Human experience shouldn't be what it is

What you think about how you think.
Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Omniverse » Wed Jun 14, 2017 3:21 pm

If we really are nothing more than biological machines and that our experiences are nothing more than the product of a brain, then I would expect experiences that reflect nothing more than a biological nature. In other words, rather than love being a very powerful and profound experience that we are familiar with, love would instead be something like the experience of being pulled to another person sort of like a magnet. Since we are talking about a universe which is run by the laws of physics and biology, then I would expect our human experiences to reflect that nature. But it seems as though our human experiences instead reflect a nature that transcends physics and biology.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10143
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jun 14, 2017 3:44 pm

Evidently, you have a very mechanistic view of biological machines......when.....you know more just by reflection of your own experiences. Yes......consciousness has some mystery about it, but its all part of physics and biology. No evidence of anything else. Thinking there is "more"...is all a part of it.

You've never been pulled to another person sort of like a magnet??? Well....its something to experience.

What experience transcends physics and biology as opposed to being wholly a part of it?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Omniverse » Wed Jun 14, 2017 3:58 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Evidently, you have a very mechanistic view of biological machines......when.....you know more just by reflection of your own experiences. Yes......consciousness has some mystery about it, but its all part of physics and biology. No evidence of anything else. Thinking there is "more"...is all a part of it.

You've never been pulled to another person sort of like a magnet??? Well....its something to experience.

What experience transcends physics and biology as opposed to being wholly a part of it?


But I think that a mechanistic view of biological machines is an accurate assessment since they are just that--machines. I would expect mechanistic experiences rather than the powerful and profound experiences that we have as human beings.

User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Regular Poster
Posts: 924
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Cadmusteeth » Wed Jun 14, 2017 6:40 pm

If the way things work goes against how you expect them to work, then it's counterintuitive. Just because it goes against your expectations doesn't mean it's incorrect. It just means you shouldn't put so much trust in your intuition. Easier said than done, but it can be done.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2039
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Nikki Nyx » Wed Jun 14, 2017 8:52 pm

Omniverse wrote:If we really are nothing more than biological machines and that our experiences are nothing more than the product of a brain, then I would expect experiences that reflect nothing more than a biological nature. In other words, rather than love being a very powerful and profound experience that we are familiar with, love would instead be something like the experience of being pulled to another person sort of like a magnet. Since we are talking about a universe which is run by the laws of physics and biology, then I would expect our human experiences to reflect that nature. But it seems as though our human experiences instead reflect a nature that transcends physics and biology.

You're starting off with a naturalistic fallacy. You've got a relatively factual statement: Our experiences are the product of the brain. But then you segué into an expectation that doesn't comply with your factual statement: You would expect experiences that reflect nothing more than a biological nature. Lastly, you conclude with a statement of how you think things should be based on your first two statements: Our human experiences reflect a nature that transcends physics and biology.

Why is this a fallacy? Because when you state your expectation, you dismiss the brain as nothing more than a simple organ with simple biological functions, and we know the brain is a complex organ with complex functions, including storing subjective experiences in a searchable database; integrating new knowledge with learned knowledge, existing experiences, and biological imperatives; forming new pathways when existing ones become corrupted; thinking about its own functions; and more. All that while acting autonomously to keep all other organ systems running.

Basically, you're doing this:
1. Dismissing the complexity of the human brain and our lack of complete understanding of its myriad functions.
2. Imagining some sort of supernatural essence that you're unable to explain without devolving into logical fallacies.
3. Concluding that you must be superior to lesser-evolved mammals and, therefore, "special."

...when you should be doing this:
1. Recognizing that the brain is a complex organ, and that we don't fully understand its myriad functions.
2. Researching until you understand the existing knowledge.
3. Forming rational conclusions based on the factual knowledge you've learned.
4. Accepting that there may be unanswered questions at our current level of knowledge, and either:
a. forming hypotheses, if sufficient information exists, or
b. setting aside the questions, until such time as sufficient information exists to form hypotheses.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26338
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Jun 15, 2017 12:59 am

Omniverse aka Matt MSV7 aka Cobalt6 AKA MarkGaB5 and so on wrote: If we really are nothing more than biological machines and that our experiences are nothing more than the product of a brain, then I would expect experiences that reflect nothing more than a biological nature. In other words, rather than love being a very powerful and profound experience that we are familiar with, love would instead be something like the experience of being pulled to another person sort of like a magnet. Since we are talking about a universe which is run by the laws of physics and biology, then I would expect our human experiences to reflect that nature. But it seems as though our human experiences instead reflect a nature that transcends physics and biology.


