Science Fiction becoming Science FACT!

[______________Orchid]

Originally posted by Teslon


Saying that the brain is an attachment to the body is very true, but we do not have anything more than that. The so called spiritual soul does not exist

To say it does not exist is to affirm that it does.

, your mind, thought, etc. is quite apparent to be your actual 'soul'.

untrue again

The brain is quite a complex object, and so is the body and by not wanting to know the truth or look into the actual reality of things, you simply conjure up ideas and make them concrete, becoming close-minded and futile in reason. This would pretty much account for The Bible, and the mass-dillusion called 'Religion'. The truth is, humans have no objective in life, as said in books and even the movie The Matrix. Humans are a plague, we are nothing, we have no real purpose other than to breed, and trying to give reason to our existence is a normal thought process, but futile. People wonder why they are here on Earth, there is no specific reason you are here, that is why we cannot figure it out. People believe that somehow they are endowed with special skills or 'God given talent'. The only way a certain skill can be specialized in is through genetic engineering, or the pre-disposition to a genetic betterment. There is no reason for your existence, and your purpose on this earth is to reproduce, just like every other primitive being. Sorry to say, we are very primitive, incapable creatures. That is why the world is being destroyed, and everyone chooses not to believe in the truth, because their minds are conformed and taught not to comprehend the truth. The truth is, we do not have a purpose. All arguments opposing this will surely prove the latter remark of beings being conformed to thought and not wanting to admit the truth.

The soul is not real, the mind is. Nihilism can be proclaimed, but because you are aware that you are here, that determines the fact that you exist. When you look into a mirror, you know you are there, therefore you exist. Atoms are quite real, and can be observed, and classifed, and known to exist. Simply saying that observation and classification doesnt mean something is there is quite close minded and ignorant.

Your grasp is superficial at best. What you fail to see is reality, and instead have convinced yoiurself thru fear that what you filter in is reality, when it is only 1% of what is real.

[Volkemord]

Originally posted by Emiko

To say it does not exist is to affirm that it does.
untrue again




Your grasp is superficial at best. What you fail to see is reality, and instead have convinced yoiurself thru fear that what you filter in is reality, when it is only 1% of what is real.

You have no idea what you are talking about, and your intellect isnt very strong. You cant type/piece sentences together correctly, and you dont have any idea what reality is.

Saying it doesn't exist DOES NOT affirm that it does, that is a very stupid and ignorant remark. Through fear, you people try and give meaning to life, through your bible and holy word. You are afraid of death, because you know there is no after life. Yet you are so sure and concrete in your stance of God and religion, and you are the ones that fear death the most.

You are ignorant and incapable. Here is a tip you should really think of absorbing into your close-minded, ignorant brain.

DO NOT hold strong opinions about things you DO NOT UNDERSTAND.

Will save you a lot of time my friend, but then again, you will keep arguing, proving your ignorance, and the fact that you DON'T understand. I am simply stating the truth, and those that want to deny the truth and dwell and conform into what they believe is reality, is truly and un-doubtedly STUPID.

So please, save your small incapable brain for something more useful, such as eating and breathing, which I am surprised your small brain can even do.

Thanks,
Teslon

(End of argument, done contending with your ignorance.)

[_____________Hardboy]

Originally posted by Teslon

Saying it doesn't exist DOES NOT affirm that it does, that is a very stupid and ignorant remark.

Actually wasn't this exactly the theory (the Ontological Proof?) that was used for the existence of God a few centruries back, and so strictly speaking isn't necessarily 'ignorant', just misguided, at least from my point of view.

However, Emiko made another point which is inconsistant with quantum theory, namely that he/she believes in an objective reality.

One of the fundimentals of quantum theory (at least as I understand it, which admittedly isn't up there with Stephen Hawking) is that there is NO objective reality, only subjective reality - remember Shrodingers cat-in-the-box. Of course this has the happy bi-product that we can all be right, at least in our own realities.

There will be no problem with moving a soul, if you choose to believe that such a thing exists, as the quantum intanglement process works by entangling particles so that they exist in two places simultaneously. Since the universe doesn't like such things, it removes one of the (which you can think of as the original), leaving the so called copy.

But, I think more fundimental to this, is the recent news that scientists were able to assemble a virus from non-living components using a receipe. It is only a matter of time before they work out a way of making a fruit fly, and then a human. If we can 'build' a biological lifeform, I think the argument in favour of a soul, at least in the traditional sense, is problematic.

[Blueprint]

Guess I'm out of the lurk closet for good.

As to "objective reality" (addressing Hardboy): I doubt there are any quantum physicists who would claim with a straight face that there is "no objective reality, only ~subjective reality~". If there are, they're probably all undergrads (or worse, undergrad philosophers, who don't do math well enough to study physics).

I think the uncertainty principle goes roughly thus: quantum-level phenomena are influenced by the mere act of observation; hence, accurate knowledge of quantum-level phenomena is impossible in principle. Or rather: knowledge of quantum-level phenomena is inherently speculative (or derivative of larger-than-quantum-level knowledge). That doesn't entitle anyone to infer that "there's no objective reality"; only that, given current bleeding-edge knowledge, certain categories of phenomena defy observation: it may turn out that the "in principle" part doesn't hold. In fact, insisting that "there's no objective reality" would seem to borrow the very notion of an "objective reality" (i.e., "a reality" about which it is an "objective fact" that there's nothing objective), and imply a contradiction.

As to the soul (addressing Teslon): I think the idea of a "soul" as typically formulated according to religion, i.e., an "essence" of a sentient being that can somehow be disembodied, is in fact bogus. But I think it's a gross oversimplification to say, "there's the mind, a function of the brain, and that's it" (I think that's what you're saying, but it's not too clear). I think the soul is better equated with consciousness as a whole, around which biological/physiological/physical theories don't quite wrap (this notion of the soul, I believe, is somewhat in accord with various sects of Buddhism, for example). I think a better synomym for "soul" is "self." Just ponder what it would mean that one's ~self~ goes on existing after one's body dies. Sort of like waiting for a sunrise after the sun burns out.

In short, I sort of agree with you, Teslon. However, you're boorishly rude and pretentious with respect to your professed knowledge and alleged abilities to argue; which is to say: u suxx0rz.

As to whether teleportation technology would scuttle the concept of the soul: doubt it (maybe it would help scuttle the mystical versions of a disembodied soul; so much the better, I reckon). Whether teleporting a human a la Star Trek is possible: maybe. Bring it on! In the words of Richard Feynman's papa, let's find out.

[___________Arcanegel]

in the future we are simply a scanned piece of paper to todays standards according to that article...line up and be sent through the giant Hewlett Packard deskjet scanner and be faxed to your bosses computer...

im up for it