« on: November 12, 2008, 02:05:11 pm »
Jesus Fucking Christ!
Why the big circle-jerk about some idea of FP's not being SCIENCE?
This thread is called "Do you BELIEVE in a SOUL?", not "PROVE whether there's a soul with SCIENCE"
I can't even begin to cite references ITT, because it's way to long and circular and filled with BS, but it never occurred to me that the good Profit was making some scientific hypothesis with need for experimental evidence, he was just giving an idea, a perspective, and he even said it could be a lie. IMO KAI you have been totally unfair here, no need to have a cactus up your ass just because you've got a degree in biology and he suggested something that YOU think is unfounded crap. I think FP has held his own pretty well ITT, where you have been a little bit fanatical.
Keep the psychotic science pedantry out of a thread about belief.
Oh and "just thinking about it" is pretty much how Einstein came up with relativity. Philosophy or science?
Where has your "true-in-a" sense gone?
-braced for the flames (all I wanted to know was how much it weighs )
So first off, yes, I do believe in a soul. Now for the brain hurty part of the post.
Most religions and beliefs share that a human/talking monkey holds some sort of cosmic energy that exist through out the universe and have called it a soul. Here is we know from various speculations out there. Mass and Energy are one and the same only in different states. The body requires energy to function. When a body dies that energy is gone. As that energy has mass, it can be concluded that when a body dies its mass decreases due to the energy becoming non-existent. Where that energy goes? Who knows, but we know it must go somewhere as if it didn't the body would just keep moving about on its own. Maybe that is how zombies come into existence, dead bodies that fail to discharge properly.
Or I could be lying.
FP framed his beliefs in pseudoscientific language, which makes them seem cheesy to a great many people (myself included) and easy to pick on.
The notion that a body's mass decreases is based on relatively poor scientific methodology, so there is no reason to see it as more than quack science. On top of that leap of faith, there is the rather awkward phrase "the energy becoming non-existent," followed by "Where that energy goes?" This is a contradiction, and the former statement violates untold hours of research that says quite definitively that energy does not just 'cease to exist.'
Trying to dismiss this as scientific arrogance is nothing short of insulting. Yes, scientists can be very fucking arrogant, and yes, science does overturn its own theories, but that is a pretty lame excuse for trying to pass off a theory that involves some sort of unidentified "energy" that is responsible for zombies as plausible.
So which is more arrogant: making ultimately tentative claims about the physical nature of reality based on empirical experiments and observation (often times, countless amounts of both), thus creating working theories that can be used to explain real phenomena? Or dismissing all that as "just a theory" and claiming that armchair intellectualism is equally likely to be true, because "everything is a possibility," resulting in theories that explain nothing and terminate further inquiry rather than inviting it?
This line of thinking supports the belief that all evidence for evolution was fabricated by incredibly advanced aliens that operate in a physical dimension outside our own, and therefore we cannot see any evidence for them. Keep wanking away at the little postmodernist in your head and you can reason that it's impossible to objectively prove that this is not true.
But it's a worthless hypothesis because it doesn't explain shit.
It's the exact same kind of thinking that leads to all that "quantum" bullshit out there.