Hi

[Minimalist]

So every human begins as an egg and a sperm and grows from there.  It seems to me that the brain grows as a result of the nutrients supplied by the mother's body.

I imagine at some point he envisions his personal invisible sky-daddy showing up with a eye-dropper full of this magic brain growing medium and implanting it into the head of the fetus?  I wonder at which stage of gestation he thinks that happens, Hydra?

[Baruch]

Spoken as the theist you are.  Yes, I am billions of living cells--more than that?  Sure.  But that has nothing to do with god or even G_D.  You just can't get past the worship part can you.  You simply have to worship something.

People are inconsistent in their views.  I do point this out.  But it isn't illegal to be inconsistent.  You maybe worship your job, your family, your things, yourself ... whatever.  And you can call that atheism if you want.  People love some things and hate other things.

If you want to ban G and O and D from your dictionary, fine with me.  Hide under your bed from the KKK seeking to hunt you down (not really of course).  How are the atheists here any more or less paranoid than pr126?  And yes, spoken like the atheist you are.  But you aren't a übermensch because of it.

[Baruch]

So every human begins as an egg and a sperm and grows from there.  It seems to me that the brain grows as a result of the nutrients supplied by the mother's body.

I imagine at some point he envisions his personal invisible sky-daddy showing up with a eye-dropper full of this magic brain growing medium and implanting it into the head of the fetus?  I wonder at which stage of gestation he thinks that happens, Hydra?

That is a mystery.  To be consistent .. and we won't be ... life and consciousness make no sense in a world of semi-random atomic motions.  Unless you choose the "emergent" magic, or hylozoism (everything is alive) or panpsychism (everything has mind).  So go with "emergent" magic, because there is no other choice once an atheist has painted themselves into a corner.  Or just tell consistency to take a hike.  It isn't illegal to be illogical.

Yes, early theology imagined something like a pre-existence on a spiritual plane (with or without multiple births).  Or imagined how spirit (you don't have one do you?) could tie up with matter, with usually matter being considered gross and spirit being considered pure.  But those are just theologies.

[Baruch]

So...the brain is matter but can't be created by matter?  Seems kinda self-contradictory.

Plus, and I've noticed this thing a lot with theists, simply asserting REALLY STRONGLY that something is true doesn't actually make the case that it is true.  If anything, it just invites the audience to entertain the opposite and try to rule it out.  Can matter create brains minds?  I don't see why it couldn't, and you have yet to show why it couldn't.

Conservation of matter.  Matter is usually neither created nor destroyed.  It is just rearranged.  And yes, your sense of true could be wrong, anyone could be.  Emergentism or epiphenominalism is the magic theory (not science) that bridges that gap.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiphenomenalism

But this is part of philosophy, not science.  And philosophy is completely wrong, so I am told here.

[Arik]

So...the brain is matter but can't be created by matter?  Seems kinda self-contradictory.

Plus, and I've noticed this thing a lot with theists, simply asserting REALLY STRONGLY that something is true doesn't actually make the case that it is true.  If anything, it just invites the audience to entertain the opposite and try to rule it out.  Can matter create brains minds?  I don't see why it couldn't, and you have yet to show why it couldn't.

Sorry to tell you Hydra but your confusion is really out of control.

The brain IS NOT the mind.
The brain is made of matter while the mind or conscious mind is an abstract entity.
The brain give energy and allow the mind to operate same same as a vehicle allow the driver to drive and if you think that the matter or brain can create the mind then you also should think that the vehicle create the driver.

Can't you see how your beliefs are so defective?

So where suppose to be that science that back up atheism?

[Arik]

Come on man--we are going in circles; at least you are.  I have been nothing but plain about my stance.  I have said clearly from the beginning that material or physical is all there is.  Nothing else.  Love is based in the physical material world.  It is the result of chemicals and chemicals we are now aware of and are learning more and more how love works.  Love is NOT only felt, it is demonstrated.  And all love is not the same.  I love my wife (and has that love gone thru changes.), my dogs, my family (well, some of them), my fav sports players, my computer and computer games--and so on................None of those loves are the same.  All of those various loves is physical. 

If you had read anything that I have posted to you you must know that I don't 'expect' god to look like anything or anybody.  Do I expect faries to look a certain way?  No, how could I since they don't exist.  I do expect you to give me some evidence of any god; if you could do that then I may form an expectation of what that god looks like.  I have told you from the very start that god is a fiction and you have not give me any reason or evidence to suggest otherwise.  Just because you believe something does not mean that that is proof.  So, stop wasting our time and give us some evidence.

Sorry Mike but your beliefs are absolutely defective.

1) If you think that....................... Love is based in the physical material world..............then you should also believe that a driver is part of the vehicle.
Don't you get out your vehicle once you reach the destination?

2) Actually is you that are wasting my time.
The day you will be able to demonstrate that your love for anyone is real I also will demonstrate to you that God exist.

Can't you see the stupidity Mike?
How on earth can you demonstrate something within except of course (as I already said) the release of extra hormones?

[Arik]

Don't confuse solid "argument" with solid "evidence."  I'm sure you think your reasoning is brilliant.

I doubt the audience here will agree.

Actually I do not expect that.......the audience here will agree.

That would mean to throw away a lifetime of false beliefs for an atheist.

My objective is not that Min.
It is rather the clash of ideas that excite me but also to learn if that occur-eventuate.

[Arik]

The brain creating the mind is not that difficult of a concept to grasp. A computer uses a combination of 0's and 1's to create all kinds of things, like pictures, videos, text files, and video games. How do 0's and 1's produce anything but more 0's and 1's? Must be magic! No, dude. It's emergence. Sometimes when you have a group of things coming together, they equal more than the sum of their parts. No god, spirits, or magic required.

That is incredible BL.

Most atheists always glorify science because according to them science back up their beliefs but since when science say that an inferior entity can create a superior entity?
Where is the evidence BL?

Your computer analogy is totally defective because a computer has been programmed by a human mind to do certain things.

[Baruch]

That is incredible BL.

Most atheists always glorify science because according to them science back up their beliefs but since when science say that an inferior entity can create a superior entity?
Where is the evidence BL?

Your computer analogy is totally defective because a computer has been programmed by a human mind to do certain things.

AI is woo woo for the ignorant.  We want to be G-d, we want to create life ala Dr Frankenstein.  But with silicon instead of multiple dead body parts.  We are demi-gods, not G-d.  Real giant Japanese robots would be a menace.  For most people, science is "pop science" which is just something for the more educate guys to read a the barber shop, instead of "pop mechanics".

[trdsf]

All very well said brother.
I suppose your critique is addressed mostly to atheists that believe that the consciousness is a product of the brain.
Personally I have some solid argument to prove my point in saying that something abstract and superior to the brain which brain is made of matter can not be created by the matter itself.

Thanks for your argument anyway.

Wow, what total intellectual cowardice.

My critique is addressed directly at you and your completely unsupported assertion.  It couldn't have been any clearer.  If you have evidence, provide it.  Stating that you have it and not providing it is not the same as providing evidence.

What you have told me in your non-answer here is that you cannot back up your claim -- you have made up something that sounds good to you and you have not actually thought about it in the slightest.

I say again: what is your evidence that consciousness requires more than the brain?  And please remember that "You can't explain it either" isn't evidence for anything more than the need for further research.

[Arik]

Arik ... so which of these Ashtangayoga principles do you do?

Yama, niyama, asana, pranayama, pratyahara, dharma, dhyana or samadhi?

I first experienced samadhi 7 years ago, providing me with insight that I can refer to during normal activity.

They are all important Baruch but I shouldn't really worry about samadhi.
Samadhi will be given to you at the correct time by your guru when he-she will see that you have done-accomplished what he previously taught you.
Never before.
Before that there is only a lot of hard work.

Remember however that my yoga does not come from Sri K. Pattabhi Jois and T. Krishnamacharya in the 20th century.

[trdsf]

What in the world does this mean??????

It means he can't answer a direct question.

[Arik]

Jesus never existed, so this story is entirely fictional. So what good is it in furthering whatever you're arguing for?

Sure, sure Jesus never existed.
Not even Pontius Pilate existed and the first Christians that prefer to be eaten alive by the lions rather than give away their beliefs for Jesus were a bunch of idiots because they must have followed a person that never existed.

Gee, I never thought about that mate.
I imagine that also Genghis Khan and Alexander the Great never existed or maybe not.
They existed because they were not theists.
Who knows.
I am so confused now.   

[Arik]

Wow, what total intellectual cowardice.

My critique is addressed directly at you and your completely unsupported assertion.  It couldn't have been any clearer.  If you have evidence, provide it.  Stating that you have it and not providing it is not the same as providing evidence.

What you have told me in your non-answer here is that you cannot back up your claim -- you have made up something that sounds good to you and you have not actually thought about it in the slightest.

I say again: what is your evidence that consciousness requires more than the brain?  And please remember that "You can't explain it either" isn't evidence for anything more than the need for further research.

Are you saying that you need evidence to prove that the driver is not a product of the vehicle?

Is not the consciousness that tell the body-brain what to do or say?
So if the consciousness is in charge why on earth should we need evidence to demonstrate that the consciousness is not created by the brain?
Have you ever seen a soldier that tell a general in command what to do?

If you still need further evidence I suggest you to ask you car if it ever create you.
You never know mate.

[Mike Cl]

People are inconsistent in their views.  I do point this out.  But it isn't illegal to be inconsistent.  You maybe worship your job, your family, your things, yourself ... whatever.  And you can call that atheism if you want.  People love some things and hate other things.

If you want to ban G and O and D from your dictionary, fine with me.  Hide under your bed from the KKK seeking to hunt you down (not really of course).  How are the atheists here any more or less paranoid than pr126?  And yes, spoken like the atheist you are.  But you aren't a übermensch because of it.

Spoken like the theist you are--can't ever quite get to the point.  I'm not sure what you said, but are you saying if one does not believe in god then the KKK will get you?  Seems about on par for you and your theist folks.  No, I'm not a superman for my views--just an atheist.  And no, I don't want to get rid of god from my dictionary, just acknowledge it for the fiction it is--like acknowledging that Bugs Bunny is a fiction, as well.