You are a 29 year old male troll, who pretends to be a five year old on children's video game forums so as to engage children using private messages. You ask children to help you write music for video games.
Omniverse wrote:Yes, I am the same as MattMVS7

viewtopic.php?f=16&t=28112&start=240#p577194
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFmrzRUojS0


You are simultaneously claiming on other forums that you are a five year old child rape victim.
Omniverse aka Matt MSV7 aka Cobalt6 AKA MarkGaB5 and so on on the Spiritual Forum wrote:OK well I can help you out a lot in this situation. I've had bi polar since I was about 10 years old. I get world ending depression at least a few times a month. I've had PTSD, the most severe anxity disorder known to man, since I was raped at 5. And I've experineced multiple NDE (some of them hellish) in which I experienced what can only be described as death.

http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/archi ... 06278.html

You are simply trying to justify your pedophilia by offering excuses for your behaviour on our forum.

Go away.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2039
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Nikki Nyx » Thu Jun 15, 2017 1:15 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Omniverse wrote:Yes, I am the same as MattMVS7

viewtopic.php?f=16&t=28112&start=240#p577194
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFmrzRUojS0

Dafuq did I just watch?!
Image
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26338
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Jun 15, 2017 1:23 am

LunaNik wrote: Dafuq did I just watch?!
A classic example of a child pervert using a lure to interest children. Matt MSV7 aka Omniverse had almost 100 of these bad music videos to lure children. You will find them all across children's video game forums.

He keeps coming back here and was banned as MattGab5 then Cobalt6, then came back as Matt MSV7 and is now as Omniverse10.
Omniverse10.jpg


Here is Matt MSV7 yet again pretending to be a child, singing another of his video game lures
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFxE4jC-v-c
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2039
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Nikki Nyx » Thu Jun 15, 2017 1:48 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
LunaNik wrote: Dafuq did I just watch?!
A classic example of a child pervert using a lure to interest children. Matt MSV7 aka Omniverse had almost 100 of these bad music videos to lure children. You will find them all across children's video game forums.

He keeps coming back here and was banned as MattGab5 then Cobalt6, then came back as Matt MSV7 and is now as Omniverse10.

I feel nauseated. Why has he not already been banned this time around?
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26338
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Jun 15, 2017 4:41 am

LunaNik wrote: I feel nauseated. Why has he not already been banned this time around?
Well.... you got to keep them talking to find them and Matt MSV7 has been banned from pretty well every other forum on the internet.

He deleted all the You tube videos he made of himself, with images of his face, about two months ago when I first mentioned what was going on.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29080
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Gord » Thu Jun 15, 2017 9:40 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/archive/index.php?t-106278.html

Spiritualforums? Why do I know that name? Hang on a sec, it was from here: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=28236#p581557

wengehuang also posted his stuff there!

Is it a popular place, or is there yet one more connection between posters that I wasn't expecting? :befuddled:
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10143
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Jun 15, 2017 4:06 pm

Omniverse wrote: But I think that a mechanistic view of biological machines is an accurate assessment since they are just that--machines.

No.....we are not just that--machines. We are as you say "biological machines." Adjectives are known the world over for MODIFYING the nouns they are attached to. Ain't basic language fun?

Omniverse wrote: I would expect mechanistic experiences rather than the powerful and profound experiences that we have as human beings.

How much more proof do you need then that biological machines are not just machines?

Start with Descartes. Everything you don't know has already had books written on point.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Omniverse » Thu Jun 15, 2017 4:23 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Omniverse wrote: But I think that a mechanistic view of biological machines is an accurate assessment since they are just that--machines.

No.....we are not just that--machines. We are as you say "biological machines." Adjectives are known the world over for MODIFYING the nouns they are attached to. Ain't basic language fun?

Omniverse wrote: I would expect mechanistic experiences rather than the powerful and profound experiences that we have as human beings.

How much more proof do you need then that biological machines are not just machines?

