News Religion Science

Will science extinguish religion?

Spread the love

Closing our religion news coverage for the week: Ross Pomeroy asks at RealClearScience:

We are perhaps the first generation of humans to truly possess a factually accurate understanding of our world and ourselves. In the past, this knowledge was only in the hands and minds of the few, but with the advent of the Internet, evidence and information have never been so widespread and accessible. Beliefs can be challenged with the click of a button. We no longer live in closed, insular environments where a single dogmatic worldview can dominate.

As scientific evidence questions the tenets of religion, so too, does it provide a worldview to follow, one that’s infinitely more coherent. More.

Huh? What with the multiverse and Help! I don’t exist!, current science seems well on its way to being the most crackpot religion ever.

Too bad we live in a culture that believes in funding the state religion.

See also: Wayne Rossiter: No “I” in “Me” (and no sense in Sam Harris) The old atheists make a lot more sense. It’s not clear what the new atheists’ interest in science is all about, if Harris’s view is typical.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

43 Replies to “Will science extinguish religion?

  1. 1
    bornagain77 says:

    As a Christian, I am very comfortable with what science has revealed to us about the nature of reality:

    “It is operationally impossible to separate Reality and Information”
    (48:35 minute mark)
    “In the beginning was the Word”
    John 1:1 (49:54 minute mark)
    Prof Anton Zeilinger speaks on quantum physics. at UCT
    https://youtu.be/s3ZPWW5NOrw?t=2984

    Theism compared to Materialism/Naturalism – an overview – video
    https://www.facebook.com/philip.cunningham.73/videos/vb.100000088262100/1139512636061668/?type=2&theater

    The Resurrection of Jesus Christ from Death as the “Theory of Everything” – video
    https://www.facebook.com/philip.cunningham.73/videos/vb.100000088262100/1143437869002478/?type=2&theater

    Verse and Music:

    Colossians 1:15-20
    The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

    Steven Curtis Chapman – Lord of the Dance (Live)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDXbvMcMbU0

    supplemental note

    Shroud of Turin: From discovery of Photographic Negative, to 3D Information, to Quantum Hologram – video
    https://www.facebook.com/philip.cunningham.73/videos/vb.100000088262100/1119619634717635/?type=2&theater

  2. 2
    Me_Think says:

    Science can never replace religion. Religion acts like an optimism booster. It helps billions of humans believe that tomorrow will be better and that some infinite being will solve their problems. As long as humans continue to be insecure (which is forever) , religion will continue to exists.

  3. 3
    Aleta says:

    The answer is no. But religions vary tremendously, so the question is extremely vague. Science has already replaced/displaced a great number of specifics from various religions, so the better question is what roles can religions play, what specific beliefs are tenable, what aspects of religion do people find useful, etc.

  4. 4
    jimmontg says:

    The verse. “The fool says in his heart there is no God.” simply means that the atheist is fooling himself. Listen to Dawkins, he doesn’t believe a bunch of the tripe he puts out. Dawkins simply refuses to admit he might be wrong. Look at him in the movie Expelled. It is like I keep telling my wife,”I may not always be right, but the Good Lord knows I’m never wrong!” Kind of sounds like the king of a city in Rome don’t it?

  5. 5
    Robert Byers says:

    THE INTERNET! you mean until this we were not a generation with facts at our fingertips? Oh brother. thats lame.
    Prove the internet has effected double digit % of humans in reflection on the universe makeup??
    What facts are there against a God? all they could say is there are no facts FOR a God.! What could be against him?
    Likewise Genesis.

  6. 6
    bornagain77 says:

    Me think claims that,,,

    “As long as humans continue to be insecure (which is forever) , religion will continue to exists.”

    That is basically the ‘opium of the masses’ claim.
    In other words, Me Think basically believes that atheists are acting rationally whereas he/she believes Christians are acting emotionally rather than rationally.
    Yet, as with practically every other substantial claim made by atheists, that claim is patently false.
    First off, rationality itself can only be coherently based in a Theistic worldview which affirms the reality of ‘mind’.

