Interaction Problem Involving the Soul and Body

[Sparko]

I did not say that “all people are afraid of death”. I said “The reason some people believe in life after death is the fear of death". And that “the belief that eternal souls/minds exist is common currency among religions”. Is this not so?

What you said was, "The fear of death is a commonplace human trait and the belief that eternal souls/minds exist is common currency among religions...not so much outside of religion...to overcome this fear."

You first accused me of believing in God because of my fear of death, I said "why would I be afraid of non existence?" and your answer was above.

Clearly, you think that I and other religionists only believe because of a fear of death. Yet I wasn't a Christian until I turned 40. I was never afraid of death enough to believe before then, so what makes you think I only believe because of a fear of death?

Already done that. If the brain ceases to exist the strong indications are that the mind does too. If you have “strong evidence” to the contrary please provide it, otherwise my argument stands based upon the available evidence.

You haven't done that. You have provided NO EVIDENCE that the mind doesn't survive death, despite claiming STRONG EVIDENCE. I never claimed "strong evidence" I just gave you some evidence and said some evidence is better than NO evidence.


You could just admit you mispoke when you said "strong evidence" - or you could actually show some strong evidence.

[Tassman]

What you said was, "The fear of death is a commonplace human trait and the belief that eternal souls/minds exist is common currency among religions...not so much outside of religion...to overcome this fear."

What I actually said was that “The reason some people believe in life after death is the fear of death". And that “the belief that eternal souls/minds exist is common currency among religions”.

You haven't done that. You have provided NO EVIDENCE that the mind doesn't survive death, despite claiming STRONG EVIDENCE.

What I said was that there is very good reason to believe that the soul/mind was dependent upon the brain for existence and that it ceases to exist when the brain ceases to exist. There is no good reason to think otherwise. I consider this to be strong evidence. You are free to disagree.

I never claimed "strong evidence" I just gave you some evidence and said some evidence is better than NO evidence.

You did not give any proper evidence, merely anecdotal accounts of NDE’s that are no more “evidence” than anecdotal accounts of leprechauns, alien abductions or Loch Ness monster sightings.

[Sparko]

What I actually said was that “The reason some people believe in life after death is the fear of death". And that “the belief that eternal souls/minds exist is common currency among religions”.

really? Could you point to where you said "some" people? I quoted you exactly:

The fear of death is a commonplace human trait and the belief that eternal souls/minds exist is common currency among religions...not so much outside of religion...to overcome this fear.

What I said was that there is very good reason to believe that the soul/mind was dependent upon the brain for existence and that it ceases to exist when the brain ceases to exist. There is no good reason to think otherwise. I consider this to be strong evidence. You are free to disagree.



You did not give any proper evidence, merely anecdotal accounts of NDE’s that are no more “evidence” than anecdotal accounts of leprechauns, alien abductions or Loch Ness monster sightings.

Again you keep trying to change your words.

What you actually said:

The ‘burden of proof’ traditionally rests with those making the positive claim, in this instance despite strong evidence to the contrary, that the minds of some sentient creatures survive death. Prove it.

Do you think you can just make up stuff? Your actual words are posted right in this thread for anyone to see and quote.

So show me this strong evidence. NO evidence is not "strong evidence" Tassman.

[Tassman]

really? Could you point to where you said "some" people? I quoted you exactly:

Here we go, #277: "The reason that some people believe in life after death is the fear of death, which is usually fueled by religions". Your quotes were as usual highly selective cherry-picked quotes. This is yet another example of your dishonesty in debate, which several people have noted...e.g. in the ‘Alarming’ Study Claiming Global Warming' thread.

Again you keep trying to change your words.

Actually no, it is you who selectively uses quotes.

What you actually said:



Do you think you can just make up stuff? Your actual words are posted right in this thread for anyone to see and quote.

So show me this strong evidence. NO evidence is not "strong evidence" Tassman.

Already dealt with:

I previously gave several examples of how brain trauma, such as epilepsy, physical accidents resulting in brain damage, brain surgery to remove brain tumors, Alzheimer’s Disease and other forms of dementia etc. can completely transform beyond recognition the mind of a person so afflicted. Hence there is very good reason to believe that the soul/mind is dependent upon the brain for existence and that it ceases to exist when the brain ceases to exist. There is no good reason to think otherwise.

I consider this to be "strong evidence". You are free to disagree”.

[Sparko]

Here we go, #277: "The reason that some people believe in life after death is the fear of death, which is usually fueled by religions". Your quotes were as usual highly selective cherry-picked quotes. This is yet another example of your dishonesty in debate, which several people have noted...e.g. in the ‘Alarming’ Study Claiming Global Warming' thread.

Thank you. but that was AFTER I called you out on your first claim where you said that "The fear of death is a commonplace human trait and the belief that eternal souls/minds exist is common currency among religions...not so much outside of religion...to overcome this fear."

Actually no, it is you who selectively uses quotes.

I have been quoting you completely, Tassman. You keep trying to change what you say when I call you out on it.

Already dealt with:

I previously gave several examples of how brain trauma, such as epilepsy, physical accidents resulting in brain damage, brain surgery to remove brain tumors, Alzheimer’s Disease and other forms of dementia etc. can completely transform beyond recognition the mind of a person so afflicted. Hence there is very good reason to believe that the soul/mind is dependent upon the brain for existence and that it ceases to exist when the brain ceases to exist. There is no good reason to think otherwise.