Start with Descartes. Everything you don't know has already had books written on point.


Alright, let me correct myself then. I should have instead said that we should only have experiences that reflect a biological mechanical nature and that our experiences shouldn't be what they are.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10143
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Jun 15, 2017 5:01 pm

Omniverse wrote:
Alright, let me correct myself then. I should have instead said that we should only have experiences that reflect a biological mechanical nature and that our experiences shouldn't be what they are.


That IS the only experience we have. What else is there?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Omniverse » Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:27 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Omniverse wrote:
Alright, let me correct myself then. I should have instead said that we should only have experiences that reflect a biological mechanical nature and that our experiences shouldn't be what they are.


That IS the only experience we have. What else is there?


I am positing a hypothetical situation here. In the event that the soul, afterlife, and paranormal are real phenomena, then I think our experiences would reflect this nature. If we were truly nothing more than biological machines, then our experiences should be nothing more than biological mechanical experiences. A biological mechanical experience would not be the powerful and profound experiences that we as human beings have such as love, beauty, and joy. Rather, experiences such as love, beauty, and joy would take on a whole new realm of experience such as feeling electrical surges, forces, etc. since that would reflect the nature of a universe that is solely chemicals, biology, naturalistic forces, etc.

User avatar
Dimebag
Regular Poster
Posts: 699
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 12:05 pm

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Dimebag » Thu Jun 15, 2017 8:18 pm

Omniverse wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Omniverse wrote:
Alright, let me correct myself then. I should have instead said that we should only have experiences that reflect a biological mechanical nature and that our experiences shouldn't be what they are.


That IS the only experience we have. What else is there?


I am positing a hypothetical situation here. In the event that the soul, afterlife, and paranormal are real phenomena, then I think our experiences would reflect this nature. If we were truly nothing more than biological machines, then our experiences should be nothing more than biological mechanical experiences. A biological mechanical experience would not be the powerful and profound experiences that we as human beings have such as love, beauty, and joy. Rather, experiences such as love, beauty, and joy would take on a whole new realm of experience such as feeling electrical surges, forces, etc. since that would reflect the nature of a universe that is solely chemicals, biology, naturalistic forces, etc.

You are discounting the multi layer nature of our experiences, and the level of abstraction our own minds can have towards experiences. Take love for example, there is both a physical reaction which is felt, the increased heart rate, and our awareness of that feeling, the sinking stomach, and our awareness of that feeling, and our awareness of those feelings allows us to reframe what would normally be viewed as purely physical feelings, with mental attachments. When the heart races we view this as a feeling associated with love, and we feel it is somehow special. There also comes with love the tendency to obsess and daydream about the person of interest. And when that daydreaming occurs it comes with those same feelings I previously discussed, the thoughts can evoke the body.

Some view this process as magical and special, and there is no doubt it is a very unique set of feelings, however it can be unpacked and its actual contents viewed and seems entirely of the body and brain.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10143
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Jun 15, 2017 11:53 pm

Omni: FIRST==you are imagining something that doesn't exist, then presupposing that it does, then imposed out of nothing restrictions that totally discount what you can experience yourself.

Silly.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2039
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:04 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
LunaNik wrote: I feel nauseated. Why has he not already been banned this time around?
Well.... you got to keep them talking to find them and Matt MSV7 has been banned from pretty well every other forum on the internet.

He deleted all the You tube videos he made of himself, with images of his face, about two months ago when I first mentioned what was going on.

I'm not surprised at either of your statements. Yikes.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2039
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:21 am

Omniverse wrote:In the event that the soul, afterlife, and paranormal are real phenomena, then I think our experiences would reflect this nature.
What you mean to say is, I, Omniverse, believe that the soul, afterlife, and paranormal are real. Since I've already decided to throw science in the garbage, because facts don't agree with my beliefs, I'm going to attempt to find someone, somewhere on the Internet, who will agree that I am a special snowflake with unique experiences that can't be explained by the standard biological functioning that exists in everyone. You picked a tough room, dude.

Omniverse wrote:If we were truly nothing more than biological machines, then our experiences should be nothing more than biological mechanical experiences.
There you go with the logical fallacies again. What makes you think our experiences aren't just biological?