    Sam Harris’s Free Will: The Medial Pre-Frontal Cortex Did It – Martin Cothran – November 9, 2012
    Excerpt: There is something ironic about the position of thinkers like Harris on issues like this: they claim that their position is the result of the irresistible necessity of logic (in fact, they pride themselves on their logic). Their belief is the consequent, in a ground/consequent relation between their evidence and their conclusion. But their very stated position is that any mental state — including their position on this issue — is the effect of a physical, not logical cause.
    By their own logic, it isn’t logic that demands their assent to the claim that free will is an illusion, but the prior chemical state of their brains. The only condition under which we could possibly find their argument convincing is if they are not true. The claim that free will is an illusion requires the possibility that minds have the freedom to assent to a logical argument, a freedom denied by the claim itself. It is an assent that must, in order to remain logical and not physiological, presume a perspective outside the physical order.
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....66221.html

    (1) rationality implies a thinker in control of thoughts.
    (2) under materialism a thinker is an effect caused by processes in the brain (determinism).
    (3) in order for materialism to ground rationality a thinker (an effect) must control processes in the brain (a cause). (1)&(2)
    (4) no effect can control its cause.
    Therefore materialism cannot ground rationality.
    per Box UD

    Moreover, it is now found that it is the Atheist, not the Christian, that is in fact acting emotionally rather than rationally.

    Atheists embarrassed: study proves atheism uses less brain function – Oct 26, 2015 by Dr. Joel McDurmon
    Excerpt: This has to be embarrassing . . . if you’re an atheist. A new study performed at the University of York used targeted magnetism to shut down part of the brain. The result: belief in God disappeared among more than 30 percent of participants.
    That in itself may not seem so embarrassing, but consider that the specific part of the brain they frazzled was the posterior medial frontal cortex—the part associated with detecting and solving problems, i.e., reasoning and logic.
    In other words, when you shut down the part of the brain most associated with logic and reasoning, greater levels of atheism result.
    You’ve heard the phrase, “I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist”? Apparently we can now also say, “I have too many brains to be an atheist.”
    For a group that makes so much noise vaunting its superior prowess with logic and reasoning, this study has got to be quite a deflator. For a group that claims to be rooted primarily in logic and reason, and to exist for little reason other than that they have used logic and reason to free themselves from belief in God and, as they allege, superstition and fairy tales, this study is the equivalent of a public depanting­—i.e., the would-be emperor’s got no clothes.
    http://americanvision.org/1263.....-function/

    When Atheists Are Angry at God – 2011
    Excerpt: I’ve never been angry at unicorns. It’s unlikely you’ve ever been angry at unicorns either.,, The one social group that takes exception to this rule is atheists. They claim to believe that God does not exist and yet, according to empirical studies, tend to be the people most angry at him.
    http://www.firstthings.com/ont.....gry-at-god

    Study explores whether atheism is rooted in reason or emotion – Jan. 2015
    Excerpt: “A new set of studies in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology finds that atheists and agnostics report anger toward God either in the past or anger focused on a hypothetical image of what they imagine God must be like. Julie Exline, a psychologist at Case Western Reserve University and the lead author of this recent study, has examined other data on this subject with identical results. Exline explains that her interest was first piqued when an early study of anger toward God revealed a counterintuitive finding: Those who reported no belief in God reported more grudges toward him than believers.”
    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....r-emotion/

    Appreciate this irony, Joseph Stalin, on his death bed, one of the greatest mass murderers in history, shook his fist at the God he did not believe in.

    “A story I heard personally from Malcolm Muggeridge (that stirred me then and still does even yet) was his account of a conversation he had with Svetlana Stalin, the daughter of Josef Stalin. She spent some time with Muggeridge in his home in England while they were working together on their BBC production on the life of her father. According to Svetlana, as Stalin lay dying, plagued with terrifying hallucinations, he suddenly sat halfway up in bed, clenched his fist toward the heavens once more, fell back upon his pillow, and was dead.”
    Ravi Zacharias, Can Man Live Without God, (Word Publ., Dallas: 1994), p. 26.

    Of related note:

    “, I maintain that whatever else faith may be, it cannot be a delusion.
    The advantageous effect of religious belief and spirituality on mental and physical health is one of the best-kept secrets in psychiatry and medicine generally. If the findings of the huge volume of research on this topic had gone in the opposite direction and it had been found that religion damages your mental health, it would have been front-page news in every newspaper in the land.”
    – Professor Andrew Sims former President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists – Is Faith Delusion?: Why religion is good for your health – preface
    https://books.google.com/books?id=PREdCgAAQBAJ&pg=PR11#v=onepage&q&f=false

  7. 7
    Origenes says:

    Ross Pomeroy: We are perhaps the first generation of humans to truly possess a factually accurate understanding of our world and ourselves.
    Yes, ‘we’ now know that ‘we’ are, in fact, nothing over and beyond a happenstance conglomeration of unthinking fermions and bosons. However neither fermions nor bosons nor combinations of them can be said to understand anything or exist at the level of personhood.

    So, Ross Pomeroy, I hate to break it to you, but it is incoherent to use terms, we now know we cannot ground, such as “we” and “understand”.

