Hi

[Arik]

I don't know what a "spiritual love" is, but it seems that all forms of love are related to hormones and glands, including for things like "God", whatever those are. :-)

...................... all forms of love are related to hormones and glands...........as far as the consciousness stay inside a body-brain.
As soon as the body die the consciousness leave and the relation with glands cease to exist.
That however doesn't mean that love cease to exist.
This has been proved by thousand of NDEs.

https://www.nderf.org/Archives/exceptional.html

[Blackleaf]

...................... all forms of love are related to hormones and glands...........as far as the consciousness stay inside a body-brain.
As soon as the body die the consciousness leave and the relation with glands cease to exist.
That however doesn't mean that love cease to exist.
This has been proved by thousand of NDEs.

https://www.nderf.org/Archives/exceptional.html

OMG, you are so dense. As I've already said, NDEs are known, through actual science, to be caused by hyperactivity in the brain, which happens shortly after the body begins to die. The person is not totally dead until that activity in the brain totally stops, and people do not recover from that. That's why NDE stands for "near death experience," not just "death experience." Sorry, but NDEs are not proof of life after death. They are hyperactive dreams, caused by neurons firing in the brain, just like every other conscious experience.

[Plu]

That however doesn't mean that love cease to exist.

Well obviously. It just ceases to exist in the now-dead-person. There's still plenty of other love left to go around.

[Baruch]

I don't know what a "spiritual love" is, but it seems that all forms of love are related to hormones and glands, including for things like "God", whatever those are. :-)

Plus - yes.  EQ vs IQ.  Poetry is EQ, algebra is IQ.  However, on another post, the question of abstractions was addressed.  Fo

Arik ... the materialist simply denies that abstractions have any validity, they all have the substance of delusion (except for the abstractions they like, such as deconstructive analysis).  The materialist senses each avenue of vulnerability to their own groupthink, and cleverly blocks each approach that is a threat to its secular ego.  An example of this was The Vienna Circle, that denied any meaning to any metaphysics.  For the materialist, there are only atoms, nothing else.  Delusion is simply the attribution of form or identity to any particular random group of atoms.  A car and a man are the same (made of atoms).  Their variant form doesn't matter.  And the fact that the man has an identity, but a car does not, is something also to be ignored.  And this is true in this sense ... the atom of iron in the man's blood is just like the atom of iron in the car frame.

[Baruch]

Well obviously. It just ceases to exist in the now-dead-person. There's still plenty of other love left to go around.

Conservation of existence ... nothing comes into existence, nothing goes out of existence.  There is only a change of form.  But what is one form vs another, other than the attribution like a child seeing a cloud that looks like a dragon.

[trdsf]

I wished I could have answered before but with no internet connection for over a week I was stuck.

Never mind, now I can so let us talk about your ...........refereed paper from a journal.

Have you ever seen anyone who published any evidence about his-her love for an other entity in any scientific journal?

THAT WASN'T THE QUESTION.  ANSWER THE ONE THAT WAS PUT AND QUIT TRYING TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT.

I don't give half a flying fuck about someone scientifically proving love, because that's not what I asked you for.

At least have the honesty to admit that you can't provide what you were asked for.  Or, if you can, provide it.

SHOW YOUR DATA.

You keep running around doing everything BUT that.

[Cavebear]

THAT WASN'T THE QUESTION.  ANSWER THE ONE THAT WAS PUT AND QUIT TRYING TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT.

I don't give half a flying fuck about someone scientifically proving love, because that's not what I asked you for.

At least have the honesty to admit that you can't provide what you were asked for.  Or, if you can, provide it.

SHOW YOUR DATA.

You keep running around doing everything BUT that.

There is always someone like that person around.  Drives me to distraction, too.

[Baruch]

There is always someone like that person around.  Drives me to distraction, too.

You are living, breathing and posting.  But you ignore that.

[Cavebear]

You are living, breathing and posting.  But you ignore that.

But I am perfection itself in all my posts.  How could I not share my brilliance with all of my friends?

[Arik]

Plus - yes.  EQ vs IQ.  Poetry is EQ, algebra is IQ.  However, on another post, the question of abstractions was addressed.  Fo

Arik ... the materialist simply denies that abstractions have any validity, they all have the substance of delusion (except for the abstractions they like, such as deconstructive analysis).  The materialist senses each avenue of vulnerability to their own groupthink, and cleverly blocks each approach that is a threat to its secular ego.  An example of this was The Vienna Circle, that denied any meaning to any metaphysics.  For the materialist, there are only atoms, nothing else.  Delusion is simply the attribution of form or identity to any particular random group of atoms.  A car and a man are the same (made of atoms).  Their variant form doesn't matter.  And the fact that the man has an identity, but a car does not, is something also to be ignored.  And this is true in this sense ... the atom of iron in the man's blood is just like the atom of iron in the car frame.