Omniverse wrote:A biological mechanical experience would not be the powerful and profound experiences that we as human beings have such as love, beauty, and joy. Rather, experiences such as love, beauty, and joy would take on a whole new realm of experience such as feeling electrical surges, forces, etc. since that would reflect the nature of a universe that is solely chemicals, biology, naturalistic forces, etc.
Do you think people would reproduce if it weren't for orgasms? They are "powerful and profound" experiences, are they not? Yet, at the end of the day, they are merely biological functions.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Omniverse » Fri Jun 16, 2017 1:31 am

LunaNik wrote:
Omniverse wrote:In the event that the soul, afterlife, and paranormal are real phenomena, then I think our experiences would reflect this nature.
What you mean to say is, I, Omniverse, believe that the soul, afterlife, and paranormal are real. Since I've already decided to throw science in the garbage, because facts don't agree with my beliefs, I'm going to attempt to find someone, somewhere on the Internet, who will agree that I am a special snowflake with unique experiences that can't be explained by the standard biological functioning that exists in everyone. You picked a tough room, dude.

Omniverse wrote:If we were truly nothing more than biological machines, then our experiences should be nothing more than biological mechanical experiences.
There you go with the logical fallacies again. What makes you think our experiences aren't just biological?

Omniverse wrote:A biological mechanical experience would not be the powerful and profound experiences that we as human beings have such as love, beauty, and joy. Rather, experiences such as love, beauty, and joy would take on a whole new realm of experience such as feeling electrical surges, forces, etc. since that would reflect the nature of a universe that is solely chemicals, biology, naturalistic forces, etc.
Do you think people would reproduce if it weren't for orgasms? They are "powerful and profound" experiences, are they not? Yet, at the end of the day, they are merely biological functions.


I never said that I actually believed in the paranormal, soul, and the afterlife. I am merely keeping an open mind to it. As for orgasms, even they would have to be nothing more than biological mechanical experiences as well if they were nothing more than the product of the brain.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2039
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:14 am

Omniverse wrote:I never said that I actually believed in the paranormal, soul, and the afterlife. I am merely keeping an open mind to it.
Why? There's no evidence to prove any of the three is real. I'll refer you back to my original post to you.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Omniverse » Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:16 am

LunaNik wrote:
Omniverse wrote:I never said that I actually believed in the paranormal, soul, and the afterlife. I am merely keeping an open mind to it.
Why? There's no evidence to prove any of the three is real. I'll refer you back to my original post to you.


Well, I don't know if there is actual evidence out there for it or not. Therefore, I am keeping an open mind to the possibility that there is evidence that skeptics are only choosing to dismiss and deny due to their biased and close minded views. However, at the same time, I am open to the possibility that the skeptics are right in saying that there is no evidence for these phenomena.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2039
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:36 am

Omniverse wrote:Well, I don't know if there is actual evidence out there for it or not.
Go look, silly.
Omniverse wrote:Therefore, I am keeping an open mind to the possibility that there is evidence that skeptics are only choosing to dismiss and deny due to their biased and close minded views.
Yeah, that word doesn't mean what you think it means. Actually, none of those words mean what you think they mean. You're not being open-minded; you're being gullible.
Omniverse wrote:However, at the same time, I am open to the possibility that the skeptics are right in saying that there is no evidence for these phenomena.
Why do you expect everyone else to do your homework for you? Do your own research. Frankly, what you're doing right now is akin to attempting to discuss genetics when you haven't yet taken a course in basic biology.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Omniverse » Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:44 am

LunaNik wrote:
Omniverse wrote:Well, I don't know if there is actual evidence out there for it or not.
Go look, silly.
Omniverse wrote:Therefore, I am keeping an open mind to the possibility that there is evidence that skeptics are only choosing to dismiss and deny due to their biased and close minded views.
Yeah, that word doesn't mean what you think it means. Actually, none of those words mean what you think they mean. You're not being open-minded; you're being gullible.
Omniverse wrote:However, at the same time, I am open to the possibility that the skeptics are right in saying that there is no evidence for these phenomena.
Why do you expect everyone else to do your homework for you? Do your own research. Frankly, what you're doing right now is akin to attempting to discuss genetics when you haven't yet taken a course in basic biology.