  8. 8
    Indiana Effigy says:

    Science will never replace religion. They are two distinct things, with different purposes. Science is indifferent to purpose. It is indifferent to what their discoveries are used for. For every scientific discovery, man can use them to benefit humanity or to benefit individuals or groups.

    Nuclear physics have provided cheap power and significantly advance medicine. But it has also resulted in the nuclear bomb.

    Evolution has advanced medicine and agriculture but has been used to justify eugenics.

    Chemistry has been used to create fertilizers and pesticides that help us feed the world, but it was used in WWI to gas the enemy.

    Religion provides a social venue that can unify communities. It provides hope to people who are suffering. It provides a filter through which scientific discoveries should be used.

  9. 9
    Mung says:

    For many, science has become their religion.

  10. 10
    Aleta says:

    I don’t see that. I know lots of scientists, many who are religious in traditional ways but some who are not, and I don’t see them thinking of science in ways that are like how people are religious.

    And, FWIW, I am not religious and I am a fan of science, but I don’t see any signs in me of thinking of science as my religion.

  11. 11
    Me_Think says:

    BA77 @ 6,

    That is basically the ‘opium of the masses’ claim.

    If that’s the way you want to interpret my comment, I have no problem.

    First off, rationality itself can only be coherently based in a Theistic worldview which affirms the reality of ‘mind’.

    Mind arises because of brain’s neurological activity. Without brain, there can be no mind. Mind is not a product of spirit or dualism.
    As for,

    Atheists embarrassed: study proves atheism uses less brain function – Oct 26, 2015 by Dr. Joel McDurmon

    the paper that you cite Neuromodulation of Group Prejudice and Religious Belief reaches no such conclusion. Instead, it embarrasses religious groups. It concludes:

    From Abstract: People cleave to ideological convictions with greater intensity in the aftermath of threat.
    The posterior medial frontal cortex (pMFC) plays a key role in both detecting discrepancies between desired and current conditions and adjusting subsequent behavior to resolve such conflicts. Building on prior literature examining the role of the pMFC in shifts in relatively low level decision processes, we demonstrate that the pMFC mediates adjustments in adherence to political and religious ideologies

    From Page 12: Discussion: Down-regulating the pMFC via TMS significantly decreased both derogation of an “anti- U.S.” out-group member and avowed belief in God, angels, and Heaven following a reminder of death, supporting the hypothesis that the pMFC plays an important role in ideological responses to threat.

    IOW, instead of preaching “God is loving”, a better way to keep members in a religious group would be to say “You will go to hell and suffer if you don’t follow what God preaches ”
    Note that the posterior medial frontal cortex (pMFC) is a plausible mediator of shifts in ideological commitment. The pMFC complex includes the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex
    (dACC) and the dorsomedial prefrontal area anterior to the supplementary motor cortex (dmPFC), and has been linked to a wide variety of reactions to negative emotional stimuli (Etkinet al., 2011; Maier et al., 2012; Rushworth et al., 2007). The pMFC plays a key role in detecting discrepancies between desired and current conditions, and adjusting subsequent behavior during decision-making tasks (Bush et al., 2002; Ridderinkhof et al., 2004; Shima and Tanji, 1998). In humans, the dACC component of the pMFC has been proposed to induce a compensatory increase in moral or cultural values following exposure to threats (e.g., reminders of death,uncertainty, or meaninglessness) (Proulx et al., 2012; Tritt et al., 2012). Reminders of death trigger activity in the dmPFC (Han, Qin, and Ma, 2010; Shi and Han, 2013).

  12. 12
    bornagain77 says:

    Me Think dogmatically claims, (or more precisely, since Me Think does not actually think that he actually exists as a person, Me Think’s brain dogmatically claims):

    “Mind arises because of brain’s neurological activity. Without brain, there can be no mind. Mind is not a product of spirit or dualism.”

    And yet, despite such a seemingly confident claim by Me Think, Me think has no scientific evidence whatsoever that mind can be generated by matter

    There is simply no direct evidence that anything material is capable of generating consciousness. As Rutgers University philosopher Jerry Fodor says,

    “Nobody has the slightest idea how anything material could be conscious. Nobody even knows what it would be like to have the slightest idea about how anything material could be conscious. So much for the philosophy of consciousness. Regardless of our knowledge of the structure of the brain, no one has any idea how the brain could possibly generate conscious experience.”

    As Nobel neurophysiologist Roger Sperry wrote,

    “Those centermost processes of the brain with which consciousness is presumably associated are simply not understood. They are so far beyond our comprehension at present that no one I know of has been able even to imagine their nature.”

    From modern physics, Nobel prize-winner Eugene Wigner agreed:

    “We have at present not even the vaguest idea how to connect the physio-chemical processes with the state of mind.”

