HomeЛюди и блогиRelated VideosMore From: Shannon Q

Looking for the Soul, a conversation with Mike from Inspiring Philosophy

156 ratings | 3192 views
Hi Welcome to Shannon Q! Tonight Mike from Inspiring Philosophy and I are going to have a chat about Neuro-Science and the soul. He and I have been exchanging some interesting neuro-science articles and thought this might be an interesting discussion to have. Check out Inspiring Philosophy! https://www.youtube.com/user/InspiringPhilosophy Articles: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/pchj.109 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21986366 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Support me on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/ShannonQ or PayPal: PayPal.me/ShannonQ0 Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Shann_Q0 Join Discord: https://discord.gg/KYsTmn ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resources: Recovering from Religion: https://www.recoveringfromreligion.or... The Clergy Project: http://clergyproject.org/ Secular Therapy: https://www.seculartherapy.org/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You can also find me on the Heathen Hour with Godless Cranium at our new channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRNvnjBQFx4x_21nBdMuuQw -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As always a HUGE thank you to Paul from Paulogia! Go check out his Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIS4
Html code for embedding videos on your blog
Text Comments (257)
Shannon Q (2 months ago)
What did you guys think? This was one of my favourite conversations!
Nathan Hood (1 month ago)
+Bob Smith "actually Nathan you said the evidence is flimsy at best , so you did make a claim lol" It's an opinion based on what you've supplied me with. If I'm wrong show me the evidence. Tell me again what 'side' I'm on. "Your blatantly lying and you refuse to go to the expert opinion a because you know that they are all against your claim lol." Still can't get the hang of you're as a contraction of you are, maybe when you're older. What do you think I have lied about specifically? You are arguing that NDE's give evidence of a soul which makes it your responsibility to provide sufficient evidence to support it. Instead of that you've presented 19 years of combined research that between them claim two *possible* cases of verified veridical NDEs and you find that compelling. I doubt anyone without a vested interest would. "I’ll Leave you with this from dr Sam Parnia....." You'll leave me with a quote from a cardiologist about the mental processes. Why no quotes from neuroscientists who actually know about brain states? Super..... "....before I block you for avoiding my question and lying about not having a position " I said I didn't have a side my position of not seeing enough evidence from you to convince me you're right has been obviously argued. But by all means run away. Knock yourself the fugggg out...... ;-) "Lie:you claimed you have no position" Liar, quote me saying that. You've changed your wording in this post from 'side' to 'position' - changing the goalposts much? "Future agnostics and lurkers who are more intellectually honest and unbiased will see this." Yes they will. They will see you totally failing to justify your position. "It is people like you Nathan that got me to start doubting my own atheism 8 years ago so you serve an important function " You used to be reasonable? Seriously? "Now that you’ve served my purpose it’s time to send you to iggy land for lying and avoiding the experts " If your purpose was to totally fail to substantiate your claims, then yeah happy to help. Let's see if you can really be brave and stop making yourself look more childish - run away Bob, run away. Did you find the evidence that corroborates Dr. Longs findings about seeing mostly dead relatives? I was looking forward to seeing that. Why haven’t you acknowledged that your claim that Dr. Watt lied about the hidden images was false? It seems impolite not to acknowledge your error toward this lady whatever other problems you might have with her.. I asked you for examples where scientists couldn’t get simple details right about Dr.Parnia’s NDE case. I’d still like some please. In our discussion about Dr Parnia’s NDE case you haven’t said why you cited a paper rebutting a report I didn’t use or why you posted an interview that wasn’t relevant both of which predated Parnia publishing that NDE. Why not? I'd still like to know who Kent is and why he's jiving..... I'd still like a primary source for Dr Sartori.
Bob Smith (1 month ago)
Nathan Hood actually Nathan you said the evidence is flimsy at best , so you did make a claim lol Your blatantly lying and you refuse to go to the expert opinion a because you know that they are all against your claim lol I’ll Leave you with this from dr Sam Parnia before I block you for avoiding my question and lying about not having a position https://goop.com/wellness/health/when-is-death-irreversible-a-resuscitation-m-d-explains-why-its-evolving/ What the evidence suggests is that the soul, the self, the psyche, whatever you want to call it, does not become annihilated, even though the brain has shut down. This suggests that part of what makes us who we are—a part that is very real—is not produced by the brain. Instead, the brain is acting like a mediator. Like anything that has been undiscovered, because we can’t touch and feel it, we choose to ignore it. The reality, though, is that human thought exists, we communicate through thoughts—so it is a real phenomena. The source of consciousness is undiscovered in the same way that electromagnetic waves have been around for millions of years, but it’s only been recently that we created a device to record them and show them to other people. So in short, we haven’t got the tools yet, or a machine that’s accurate enough to pick up your thoughts and show them to me. In the next couple of decades, I believe it will be discovered that we continue to exist after death, and that consciousness is in fact an independent entity. As I said in many of my posts , the adherent from the religion of atheism when faced with evidence that goes against his religion of atheism will either avoid the evidences or twist then in a way that goes against the concensus of experts in their fields yet will change the goal posts back when it comes to evidences that favor his religion of atheism . Lie:you claimed you have no position Fact : you keep claiming the evidence is flimsy yet you refuse to quote the consensus opinions of NDE researchers to back your claims . Fact: you do have an opinion. And it’s an emotional one and it’s a position that favors your religion of atheism . This wasn’t a total waste of time , what I showed here is your willing to abandon science and come up with all kinds of elaborate excuses not to quote the primary experts in their field . Future agnostics and lurkers who are more intellectually honest and unbiased will see this . It is people like you Nathan that got me to start doubting my own atheism 8 years ago so you serve an important function Now that you’ve served my purpose it’s time to send you to iggy land for lying and avoiding the experts Mwahhhhhhhh
Nathan Hood (1 month ago)
+Bob Smith "again nathan you’ve done nothing but post a bunch of garbage ." You mean that I have once again posted a lot of stuff you have no answer to so you're going to ignore it. Really? You have nothing? I’m gonna ask you again , can you name one NDE researcher that backs your side. As I told you many times in my last post I've made no claims, I don't have a side. I'm questioning your willingness to believe things without sufficient evidence. That is all I'm doing I'm not advocating for a "side". "When I ask about population genetics I go to population geneticists not secondary experts ." And in matters of consciousness you go to an oncologist like Dr Long a cardiologist like Dr Parnia??? Seriously dude they are amateurs in matters of the mind compared to neuroscientists, psychologists, parapsychologists and the like. They are like football fans commenting on the deeper matters of in game tactics. Just because someone takes an interest in something doesn't make them experts. "If you don’t answer my question about supplying the opinion of NDE experts that back your side and quotes from them I’m gonna assume your playing dodge ball and I’m going to put you on iggy . " If I don't supply experts to back up something I haven't claimed you're going to..... to use your terms...... run away? Excuses, excuses Bob - are you proud? Did you find the evidence that corroborates Dr. Longs findings about seeing mostly dead relatives? I was looking forward to seeing that. Why haven’t you acknowledged that your claim that Dr. Watt lied about the hidden images was false? It seems impolite not to acknowledge your error toward this lady whatever other problems you might have with her.. I asked you for examples where scientists couldn’t get simple details right about Dr.Parnia’s NDE case. I’d still like some please. In our discussion about Dr Parnia’s NDE case you haven’t said why you cited a paper rebutting a report I didn’t use or why you posted an interview that wasn’t relevant both of which predated Parnia publishing that NDE. Why not? I'd still like to know who Kent is and why he's jiving..... I'd still like a primary source for Dr Sartori. Have a nice day Bob.