I already have done the research. All I see is an ongoing debate between skeptics and proponents that never seems to end. I see no definite answer one way or the other as to whether there is actual evidence or not. The debate regarding life after death, the soul, and the paranormal has been an ongoing debate for ages and I don't think there will ever be a time where I can see any definite conclusion being reached one way or the other.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26338
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:51 am

Omniverse wrote: I already have done the research.
Omniverse a week ago wrote: I do not wish to dedicate my life into this nde/paranormal research since I plan on dedicating my life to a different hobby. In other words, the afterlife is very important to me, but the research itself is not.

viewtopic.php?f=16&t=28112&hilit=hobby&start=200#p575733

Matt MSV7 AKA Omniverse is too busy making children's music videos, to lure children, do any research. He said that last week. He is simply lying as that's what trolls do. :lol:

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Omniverse » Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:53 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Omniverse wrote: I already have done the research.
Omniverse a week ago wrote: I do not wish to dedicate my life into this nde/paranormal research since I plan on dedicating my life to a different hobby. In other words, the afterlife is very important to me, but the research itself is not.

viewtopic.php?f=16&t=28112&hilit=hobby&start=200#p575733

Matt MSV7 AKA Omniverse is too busy making children's music videos, to lure children, do any research. He said that last week. He is simply lying as that's what trolls do. :lol:


I did do the research. I did enough to the point where I have had enough and couldn't decide one way or the other. However, it is not a life dedication's worth of research. That is what I meant when I said that I am not willing to dedicate my life into this research.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26338
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:58 am

Omniverse aka Matt MSV7 wrote: I did do the research.
Piss off, you pervert.

In the other thread you were unable to offer one example. You are just trolling between stalking children.

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=28202&p=578702#p578856

Here is Matt MSV7's video from three weeks ago.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvV-SFwxw4E

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2039
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 16, 2017 3:32 am

Omniverse wrote:I already have done the research. All I see is an ongoing debate between skeptics and proponents that never seems to end. I see no definite answer one way or the other as to whether there is actual evidence or not. The debate regarding life after death, the soul, and the paranormal has been an ongoing debate for ages and I don't think there will ever be a time where I can see any definite conclusion being reached one way or the other.

That's not how one reaches conclusions. One weighs the arguments of both sides. The anti-science people have no valid argument to support their beliefs, and no valid evidence.

The burden of proof is on the people claiming there is a soul. They haven't proven that there is, though they've been trying for millennia. As a skeptic, it's not my job to prove there isn't a soul; you can't prove the nonexistence of something; that's a basic scientific principle. But it absolutely is my job to poke holes in their evidence, especially when it consists of anecdotes and hearsay, neither of which constitutes evidence.

The reason the debate "never seems to end" is because the proponents keep insisting that skeptics accept bull-shit as evidence, and we refuse to do so. If you want to prove something, you must provide irrefutable evidence via an experiment that can be replicated. Period.

There is no evidence of a soul.
There is no evidence of an afterlife.
There is no evidence of the paranormal.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2039
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 16, 2017 3:36 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Omniverse aka Matt MSV7 wrote: I did do the research.
Piss off, you pervert.

In the other thread you were unable to offer one example. You are just trolling between stalking children.

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=28202&p=578702#p578856

Here is Matt MSV7's video from three weeks ago.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvV-SFwxw4E

WTF? Also, his whole channel is full of video game "interpretations" like "what the mushroom from Mario might be feeling." I can't even...
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Omniverse » Fri Jun 16, 2017 3:41 am

LunaNik wrote:
Omniverse wrote:I already have done the research. All I see is an ongoing debate between skeptics and proponents that never seems to end. I see no definite answer one way or the other as to whether there is actual evidence or not. The debate regarding life after death, the soul, and the paranormal has been an ongoing debate for ages and I don't think there will ever be a time where I can see any definite conclusion being reached one way or the other.

That's not how one reaches conclusions. One weighs the arguments of both sides. The anti-science people have no valid argument to support their beliefs, and no valid evidence.

The burden of proof is on the people claiming there is a soul. They haven't proven that there is, though they've been trying for millennia. As a skeptic, it's not my job to prove there isn't a soul; you can't prove the nonexistence of something; that's a basic scientific principle. But it absolutely is my job to poke holes in their evidence, especially when it consists of anecdotes and hearsay, neither of which constitutes evidence.

