Can science prove God ?

[J.C.MacSwell]

36 minutes ago, iNow said:

I reckon that depends entirely on how one chooses to define soul

 

My intention was defining it as something you consider yourself aside from your physical body, assuming there is such a thing. If there isn't I think it's almost certain, at least in my mind (lol because that's where I assume my soul would be), that we do not have free will. Most people believe they have free will and some essence of self but can't prove it, and I think that is how I would define my soul

So I guess that's roughly how I choose to define it, but I can't even be certain I have a choice, though it feels like I have both a soul and free will right now, being alive and all.

So assuming it exists...the question becomes what happens to it when you die?

Since it really doesn't lend itself to a scientific investigation, it can't be proven as correct thinking...so religion, unencumbered by provable lines of thought, gets to reign over this type of question. 

That's the best I think I can do at the moment...weak-ass as it seems.

[iNow]

21 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

something you consider yourself aside from your physical body, assuming there is such a thing

Like the memories we form in the minds of those around us?

The words which will live on in perpetuity on databases like this one?

The furniture and similar woodwork I have scattered around my home and in the homes of loved ones received them as gifts?

The way our cells will feed other life forms and transform into new life in other ways later?

There are lots of ways we live on. Call it a soul or not, of course we’re more than just ourselves. 

We are the universe expressing itself as a human being for a little while. 

24 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

the question becomes what happens to it when you die?

Recycling. 

25 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

That's the best I think I can do at the moment...weak-ass as it seems.

Listen, man. Yours was great. I’m the one who just said recycling is a definition for soul.  

[mar_mar]

33 minutes ago, TheVat said:

These movies are evidence that people are imaginative and some imaginative people become screenwriters.  

Regarding soul, this seems to be a prescientific concept from the ancient world when the nature of living things was not understood.  When a person stopped breathing, ancient people saw that final breath as some essence leaving the body because it provided a simple explanation to them of life as some animating force.

 

It's not about imagination. But I'll leave it.

So you don't believe that you have a soul.

I believe that you have one. So if i offered you a contract for you to sell me your soul for 10 dollars, would you agree?

This is from imaginative movie also.

 

And if you don't believe that you have a soul, it turns like you are a bag with bones.

Have you ever asked yourself "who am I?" It's interesting what labels you associate yourself with?

1 hour ago, iNow said:

You have literally less than zero credibility with me. You’ll need to try slightly harder than that. 

 

I apologize. i didn't mean to be rough.

[iNow]

I said try harder and you took that to mean I thought you were being too rough?

I’m not sure what your problem is, but I bet it’s hard to pronounce.

[mar_mar]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

You're so lucky you've found an argument nobody can ever assail! It's the answer to every unknown, it uses only the knowledge you currently have, it puts all those smartass scientists in their places, and you never have to study or bother with thinking on your own. You can now close your mind for good! 

human mind is not capable of absorbing the fullness of existence

Edited December 16, 2023 by mar_mar

[Phi for All]

2 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

human consciousness is not capable of absorbing the fullness of existence

There you go! All you have to do is claim we can't do something that your god can do easily, and you set up a vertical hierarchy that you can use to manipulate and subjugate others with. The part about consciousness "absorbing existence" is particularly nebulous. That's a first class religious argument right there.

Don't forget to berate us for being sinners! That's really the important part. Call us sinners first and you're obviously higher up the moral ladder than we are. Judgement is yours!

[J.C.MacSwell]

8 hours ago, Phi for All said:

There you go! All you have to do is claim we can't do something that your god can do easily, and you set up a vertical hierarchy that you can use to manipulate and subjugate others with. The part about consciousness "absorbing existence" is particularly nebulous. That's a first class religious argument right there.

Don't forget to berate us for being sinners! That's really the important part. Call us sinners first and you're obviously higher up the moral ladder than we are. Judgement is yours!

Correct me if I'm wrong but in the Abrahamic religions isn't everyone but God considered a sinner?

The point being that unless someone claims they are God that doesn't necessarily put them higher on any moral ladder.

People do judge though, often in a way that seems to imply they think they are better. I just don't see this as unique to the religious.

Do you not judge? Do you not have a moral compass and some guiding principles? I can see the advantage of not committing to a set of rules in a book you haven't read yet (often the starting point where faith comes first and a fuller understanding of the "rules" second) but each and everyone making up their own rules isn't necessarily good either.

Progress on at least some critical agreements can be made but I think more easily in a group of say, 10 than 100 and say 40 million (roughly Canadian population) rather than 8 billion...but somewhere along the line in any group where a hierarchy does not yet exist, especially in the bigger ones, someone might decide they should be the leader...and someone else might also...or instead decide that supporting the first might move them "up" in the group...and away we go...the ladder is set up and ready to go...the race is on for some...and the indifferent are set up and encouraged to have at least a slightly easier time following and at least a slightly harder time not...and often judged accordingly. Doesn't seem unique to religions.

10 hours ago, TheVat said:

These movies are evidence that people are imaginative and some imaginative people become screenwriters.  

Regarding soul, this seems to be a prescientific concept from the ancient world when the nature of living things was not understood.  When a person stopped breathing, ancient people saw that final breath as some essence leaving the body because it provided a simple explanation to them of life as some animating force.

 

Do you not feel you have a strong sense of "self" though, beyond (or maybe emergent from?) your physical being? 

[mar_mar]

9 hours ago, Phi for All said:

There you go! All you have to do is claim we can't do something that your god can do easily, and you set up a vertical hierarchy that you can use to manipulate and subjugate others with. The part about consciousness "absorbing existence" is particularly nebulous. That's a first class religious argument right there.

Don't forget to berate us for being sinners! That's really the important part. Call us sinners first and you're obviously higher up the moral ladder than we are. Judgement is yours!

My God? It's sounds unusual for me. Though people say "Oh my God". But ok, these are my eyes I see the world through.

I read in one book, that there's no evil on the Earth. Things are happening in there turn, and they are neutral in the core. And these are men, who give moral judgments, that something is good, or bad. The only true evil is a sin, which men commit in there own free will. And me either.

We can't live in the world without judgements. Ultimately they form system of values. The thing is that i attach or detach from the judgements iand receive.

I try to avoid judgements, and labels. But when I being judged I try to learn a lesson. Though it said "don't judge and you won't be judged".

9 hours ago, Phi for All said:

There you go! All you have to do is claim we can't do something that your god can do easily, and you set up a vertical hierarchy that you can use to manipulate and subjugate others with.

That's why you don't believe in God. Because you are confident that you and only you control your life. And the faith suppose you to surrender to the God's will. And this is surrender for our Ego. And this surrender looks like hierarchy for you.

And about comprehension. I think that intelligence is the greatest gift, and I bow my head in front of knowledge. And yet Paul the Apostle says "For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight."

Edited December 16, 2023 by mar_mar

[iNow]

Enough proselytizing and preaching from yet another gullible fool caught in a god fog. 

[mar_mar]

Science hasn't proved  or disproved the existence of God.

Edited December 16, 2023 by mar_mar

[J.C.MacSwell]

1 hour ago, mar_mar said:

Science hasn't proved  or disproved the existence of God.

Until He stops working in mysterious ways that's unlikely to change.

[mar_mar]

27 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Until He stops working in mysterious ways that's unlikely to change.

And science doesn't give an answer to a simple, but fundamental question, such as "who you are".

[sethoflagos]

8 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

And science doesn't give an answer to a simple, but fundamental question, such as "who you are".

Neither does religion,

Though Sartre has a pretty good stab at it imho. "You are who you make yourself to be".

[Phi for All]

4 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but in the Abrahamic religions isn't everyone but God considered a sinner?

The point being that unless someone claims they are God that doesn't necessarily put them higher on any moral ladder.

You're going by the book now? You think these folks are actually practicing what they preach?!

Tell me you've never seen people pointing out the sins of others righteously. I think it's part of the whole magic of sinning your ass off but being aware enough to openly ask for forgiveness. That's what seems to bump you up the heaven ladder.

4 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Do you not judge? Do you not have a moral compass and some guiding principles? I can see the advantage of not committing to a set of rules in a book you haven't read yet (often the starting point where faith comes first and a fuller understanding of the "rules" second) but each and everyone making up their own rules isn't necessarily good either.

Judgement is measurement, and yes, we do it all the time as part of the way we observe the universe. The difference is sort of like what we have here at SFN wrt attacking ideas instead of people. I fight against the urge to judge a whole person by what I observe, and try to make my measurements based on their words and actions for that situation. I don't think I'm better person than a meth addict, or a religious zealot, or a someone who has less money, or a person from a foreign country. I don't think a priest, or a billionaire, or a police officer is a better person than I am. People are people, the only humans we know of in the whole universe.

When you think about it, any judgement that isn't about specific actions is prejudice. It's fairly easy to spot, actually. If someone throws trash on the ground, we can denounce that act without claiming they're a litterbug. Exactly how much trash do you have to throw and how often in order to deserve that judgement? I think it's better to call out each act and hope the person can change, which might be much easier without the onerous judgement about their whole being.

[TheVat]

5 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Do you not feel you have a strong sense of "self" though, beyond (or maybe emergent from?) your physical being? 

Well of course.  That's why dualism remains the dominant philosophical position of most of humanity.  The phenomenal aspect of existence, qualia, points us to a sense of self.  Some kinds of dreaming or traumatic conditions, like ones where we leave our bodies, naturally lead to the notion of a soul or "astral body."  I have had a couple such experiences myself, and am aware of both the dualistic mystical explanations and the neurological ones.  I lean towards the latter, while remaining agnostic on the former.  

On litterbugs, I remain firm in the advocacy of public flogging.  It's an offense I find less easy to understand than murder.  🙂

3 hours ago, iNow said:

Enough proselytizing and preaching from yet another gullible fool caught in a god fog. 

Swap God for a janitor, rot in a jar of dog paws!

(one of my favorite palindromes)

[mar_mar]

2 hours ago, sethoflagos said:

Neither does religion,

Though Sartre has a pretty good stab at it imho. "You are who you make yourself to be".

I think, according to religion (any) i'm a soul.

Edited December 16, 2023 by mar_mar

[TheVat]

50 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

according to religion (any) i'm a soul.

Buddhism does not posit a soul.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2010/jan/20/buddhism-animals-souls-religion

[geordief]

11 minutes ago, TheVat said:

Buddhism does not posit a soul.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2010/jan/20/buddhism-animals-souls-religion

Which came first ,religions with a soul or religions without a soul?

Is there a connection between  the two belief systems?

Or do we call them  both "religions" out of laziness .

Is there a better word that would describe all the world's "religions"?

[iNow]

3 minutes ago, geordief said:

Is there a better word that would describe all the world's "religions"?

Unnecessary. Problematic works, too. 

[J.C.MacSwell]

4 hours ago, Phi for All said:

You're going by the book now? You think these folks are actually practicing what they preach?!

Some do to some extent.

 

4 hours ago, Phi for All said:

Tell me you've never seen people pointing out the sins of others righteously.

Can't do that. It would contradict the very post you were quoting me from.

 

9 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

People do judge though, often in a way that seems to imply they think they are better. I just don't see this as unique to the religious.

 

[mar_mar]

3 hours ago, TheVat said:

Buddhism does not posit a soul.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2010/jan/20/buddhism-animals-souls-religion

When i say religion, i mean religion. For me religion is manifested connection between a man and God. Or spiritual world.

Buddhism is atheistic doctrine, there's no God in this teaching. That's why there's no concept of a soul.  Some Buddhist traditions have concept of atman, self. Though i think it was derived from Hinduism.

Edited December 16, 2023 by mar_mar

[iNow]

No true Scotsman. The bad faith persists… pun intended 

[dimreepr]

On 12/15/2023 at 6:07 PM, sethoflagos said:

So science is of no assistance in assessing the potential benefits of reciprocity?

Tough on those who were born with a low empathy level and are denied the means to work out that there may be some value in faking it now and then.

That's not what I said.

On 12/15/2023 at 7:20 PM, J.C.MacSwell said:

Yes. Religions have answers to those ranging from good through terrible.

Science can't answer them...though I guess some might try to claim they have scientific answers for them.

But I was thinking more along the lines of "what happens to our souls when we die?".

A more pertinent question, I think, is what happens to our soul's while we're alive.

@Phi for All This is what I think we're missing, in our modern age, that a stone aged person just saw as a fact.

A good person has a good soul and is therefore in heaven, alive or dead; when seen as a fact it becomes a reason to celebrate their life, in their death; morning becomes easier, as does forgiveness.

This is what I think Nietzche was searching for, a scientific explanation of the soul, that can replace a need for god; in our age of enlightenment.

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

Tough on those who were born with a low empathy level and are denied the means to work out that there may be some value in faking it now and then.

There is no value in a fake.

17 hours ago, mar_mar said:

When i say religion, i mean religion. For me religion is manifested connection between a man and God. Or spiritual world.

Buddhism is atheistic doctrine, there's no God in this teaching. That's why there's no concept of a soul.  Some Buddhist traditions have concept of atman, self. Though i think it was derived from Hinduism.

Why do you need God? Genuine question

Maybe Buddha, understood... 😉 

[sethoflagos]

18 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

There is no value in a fake.

Clarion call of the single and unemployed.

Been there.

Moved on.

[dimreepr]

2 minutes ago, sethoflagos said:

Clarion call of the single and unemployed.

Why?

2 minutes ago, sethoflagos said:

Been there.

Moved on.

Did you stop cheating?