Bob Smith (1 month ago)
Nathan Hood and no I don’t accept that neuroscientists are able to comment on ndes because they are not NDE experts. When I ask about population genetics I go to population geneticists not secondary experts . I could care less what a Secondary expert says compared to the primary experts . If your going to rely on neuroscientists your gong to have to show me their NDE research . The reason why you refuse to give me the opinions of the experts is that you know they all stack up against you . The atheist when asked to supply the opinions and research of experts that back his side will do so with pleasure but when asks to supply the opinions of the experts in a field that go against his opinion he suddenly loses interest in doing so . If you don’t answer my question about supplying the opinion of NDE experts that back your side and quotes from them I’m gonna assume your playing dodge ball and I’m going to put you on iggy .
Bob Smith (1 month ago)
Nathan Hood again nathan you’ve done nothing but post a bunch of garbage . I’m gonna ask you again , can you name one NDE researcher that backs your side . .without going into any nitpicking . Give me names . If you think that correcting a researchers name or spelling is going to help you then your mistaken .
Zenon (25 days ago)
It seems like Mike is swirling in assumptions, such as: 1) assume god exists 2) assume the god is the Christian god 3) assume the Bible is true 4) invent your own weird definition of "soul" that no one else uses 5) assume this "soul" exists based on no evidence 6) assume the god you assumed exists gave you the "soul" you assume you have
Skavar4000 (1 month ago)
I think you were a fine enabler... encouraging and rewarding his exploration of his delusional religious thinking without challenging much of anything and giving it much more credence than it deserved.
Nathan Hood (1 month ago)
What I really want to know is how does Mike's view of reality change how he interacts with the world differently than say a methodological naturalist. Basically we're experiencing the same thing....right? I'm open to the proposition that I'm missing something here - feel free to help with that.
Brit Ny (1 month ago)
Our friend here is grossly misrepresenting that study about people who had no word for "blue" and could therefore not identify the color blue. It's been awhile, but I definitely remember enough to demand sources whenever this guy says, "I read a study".
uncleanunicorn (1 month ago)
IP is fetishizing mental activity into some sort of cosmic underpinning. There's no basis to assume that Mind is the base of all being when science tells us - not only that brain activity is totally mutable based on physical forces, but that in natural history there was a primordial Earth with no life; and certainly no minds. Brain activity is a gradually developing 'after-thought', pun intended. The physical world exists until itself, minds or not.
WU (1 month ago)
No soul, just mind, which also contains our personality as defined by our everyday experiences. But, in the end, each to their own, believe what you want, it's your choice.
Tobias Hagström (1 month ago)
I don't have time to listen to all of this today, but I kinda wanna say what I think needs to be said on the whole "Hard Problem of Consciousness". This is a pretty small channel, so I'm gonna cross my fingers and hope that Shannon reads all her comments, even on a video that's a week old. I used to think the HPoC was an issue, it feels intuitive that "qualia" is real, that there are actual properties to sensations, that "it's like something" to feel something, all that. I couldn't make sense of it though, it felt like there was something wrong with my reasoning for years, until it finally hit me, and then it all made sense. There is no qualia. Sensations are abstract, they are as real in your brain as they are in a computer that accurately runs a simulation of those sensations. Then why do they not feel abstract? Because you're acting as if your thinking mind is separate from your feeling mind, which it is not. Ever been lost in thought and then stumbled upon a mirror and had that trippy feeling of suddenly remembering that you're a real human with a face, not just an abstract thinker? That's an example of how we separate our thinking and feeling minds. Our feeling mind is what experiences the supposed qualia. And our thinking self is then trying to account for the existance of that qualia, as if it looked into the feeling mind and saw that there was indeed qualia there. Except that's not how it works, because the thinking mind gets its idea of qualia directly from the feeling minds sensations. The feeling mind is all about taking in raw neural data and running it through concretizing filters to make it easier to sort and process. For external objects, this is very useful, makes them easier to keep track of. Problem is we do the same with sensations, we sort of treat them as if they are objects the same way that a chair is. The chair is a concrete object that is observed abstractly, and then processed as concrete. But pain is an abstraction, it's an event, yet we sort of process it in a similar concrete way as we do the chair. We tend to agree that numbers are abstract, because we understand numbers by by reasoning through our thinking mind, whereas pain comes as a direct sensation in the feeling mind, a difference that leads the thinking mind to have this intuitive idea that there is "something to pain", some realness, something non-abstract, maybe "spiritual"? But there's not. We're fooling ourselves. Because we keep forgetting that our thinking mind gets its awareness of pain from the feeling mind, as a direct sensation that the feeling mind processes as if it was "its own thing". And that's why when the thinking mind does its thinking, it falls into the trap of thinking that the sensation of pain must be accounted for in the same way the chair must be, concrete, objective, non-abstract existence. I think this is a reasonably good explanation of my thinking on this. But it's a bit difficult to talk about, as I said, this realization was just within my grasp for years before I finally got it, the problem is that it is weird and very unintuitive, it requires a kind of meta thinking that we simply not used to using, so it's not super-easy to put into words clearly. Hope it made sense, I wrote this as I'm literally preparing to go to sleep, probably the worst and/or best time to write about heavy philosophical fuckery.
John Thimakis (1 month ago)
*Mere* matter can't produce consciousness in the brain because a "soul" is required that works on magic. This is basically the theologian's argument. Another example of a God of the gaps, we can't currently explain it so "magic" does. 🤦‍♂️
Makhi Laveau (1 month ago)
John Thimakis is that all ? Seems like some things were bare assertions on your end,?
Makhi Laveau (1 month ago)
I’m also a naturalist, so your Comment on the tail end is irrelevant to any I would be defending.
Makhi Laveau (1 month ago)
Okay? If you meant that as an argument for Materialism, which by the way, is not synonymous with methodologies of science, since it is a philosophy, accounting for the mind, that it is a simple non sequitur fallacy. I ran into you a while back, I could have sworn your arguments were more informed than this.
John Thimakis (1 month ago)
+Makhi Laveau "Which worldview accounts" LOL. There is a worldview that put men on the moon, discovered electricity, cars, planes and evidenced based medicine. Then there is the worldview that attributes sickness to demons, burns witches, believes babies are born corrupt and are deserving of hellfire, appeals to authorities and ancient texts. I'm pretty sure I know which worldview has any chance of accounting for any observed natural process. On the other hand the supernatural ie "magic" is merely a placeholder for our ignorance and explains nothing because magic can account for anything and everything.
Makhi Laveau (1 month ago)
You don’t see a distinction between idealism and dualism?
loriemae enriquez (1 month ago)
I love you IP
Tensai55 (2 months ago)
55:51 It sounds like he's thinking of an old branch of philosophy that posits that everything actually occurs inside our own heads and the outside world isn't real. That's what the children's song "Row row row your boat" is about. I don't remember much about it and apparently I don't remember enough to even find useful Google results. I just remember discussing it in the only philosophy class I've ever had - which was about 10 years ago. I wasn't really a fan of philosophy. It involves far too much armchair science (as potholer54 calls it) for me to really be comfortable with the subject - an awful lot of sitting around and thinking about things without ever bothering with any actual research or data. Or at least that's how philosophers often come across anyway - especially those that like to go on and on about "thought experiments." What are you actually proving? That you imagined a specific scenario and then a specific result? That doesn't prove a damn thing! Maybe that you have a rather limited imagination if you couldn't come up with any other results or variables in your little imagined story.
Tensai55 (2 months ago)
Why would they expect brain activity to increase when on psychoactive drugs? I mean, aren't they just causing a dream-like state while you're awake? Does brain activity spike when a person is dreaming? Ppl can have extremely realistic dreams, that's part of where some of the more superstitious ideas about dreams come from. They swear up and down that it wasn't "just a dream" that it was life-like and then they insist that it must mean something, so they go looking for answers - and there's an entire community of woo peddlers willing to indulge them.
Tensai55 (2 months ago)
Shannon asks what evidence he would need to see to prove to him that it comes from the brain (and thus not a "soul"). He changes the subject. Yeah, that's about what I expected. He has his conclusion and he will ignore anything that is contrary to it. That's pretty common across ppl asserting a soul exists. Although, he seems to consider a soul to be a person's mind/consciousness/thoughts. Now that I think about it, ppl trying to make intellectual arguments for the soul tend to conflate the soul with the mind. But religious ppl usually never think of a soul like that, at least in my experience anyway. From the descriptions ppl use, they tend to conflate the soul with a person's feelings/instincts or their subconsciousness. It's a curious concept really. For all that philosophers and religious ppl have debated and discussed the concept at great length for thousands of years, we still don't have a clear understanding of what a soul really is supposed to be. Is it a person's mind? Their feelings? Their subconsciousness? Their consciousness? Their instincts? Everyone has a different idea of what a soul is.
delight eminem (2 months ago)
Was this filmed in 400 B.C? The video quality is crap! Love Mike though, no homo!
Jeremiah Reese (1 month ago)
Honestly accurate
John Buckner (2 months ago)
Although I refer to myself as a pluralist because it's the way I experience the world, and have never had one of those non dual enlightenment experiences, I absolutely loved this conversation. Totally resonated with it; I could have listened to you guys flesh this thing out for another 2 or 3 hours. Looking forward to IP's Genesis series
L (2 months ago)
So was IP’s main objection to physicalism basically correlation doesn’t necessarily entail causation?
Mavortius (2 months ago)
Between materialists and idealists alike, there is correlation, but they each think causation goes in the other direction, and they each have their own stories of how that works. It's difficult to determine which way the causation goes.
Bob Smith (2 months ago)
Shannon obviously hasn’t studied NDE science yet .the proponderance of evidence from NDEs are highly suggestive of consciousness in some way we don’t yet fully understand seems to survive physical death and there is an afterlife .
Nathan Hood (1 month ago)
+Bob Smith "the fact that 96% of nders see deaf people only in their ndes ." Bruce Willis and Haley Joel Osment in "The Fourth Sense - I hear deaf people" You promised me corroborating evidence of this in the thread pinned by Shannon at the top and never gave it. "Your post is also destroyed by the veridical NDE experiences by Pamela Reynolds whose eyes were taped shut and she had ears plugs put into her that produced a loud clicking sound as all her blood was drained out of her brain ." Her eyes were not taped shut. This is a later addition to the story. G.M. Woerlee, an anaesthesiologist, was asked to examine the case and found that the auditory events she claimed to hear were explainable without recourse to paranormal influence. Here's his report. https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc461684/m1/1/ "And your quote about being unconscious is wrong .dr Parnias aware study was about ndes during cardiac arrest where the brain simply becomes non functional 30 seconds after cardiac arrest so it isn’t about simply being unconscious , " More up to date studies like https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5901399/ show cell and neuron activity can continue for two to five minutes after the onset of Spreading Depolarisation, and that does not occur until some time after the heart has stopped beating. So the 3 minutes easily falls within the range.
Nathan Hood (1 month ago)
+Bob Smith Hi Bob. Remember me, the atheist from the thread that Shannon has pinned to the top. Yes the one you were going to make 'run away' and 'TKO' not to mention 'knock the fuggg out' you stunning adult you. The one that, when it became apparent could show you couldn't actually back up your claims you put on iggy and ran away from. Are you feeling better now? You seemed quite tense before.... Wishing you the best..... "Now tell me how does your non expert opinion jive with the expert opinion of the top NDE researcher in the world . " That's just, like, your opinion man. I asked who had judged him this and you never answered. You never got round to telling me how Dr.Parnia (a good cardiologist by all accounts is a better judge of brain states than neurologists, psychologists, parapsychologists etc. I never understood that. As you've quoted from the Independent yourself in the other thread I thought I'd share this with you: https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/human-brain-conscious-heart-stops-beating-death-neurology-research-a8232921.html There's a link to the peer reviewed paper in the article. It indicates that brain cells and neurons can be active minutes after cardiac arrest. Of course as with all science this needs repeating for us to have confidence in it but it saves having to believe in things we can't show to exist. Anyway don't worry your pretty little head about it. Night night Bob.