The reason the debate "never seems to end" is because the proponents keep insisting that skeptics accept bull-shit as evidence, and we refuse to do so. If you want to prove something, you must provide irrefutable evidence via an experiment that can be replicated. Period.

There is no evidence of a soul.
There is no evidence of an afterlife.
There is no evidence of the paranormal.


I would agree that one would have to weigh the arguments from both sides to draw a conclusion. In a debate between a really dumb person and a really smart person, I would be able to clearly see that the smart side of the debate is correct. However, in a debate between two sides where both sides put up good arguments, then there is no way I can decide. You do realize that everything you have just said in your post is also up for debate as well and isn't any definite conclusion?

You act as though I am supposed to be convinced of this one single argument you have put forth when, the fact of the matter is, there have been tons of good arguments put up by both skeptics and proponents which leaves me in a position where I cannot decide one way or the other. This is nothing like the debate between flat earth believers and people who do know the earth is a sphere. People who attempt to argue in favor of the earth being flat are not smart people at all and they put up bad arguments. However, in the debate between proponents of the afterlife, soul, and the paranormal such as the nde researchers and Alex Tsakaris, I think both the skeptics and these proponents put up good arguments.
Last edited by Omniverse on Fri Jun 16, 2017 3:47 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3054
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby ElectricMonk » Fri Jun 16, 2017 3:45 am

Human interactions can't be mechanistic and straight-forward since we possess Theory of Mind. This causes all interactions to become potential 2nd order chaotic systems, i.e. we act according to the predictions we made about the predictions of others, not just actions.
It's a mental arms race, and those least bound by simplistic biological responses win.

PS: I'm not going to watch any of that sick stuff, but I honor your sacrifice of doing so.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2039
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:15 am

Omniverse wrote:You do realize that everything you have just said in your post is also up for debate as well
No, it's not. Let's review, shall we?
1. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
2. No one who has claimed the soul exists has proven his claim.
3. Therefore, there is no evidence that a soul exists. QED
Omniverse wrote:and isn't any definite conclusion?
You're mistaken. I said, "There is no evidence of a soul/an afterlife/the paranormal," and this is a valid conclusion, since no evidence exists for any of the three.
Omniverse wrote:You act as though I am supposed to be convinced of this one single argument you have put forth
No, I don't. I act as if you should be rational and weigh the available evidence. Since there is no evidence for a soul/an afterlife/the paranormal, it shouldn't take you long.
Omniverse wrote:when, the fact of the matter is, there have been tons of good arguments put up by both skeptics and proponents
Arguments are not evidence. Proof requires evidence, and proponents have none, as the good arguments of skeptics have pointed out ad infinitum. I'm not sure what your issue is.
Omniverse wrote:This is nothing like the debate between flat earth believers and people who do know the earth is a sphere.
It is exactly like that debate. Flat Earthers have no evidence for their belief. Neither do believers in a soul, an afterlife, or the paranormal. It doesn't matter whether their arguments are convincing; it only matters what actual verifiable evidence they produce.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Omniverse » Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:31 am

LunaNik wrote:
Omniverse wrote:You do realize that everything you have just said in your post is also up for debate as well
No, it's not. Let's review, shall we?
1. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
2. No one who has claimed the soul exists has proven his claim.
3. Therefore, there is no evidence that a soul exists. QED
Omniverse wrote:and isn't any definite conclusion?
You're mistaken. I said, "There is no evidence of a soul/an afterlife/the paranormal," and this is a valid conclusion, since no evidence exists for any of the three.
Omniverse wrote:You act as though I am supposed to be convinced of this one single argument you have put forth
No, I don't. I act as if you should be rational and weigh the available evidence. Since there is no evidence for a soul/an afterlife/the paranormal, it shouldn't take you long.
Omniverse wrote:when, the fact of the matter is, there have been tons of good arguments put up by both skeptics and proponents
Arguments are not evidence. Proof requires evidence, and proponents have none, as the good arguments of skeptics have pointed out ad infinitum. I'm not sure what your issue is.
Omniverse wrote:This is nothing like the debate between flat earth believers and people who do know the earth is a sphere.
It is exactly like that debate. Flat Earthers have no evidence for their belief. Neither do believers in a soul, an afterlife, or the paranormal. It doesn't matter whether their arguments are convincing; it only matters what actual verifiable evidence they produce.


