h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I think you may be approaching what some here may recognize as Anhaga's Question (although I certainly don't claim priority in the asking):

'If the soul is *in principle* undetectible by any material device, how does the material brain communicate with the soul?'






(cf. F135418?thread=563544)

A very good question and the most popular argument against dualism.

This is the main reason why dualism is in such low regard among modern philosophers. I am unaware of a legitimate solution by dualists. It seems to me that the fundamental definition of "physical" itself is:

having causal effects on spatiotemporal phenomena

If this is so, then any entity or process that has a causal effect must be considered physical. If this is so, and we are conscious of our soul(to be conscious of the soul would be an instance of causation), then the soul must be physical.

In short...you're a monist; and rightfully so.

easyjacksn

I'm not sure why you are being so antagonistic about what IS a very subjective and personal experience (and, in my case, exploration).

I accept that some may not understand what I feel in my heart or understand with my brain, but that doesn't make my experience or study unworthy.

I don't think less of someone who believes in God or someone who is a rationalist who doesn't accept what they can't see or touch.

I am guessing that you haven't read the thread from the beginning to see that some of us have carefully explained what we believe or don't believe or define as "religion" or "spirituality" or the need or lack of need for either.

Anhaga makes it clear that he doesn't necessarily understand or need religion or "the spiritual" in his life. Several others have expressed their own particular understanding or feelings on religion and spirtuality, or their own personal search.

I, for one, don't see the need for anyone to "prove" or "disprove" what they understand or what they feel.

My point about children is that one doesn't reach adulthood knowing all there is to know and, therefore, to reject any further exploration of what is unknown or as yet fully understood. Life is a continual journey of learning, understanding, finding errors, finding new paths.

I may have come to conclusions on a number of issues... that doesn't mean that I have necessarily come to a complete understanding or that I won't, later in life completely reverse my ideas on certain things.

Nor do I have to rationalise my exploration. I'm not preparing a thesis for anyone to pass or fail me on.... I am studying for myself.

Mudhooks:

I'm honestly not trying to be antagonistic. I'm merely trying to exchange ideas with others in an attempt to grow intellectually. I have no problem agreeing to disagree. If you like, I can stop responding to your posts regarding these issues so that you can continue posting in this thread without feeling pressured to argue in return.

No hard feelings.

I'd be very interested in hearing your personal journey towards your personal beliefs. That way, can we know what we are agreeing to disagree upon.

I think everything that has been posted here, until now has been more or less personal opinion and experience. I can't agree or disagree upon anyone else's personal opiinion or experience. I also can't "defend" my personal opinions or conclusions drawn from personal experience nor would I expect, for instance, that Anhaga defend his personal belief that religion has no place in his life.

A number of years ago, I ended up in the hospital. During the crisis which brought me there, I "died"... obviously (or maybe not, but that is another discussion entirely) I was revived.

At some point before, during or after the "death" and/or revival, I experienced what can only be described as "a near death experience".

There was the light, the voices, the hands reaching out to me, familiar (or perhaps not familiar but -- here is one of the unexplainables--- you know when you meet someone new but it's like you've known them all your life?--- familiar in that sense) faces, a sense of bliss, and then my own voice saying "No! I'm not ready!" (which everyone in the waiting room in the ER heard).... and then waking up....

For one person, that might have been the moment when they suddenly believed in God, whereas they had previously been a card-carrying Atheist. Another might, at that moment have "confirmed" their believe in the existence of God. Another might say "God saved me so that I might "finish" something.

I've had people tell me "It must have been a life-altering experience!"

No.... actually, it hasn't "changed" my life but I know that I can think of a lot of rational explanations for what happened to me... a lot of medical and scientific explanations for what happened to me. Certainly, it didn't confirm for me that there is a "God" or a heaven or angels or whatever. What I do know is that I cannot say that what I experienced was or was not entirely a product of a scientifically explainable series of events and processes.

Had a Christian told me that they had this same experience, I would not be able to say to them "You didn't experience a meeting with God. What you experienced was a loss of oxygen to the brain which caused you to see a bright light ....etc. etc." I wasn't there whan they had their "experience". Nor was anyone there with me to say "You met God".

The fact is, I experienced a wonderous and compeletely subjective event which has added another ponderable to the list of ponderables in my life-experience.

Mudhooks:

I think you might find Spinoza interesting. According to him, god and nature are one in the same, the infinite substance of which humans are merely a part.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinoza