Stamp out anti-science in US politics

[Valmy]

So, if all humans died tomorrow and no more functioning human brains existed would the spiritual world cease to exist?

Haven't I made that clear?  Yes.

[Viking]

What are you thinking of here?  When did the Old Hebrews predict anything and get it right?

To my knowledge, nothing.

I was talking about the old hebrews getting their own history right, which they managed to fail magnificently.

[Razgovory]

I do not get the distinction between real spirituality and false spirituality.  I do not get the distinction between real or fictional spiritual world.  All human cultures deal with spirituality to a ridiculous degree.  Obviously it is an important part of the human experience.

As for the last part I am sure there might be something physical about it but I get the impression it is abstract thinking and language.

False spirituality is invented to work as a control. To see if the effects of supposedly true spirituality is any different from false spirituality. Basically, if the fake stuff gives the same result as the real stuff then the supposedly real stuff is fake as well. e.g. the god helmet

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_helmet
[/quote]

So if I develop a helmet that stimulates the brain to give readings identical to being hungry there is no such thing as hunger since the the false brain scans and the real brain scans are identical?

[Viking]

So, if all humans died tomorrow and no more functioning human brains existed would the spiritual world cease to exist?

Haven't I made that clear?  Yes.

Good, we agree. There is no non-material dimension to what we call spirituality.

Now, what relevance do the delusions and halucinations about the life of an otherwise irrellvant rabbi of the 1st and 2nd century proto-christians have for us? Surely my own spiritual experience is infinitely more relevant to myself than the spiritual experience of matthew, mark, luke or john?

[Razgovory]

Yes, but the Bible does assert the factualness of the great flood, the 7 day creation and the existence of Pi-Ramses and The Assyrian Empire. The only reason you know which is "spiritual" and factual is that historians and scientists have demonstrated much of the BS in the bible was untrue.

You need to work on your theology.  St. Augustine of Hippo argued that not all of the Bible should be taken literally and that was in the fifth century.

[Viking]

So if I develop a helmet that stimulates the brain to give readings identical to being hungry there is no such thing as hunger since the the false brain scans and the real brain scans are identical?

No, you would have proved that the effect that provokes hunger is material, just like the god helmet suggests that the effect that provokes spiritual experience is material.

[Viking]

Yes, but the Bible does assert the factualness of the great flood, the 7 day creation and the existence of Pi-Ramses and The Assyrian Empire. The only reason you know which is "spiritual" and factual is that historians and scientists have demonstrated much of the BS in the bible was untrue.

You need to work on your theology.  St. Augustine of Hippo argued that not all of the Bible should be taken literally and that was in the fifth century.

The Bishop of Hippo was a smart guy who realized that much of the bible was BS as you said. He would have been one of the first people to realize this and suggest that it was not meant to be literal. Had he suggested that the BS bits were untrue, he would have been executed. What effect of this threat had on his motivation will never be known.

[Fate]

There is a spiritual world? Prove it.

Only after you prove the existence of love, hatred, friendship, envy...

Mammilary nuclei, antherior thalamic nuclei, cingulate gyrus, enterorhinal cortex, amygdala, hippocampus....

Now where's the spiritual world?

[Oexmelin]

There is a spiritual world? Prove it.

Only after you prove the existence of love, hatred, friendship, envy...

Why?

Because it is supposed to function as an analogy - which is a pretty fundamental, and powerful, way the human mind understands, and treats information. And the pretty amazing things is that these analogies, and the ways by which we think about things, has pretty important physiological effects. You treat these words as if they were "simply" labels to independant physiological effects, whereas it doesn't seem so outrageous to think the labelling itself, and the actual idea that we might share these feelings and experiences, would necessarily effect the material world. To think them "merely" words is, I think it is a pretty limited way to think about the human experience.

And so I guess my pretty limited point is simply that one can safely assume that there is such a thing as a State, a feeling, a sentiment, and that, therefore, "asking to prove" the existence of the spiritual might not be the most fruitful question to get to the heart of spirituality.

[Valmy]

Now, what relevance do the delusions and halucinations about the life of an otherwise irrellvant rabbi of the 1st and 2nd century proto-christians have for us? Surely my own spiritual experience is infinitely more relevant to myself than the spiritual experience of matthew, mark, luke or john?

That is up to you to decide.  Their messages stand on their own merits.

[Viking]

There is a spiritual world? Prove it.

Only after you prove the existence of love, hatred, friendship, envy...

Why?

Because it is supposed to function as an analogy - which is a pretty fundamental, and powerful, way the human mind understands, and treats information. And the pretty amazing things is that these analogies, and the ways by which we think about things, has pretty important physiological effects. You treat these words as if they were "simply" labels to independant physiological effects, whereas it doesn't seem so outrageous to think the labelling itself, and the actual idea that we might share these feelings and experiences, would necessarily effect the material world. To think them "merely" words is, I think it is a pretty limited way to think about the human experience.

And so I guess my pretty limited point is simply that one can safely assume that there is such a thing as a State, a feeling, a sentiment, and that, therefore, "asking to prove" the existence of the spiritual might not be the most fruitful question to get to the heart of spirituality.

You are obfuscating. You did not ready my reply nor have you attempted to deal with it in any way. Experiences we have of the material world cannot be analogous to experiences of the spiritual world when the issue up for discussion is the existence of a non-material spiritual world.

[Razgovory]

Yes, but the Bible does assert the factualness of the great flood, the 7 day creation and the existence of Pi-Ramses and The Assyrian Empire. The only reason you know which is "spiritual" and factual is that historians and scientists have demonstrated much of the BS in the bible was untrue.

You need to work on your theology.  St. Augustine of Hippo argued that not all of the Bible should be taken literally and that was in the fifth century.

The Bishop of Hippo was a smart guy who realized that much of the bible was BS as you said. He would have been one of the first people to realize this and suggest that it was not meant to be literal. Had he suggested that the BS bits were untrue, he would have been executed. What effect of this threat had on his motivation will never be known.

Who would have executed him?  Your statement is absurd, if he didn't believe in Christianity he wouldn't have become a bishop or live the life of an aesthetic.  It's not like that was the only field for an educated young man.  It's like saying that Dawkins could very well be a secret Jew but is an Athiest in public because of the risk of socially disgracing himself or risked losing book sales.  The threat of this on his motivation can never be known.

[Viking]

Now, what relevance do the delusions and halucinations about the life of an otherwise irrellvant rabbi of the 1st and 2nd century proto-christians have for us? Surely my own spiritual experience is infinitely more relevant to myself than the spiritual experience of matthew, mark, luke or john?

That is up to you to decide.  Their messages stand on their own merits.

Ahhh.. and that is where I started this discussion... 

Good, now I can go get my morales from a person who thinks that stoning adulturesses is wrong in and of itself rather than stoning is ok as long as the men doing the stoning are not hypocrites.

[Razgovory]

So if I develop a helmet that stimulates the brain to give readings identical to being hungry there is no such thing as hunger since the the false brain scans and the real brain scans are identical?

No, you would have proved that the effect that provokes hunger is material, just like the god helmet suggests that the effect that provokes spiritual experience is material.

I fail to see your point here.  The idea that someone can have spiritual experience might have some material effect on the brain disproves that someone can have a spiritual experience?

[Valmy]

Good, now I can go get my morales from a person who thinks that stoning adulturesses is wrong in and of itself rather than stoning is ok as long as the men doing the stoning are not hypocrites.

I never recall insisting you do.  Are you seriously this concrete?