Yes, and that is mostly bizarre.
Materialists always talk about evolution but for them evolution only relate to a change in the body in order to survive.
Evolution of the consciousness is something unknown to them that is why an atom in the car is the same as an atom in a developed human.

Sometime it make me think at those horses going around with the blinkers on the eyes while pulling the heavy cart not knowing where they head to.
Just incredible considering that we are in 2019 and not in the middle ages.

[Arik]

Well obviously. It just ceases to exist in the now-dead-person. There's still plenty of other love left to go around.

A dead person?

Oh, I see.
You must have seen a dead consciousness next to a body?
Gee, that is incredible Plu.
This must be the first time in the history of this universe that somebody has seen a dead consciousness and can say without any doubt that people really die.
Good on you mate.

[Arik]

OMG, you are so dense. As I've already said, NDEs are known, through actual science, to be caused by hyperactivity in the brain, which happens shortly after the body begins to die. The person is not totally dead until that activity in the brain totally stops, and people do not recover from that. That's why NDE stands for "near death experience," not just "death experience." Sorry, but NDEs are not proof of life after death. They are hyperactive dreams, caused by neurons firing in the brain, just like every other conscious experience.

As you already said?

Oh, I see.
Because you already said it means that it must be true, isn't it BL?

Well, well, also the doctors that declare the chap dead already said that the chap is really dead (body dead, brain dead) so why should I believe you and not doctors that study the human body for years and years?

Where is your evidence that what you say is true?
Beside if would be even true what you say then it would not be possible for a brain under stress to put together a clear, sharp and well-defined experience that is recollected even after years and years?

You rather would get an hallucination that is not clear, sharp and well-defined and is forgotten after a short time.

Sorry BL but your idea is a total failure put up in order to shovel away the fact that consciousness never die.

[Arik]

THAT WASN'T THE QUESTION.  ANSWER THE ONE THAT WAS PUT AND QUIT TRYING TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT.

I don't give half a flying fuck about someone scientifically proving love, because that's not what I asked you for.

At least have the honesty to admit that you can't provide what you were asked for.  Or, if you can, provide it.

SHOW YOUR DATA.

You keep running around doing everything BUT that.

Michael Shermer states that, in reality, all experience is mediated and produced by the brain, and that so-called paranormal phenomena like out-of body experiences are nothing more than neuronal events. The study of patients with NDE, however, clearly shows us that consciousness with memories, cognition, with emotion, self-identity, and perception out and above a life-less body is experienced during a period of a non-functioning brain (transient pancerebral anoxia). And focal functional loss by inhibition of local cortical regions happens by “stimulation” of those regions with electricity (photons) or with magnetic fields (photons), resulting sometimes in out-of-body states.



http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/Mediaskeptics/vanLommel.html

[Plu]

A dead person?

You must have seen a dead consciousness next to a body?

You can't see a dead consciousness. The whole reason it's so hard to convince people a consciousness remains after you die is because there's no particles to make it up out of, so definitely it can't be something visible, audible, or otherwise perceptible to the still living.

[Blackleaf]

As you already said?

Oh, I see.
Because you already said it means that it must be true, isn't it BL?

Well, well, also the doctors that declare the chap dead already said that the chap is really dead (body dead, brain dead) so why should I believe you and not doctors that study the human body for years and years?

Where is your evidence that what you say is true?
Beside if would be even true what you say then it would not be possible for a brain under stress to put together a clear, sharp and well-defined experience that is recollected even after years and years?

You rather would get an hallucination that is not clear, sharp and well-defined and is forgotten after a short time.

Sorry BL but your idea is a total failure put up in order to shovel away the fact that consciousness never die.

It doesn't matter how many times someone says something, although you seem to be the one under the impression you can ignore the facts and say whatever you want. I don't care if you think "my idea" is a failure or not. Unlike you, I have research on my side. Brainwaves have been observed in people at the point of medically declared "death." On the medical table, you are declared "dead" when your heart stops, not when your brain stops. These people are not braindead, as you claim. That has been debunked. And no, I'm not going to do the Google search to find the articles. I'm wasting any more effort on you than I have to.