My experience at RaptureReady

[RussDill]

Well, I'm speaking to you aren't I?

I am not a spirit, I am a human being. You would first need to prove that I have a spirit.

 

[RussDill]

Is it up to science to conclude that you have a soul? Or, is it up to you? If it's there, then there should be a way to determine this, because it's yours.

If there is a soul, and it has an effect on the real world, then it is provable by science. If there is a soul and it has no effect on the real world, then what does it have to do with reality?

The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

No, the proof would be what you present to us.

 

[Yahweh]

Are we speaking for everyone here or what? Thus far we have 2 votes against and 1 vote for. But what about the rest of humanity? Are you saying that what applies to you applies to everyone else? I'm sure there are lots of people in the world that would beg to differ.

You cannot possibly be asserting that "Truth" is determined by the number of people who agree, are you?

Argument ad Populum is the worst way to make an argument.

 

[Iacchus]

You cannot possibly be asserting that "Truth" is determined by the number of people who agree, are you?

Argument ad Populum is the worst way to make an argument.

Of course not! But then how else will we decide? You seem to be asserting one thing and I another?

How do you know whether it's true or not?

 

[Ipecac]

I don't think Iacchus is really interested in anything but jerking us along here. He's making no real arguments, nor refuting ours.

I'm done playing.

 

[Iacchus]

I don't think Iacchus is really interested in anything but jerking us along here. He's making no real arguments, nor refuting ours.

I'm done playing.

Bye bye. So wrong to you too!

 

[Iacchus]

I am not a spirit, I am a human being. You would first need to prove that I have a spirit.

And yet how do you know anything unless you can see it for yourself? Afraid you missed the boat on that one, unless you're ready to drop "science" as an answer.

 

[RussDill]

And yet how do you know anything unless you can see it yoursef? Afraid you missed the boat on that one, unless you're ready to drop "science" as answer.

I have no evidence for any spirit, just as I don't have evidence for any gardian angel, or any other such thing.

 

[Iacchus]

If there is a soul, and it has an effect on the real world, then it is provable by science. If there is a soul and it has no effect on the real world, then what does it have to do with reality?

That's dumb, because if your soul is "you," then it does have an effect on reality.

 

[RussDill]

That's dumb, because if your soul is "you," then it does have an effect on reality.

Then there is nothing special, spiritual, or mysticall about a soul and its silly to talk about it.

 

[Yahweh]

Of course not! But then how else will we decide? You seem to be asserting one thing and I another?

How do you know whether it's true or not?

You are making a Sweeping Generalization. Just because there are mulitple ways to make an assertion does not make them all equally valid.

For instance, I would suggest things which are demonstratably true is most likely a much more valid way to support an assertion than coin flipping.

I do not, however, see "mob mentality" as a valid way of supporting a belief. Is the world flat? Does everything revolve around it? I'll tell you that the world was never flat, nor did the sun revolve around it while so many people were convinced it does.

 

[Yahweh]

I don't think Iacchus is really interested in anything but jerking us along here. He's making no real arguments, nor refuting ours.

I'm done playing.

I've got patience and time to kill, I'll hang about for just a bit longer...

 

[Iacchus]

The word "soul" has certain connotations, at the very least it refers to some non-material part of your being. The existence of such a thing is certainly not self-evident. the mere fact that I exists does not necessarily imply such a thing.

It's about as self-evident to me as consciousness is, because that's what it is.

Besides, where does your consciousnes go when you dream? Isn't if funny how you're no longer aware of yourself in the material world, but quite often find yourself in this strange world of dreams which, quite often become a reality unto themselves? And then at times it becomes so real, that you can hardly imagine you weren't where you were already supposed to be. And then when you finally do wake up, you go "Wow, what the heck was that all about?"

In fact I've had any number of dreams like this myself, one of which is illustrated on the following page (regarding the Indian tapestry) ...

http://www.dionysus.org/x0901.html

 

[Yahweh]

It's about as self-evident to me as consciousness is, because that's what it is.

You have successfully decieved yourself.

(Its not that hard is it...)

Besides, where does your consciousnes go when you dream?

Who was it who said "Consciousness is what goes away when you fall asleep"?...

Isn't if funny how you're no longer aware of yourself in the material world, but quite often find yourself in this strange world of dreams which, quite often become a reality unto themselves?

Its a very natural process, its mechanism is well documented and verified...

There is nothing inherenetly "funny" about it.

It is quite impossible for your dreams to become an alternate reality. The reasoning is due to the fact that your sensations cannot alter objective reality.

In fact I've had any number of dreams like this myself, one of which is illustrated on the following page (regarding the Indian tapestry) ...

http://www.dionysus.org/x0901.html

Sorry, but dreams are not evidence for a soul/spirit/chakra/aura/shadowperson/dualistic reality.

 

[Iacchus]

You have successfully decieved yourself.

(Its not that hard is it...)

Yep, poor little ol' me. Something I'll have to take to the grave with me I suppose?

Could be worse things to happen I guess?

Who was it who said "Consciousness is what goes away when you fall asleep"?...

And yet why is it possible to become wide awake in your dreams?

Its a very natural process, its mechanism is well documented and verified...

The mechanism may be documented, but not the medium itself. At least not in any of your "scientifc journals."

There is nothing inherenetly "funny" about it.

"Peculiar" to say the least.

It is quite impossible for your dreams to become an alternate reality. The reasoning is due to the fact that your sensations cannot alter objective reality.

