Poll: What is your religion?

[Freelanc3r]

Where's emo as on option?

FML, *cuts self*

 

[Tefal]

What about your personal subjective experience of love?

In theory, you could have people that behave exactly like they are in love, right down to the chemical changes and what not, but they feel no love for each other, i.e. they do not experience what you do.

then that would require a "soul" or some unmeasureable extra factor.

 

[PermaBanned]

then that would require a "soul" or some unmeasureable extra factor.

No... the chemicals effect the body. I thought it was the belief that the soul is completely separate from the body?

 

[Tefal]

No... the chemicals effect the body.

That was my point genius.

I thought it was the belief that the soul is completely separate from the body?

Yes so If everything is the same right down the the chemicals/electrical then you would need a soul or some other unknown for them to be different.

 

[PermaBanned]

That was my point genius.

Yes so If everything is the same right down the the chemicals/electrical then you would need a soul or some other unknown for them to be different.

So how to you explain a change to the body effecting something that's not the body?

We are essentially biological computers programmed to act like humans, where the 'input' is the universe and the 'output' is interaction with said universe. We're all different because of genetics.

 

[Tefal]

So how to you explain a change to the body effecting something that's not the body?

We are essentially biological computers programmed to act like humans, where the 'input' is the universe and the 'output' is interaction with said universe. We're all different because of genetics.

this is my point.

If you have two people differencing the exact same chemical and electrical changes in the brain they will "feel" the same way.

The only way one would be in love and the other not is if there is a soul and that is what produces love not the chemicals/electrical state of the brain.

 

[Jotun]

I voted agnostic, honestly I don't care.

 

[PermaBanned]

this is my point.

If you have two people differencing the exact same chemical and electrical changes in the brain they will "feel" the same way.

The only way one would be in love and the other not is if there is a soul and that is what produces love not the chemicals/electrical state of the brain.

Or maybe one person loves somebody who doesn't love them? Where does the need for a soul come into it?

 

[Muban]

Agnostic theism

 

[Tefal]

Or maybe one person loves somebody who doesn't love them?

What?


Unless that person is part of the test it doesn;t matter.

Did you even read the post i was talking about at the start.

Where does the need for a soul come into it?

FFS.



Serially did you even read it or just wade in on some completely unrelated tangent?

 

[PermaBanned]

What?

Unless that person is part of the test it doesn;t matter.

Did you even read the post i was talking about at the start.

FFS.

Serially did you even read it or just wade in on some completely unrelated tangent?

I read everything on the last page, i don't have nor want the time to spend reading every post made on here. I don't understand how you drew the conclusion that you need a soul to be different. Do you understand how evolution works? We're not all asexual...

 

[titaniumx3]

then that would require a "soul" or some unmeasureable extra factor.

You can call it what you want, but it's something that exists and isn't a mere illusion. Maybe in the future when we have evolved sufficiently we can build a more coherent model of how it works and how it relates to the 'physical' aspect of the universe. Maybe one day we will no longer require our bodies and simply exist as 'souls' as you put it.

 

[semi-pro waster]

Proof is the formal demonstration of the validity of a deductive argument.

In certain circumstances (e.g. specific to science) but in this debate we appear to be using the words proof and evidence interchangeably which suggests it is the more commonly used vernacular that is appropriate. Proof or evidence is something you advance in support of your position - it does not have to convince anyone else to stand as proof but they are welcome to put no weight on it for that reason if they so choose.

I don't believe that morality is absolute, no, I think that's fairly obvious. But don't be so ridiculous and naive as to proclaim any sort of positive link between religion and morality.

You presume too much. It wasn't where I was leading with the question - morality has been shaped by religion for better or worse but I cannot and will not say that it would not have developed independently.

However where I was leading to is the point that RDM raised; if morality is not absolute then by implication what is true or right for one person is not necessarily so for another.

You can keep pointing it out as many times as you like, it doesn't make it so. Proof is proof, truth is truth, regardless of who it's directed at or who is interpreting it. What you've suggested to be proof isn't anything of the sort.

No, it's not proof you accept. We've reached an impasse as I knew we would although I'm not claiming any sort of mystical ability to see the future here, it was obvious from the second the topic started. Neither of us are likely to change our opinion on this after the few salvos so far so I'm not sure how much more mileage there is left in the debate.

Obviously, that's fair enough. I disagree with the 'question of God doesn't impact me in any way' statement, as it quite obviously does. There are numerous ways in which it does from the judgement of yourself, the monitoring of yourself, the extremist Islamic terrorism that's happening, the retardation of various cultures (America's and Ireland's spring to mind) hence why I'm so anti religion.

Aside from the theoreticals it really doesn't impact on my daily life in any discernable way.

 

[asim18]

What has love got to do with god and religion?

We all know God doesn't exist and that religion is man made.

 

[Tefal]

II don't understand how you drew the conclusion that you need a soul to be different.

If your brain is in the same chemical state as someone else unless you have major physical deformities in your brain you'll be feeling approximately the same.

Do you understand how evolution works?

Do you?

Also please say how you think evolution in important in this.

We're not all asexual...

obviously, now how does that relate to anything?

 

[Naffa]

You presume too much. It wasn't where I was leading with the question - morality has been shaped by religion for better or worse but I cannot and will not say that it would not have developed independently.

Of course morality has not developed totally independently and separate from religion, that would be a ridiculous thing to say given how much of a part religion has played in our culture. It is fair to say, however, that we're becoming more reasonable in the absence of religion.

Just to cite a couple of examples, I don't believe that infanticide (especially of one's own child) is permissible, could ever be justified in any way, shape, form or whatever yet that's not true for Christianity. I also don't believe homosexuality is immoral and I have no distaste for the female birth canal, unlike practically every religion. I don't see the need to murder infidels, whereas certain religions mandate such action.

Neither of us are likely to change our opinion on this after the few salvos so far so I'm not sure how much more mileage there is left in the debate.

That's a fair cop, it's always enjoyable to discuss such things though.

 

[titaniumx3]

It is fair to say, however, that we're becoming more reasonable in the absence of religion.

It's a little too early in our existence to tell and personally I feel that religion is merely the side effect of a far more ingrained problem with humanity, or any sufficiently advanced civilisation for that matter. In other words, take away religion and something else will replace it ... different name, same ****.

 

[Darg]

Almost 60% of these forums are atheist/agnostic. Good to see some sanity around the place

 

[PermaBanned]

If your brain is in the same chemical state as someone else unless you have major physical deformities in your brain you'll be feeling approximately the same.

Do you?

Also please say how you think evolution in important in this.

obviously, now how does that relate to anything?

It isn't. We don't all react in exactly the same way to every situation. Because we're different.

Yes. Evolution is important in that it allows for genetic differences, which lead to differences in the way people act.

Well if we were identical in our genetic makeup (as you're suggesting) then we'd have to be asexual, as we'd all be the same.

 

[Tefal]

It isn't. We don't all react in exactly the same way to every situation. Because we're different.

Not I'm talking about brain chemistry not a situation at all.

if we were all different to the degree that if we were undergoing roughly the same chemical levels and electrical activity.

Nuero surgery/anaesthetics drugs/MRi'/cT scans would be useless.


We are all a bit different in personality etc but how we fuction is pretty much the same for every one.

The people who function very differently are usually considered disabled.

Well if we were identical in our genetic makeup (as you're suggesting)

No I'm not.


An MRI/CT/FMRI will show very similar activity in 2 brains when doing the same thing.



Which is what i am saying if the brain is undergoing the same chemical and electrical process they are probably feeling the same thing.