Bob Smith (2 months ago)
TruthSeeker as far as implied near death not being death dr Sam Parnia himself is in the process of lobbying to change that definition from ndes to ades or actual death experience for ndes occurring during cardiac arrest somyiur wrong on that also
Bob Smith (2 months ago)
TruthSeeker 5 that is an opinion that doesn’t jive with the consensus of the majority of NDE researchers so if your going by your religion of atheism subjective opinion yes you can make any evidence look bad But what are the experts saying my friend Again let’s see what they are saying shall we start g with the top NDE expert in the world dr Sam Parnia https://goop.com/wellness/health/when-is-death-irreversible-a-resuscitation-m-d-explains-why-its-evolving/ What the evidence suggests is that the soul, the self, the psyche, whatever you want to call it, does not become annihilated, even though the brain has shut down. This suggests that part of what makes us who we are—a part that is very real—is not produced by the brain. Instead, the brain is acting like a mediator. Like anything that has been undiscovered, because we can’t touch and feel it, we choose to ignore it. The reality, though, is that human thought exists, we communicate through thoughts—so it is a real phenomena. The source of consciousness is undiscovered in the same way that electromagnetic waves have been around for millions of years, but it’s only been recently that we created a device to record them and show them to other people. So in short, we haven’t got the tools yet, or a machine that’s accurate enough to pick up your thoughts and show them to me. In the next couple of decades, I believe it will be discovered that we continue to exist after death, and that consciousness is in fact an independent entity. Now tell me how does your non expert opinion jive with the expert opinion of the top NDE researcher in the world . This by itself blows your no 5 out of the water as he is more qualified to judge the evidence from his own study and from the studies of other NDE researchers then you or I Ok no 5 destroyed . Now focus on the first 4 and remember my corrections After we are done I want you to consider allowing me to adopt you as my atheist pet so I could teach you to think and reason like a normal human being . I mean that as a selfless act of kindness
Jerry Penna (2 months ago)
So you can’t really argue the Bible, too many contradictions and doesn’t make sense. You can’t argue evolution, that debate is over. You can’t argue that the earth is the center of the universe. You can’t argue that the earth is, flat. you can’t argue the age of the earth matches the Bible. So let’s make up some mine created reality that we really don’t fully understand yet, as the human brain might be the most complicated and complex yet least understood area of science. So this mind created reality somehow retrofits through post hoc rationalizations matches the God of the Bible! This is so desperate.
Jerry Penna (2 months ago)
Everything we observe by brain Research, split personality disorder, everything basically fits with IP model. Even when the evidence is for or against idealism This is just God of the gap’s no matter what it is if we don’t understand a complex process then God done did it.
Daviyd Viljoen (2 months ago)
It seems unwise to go ask Mike for counsel, for he will answer both yes and no. (I couldn't resist a Lord of The Rings reference). My dog will serve as an example, she sees in colour (albeit slightly different from humans, due to the amount of rods and cones in her eyes), she experiences multiple emotional states, including to depression, and to some extent she exhibits an awareness of self. The hard problem of consciousness, at least as IP articulates it, applies to her; does this mean she has a soul as well? (I don't see a problem here, why would one expect to see colour on something like an fMRI?) To my mind, the current paradigm, i.e. that consciousness is an emergent property of neuro-chemical activity is the most parsimonious. Mike's views on the matter seem somewhat post hoc. (Especially regarding the soul splitting up somehow to account for multiple personality disorder.) David Hume proposed the bundle theory, which IP briefly alluded to, essentially consciousness is not limited to only one area of the brain, the whole brain produces it. There is an excellent book on the subject written by Bruce Hood, I don't recall the title of the top of my head, wherein he states that the "self" is an illusion which is comprised of your thoughts and experiences, and claims that Hume's bundle theory is supported by the data, however not in the manner IP suggests. We are missing some of the steps to explain how consciousness arises, however, there are some plausible hypotheses; much the same as origins of life research. And I really need that source on ancient people not being able to see blue. Don't take my word for anything, I've be wrong about stuff before...
Daviyd Viljoen (2 months ago)
https://www.sciencealert.com/humans-didn-t-see-the-colour-blue-until-modern-times-evidence-science/amp I call BS as the colour blue is recorded in the Hebrew bible (Numbers 15:38).
VICKING (2 months ago)
you are lying Shannon , admit it that you are a Satanist
ayechaben 7 (1 month ago)
Seriously?
InaneDragon (2 months ago)
It may be worth noting that, according to every Christian theologian I've talked to, Mike is a heretic doomed to hell, because Idealism violates Christian eschatology.
TruthSeeker (2 months ago)
+InaneDragon I Agree, Mike has created his own religion, where he to espouse his views a few hundred years ago he would have been burned at the stake.
InaneDragon (2 months ago)
+Bru Master Nope. Every theologian of Christianity I have spoken to has held to material dualism strictly based upon the bible & church fathers. Idealism is a heresy to them, no less than materialism.
Bru Master (2 months ago)
I agree with DManCAWMaster, you're probably confusing the two meanings of the word. Regarding metaphysical idealism (what IP holds to) I think Christianity necessarily entails it.
DManCAWMaster (2 months ago)
Lol I think they are confusing Idealism eschatology ie Revelation which is different than just being an idealist in the mind body sense. Mike is a Preterist and doesn't hold to Idealistic interpretation of Revelation
a. y (2 months ago)
Michael seems to be saying that the universe manifests from our consciousness as observers. How then does the universe seem to have continued obliviously without our involvement? Stars and planets collide and presumably did so before we arrived. And we can compare our experiences; matter exists, and not just in some mathematical or ephemeral way! Is this just another way of shoehorning God into a material world?
a. y (2 months ago)
+Rebecca Sosa This is nonsense, the delayed double slit experiment is flawed due to a lack of initial precision in the entangled wave's bandwidth. Intelligent observation is not required! https://www.quora.com/Can-the-results-of-a-delayed-choice-quantum-eraser-be-explained-in-laymens-terms-that-also-shows-that-human-consciousness-is-not-a-factor Furthermore you invoke the idea of a god to be the creator of the universe which is also flawed because you are using an unexplained entity that is bigger than the thing you are trying to explain and which already has more parsimonious explanations.
ikon (2 months ago)
+Rebecca Sosa That's just your biased interpretation of the double slit experiment. You read into the experiment all the supernatural elements instead of allowing the evidence to lead you there.
Rebecca Sosa (2 months ago)
a. y The quantum mechanics double slit experiment actually leads to the conclusion that materialism is not the reality that ppl expect it to be. It shows that consciousness actually creates it upon observation (to an extent) and since as you said, so much of it goes on without our observation, there must be a greater consciousness than ours (that is God -the Creator.)