I understand it becomes even more real after death.

Sorry, but dreams are not evidence for a soul/spirit/chakra/aura/shadowperson/dualistic reality.

Well obviously "evidence" of something.

 

[RussDill]

Yep, poor little ol' me. Something I'll have to take to the grave with me I suppose?

Could be worse things to happen I guess?

Ya, we all know that you'd rather take your lies to the grave and never learn any truth. Just realize this, if it turns out that there is no afterlife, you have completely squandared the time you do have, and found zero truth.

And yet why is it possible to become wide awake in your dreams?

Becuse then you wouldn't be dreaming...would you? Once you understand the actual process behind dreaming, its pretty clear.

The mechanism may be documented, but not the medium itself. At least not in any of your "scientifc journals."

Umm....You claim there is a medium. There is no need for one, there is no evidence for one. So why should scientific journals talk about it? Should they make mention of every unsupported idea that anyone comes up with just to satisfy you?

"Peculiar" to say the least.

Not really. Not once you study it in depth

I understand it becomes even more real after death.

I think you need to rephrase that "I lie to myself and say that we enter the dream world after we die because it makes me feel more secure"

Well obviously "evidence" of something.

yup, it sure is, its evidence that we dream. Pretty astounding, isn't it?

 

[Iacchus]

Yep, nothing is at it appears. Anyone ever hear that phrase? Hmm ... might have been Sherlock Holmes that said that?

Could have been quoted in the movie, The Matrix, too for all I know?

 

[Some Friggin Guy]

Iacchus, I'm not going to try and convince you, since it would be as pointless as trying to teach an 800 pound gorilla to fly.

Therefore, I'm going to put it simply.

I do not believe in a soul, spirit, ka, chakram (with the exception of the arabian weapon), or any other life essence which cannot be measured.

I do not believe in any kind of god, deity, great wolf spirit, large Norwegian swinging a ball-peen hammer to make thunder, or any other remotely supreme being since these things cannot be measured.

I know about scienc, and while not a scientist, I am aware that any expirment which has gone on to prove something can be repeated and tested. I may even chose to do the testing myself.

And, yes, Sting did sing about being Spirits in the Material World.

While We're at it, Pete Townshend and the Who sang about a young lad in England who, while deaf, dumb and blind, became a champion pinball player and should have been recognized as a new messiah.

I view both as this: very entertaining music which may or may not have been written by people who believe it. And if they do believe it, until it can be proven and measured, it has no bearing.

So, having said all that, I have grown tired of your platitudes and sound bites. I have grown tired of repeating what you have been told by other posters. I will keep reading you posts, but I will no long reply to you until you do the following:

1. Offer proof of a soul or spirit. (Saying it is interchangeable with consciousness is not proof, it is bending a definition.)

2. Offer proof of a deity of some type.

3 Offer scientific proof of an afterlife.

I will ask Russ and Yahweh to be secondary judges to this.

If you provide scientific proof of ANY of these claim, I will personally reward you $1000 of my own money, and I will vouch for you with Mr. Randi for the million dollar prize, as well.

This isn't a bet. I'm looking for nothing in return. Just for actual scientific and measurable evidence.

 

[Iacchus]

Iacchus, I'm not going to try and convince you, since it would be as pointless as trying to teach an 800 pound gorilla to fly.

Therefore, I'm going to put it simply.

I do not believe in a soul, spirit, ka, chakram (with the exception of the arabian weapon), or any other life essence which cannot be measured.

I do not believe in any kind of god, deity, great wolf spirit, large Norwegian swinging a ball-peen hammer to make thunder, or any other remotely supreme being since these things cannot be measured.

Stuck in the mud again I see huh? Well sorry to say I didn't come here to "agree" with anybody. If you're looking for that perhaps you should try Rapture Ready?

I know about scienc, and while not a scientist, I am aware that any expirment which has gone on to prove something can be repeated and tested. I may even chose to do the testing myself.

The only problem here is that we're speaking of something a little more personal, which science has repeatedly demonstrated it is incapable of handling ...

And, yes, Sting did sing about being Spirits in the Material World.

While We're at it, Pete Townshend and the Who sang about a young lad in England who, while deaf, dumb and blind, became a champion pinball player and should have been recognized as a new messiah.

I view both as this: very entertaining music which may or may not have been written by people who believe it. And if they do believe it, until it can be proven and measured, it has no bearing.

I have no problem accepting that Sting believes in what he sings about. In fact I understand he derived most of his (early) material from his dreams.

So, having said all that, I have grown tired of your platitudes and sound bites. I have grown tired of repeating what you have been told by other posters. I will keep reading you posts, but I will no long reply to you until you do the following:

I have pretty much given up on you too by the way.

1. Offer proof of a soul or spirit. (Saying it is interchangeable with consciousness is not proof, it is bending a definition.)

2. Offer proof of a deity of some type.

3 Offer scientific proof of an afterlife.

I will ask Russ and Yahweh to be secondary judges to this.

If you provide scientific proof of ANY of these claim, I will personally reward you $1000 of my own money, and I will vouch for you with Mr. Randi for the million dollar prize, as well.

This isn't a bet. I'm looking for nothing in return. Just for actual scientific and measurable evidence.

Hey, did anybody ever tell you that science was not infallible? So please don't accuse me of not knowing what I'm talking about, Okay?

All I can say is stick around, the truth may "yet" be forthcoming.