But you need to establish whether there is actual evidence through arguments and debate in the first place. You cannot just look at the research someone has done and immediately dismiss it as not having any evidence simply because things appear to have no evidence at face value. Let me give you an example here to make my point. Skeptics have been saying that, for example, the rat study debunks the nde research. But unless they have read all they could into the debates regarding this where the nde researchers come up with arguments that attempt to debunk the skeptics, then for these skeptics to just jump to the conclusion that the rat study debunks the nde research, then that would be close minded. Now, skeptics have been trying to establish their worldview in regards to why they think there is no evidence while proponents have been attempting to establish their worldview in regards to them thinking there is evidence. Like I said, I see no definite conclusion and I am unable to decide.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26338
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:58 am

Omniverse AKA MarkGab5 AKA Cobalt6 AKA Matt MSV7 wrote:But you need to establish whether there is actual evidence through arguments and debate in the first place.
Well as you don't know any evidence why don't you piss off and go do some research and come back in five years with your best evidence.

This is exactly the same thread you have started now five times.
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=28112#p573986

You were banned from Rational Skeptic forum for opening ten threads on exactly this same topic and ignoring everyone's points.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2039
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 16, 2017 5:12 am

Omniverse wrote:But you need to establish whether there is actual evidence through arguments and debate in the first place. You cannot just look at the research someone has done and immediately dismiss it as not having any evidence simply because things appear to have no evidence at face value.
Er...what? I'm perfectly capable of reading a scholarly study and establishing whether it's valid or not. And if it's outside my field of knowledge, I'm perfectly capable of researching the credentials of experts in the field and relying on their interpretation of the study. Arguing and debating with people like you isn't going to establish whether there is evidence.

Omniverse wrote:Let me give you an example here to make my point. Skeptics have been saying that, for example, the rat study debunks the nde research.
I need a link.

Omniverse wrote:But unless they have read all they could into the debates regarding this where the nde researchers come up with arguments that attempt to debunk the skeptics, then for these skeptics to just jump to the conclusion that the rat study debunks the nde research, then that would be close minded.
If the study's conclusions don't stand on their own without apologia, then that's the fault of the researchers for failing to form a valid hypothesis, following the proper method, and accepting the conclusion, even if it proved their hypothesis false. Failure is also data.

Omniverse wrote:Now, skeptics have been trying to establish their worldview in regards to why they think there is no evidence while proponents have been attempting to establish their worldview in regards to them thinking there is evidence. Like I said, I see no definite conclusion and I am unable to decide.
Several errors here:
1. Skeptics don't have a world view in the sense you mean it. We have no belief systems that we need to defend with baseless arguments because we lack evidence. That's what you and folks like you don't understand: Skeptics do not have faith. We don't "believe in" things. At all. Things either exist, and there is evidence to prove it, or they don't exist, because there is no evidence to prove it.
2. Skeptics don't "think" there is no evidence for the existence of a soul; we know there is none.
3. You see no definite conclusion because you're a believer and you have faith, so you want to believe there's a soul. If you were thinking strictly from an evidentiary viewpoint, you would be forced to conclude that no evidence exists to support the claim.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Omniverse » Fri Jun 16, 2017 5:30 am

LunaNik wrote:Er...what? I'm perfectly capable of reading a scholarly study and establishing whether it's valid or not. And if it's outside my field of knowledge, I'm perfectly capable of researching the credentials of experts in the field and relying on their interpretation of the study. Arguing and debating with people like you isn't going to establish whether there is evidence.


No, this would not be the right way to do it because even this would be nothing more than a close minded conclusion. It doesn't matter what arguments you have to support your conclusion--it all comes down to researching extensively into the debates regarding this nde/paranormal research and drawing your honest and open minded conclusion as to whether there is evidence or not. I think that your skeptical arguments against this nde/paranormal research would also be your own apologia (personal opinion). You would make your own arguments that attempt to support a materialistic view of ndes which is your opinion while the nde researchers would attempt to support their research which is their view.