I consider this to be "strong evidence". You are free to disagree”.

Show me someone who died and their mind did not survive their death. That would be strong evidence. But you can't because it is impossible. There can be no STRONG evidence that the mind doesn't survive death.

And remember, you keep talking about evidence being scientifically and experimentally proven in order to be believed. Not just conjecture. That is why you don't believe in God, remember? Because there isn't any testable evidence for him? But now "good reasons to believe" are "strong evidence" for you.

Amazing.

[Tassman]

Thank you. but that was AFTER I called you out on your first claim where you said that "The fear of death is a commonplace human trait and the belief that eternal souls/minds exist is common currency among religions...not so much outside of religion...to overcome this fear."

No, I claimed: "The reason that some people believe in life after death is the fear of death, which is usually fueled by religions". This was a direct response to your unsubstantiated claim that “There are reasons good enough that most people believe in life after death”.

I have been quoting you completely, Tassman. You keep trying to change what you say when I call you out on it.

Nope! See above.

Show me someone who died and their mind did not survive their death. That would be strong evidence.

More to the point, show me someone who died and their mind did survive their death. There is no evidence of this apart from some anecdotal claims of NDE’s or religious mythology about dying and rising ‘god/men’.

But you can't because it is impossible. There can be no STRONG evidence that the mind doesn't survive death.

There is no verifiable evidence of anyone’s mind surviving death.

And remember, you keep talking about evidence being scientifically and experimentally proven in order to be believed. Not just conjecture. That is why you don't believe in God, remember? Because there isn't any testable evidence for him? But now "good reasons to believe" are "strong evidence" for you.

You have it back-to-front. There is good reason NOT to believe.

[Sparko]

No, I claimed: "The reason that some people believe in life after death is the fear of death, which is usually fueled by religions". This was a direct response to your unsubstantiated claim that “There are reasons good enough that most people believe in life after death”.

So you did. I was wrong.

More to the point, show me someone who died and their mind did survive their death. There is no evidence of this apart from some anecdotal claims of NDE’s or religious mythology about dying and rising ‘god/men’.

There are many such "anectdotal" reports, from Jesus to many people today who report being outside of their body when they have died on the operating table but were subsequently revived to tell the tale. Now I know you don't think that is good evidence, but it is more evidence than you have, which is ZERO.


Which means you don't have any STRONG evidence. Just conjecture.

[Tassman]

So you did. I was wrong.

Thank you for your acknowledgement.

There are many such "anectdotal" reports, from Jesus to many people today who report being outside of their body when they have died on the operating table but were subsequently revived to tell the tale. Now I know you don't think that is good evidence, but it is more evidence than you have, which is ZERO.

So, feel free to argue for the existence of fairies or the pagan gods on the basis of anecdotal accounts of their existence.

Which means you don't have any STRONG evidence. Just conjecture.

We do have strong evidence of the precise effect of brain trauma or dementia on the mind and nature of a person, hence it is good evidence that the mind is dependent on the brain. There is no good evidence to the contrary.

[Sparko]

Thank you for your acknowledgement.



So, feel free to argue for the existence of fairies or the pagan gods on the basis of anecdotal accounts of their existence.



We do have strong evidence of the precise effect of brain trauma or dementia on the mind and nature of a person, hence it is good evidence that the mind is dependent on the brain. There is no good evidence to the contrary.

Your evidence is only dealing with people who are NOT dead, Tassman. That has nothing to do with the mind/soul surviving death or not.

[Tassman]

Your evidence is only dealing with people who are NOT dead, Tassman.

Do you have evidence dealing with people who are dead?

That has nothing to do with the mind/soul surviving death or not.

The only evidence we have of such an unlikely occurrence, given what we know of the brain’s interaction with the mind, is on the basis of anecdotal accounts as you’ve already acknowledged.

[JimL]

Your evidence is only dealing with people who are NOT dead, Tassman. That has nothing to do with the mind/soul surviving death or not.

Question. Did you believe the boy who recently said that he died and went to heaven? If not, why not?

[Sparko]

Do you have evidence dealing with people who are dead?

With people who were dead and came back.

The only evidence we have of such an unlikely occurrence, given what we know of the brain’s interaction with the mind, is on the basis of anecdotal accounts as you’ve already acknowledged.

And which you have none. So you have no strong evidence. Repeating the same thing over and over doesn't change that fact, Tassman.

[JimL]

With people who were dead and came back.




And which you have none. So you have no strong evidence. Repeating the same thing over and over doesn't change that fact, Tassman.

Since the great majority of people who've been pronounced dead only to be revived don't report any such experiences, we can claim to have more evidence than you, if that's what you want to call evidence.

[Sparko]

Since the great majority of people who've been pronounced dead only to be revived don't report any such experiences, we can claim to have more evidence than you, if that's what you want to call evidence.

Where's your evidence of this?

[Tassman]

With people who were dead and came back.

So, you see dead people.

And which you have none. So you have no strong evidence. Repeating the same thing over and over doesn't change that fact, Tassman.

There is an abundance of verified evidence showing that the minds of individuals are dependent upon brain function. OTOH there is no verified evidence of “minds” existing without being sustained by brain function. What more can be said?