Alan Alldredge (2 months ago)
Brain processing is not "electrical signal", they are electro-mechanical signals which feature EM (ephatic signaling). Current models show that neurons are exploiting a "broad cast" look up. Post synaptic firing is 'post - process' (dendritic). Post synaptic theory relies on the Hodgkin-Huxley/Pitts model which describes point neurons AS networks for computational. This is not what the brain does. The brain is a holistic system. The final firing of the neuron is a small part of information processing system. One might describe this ionic domain as "power supply". There are two time scales: ionic and helical. Helical IS used for fractal weaving of memory and experience. IP makes the physicalist state-transition argument. There is no state transition problem. Subneural memory is coded in braided Mflux. The monomer/dimer/MT set have "spin up" fractal or braided magnetic flux using some time of geometric phase to encode memory. This braided state of information maintains a fractal ontology TO the axon and beyond. The brain likely "creates" consciousness using hexagonal fractal compression which is the main feature of grid cell converting Fourier information to rate code. This point to our conscious gestalt bubble is some form of a space filling curve. Adding to this model, the recent discovery of reverse (mnemonic) memory reveals that AS we navigate spacetime all objects are "hashtagged" with essence and subjective qualities.
Sweet Heathen (2 months ago)
**claps wildly** Absolutely LOVED this! I could listen to these topics all day. Thanks for being awesome, guys! <3
Emery Thrash (2 months ago)
I really enjoyed this!
Life was Given to us (2 months ago)
Do our genetic codes create our brain? And does our brain create consciousness? Even if so there could be a case made for the soul.
Ted Green (2 months ago)
The brain is the physical filter for the immaterial parallel in the mind (because essentially the represent the same thing - as Mike said). If you affect the filter that processes information gathered from the 5 senses, of course how you perceive that information (via mind) is changed {the input - physical to mental). And going the other way (mental to physical / mind to brain / thoughts to actions) --> if your brain is damaged, your sou'ls expressions will be altered and your actions will not marry up correctly with your thoughts\motives (see Alzheimer's). Note: information\motives are non-physical; it's obvious physical reality is not all there is...I'm actually surprised we're still discussing this in 2019. Note: Mike's explanation of a simulation\parallel - "video game exact representation of oneself" I believe is EXACTLY RIGHT. This also allows for Jesus and God to be ONE. Jesus is the man-form or "subjective person" and exact representation of the Creator (objective person); and we, like him (from Him\children), are the representation of our non-material selves put into this physical video game\simulation of sorts - to play out events IN TIME (whereas, in God's natural mind \ Heaven - there is no time). God stretched out eternity to create a pock of time to we can play out events step by step in a separate platform\reality called this universe. It's essentially a virtual classroom in God's mind. We're here to learn how to love unconditionally. We either pass or fail. The "process" of this, is called time" . The Method of this is called physical reality. When the bible says we are "vessels" and/or body is a temple of Holy Spirit - it's not meant to be philosophical. Paul is telling the 100% truth. *Re: Jesus \ God. It should make sense now why Jesus says, "I can only DO, what I see the Father doing". "I and the Father are One"; to Phillip Jesus says, "when you SEE me, you have SEEN the Father".* Shannon's question in the 17-18th minute is a good one...why do we need a physical classroom to learn if we can do in with our spirit\soul form... 1. That assumes we can do it in that form. 2. Spirit realm is timeless...if we wanted the challenge of how we attain certain goals, etc. you would need a completely different platform of linear time with struggle. Heaven is not that place. It's like being in Heaven and asking, well how do I row upstream? Well in Heaven, you might have the mental acknowledgement, but the experience is of higher value (a high grade of knowledge). Shannons Question at Min 22: Re: Self 1. Essentially, Mike is right. We are all part of the ONE "body" of Consciousness expressed as different persons (children). Fruit\Tree; Children\Father; Seed; (Bible mentions these typologies over and over again for a reason). Now, we don't really LIKE this because we feel like our Individual selves will be "destroyed" or irrelevant in the next life. Well its more like this: In the physical realm, we celebrate individualism to the point of pride. So I am Ted who is a Human. In Heaven, using the same language, I would be a human, who's name is Ted. The individual is still there, but the emphasis is on the "collective ONE (we)" instead of the one (me). --Our main issue here in the physical reality is the we like our individualism TOO MUCH (actually, we LOVE IT). That's why the 1st commandment is the same as the 1st SIN - Do not have Other gods - NAMELY YOURSELF. Shannon question min 28-30: The moment she uses the word logical, its over. Logic is Truth. Truth is a judgment (for limited minds anyway). Judgments are mental. Mental is not physical. The End.
Rebecca Sosa (2 months ago)
Ted Green Amen my brother!!
No You (2 months ago)
One of my best friends talks a lot like you Mike but oh god we argue haha.
No You (2 months ago)
Edit: and of course as I've seen happen in almost every video with her Shannon Q addresses the question/comment I think of as soon as she starts talking. / We know psychosomatic effects happen...how does that somehow speak towards Idealism instead of speaking towards Physicalism showing that the body can manifest different reactions to the same stimulus given different stuff happening inside of a brain, such as a damaged or altered brain structure?
No You (2 months ago)
How come electrons protons and neutrons make gold or helium if it's all just electrons neutrons and protons? This is the same question as "how do we get consciousness out of the electrochemical signals of the brain if it's all just electrochemical signals?" And then trying to assert that the constituent parts of something don't make any sense as an explanation for the complex emergent result. Also the brain does not contain the entirety of cognition. And computers are not a tenth as complex as the human body and brain so yeah of course they aren't conscious. Question redux: how do all these same Legos make a spaceship or a castle or a cat?
Nathan Hood (1 month ago)
+Bob Smith Hi Bob. Miss me. He's probably confused by your unorthodox sentence structure and incoherent claims. But I'm heartbroken that you probably won't read this after running away and putting me on iggy 'cos you had no actual evidence of veridical NDE's. Still I can console myself by 'reading' another video.
Bob Smith (1 month ago)
InaneDragon insane dragon translation : since I don’t understand a post I’ll just accuse the poster of using word salad and voila I’ll look intelligent . Dude and just like your rebuttal videos which even your fellow atheists don’t read your quickly becoming irrelevant;)
InaneDragon (1 month ago)
+Ted Green That isn't "simple". That's word salad intended to make people shut down and accept what you have to say without thought.
No You (1 month ago)
+Ted Green you are still just god of the gapping. "Our perception and exploration is limited therefore insert god wherever it hasn't gone."
ulf persson (2 months ago)
First, there is nothing better than hearing you laugh Shanon, its such a adorable laugh :D Secondly, people like IP is quite annoying, his case rest on that we cant solve a problem, and even make a problem where there is none. Every physical evidence you brought up about the brain, he tried to explain away, its irking me. And i think Dan Barker explained this quite well, he stands on stage nd tell people to imagine his "digestion" then walks over the stage. Then ask of the digestion was doing it then, or was following him? maby lagging behind? Its a word that we use to describe a prosess, same goes for mind, and for some part conciousness, and IP keeps changing words having the same apply all over the place, and i find that dissegenious. As with all other christians, he needs to prove that there is something as a soul, nost just tro to philosophise it into existance and use "i dont know therefor" fallacy . Until they PROVE a soul exist, this is a non disvussio honestly. But i like listning to Shannon anyway :D
Dm X (17 days ago)
+jason littleton weakest Reply i have ever read can you make some Arguments or not??? you a shannon dickrider so what now you gonna debunk that or not i already said i aint a fan of any nigga i disagree with IP on various Things and even debated him however in this case i would agree with him because he presents Facts so would you take your bumheadass and finally Show proof or suck some more of that shannon dick???
jason littleton (18 days ago)
Dm X the most fanboy reply I’ve ever read
hi (18 days ago)
Dm X 1) You used an ad hominem attack, having an anime profile pic has nothing to do with the argument unless you like insulting. You also have a superman anime profile pic making you a hypocrite. 2) You’re better than everyone else? lol, pride is a horrible sin. 3) Fanboys’ definition is people who like someone/something and become obsessive about him/her/it. Just because you have a worldview doesn’t mean it’s correct, I could have a worldview where the sun is actually small, does that mean I’m correct? 4) You’re extremely immature, you regularly insult others, calling them idiots, dumb shits. You consider yourself correct, you keep reposting the same playlist. Please stop. Have a good day!
Dm X (2 months ago)
+jason littleton nigga say's the bitch with a anime Profile pic boi if you dont get your weabo ass out of here i aint a fan im a fan of myself there are certain People i agree and that are the ones that speak those Facts the Word fan doesnt exist in my worldview im better than anybody the only fanboys i see here are those niggas that wank of Shannon even if this wasnt a debate making it a debate and making it look like Shannon won those are the depressed lil 12 year old cucks that wanna Smash badly but will never get it sad
Darren Marsh (2 months ago)
If the soul is a non-physical source of consciousness how does that function? If a squishy computer can't do it I'm not sure how positing a soul is in any way explanatory. It just seems like this soul has consciousness because of magic.
Dm X (2 months ago)
+Darren Marsh LMFAO nigga say's that was a Flat earth Video all of you infidelic Friends only make flat earth type Videos no proof not in the comments not in the description not in the Video how About you niggas shut the fuck up and Show proof instead of your bullshit Talking what???? the current Brain model???? HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE MOTHERFUCKING SOURCE FOR CONCIOUSSNESS YOU IDIOTIC LIL FUCKFACE even current scientist are trying to eliminate some Sources for concioussness there is no data of any material concioussness existing or any Material object concioussness emerged from you are a unscientific fuck seriously how something functions isnt the same as something existing just because People back then didnt know how the universe came to be doesnt make the big bang model any less true get that into your head you baffon YOU TAKE ONE ARGUMENT FROM THE VIDEO AND MAKE A TRASHY ASS RESPONSE TO DEBUNK A ENTIRE SERIOUS OF VIDEOS ARE YOU STUPID?????? FMRI,MRI etc could not found anything in the motherfucking brain causing concioussness to arise so no you are wrong IP is definatly rigth and has the data to back it up he explained even in his other 3 Videos how it works so that objection you can throw out of the window already
Darren Marsh (2 months ago)
+Dm X That was basically a flat Earth video. All criticism of the established brain model and zero evidence for the non corporeal consciousness. Just saying that there must be a conscious soul in no way makes it true and provides no explanation for how that consciousness might function. There's no place in the brain where shapes and colours are combined? Great, now show me where that happens in the soul and you might have a point.
Dm X (2 months ago)
watch his Video stop saying magic like an autistic lil kid https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBsI_ay8K70&list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TX_4LthrdGqACsqIWKd2gs- here he proofed the Soul exist and explained it with the data
reenatai75 (2 months ago)
Too much interruption
a. y (2 months ago)
Consciousness is problematic because we have little experience of working with something so complex! If AI, or its complexity when combined with the internet appears intelligent in every respect, it may still not be the same thing as an evolved biological system. Quantum biology is giving some insight into what that extra factor might be, but that still doesn't imply the supernatural!
Nathan Hood (1 month ago)
+Dm X "the chinese box is no Argument it is a thaugth Experiment....." If you're referring to Searle's thought (with an 'o' not an 'a' can't you use a spellchecker?) experiment then philosophy textbooks say that it forms an argument called The Chinese Room Argument https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-room/ "....ma guy get your Facts rigth...." Spell 'right'' right you illiterate goon. I did get it right you inept loon, and the most trusted encyclopedia of philosophy in the Western world agrees with me. You have no clue what the fuck you're talking about. "...like Schrödingers box is a thaugth Experiment" That would be Schrödingers cat not Schrödingers box ffs. I'm taking it that English is not your primary language. "and no again it is settled " Only for people who have no knowledge of the arguments. "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBsI_ay8K70&list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TX_4LthrdGqACsqIWKd2gs-" Really? You expect me to listen through a series of four videos in the vain hope that you've referred me to something better than IP's personal view on the matter somewhere in there. Nah. Better reffering me to a single video and a timestamp if appropriate would be reasonable. "it is not far from settled it was already settled" Real philosophers such as Margaret Boden, Tim Crane, Daniel Dennett, Jerry Fodor, Stevan Harnad, Hans Moravec and Georges Rey disagree with you. Why should I believe you over them? "the Robot can not react to infinite variables but the human can" Seriously? Give evidence of both of these claims. Are you claiming the human brain is infinite? Your claim would necessitate that. "AI does and so is not conciousse since those reactions are programmed by another Person" a. y is right, you haven't got a clue about machine learning. "...and that other Person for bulding in infinite variables would take an infinite of time " But you think a human brain can react to an infinite input of variables in less time when it's only a fraction of the processing speed of computers. "wich means no AI can not be concious." ' No AI can not be conscious' is a double negative that means all AI must be conscious. Perhaps you should learn punctuation.... and grammar..... and spelling..... and the subject you are discussing before posting nonsense.... etc
Dm X (1 month ago)
+Nathan Hood the chinese box is no Argument it is a thaugth Experiment ma guy get your Facts rigth like Schrödingers box is a thaugth Experiment and no again it is settled https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBsI_ay8K70&list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TX_4LthrdGqACsqIWKd2gs- it is not far from settled it was already settled the Robot can not react to infinite variables but the human can even if the human doesnt understand it it doesnt require to understand it to give a reaction however the AI does and so is not conciousse since those reactions are programmed by another Person and that other Person for bulding in infinite variables would take an infinite of time wich means no AI can not be conciousse
Nathan Hood (1 month ago)
+Dm X It's generally called the Chinese Room Argument, and no it doesn't debunk AI as this is an ongoing argument in philosophy. Replies such as the 'other minds' reply, the 'robot' reply, the 'intuition' reply, the 'brain simulator' reply and the 'systems' reply (and variants thereof) are still open debates. This is far from settled.
a. y (2 months ago)
+Dm X You tell me what it is then?