You say that you are perfectly capable of drawing a conclusion regarding this nde research without having to resort to looking deep into the debates regarding the research. Again, I think you are just drawing a hasty and close minded conclusion based upon your own opinions. This is because whatever arguments you present here that attempt to support your conclusion are also debatable as well and will not silence the proponents since they would still have good arguments to come back at you regardless of what type of skeptical argument it is. Lastly, if I really am wrong and the skeptics really are right, then my own view here would not be based upon being a proponent myself. Rather, it would have been out of ignorance, logical fallacies, etc.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29080
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Gord » Fri Jun 16, 2017 6:46 am

Omniverse wrote:You say that you are perfectly capable of drawing a conclusion regarding this nde research without having to resort to looking deep into the debates regarding the research.

Who said that? :befuddled:
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26338
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Matt MSV7 Trolling thread.

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Jun 16, 2017 6:59 am

Omniverse AKA Matt MSV7 AKA Cobalt6 AKA MarkGaB5 wrote:-it all comes down to researching extensively

Set out and link us to one NDE event you have studied extensively?

You can't can you. You don't know any. You are too busy stalking children.


Here is your latest you tube video seeking help from innocent children with your music, on children's forums.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ng5DyeMcG8o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFmrzRUojS0
Last edited by Matthew Ellard on Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:04 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8096
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Poodle » Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:04 am

Omniverse wrote:... Lastly, if I really am wrong and the skeptics really are right, then my own view here would not be based upon being a proponent myself. Rather, it would have been out of ignorance, logical fallacies, etc.

That's the most accurate statement you've ever made on the net.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2039
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Human experience shouldn't be what it is

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:56 pm

Omniverse wrote:
LunaNik wrote:Er...what? I'm perfectly capable of reading a scholarly study and establishing whether it's valid or not. And if it's outside my field of knowledge, I'm perfectly capable of researching the credentials of experts in the field and relying on their interpretation of the study. Arguing and debating with people like you isn't going to establish whether there is evidence.

No, this would not be the right way to do it because even this would be nothing more than a close minded conclusion.
You don't understand how science works.

Omniverse wrote:It doesn't matter what arguments you have to support your conclusion--it all comes down to researching extensively into the debates regarding this nde/paranormal research and drawing your honest and open minded conclusion as to whether there is evidence or not.
No, it doesn't. I don't have to waste my time listening to people who believe in leprechauns spew logical fallacies about why leprechauns exist in order to arrive at a logical conclusion. All I have to do is say, "Show me your evidence. Oh, you have none? Then sod off."

Omniverse wrote:I think that your skeptical arguments against this nde/paranormal research would also be your own apologia (personal opinion).
1. You're not thinking. At all.
2. That's not what "apologia" means.

Omniverse wrote:You would make your own arguments that attempt to support a materialistic view of ndes which is your opinion while the nde researchers would attempt to support their research which is their view.
Wrong again. I wouldn't waste time making arguments to support a "materialistic view of NDEs," and you have no idea of my viewpoint on NDEs, since I haven't elucidated any explanation for the phenomenon.

Omniverse wrote:You say that you are perfectly capable of drawing a conclusion regarding this nde research without having to resort to looking deep into the debates regarding the research.
Yes, I am. Because the believers are convinced that an NDE is caused by the soul leaving the body and having a conscious experience, and that's pure bovine excrement. There is no evidence for the existence of the human soul, so I can safely discard every single argument that includes that concept. This is called "logic."

Omniverse wrote:Again, I think you are just drawing a hasty and close minded conclusion based upon your own opinions. This is because whatever arguments you present here that attempt to support your conclusion are also debatable as well and will not silence the proponents since they would still have good arguments to come back at you regardless of what type of skeptical argument it is.
Again, you're not thinking. And my conclusions are not based on my personal opinions, but on the lack of scientific evidence regarding NDEs. My arguments, therefore, are not debatable, since they're based in fact. In a like manner, the proponents do not have good arguments, since they lack a factual foundation. See the difference? Your contention is solely based on your personal opinions, not on facts.

Omniverse wrote:Lastly, if I really am wrong and the skeptics really are right, then my own view here would not be based upon being a proponent myself. Rather, it would have been out of ignorance, logical fallacies, etc.
You are, and it is.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein


Return to “Brain, Mind, & Consciousness”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests