
Posts: 1,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 4:36:55 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 4:28:49 PM, lightseeker wrote:
let's assume that it's year 2200. so, once upon a time, there was a criminal. he'd done something pretty bad, that brought him a death sentence. but he escaped justice and was captured after 10 years. during these years, due to some accidents and health issues, he'd lost his eyes, his brain, his hands, his legs, his heart, his kidneys, a lot of his blood, and pretty much all other parts of his body in one time or another, but since he had money, he was able to replace them all with new parts.

so when this guy is captured, will he be held accountable for the crime he'd committed 10 years ago, or not?

Your brain contains all your memories, your consciousness, and its structure defines who you are. So if your brain is removed, then you will die. If your brain is replaced with another then what is living in your body is someone else.

So the new brain of this guy is someone else and is not responsible for the actions of the previous owner of the body.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 4:39:22 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 4:28:49 PM, lightseeker wrote:
let's assume that it's year 2200. so, once upon a time, there was a criminal. he'd done something pretty bad, that brought him a death sentence. but he escaped justice and was captured after 10 years. during these years, due to some accidents and health issues, he'd lost his eyes, his brain, his hands, his legs, his heart, his kidneys, a lot of his blood, and pretty much all other parts of his body in one time or another, but since he had money, he was able to replace them all with new parts.

so when this guy is captured, will he be held accountable for the crime he'd committed 10 years ago, or not?

Not a shred of evidence or an iota of indication to an observation, nothing at all other than an ancient referral to superstition, you are forced to stoop so low to the bottom of the barrel of reason and rationale so as to create a far fetched, seemingly impossible scenario in order to show why you believe in a soul?
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Omniverse
Posts: 973
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 4:41:27 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
I've already caught lightseeker indulging in a number of logical fallacies. He doesn't even know what logical fallacies are, hence his propensity to fall prey to them.

Please review what "Appeal to Consequences" is. The entire OP will be instantly pulverized.

Oh, some of the Muslim theocratic sycophants back in Iran are so pathetically oblivious to the rudiments of logic and yet they presume to pontificate on it. Oh, they also condone the public lashing of teens and death sentences on non-Muslim foreigners who happen to be novelists.

Maybes there's a correlation between the two...
keithprosser
Posts: 2,019
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 4:55:05 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
I'll suggest a slight variation which I think might make the issue clearer. Suppose the criminal exchanged his brain with an innocent person before they are both arrested.

Given brains can't be exchanged more than once, which one should be executed?

Please - no one says its a no-brainer!
lightseeker
Posts: 1,026
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 5:09:19 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 4:36:55 PM, distraff wrote:
At 7/31/2016 4:28:49 PM, lightseeker wrote:
let's assume that it's year 2200. so, once upon a time, there was a criminal. he'd done something pretty bad, that brought him a death sentence. but he escaped justice and was captured after 10 years. during these years, due to some accidents and health issues, he'd lost his eyes, his brain, his hands, his legs, his heart, his kidneys, a lot of his blood, and pretty much all other parts of his body in one time or another, but since he had money, he was able to replace them all with new parts.

so when this guy is captured, will he be held accountable for the crime he'd committed 10 years ago, or not?

Your brain contains all your memories, your consciousness, and its structure defines who you are. So if your brain is removed, then you will die. If your brain is replaced with another then what is living in your body is someone else.

So the new brain of this guy is someone else and is not responsible for the actions of the previous owner of the body.

so you say if a good person for example, exchanges his brain with that of a bad person, he'll become that bad person?
lightseeker
Posts: 1,026
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 5:13:14 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 4:39:22 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 7/31/2016 4:28:49 PM, lightseeker wrote:
let's assume that it's year 2200. so, once upon a time, there was a criminal. he'd done something pretty bad, that brought him a death sentence. but he escaped justice and was captured after 10 years. during these years, due to some accidents and health issues, he'd lost his eyes, his brain, his hands, his legs, his heart, his kidneys, a lot of his blood, and pretty much all other parts of his body in one time or another, but since he had money, he was able to replace them all with new parts.

so when this guy is captured, will he be held accountable for the crime he'd committed 10 years ago, or not?

Not a shred of evidence or an iota of indication to an observation, nothing at all other than an ancient referral to superstition, you are forced to stoop so low to the bottom of the barrel of reason and rationale so as to create a far fetched, seemingly impossible scenario in order to show why you believe in a soul?

actually that scenario isn't all that impossible. most of the parts of the body, even now, can be exchanged. the only important one that remains, is the brain. and if you think memories and character and things like wisdom, humanity, courage, ... are stored in the brain, you should be able to extract those from a dead man's brains.
Les_Rong
Posts: 341
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 5:14:46 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 4:28:49 PM, lightseeker wrote:
let's assume that it's year 2200. so, once upon a time, there was a criminal. he'd done something pretty bad, that brought him a death sentence. but he escaped justice and was captured after 10 years. during these years, due to some accidents and health issues, he'd lost his eyes, his brain, his hands, his legs, his heart, his kidneys, a lot of his blood, and pretty much all other parts of his body in one time or another, but since he had money, he was able to replace them all with new parts.

so when this guy is captured, will he be held accountable for the crime he'd committed 10 years ago, or not?

No, because he'll be dead. No brain, no person.

btw, this is a kindergarten level paradox about identity. If I have a hammer, and replace the handle, then the head, is it the same hammer, or different? If the same, does that mean the hammer has a soul?
lightseeker
Posts: 1,026
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 5:15:49 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 4:41:27 PM, Omniverse wrote:
I've already caught lightseeker indulging in a number of logical fallacies. He doesn't even know what logical fallacies are, hence his propensity to fall prey to them.

Please review what "Appeal to Consequences" is. The entire OP will be instantly pulverized.

Oh, some of the Muslim theocratic sycophants back in Iran are so pathetically oblivious to the rudiments of logic and yet they presume to pontificate on it. Oh, they also condone the public lashing of teens and death sentences on non-Muslim foreigners who happen to be novelists.

Maybes there's a correlation between the two...

dude, answer the question if you can. things like lashing and other B.S that you're spewing from your mouth have been answered and refuted more than once. not accepting logic, doesn't turn you into a hotshot, it just makes you look more moronic.
Omniverse
Posts: 973
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 5:21:05 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 5:15:49 PM, lightseeker wrote:
At 7/31/2016 4:41:27 PM, Omniverse wrote:
I've already caught lightseeker indulging in a number of logical fallacies. He doesn't even know what logical fallacies are, hence his propensity to fall prey to them.

Please review what "Appeal to Consequences" is. The entire OP will be instantly pulverized.

Oh, some of the Muslim theocratic sycophants back in Iran are so pathetically oblivious to the rudiments of logic and yet they presume to pontificate on it. Oh, they also condone the public lashing of teens and death sentences on non-Muslim foreigners who happen to be novelists.

Maybes there's a correlation between the two...

dude, answer the question if you can. things like lashing and other B.S that you're spewing from your mouth have been answered and refuted more than once. not accepting logic, doesn't turn you into a hotshot, it just makes you look more moronic.

Says the individual who can't fathom what logical fallacies are and therefore keeps committing them left and right. "Appeal to consequences" , go and learn what it is and re-read your OP.

OP instantly pulverized.
lightseeker
Posts: 1,026
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 5:25:19 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 4:55:05 PM, keithprosser wrote:
I'll suggest a slight variation which I think might make the issue clearer. Suppose the criminal exchanged his brain with an innocent person before they are both arrested.

Given brains can't be exchanged more than once, which one should be executed?