Dm X (2 months ago)
+a. y no you are just not familiar with Concioussness at all and if you belive what i said was possible you are an idiot and need to educate yourself a lot more
a. y (2 months ago)
Michael thinks we're going to turn the whole universe into Eden? ! ! ! Looney alert ! ! !
a. y (2 months ago)
+Dm X The looney alert went off at 24:00
Dm X (2 months ago)
+a. y Show the timestamp
a. y (2 months ago)
+Dm X You didn't listen to the discussion?
Dm X (2 months ago)
+a. y oooooff say's the guy that say's ''Michael thinks we're going to turn the whole universe into Eden? ! ! ! Looney alert ! ! !'' where did he even say this Show me ma guy
a. y (2 months ago)
+Dm X Don't be so offensive!
Lexipaichnidi • (2 months ago)
The self would in Christian terms be spirit, not mind.
Dm X (17 days ago)
+hi a old man Walking from the house to the stores would be Pretty slow
hi (18 days ago)
Dm X No, YOU educate yourself on Christianity, you like insulting others, you don’t love your enemies, if you did you wouldn’t have insulted faster than an old man walking from the house to the stores.
Dm X (2 months ago)
the mind if not the brain wich we proofed already would be a way of being the spirit since it would be the immaterial wave functionality of probability of occuring at randome Events so no you are wrong educate yourself on Christianity
Admiral Krang (2 months ago)
The conscious emerges from the pre-conscious while you're awake, because it needs that higher level function for non-rudimentary processes like language, but it's really a small portion what's actually going on. In Islam, Allah keeps you breathing while you're asleep (because your soul isn't present), which is not far from the truth if it were explaining the conscious process. I think the more one understands theory of mind, the less they would believe, or at least need to redefine it as what they're still ignorant of, and that's why it's irrational. If only two people have a different explanation for one thing, then at least one is incorrect, if not both. Ignorance is synonymous with magic, which is why we need science to have the humility to say we don't know and investigate, instead of assert nonsense as if we do because that would be dishonest.
Dm X (2 months ago)
Allah is gay go away nigga you trash
Kedama FOE (2 months ago)
i disagree with this guy, your soul is existence. its a part of you but still a large part of existence. it is not you you are your body and mind. when we Animist say body, mind, and soul, we are making a distinction between the physical, metaphysical, and existential and how these three parts make up you. the existential or the soul is the base line. does it exist: if yes it has a soul. is it physical if yes: it has a soul and a body. does it have a mind: if yes: it has a soul a body and a mind. when you die your existence stops but the existence continues and finds a new form. nothing of your mind remands after death your body is reused and your existence was never used it just is. for as long as the universe has existed(which was always) so has the "soul" i think hes gleaming at this concept but their is no way of knowing if you mind survives, from what we know the "mind" needs the "body," just like the "body" needs the "soul" look at my god, the sun: the sun has a body and it has soul, i don't know if it has a mind and with all the evidence chances are it doesn't, same with a rock. a body can exist without a mind but i have never seen mind without a body. Sorry Ocean but a disembodied mind makes no sense to me. not saying thor doesn't exist...just saying hes literally thunder.
Vincent Van Gogh (2 months ago)
What about the mind body problem? How physical (mind) effects have a real effect on the non-physical (mind), how would you solve it?
Zodiac Sam (2 months ago)
Horseshit
Falcondd (2 months ago)
Sam Swing Great rebuttal, Sam!
Dm X (2 months ago)
you mean Shannon yeah she does look like a horse
RifledParrot (2 months ago)
I have the same problem with the soul as with ghosts. What keeps them in place? They are non-material and not affected by gravity or the electric forces. We are moving through space as the earth spins, revolves around the sun and the sun revolves around the galaxy. How do we not whizz away from our souls.
Trolltician (2 months ago)
I don't know how you can honestly call the human eye garbage until you can present a better working system.
Trolltician (2 months ago)
+fiona fiona surgeries and glasses bring human eyes back into alignment. Last time I checked, cameras aren't a substitute for human eyesight.
fiona fiona (2 months ago)
There are Glasses and the "gray Starr" surgery is even better at correcting sight. Colorblindness occurs in males more often, since females might very well only have one colour blind eye, therefore see more shades/colours. Human eyes can't see in 16k cameras can? Would you define how that "better" needs to look?
Trolltician (2 months ago)
+Darren Marsh How many human bodies have functioning bird eyes?
Darren Marsh (2 months ago)
Bird eyes.
Leo Savage (2 months ago)
I like to use language as an analogy for the mind. Language is the Symbols/sound we use by arranging than in order to communicate Ideas. In that same fashion, I see the mind as a language the brain use to arrange our experience of the world. Our brain main purpose is to process all the information our body can detect and experience about the world around. Everything we are is the conjunction of all our life experience. Is like Steve McRae explains about Color. Color is an illusion created by our brain. There no such thing as Blue and red outside our mind. If we accept color is an illusion why can't we also conclude the mind is also an Illusion? I really don't find why a soul is even necessary for the mind to function.
Trolltician (2 months ago)
+Leo Savage Fail more chief. If we invented color as a mebtal abstraction, just show me the mechanism. Hard fail. Maybe the hardest.
Leo Savage (2 months ago)
+Trolltician I really don't care if you say I'm wrong and when I ask you why before you just told me _There nothing more to say_ . If you actually are able to show how color exists outside our mind then you should go challenge someone that has knowledge about the topic and State that color is an illusion, and prove them wrong. Steve doesn't hide, You can find him easily and he actually responds instead of making excuse like you do. He enjoys the challenge. So if you aren't able to actually grow some ball and talk to him directly why waste my time with cowards that don't challenge their view. Go tell you to excuse to someone that actually cares.
Trolltician (2 months ago)
+Leo Savage Bro. You really don't get it. If he wants to defend that idiocy, as you stated it, then I will be more than glad to correct the record for dullards like you. I, however, have nothing to prove here. The statement you made is blatantly wrong, otherwise you would show me the mechanism from which phenomenal color is created via noumenal input with such noumena having the property of color. Simple. Falsifiable. And non-existent.
Leo Savage (2 months ago)
+Trolltician Then you should talk to James the host of modern-day debate or Kyle from Nonsequitor to see if a debate could be arranged.
Trolltician (2 months ago)
+Leo Savage And there is no fear here. If he wants, we can discuss it to his hearts content on modern day and I will even cede every empirical fact he claims and still prove him wrong, if he in fact claims color is a fundamental illusion.
David Chorak (2 months ago)
See eye aye oh... kick it.
David Chorak (2 months ago)
Hey your on the way... I’m just playing ..., live you truly... it’s a stage your going through.
David Chorak (2 months ago)
Well that’s a deep subject mama ... let me think.... while needs a material brain... Madonna doesn’t. Sure just click the refresh button you’ll come back. Like the valkyries do to Vikings.
David Chorak (2 months ago)
You’re manifesting matter so effortlessly.... impressive.
David Chorak (2 months ago)
Take a drink before you become arrid.
David Chorak (2 months ago)
What is this maze of intellectuality do for me...
David Chorak (2 months ago)
You talk about the soul as if your clueless ...you really never have a spiritual experience.
David Chorak (1 month ago)
sasilik Really appreciate your concern for my well being but let’s give it a break. Happy trails to you. Love ya.
sasilik (1 month ago)
+David Chorak , not really good for you because you are wide open for every conman out there. But its your life.
David Chorak (1 month ago)
sasilik Good for you.
sasilik (1 month ago)
+David Chorak I am not looking for particularly anything in my life. I just live it. Without need for believing every spiritual crap that someone makes up and peddles out there. You really should start living for and in reality not for some imaginary stuff which consist only of abstract ideas and pure talk.
David Chorak (1 month ago)
sasilik It’s a sunny day. I have hills and mountains to climb in my back yard. Happy trails to you. I lost interest in this thread. You find what you look for in life. I wish you good luck in that endeavor. Try SBUX it’s easy to make a friend there, if you look for one.
David Chorak (2 months ago)
Let’s get a little more intellectual
David Chorak (2 months ago)
Brain damage changes political views ... that explains everything.
David Chorak (2 months ago)
fiona fiona Wow... but you survived... I was just horsing around... not drinking not smoking... maybe a little cranky... they’re not that serious themselves... no harm no foul .... it was cathartic....
fiona fiona (2 months ago)
So Nazis were soothed with vodka, whenever they got annoying? (admittedly my Grate grandparents happen to have been both)
David Chorak (2 months ago)
I perceive you are me and I am you and we are all together... nevertheless I’m an augmented athiest... sure it makes great sense mama.
fiona fiona (2 months ago)
I preserve, you, you are similar to how I look from the outside, you might be a person too... Its 100 years old .
David Chorak (2 months ago)
Now that you get the broad terms out of the way let’s go go...
David Chorak (2 months ago)
Yeah Paul meant things that float around your sour brain is soul. Good to hear you speak for “ most [email protected]
David Chorak (2 months ago)
Some sort of.... mental matter... drop a few philosopher names to demonstrate. You didn’t just fall off the turnip truck.
fiona fiona (2 months ago)
That's how philosophy /theology works.
David Chorak (2 months ago)
If you haven’t experienced your soul all you know about it is from external sources.
David Chorak (1 month ago)
Jeremiah Reese Your statement work for me.
Jeremiah Reese (1 month ago)
Not really. It's just a name for something that we inherently know to be a part of each of us
David Chorak (2 months ago)
Loofah this guy is sooo serious...
David Chorak (2 months ago)
Oh this is gonna be fun. Hope nobody is offended I kinda mean we’ll ... this is gonna be filled with laughter ... judging by your laugh mana
David Chorak (2 months ago)
No offense but you’re looking for the soul in all the wrong places. It’s nowhere to be found with the intellect.
jamie Russell (2 months ago)
The bible says the life giving breath, the spirit or metabolism is given to the dust and that combination makes a living being who is a soul. So the soul is the personhood, mind, developed memories and personality but only conscious with a body. You hurt the body, it wrecks the souls abilities to function. It is entirely dependent on the body to exist. But it's not merely matter. The difference between a dead body and when. It was alive is the spirit/breath. The only person is the one with a spirit functioning in it's body That is why the gospel stresses Jesus physical body after He rose. Because Jesus died. The man Christ Jesus bore the penalty for our sin. Which is death. "The living know that they shall die but the dead know not anything. The dust returns to the ground and the spirit THE BREATH returns to God who gave it. Not you ghost spirit boy goes, but his gift of breath returns to Him We eagerly await to see the manifestation of the sons of God. We don't yet know what we shall be, but we know we will be like Him for we shall see Him as He is. We shall not all sleep, but we shall be changed. We will not precede those who fell asleep but be changed. The dead in Christ shall rise first, and we who are alive and remain will be gathered up together WITH THEM to meet the Lord in the air. And then we shall always be with the Lord. COMFORT ONE ANOTHER WITH THESE WORDS.
Trolltician (24 days ago)
+Zenon You're an idiot. Fundy does not equal Christian. There are many people of all stripes with bad views. Sola Scriptura is certainly among them. And you are certainly among those who hold idiocy dearly.
Zenon (25 days ago)
@ jamie Russell - the Bible also says you're not a person until you "breathe your first breath" (aka birth) which means fetuses are NOT 'persons' according to the Bible. Do you agree with the Bible that fetuses are not people? Also, who cares what the Bible says, it's a creative fiction book, as illustrated by the talking donkey, talking trees, magic, witches, dragons, zombies, 900 yr old people, and general scientific backwardsness, historical backwardsness, and atrocious concept of morality.
Trolltician (2 months ago)
+Poseidon63 Hard fail. Please lay off the cock gobbling.
Poseidon63 (2 months ago)
Do you think anybody with appropriately functioning logical faculties takes any notice of the scribblings of iron age goat herding desert tribes about talking snakes and bushes, a man living in a whale, dragons, magic spells and a transcendent zombie magician, get a grip son, and grow up.
jamie Russell (2 months ago)
Traditional duelists are offspring of Greek, not Hebrew ideas.
jason littleton (2 months ago)
Crow ManyClouds actually they used monsters
Trolltician (2 months ago)
+Crow ManyClouds I see what you did there...
Crow ManyClouds (2 months ago)
Traditional duelists use weapons, not words!
Inverted 311 (2 months ago)
What is a self aware agent?
Trolltician (2 months ago)
Something that can recognize it's own existence.
Inverted 311 (2 months ago)
Being the book cover makes you the individual of soul.
Inverted 311 (2 months ago)
jamie Russell Is a very special band out of Omaha... However, the number itself has a many different important things to it.
jamie Russell (2 months ago)
What is 311?

Would you like to comment?

Join YouTube for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.