Please - no one says its a no-brainer!

all right. we can either say that character is stored inside the brain, or in the soul. if you go with the former, you should be able to extract character and consciousness and things like humanity, ... from a dead person's brains. which you can't.

and if you go with the latter, then the answer is the criminal, because brain is like other parts of the body, with a specific function, which is to control the body and give inputs of the senses to the soul to analyze.
lightseeker
Posts: 1,026
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 5:31:53 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 5:14:46 PM, Les_Rong wrote:
At 7/31/2016 4:28:49 PM, lightseeker wrote:
let's assume that it's year 2200. so, once upon a time, there was a criminal. he'd done something pretty bad, that brought him a death sentence. but he escaped justice and was captured after 10 years. during these years, due to some accidents and health issues, he'd lost his eyes, his brain, his hands, his legs, his heart, his kidneys, a lot of his blood, and pretty much all other parts of his body in one time or another, but since he had money, he was able to replace them all with new parts.

so when this guy is captured, will he be held accountable for the crime he'd committed 10 years ago, or not?

No, because he'll be dead. No brain, no person.
so you're saying that transplanting the brain, will never happen? the same thing could've been said about heart for example not that long ago.

btw, this is a kindergarten level paradox about identity. If I have a hammer, and replace the handle, then the head, is it the same hammer, or different? If the same, does that mean the hammer has a soul?

of course the hammer wont be the same hammer, because a hammer doesn't have a self. the goal of this question is that we all have an unchanging self. the self that remains constant, even when different parts of our bodies might change. I'm me, and have always been me. our body is changing every second of every day, yet our self remain the same. and by self, I don't mean character, I mean the awareness that you're mounting your character on.
keithprosser
Posts: 2,019
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 5:44:55 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
you should be able to extract character and consciousness and things like humanity, ... from a dead person's brains. which you can't.

If we're going to worry about what we can and can't do neither the op scenario or my update of it are possible so where do we go? Why can't I extract such things from a brain? I'd say you can't get them from a dead brain, but you might grom a living brain beacase such things as character and consciousness are produced by the operation of a working brain - that is what brains do; they make conscousness.

Now if you say that character and consciousness are elements of the soul and the soul is departed from a dead person that is fair enough, that is your position. But it is not mine!

Just to make sure: My answer to my question is that one would undoubtedly execute the body containing the brain of the murderer.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 5:46:58 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
If these are the extraordinary lenghths you need to go to to justify religions, it is no wonder that they are dying out.
Omniverse
Posts: 973
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 5:48:11 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
The never-ending stream of fallacies just gushes out!

So because we currently cannot extract "character and consciousness and things like humanity, ... from a dead person's brains", this proves soul exists?!

Fantastic.

Source: http://theskepticalzone.com...

"
Split-brain patients and the dire implications for the soul

Many of our readers " especially among the regulars at Uncommon Descent " are substance dualists. That is, they believe that each of us has an immaterial mind or soul that constitutes our true self, and that the body, including the brain, is merely a vehicle "inhabited" and controlled by the mind or soul.

There are many problems with this idea, which is why it is rejected by most neuroscientists and philosophers. One of the most striking is the problem posed by the strange characteristics of split-brain patients, as described in this video by VS Ramachandran:
"

In one notorious split-brain patient, one side was theist and the other atheist.
Please note that " In experiments with split-brain patients, it"s possible to pass information to one hemisphere but not the other. The left hemisphere literally doesn"t know what the right hemisphere knows, and vice-versa."

The question whether he was a believer or not was asked to a split-brain patient. One side answered Theist, the other Atheist. Gosh, that poor soul just have been confused....

Source: http://www.legiontheory.com...

"
(....)
An even more compelling illustration of split-brain multiple consciousness and will, is the case of the patient Paul S. For most people, their speech is controlled by their left cortical hemisphere, but very rarely a person has speech areas in both hemispheres. Paul S. was just such a person. He was also a patient who received a commissurotomy. After his split-brain surgery, both his left hemisphere and his right hemisphere could speak. When they did, Paul"s left hemisphere said that he wanted to be a draftsman, and his right hemisphere said he wanted to be a racing driver
"
distraff
Posts: 1,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 6:00:08 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 5:09:19 PM, lightseeker wrote:
At 7/31/2016 4:36:55 PM, distraff wrote:
At 7/31/2016 4:28:49 PM, lightseeker wrote:
let's assume that it's year 2200. so, once upon a time, there was a criminal. he'd done something pretty bad, that brought him a death sentence. but he escaped justice and was captured after 10 years. during these years, due to some accidents and health issues, he'd lost his eyes, his brain, his hands, his legs, his heart, his kidneys, a lot of his blood, and pretty much all other parts of his body in one time or another, but since he had money, he was able to replace them all with new parts.

so when this guy is captured, will he be held accountable for the crime he'd committed 10 years ago, or not?

Your brain contains all your memories, your consciousness, and its structure defines who you are. So if your brain is removed, then you will die. If your brain is replaced with another then what is living in your body is someone else.

So the new brain of this guy is someone else and is not responsible for the actions of the previous owner of the body.

so you say if a good person for example, exchanges his brain with that of a bad person, he'll become that bad person?

No, he will remain a good person, he will now have a new body, the body of the bad person. the bad person who's brain is moved to the body of the good person will remain a bad person but will have the body of the good person.
lightseeker
Posts: 1,026
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 6:00:42 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 5:44:55 PM, keithprosser wrote:
you should be able to extract character and consciousness and things like humanity, ... from a dead person's brains. which you can't.

If we're going to worry about what we can and can't do neither the op scenario or my update of it are possible so where do we go? Why can't I extract such things from a brain? I'd say you can't get them from a dead brain, but you might grom a living brain beacase such things as character and consciousness are produced by the operation of a working brain - that is what brains do; they make conscousness.

it's said that matter/energy can't create information, intelligence can. meaning, if body is created from matter and energy, how can it contain information even when no source existed to give it any? like when an insect pops out of it's egg, and knows exactly what to do and how to look for food, or when a calf is born, and knows exactly where to find milk and how to eat. these examples show that the brain, has information about things, without being taught.
so, which source a calf's brain used to create that information, without any input from outside?

Now if you say that character and consciousness are elements of the soul and the soul is departed from a dead person that is fair enough, that is your position. But it is not mine.
so, explain how a pigeon knows how to find directions without being taught, or a fox knows how to align itself with the earth's magnetic field to be able to hunt it's pray?

Just to make sure: My answer to my question is that one would undoubtedly execute the body containing the brain of the murderer.
lightseeker
Posts: 1,026
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 6:02:27 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 5:46:58 PM, desmac wrote:
If these are the extraordinary lenghths you need to go to to justify religions, it is no wonder that they are dying out.

these are simple logical questions. aren't used to preserve my religion. are used to show the existence of soul.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 6:05:03 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 6:02:27 PM, lightseeker wrote:
At 7/31/2016 5:46:58 PM, desmac wrote:
If these are the extraordinary lenghths you need to go to to justify religions, it is no wonder that they are dying out.

these are simple logical questions. aren't used to preserve my religion. are used to show the existence of soul.

Soul died with Otis Redding.
Looncall
Posts: 455
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 6:20:30 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 5:31:53 PM, lightseeker wrote:
At 7/31/2016 5:14:46 PM, Les_Rong wrote:
At 7/31/2016 4:28:49 PM, lightseeker wrote:
let's assume that it's year 2200. so, once upon a time, there was a criminal. he'd done something pretty bad, that brought him a death sentence. but he escaped justice and was captured after 10 years. during these years, due to some accidents and health issues, he'd lost his eyes, his brain, his hands, his legs, his heart, his kidneys, a lot of his blood, and pretty much all other parts of his body in one time or another, but since he had money, he was able to replace them all with new parts.

so when this guy is captured, will he be held accountable for the crime he'd committed 10 years ago, or not?

No, because he'll be dead. No brain, no person.
so you're saying that transplanting the brain, will never happen? the same thing could've been said about heart for example not that long ago.

btw, this is a kindergarten level paradox about identity. If I have a hammer, and replace the handle, then the head, is it the same hammer, or different? If the same, does that mean the hammer has a soul?

of course the hammer wont be the same hammer, because a hammer doesn't have a self. the goal of this question is that we all have an unchanging self. the self that remains constant, even when different parts of our bodies might change. I'm me, and have always been me. our body is changing every second of every day, yet our self remain the same. and by self, I don't mean character, I mean the awareness that you're mounting your character on.

I think that identity equates to history. It may not be the same physical hammer, but it could still be grandpa's hammer. This fits with your description.

Our awareness, as far as anyone knows, is patterns of activity in our brains.

From either point of view, there is no need for something extra to carry identity: no soul.
The metaphysicist has no laboratory.
lightseeker
Posts: 1,026
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 6:23:35 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 5:48:11 PM, Omniverse wrote:
The never-ending stream of fallacies just gushes out!
prove your words with logic, not with baseless accusations.

So because we currently cannot extract "character and consciousness and things like humanity, ... from a dead person's brains", this proves soul exists?!
the thing that proves soul exists, is the fact that our self remains the same. you're you, no matter how many different characters you have.

Source: http://theskepticalzone.com...

"
Split-brain patients and the dire implications for the soul

Many of our readers " especially among the regulars at Uncommon Descent " are substance dualists. That is, they believe that each of us has an immaterial mind or soul that constitutes our true self, and that the body, including the brain, is merely a vehicle "inhabited" and controlled by the mind or soul.

There are many problems with this idea, which is why it is rejected by most neuroscientists and philosophers. One of the most striking is the problem posed by the strange characteristics of split-brain patients, as described in this video by VS Ramachandran:
"

In one notorious split-brain patient, one side was theist and the other atheist.
Please note that " In experiments with split-brain patients, it"s possible to pass information to one hemisphere but not the other. The left hemisphere literally doesn"t know what the right hemisphere knows, and vice-versa."

The question whether he was a believer or not was asked to a split-brain patient. One side answered Theist, the other Atheist. Gosh, that poor soul just have been confused....


Source: http://www.legiontheory.com...

"
(....)
An even more compelling illustration of split-brain multiple consciousness and will, is the case of the patient Paul S. For most people, their speech is controlled by their left cortical hemisphere, but very rarely a person has speech areas in both hemispheres. Paul S. was just such a person. He was also a patient who received a commissurotomy. After his split-brain surgery, both his left hemisphere and his right hemisphere could speak. When they did, Paul"s left hemisphere said that he wanted to be a draftsman, and his right hemisphere said he wanted to be a racing driver
"
let me give you an example. think of a radio which is not broken. the system works and turns waves into sound. but if you change the channel, does it mean that the waves have changed? no it doesn't. it just means that now you're listening to a different channel. if you change those channels with your own choice, then the consequence is on you. if someone or something else causes that to happen, then the blame is on them. also if the radio is broken, and only plays static, does it mean that the waves have ceased to exist? no, it just means that you can't access them.
Les_Rong
Posts: 341
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 6:24:13 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 5:31:53 PM, lightseeker wrote:
At 7/31/2016 5:14:46 PM, Les_Rong wrote:
At 7/31/2016 4:28:49 PM, lightseeker wrote:
let's assume that it's year 2200. so, once upon a time, there was a criminal. he'd done something pretty bad, that brought him a death sentence. but he escaped justice and was captured after 10 years. during these years, due to some accidents and health issues, he'd lost his eyes, his brain, his hands, his legs, his heart, his kidneys, a lot of his blood, and pretty much all other parts of his body in one time or another, but since he had money, he was able to replace them all with new parts.

so when this guy is captured, will he be held accountable for the crime he'd committed 10 years ago, or not?

No, because he'll be dead. No brain, no person.
so you're saying that transplanting the brain, will never happen? the same thing could've been said about heart for example not that long ago.

Neither you nor I knows what the future will hold. What I know is, when someone loses their brain, they are dead. By definition.

If a brain was transplanted into a body, it would be a body transplant, and the person would be the one whose brain it was, with a new body.

btw, this is a kindergarten level paradox about identity. If I have a hammer, and replace the handle, then the head, is it the same hammer, or different? If the same, does that mean the hammer has a soul?

of course the hammer wont be the same hammer, because a hammer doesn't have a self. the goal of this question is that we all have an unchanging self. the self that remains constant, even when different parts of our bodies might change. I'm me, and have always been me. our body is changing every second of every day, yet our self remain the same. and by self, I don't mean character, I mean the awareness that you're mounting your character on.

By the same token, a body with a new brain would be a new person, not the same person. In a nutshell, you are your brain.
lightseeker
Posts: 1,026
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 6:25:15 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 6:05:03 PM, desmac wrote:
At 7/31/2016 6:02:27 PM, lightseeker wrote:
At 7/31/2016 5:46:58 PM, desmac wrote:
If these are the extraordinary lenghths you need to go to to justify religions, it is no wonder that they are dying out.

these are simple logical questions. aren't used to preserve my religion. are used to show the existence of soul.

Soul died with Otis Redding.
soul is eternal.
and explain why you think that, since I'm not American.
Omniverse
Posts: 973
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 6:28:02 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
Let it be noted that lightseeker had nothing to say about the split-brain examples nor about the fatal, or at least clearly damaging, implications to the Soul-hypothesis.

Lightseeker still doesn't know what an "Appeal to consequences" is. Still doesn't know how to handle facts that contradict his assertions.

I guess that is what he is used to in Iran.
lightseeker
Posts: 1,026
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 6:33:03 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 6:00:08 PM, distraff wrote:
At 7/31/2016 5:09:19 PM, lightseeker wrote:
At 7/31/2016 4:36:55 PM, distraff wrote:
At 7/31/2016 4:28:49 PM, lightseeker wrote:
let's assume that it's year 2200. so, once upon a time, there was a criminal. he'd done something pretty bad, that brought him a death sentence. but he escaped justice and was captured after 10 years. during these years, due to some accidents and health issues, he'd lost his eyes, his brain, his hands, his legs, his heart, his kidneys, a lot of his blood, and pretty much all other parts of his body in one time or another, but since he had money, he was able to replace them all with new parts.

so when this guy is captured, will he be held accountable for the crime he'd committed 10 years ago, or not?

Your brain contains all your memories, your consciousness, and its structure defines who you are. So if your brain is removed, then you will die. If your brain is replaced with another then what is living in your body is someone else.

So the new brain of this guy is someone else and is not responsible for the actions of the previous owner of the body.

so you say if a good person for example, exchanges his brain with that of a bad person, he'll become that bad person?

No, he will remain a good person, he will now have a new body, the body of the bad person. the bad person who's brain is moved to the body of the good person will remain a bad person but will have the body of the good person.

so, you're saying the brain carries the consciousness.
this is tricky. because if soul is attached to the brain, and is moved with it, then yes, changing the brains, would change the soul as well. like cutting someone's head and attaching it to another body.

though, even the brain cells are changing by the second. the old cells die and new ones replace them. yet our self remains the same.

and if you think that it's the brain carries the consciousness, not the soul, then you should be able to explain things like animal's instincts, or the sense of right and wrong (wisdom) that people have without being taught.
lightseeker
Posts: 1,026
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 6:37:44 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 6:20:30 PM, Looncall wrote:
At 7/31/2016 5:31:53 PM, lightseeker wrote:
At 7/31/2016 5:14:46 PM, Les_Rong wrote:
At 7/31/2016 4:28:49 PM, lightseeker wrote:
let's assume that it's year 2200. so, once upon a time, there was a criminal. he'd done something pretty bad, that brought him a death sentence. but he escaped justice and was captured after 10 years. during these years, due to some accidents and health issues, he'd lost his eyes, his brain, his hands, his legs, his heart, his kidneys, a lot of his blood, and pretty much all other parts of his body in one time or another, but since he had money, he was able to replace them all with new parts.

so when this guy is captured, will he be held accountable for the crime he'd committed 10 years ago, or not?

No, because he'll be dead. No brain, no person.
so you're saying that transplanting the brain, will never happen? the same thing could've been said about heart for example not that long ago.

btw, this is a kindergarten level paradox about identity. If I have a hammer, and replace the handle, then the head, is it the same hammer, or different? If the same, does that mean the hammer has a soul?

of course the hammer wont be the same hammer, because a hammer doesn't have a self. the goal of this question is that we all have an unchanging self. the self that remains constant, even when different parts of our bodies might change. I'm me, and have always been me. our body is changing every second of every day, yet our self remain the same. and by self, I don't mean character, I mean the awareness that you're mounting your character on.

I think that identity equates to history. It may not be the same physical hammer, but it could still be grandpa's hammer. This fits with your description.
the hammer itself is changed, the hammer in your head hasn't. therefor you think it's the same. because you're giving the hammer, a self. because you have an unchanging self, and the hammer doesn't.

Our awareness, as far as anyone knows, is patterns of activity in our brains.
our awareness. this our that you said, is what I'm talking about. there is something unchanging that you're using as a base when talking about yourself. that's the unchanging thing that I'm referring to.

From either point of view, there is no need for something extra to carry identity: no soul.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 6:42:14 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 5:13:14 PM, lightseeker wrote:
At 7/31/2016 4:39:22 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 7/31/2016 4:28:49 PM, lightseeker wrote:
let's assume that it's year 2200. so, once upon a time, there was a criminal. he'd done something pretty bad, that brought him a death sentence. but he escaped justice and was captured after 10 years. during these years, due to some accidents and health issues, he'd lost his eyes, his brain, his hands, his legs, his heart, his kidneys, a lot of his blood, and pretty much all other parts of his body in one time or another, but since he had money, he was able to replace them all with new parts.

so when this guy is captured, will he be held accountable for the crime he'd committed 10 years ago, or not?

Not a shred of evidence or an iota of indication to an observation, nothing at all other than an ancient referral to superstition, you are forced to stoop so low to the bottom of the barrel of reason and rationale so as to create a far fetched, seemingly impossible scenario in order to show why you believe in a soul?

actually that scenario isn't all that impossible. most of the parts of the body, even now, can be exchanged. the only important one that remains, is the brain. and if you think memories and character and things like wisdom, humanity, courage, ... are stored in the brain, you should be able to extract those from a dead man's brains.

So, what does that have to do with souls?
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
distraff
Posts: 1,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 6:48:49 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 6:33:03 PM, lightseeker wrote:
At 7/31/2016 6:00:08 PM, distraff wrote:
At 7/31/2016 5:09:19 PM, lightseeker wrote:
At 7/31/2016 4:36:55 PM, distraff wrote:
At 7/31/2016 4:28:49 PM, lightseeker wrote:
let's assume that it's year 2200. so, once upon a time, there was a criminal. he'd done something pretty bad, that brought him a death sentence. but he escaped justice and was captured after 10 years. during these years, due to some accidents and health issues, he'd lost his eyes, his brain, his hands, his legs, his heart, his kidneys, a lot of his blood, and pretty much all other parts of his body in one time or another, but since he had money, he was able to replace them all with new parts.

so when this guy is captured, will he be held accountable for the crime he'd committed 10 years ago, or not?

Your brain contains all your memories, your consciousness, and its structure defines who you are. So if your brain is removed, then you will die. If your brain is replaced with another then what is living in your body is someone else.

So the new brain of this guy is someone else and is not responsible for the actions of the previous owner of the body.

so you say if a good person for example, exchanges his brain with that of a bad person, he'll become that bad person?

No, he will remain a good person, he will now have a new body, the body of the bad person. the bad person who's brain is moved to the body of the good person will remain a bad person but will have the body of the good person.

so, you're saying the brain carries the consciousness.

Yes.

this is tricky. because if soul is attached to the brain, and is moved with it, then yes, changing the brains, would change the soul as well. like cutting someone's head and attaching it to another body.

I think that the "soul" is a word for many of the processes in the brain that involve consciousness. I don't think there is an actual immaterial intelligence or soul from another dimension controlling the brain because of a lack of evidence.

though, even the brain cells are changing by the second. the old cells die and new ones replace them. yet our self remains the same.

and if you think that it's the brain carries the consciousness, not the soul, then you should be able to explain things like animal's instincts, or the sense of right and wrong (wisdom) that people have without being taught.

I don't think that the cells themselves matter. What matters is the configuration of the cells. Nobody knows what consciousness is and for all I know maybe it really is immaterial and from another dimension. There is a lot about the brain we don't understand and I can't say for sure what it is or even if it is a set of physical cells. Maybe it is an electrical or chemical process, and the cells themselves are just there for memory storage and allowing the process to happen. But the evidence does point to the fact that everything intellectual is happening in the brain so our consciousness is there somehow.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 6:53:37 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 6:00:42 PM, lightseeker wrote:
At 7/31/2016 5:44:55 PM, keithprosser wrote:
you should be able to extract character and consciousness and things like humanity, ... from a dead person's brains. which you can't.

If we're going to worry about what we can and can't do neither the op scenario or my update of it are possible so where do we go? Why can't I extract such things from a brain? I'd say you can't get them from a dead brain, but you might grom a living brain beacase such things as character and consciousness are produced by the operation of a working brain - that is what brains do; they make conscousness.

it's said that matter/energy can't create information,

NO, that is not said by anyone but you and is a false statement.

intelligence can. meaning, if body is created from matter and energy, how can it contain information even when no source existed to give it any?

What information is being given, exactly? From what source? Define your terms.

like when an insect pops out of it's egg, and knows exactly what to do and how to look for food, or when a calf is born, and knows exactly where to find milk and how to eat. these examples show that the brain, has information about things, without being taught.
so, which source a calf's brain used to create that information, without any input from outside?

The input is indeed from outside and has been driving that information for millions of years. That's all explained by evolution. You should take the time to learn about evolution, then you will understand those questions.

Our work here is done.

Now if you say that character and consciousness are elements of the soul and the soul is departed from a dead person that is fair enough, that is your position. But it is not mine.
so, explain how a pigeon knows how to find directions without being taught, or a fox knows how to align itself with the earth's magnetic field to be able to hunt it's pray?

Just to make sure: My answer to my question is that one would undoubtedly execute the body containing the brain of the murderer.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
lightseeker
Posts: 1,026
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2016 6:54:48 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/31/2016 6:24:13 PM, Les_Rong wrote:
At 7/31/2016 5:31:53 PM, lightseeker wrote:
At 7/31/2016 5:14:46 PM, Les_Rong wrote:
At 7/31/2016 4:28:49 PM, lightseeker wrote:
let's assume that it's year 2200. so, once upon a time, there was a criminal. he'd done something pretty bad, that brought him a death sentence. but he escaped justice and was captured after 10 years. during these years, due to some accidents and health issues, he'd lost his eyes, his brain, his hands, his legs, his heart, his kidneys, a lot of his blood, and pretty much all other parts of his body in one time or another, but since he had money, he was able to replace them all with new parts.

so when this guy is captured, will he be held accountable for the crime he'd committed 10 years ago, or not?

No, because he'll be dead. No brain, no person.
so you're saying that transplanting the brain, will never happen? the same thing could've been said about heart for example not that long ago.
Neither you nor I knows what the future will hold. What I know is, when someone loses their brain, they are dead. By definition.
If a brain was transplanted into a body, it would be a body transplant, and the person would be the one whose brain it was, with a new body.
so you're saying that character is a product of brain. and goodness and badness of people is stored inside their brains, correct? and can it be shown?

btw, this is a kindergarten level paradox about identity. If I have a hammer, and replace the handle, then the head, is it the same hammer, or different? If the same, does that mean the hammer has a soul?

of course the hammer wont be the same hammer, because a hammer doesn't have a self. the goal of this question is that we all have an unchanging self. the self that remains constant, even when different parts of our bodies might change. I'm me, and have always been me. our body is changing every second of every day, yet our self remain the same. and by self, I don't mean character, I mean the awareness that you're mounting your character on.

By the same token, a body with a new brain would be a new person, not the same person. In a nutshell, you are your brain.

our brain is changing by the second. old cells are being replaced with the new ones. yet our self remain the same. also, the brain itself had prerecorded information in it when we were born. at least we can show this in the animals. if we're our brain, then how can we have wisdom without being taught? or animals can have instinct without being taught?