    Contemporary physicist Nick Herbert states,

    “Science’s biggest mystery is the nature of consciousness. It is not that we possess bad or imperfect theories of human awareness; we simply have no such theories at all. About all we know about consciousness is that it has something to do with the head, rather than the foot.”

    Physician and author Larry Dossey wrote:

    “No experiment has ever demonstrated the genesis of consciousness from matter. One might as well believe that rabbits emerge from magicians’ hats. Yet this vaporous possibility, this neuro-mythology, has enchanted generations of gullible scientists, in spite of the fact that there is not a shred of direct evidence to support it.”

    David Chalmers on Consciousness (Descartes, Philosophical Zombies and the Hard Problem) – video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NK1Yo6VbRoo

    “But the hard problem of consciousness is so hard that I can’t even imagine what kind of empirical findings would satisfactorily solve it. In fact, I don’t even know what kind of discovery would get us to first base, not to mention a home run.’
    David Barash – Materialist/Atheist – evolutionary biologist and professor of psychology at the ­University of Washington

    “We have so much confidence in our materialist assumptions (which are assumptions, not facts) that something like free will is denied in principle. Maybe it doesn’t exist, but I don’t really know that. Either way, it doesn’t matter because if free will and consciousness are just an illusion, they are the most seamless illusions ever created. Film maker James Cameron wishes he had special effects that good.”
    Matthew D. Lieberman – neuroscientist – materialist – UCLA professor

    “I think the idea of (materialists) saying that consciousness is an illusion doesn’t really work because the very notion of an illusion presupposes consciousness. There are no illusions unless there is a conscious experience or (a conscious person) for whom there is an illusion.”
    Evan Thompson, Philosopher – author of Waking, Dreaming, Being

    At the 23:33 minute mark of the following video, Richard Dawkins agrees with materialistic philosophers who say that:
    “consciousness is an illusion”
    A few minutes later Rowan Williams asks Dawkins ”If consciousness is an illusion…what isn’t?”.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWN4cfh1Fac&t=22m57s

    Moreover, contrary to Me Think’s dogmatic assertion that mind arises from matter for which he has no scientific evidence whatsoever, there is much scientific evidence for the reality of mind.

    ‘Brain Plasticity’, the ability to alter the structure of the brain from a person’s focused intention, has now been established by Jeffrey Schwartz, as well as among other researchers.    

    The Case for the Soul – InspiringPhilosophy – (4:03 minute mark, Brain Plasticity including Schwartz’s work) – Oct. 2014 – video
    The Mind is able to modify the brain (brain plasticity). Moreover, Idealism explains all anomalous evidence of personality changes due to brain injury, whereas physicalism cannot explain mind.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBsI_ay8K70

    Moreover, completely contrary to Me Think’s materialistic thought, mind has been now also been shown to be able to reach all the way down and have pronounced effects on the gene expression of our bodies:

    Scientists Finally Show How Your Thoughts Can Cause Specific Molecular Changes To Your Genes, – December 10, 2013
    Excerpt: “To the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper that shows rapid alterations in gene expression within subjects associated with mindfulness meditation practice,” says study author Richard J. Davidson, founder of the Center for Investigating Healthy Minds and the William James and Vilas Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
    “Most interestingly, the changes were observed in genes that are the current targets of anti-inflammatory and analgesic drugs,” says Perla Kaliman, first author of the article and a researcher at the Institute of Biomedical Research of Barcelona, Spain (IIBB-CSIC-IDIBAPS), where the molecular analyses were conducted.,,,
    the researchers say, there was no difference in the tested genes between the two groups of people at the start of the study. The observed effects were seen only in the meditators following mindfulness practice. In addition, several other DNA-modifying genes showed no differences between groups, suggesting that the mindfulness practice specifically affected certain regulatory pathways.
    http://www.tunedbody.com/scien.....ges-genes/

    as well there is much scientific evidence that mind can exist independently of the material brain upon death just as is held in Christianity

    Near-Death Experiences: Putting a Darwinist’s Evidentiary Standards to the Test – Dr. Michael Egnor – October 15, 2012
    Excerpt: Indeed, about 20 percent of NDE’s are corroborated, which means that there are independent ways of checking about the veracity of the experience. The patients knew of things that they could not have known except by extraordinary perception — such as describing details of surgery that they watched while their heart was stopped, etc. Additionally, many NDE’s have a vividness and a sense of intense reality that one does not generally encounter in dreams or hallucinations.,,,
    The most “parsimonious” explanation — the simplest scientific explanation — is that the (Near Death) experience was real. Tens of millions of people have had such experiences. That is tens of millions of more times than we have observed the origin of species , (or the origin of life, or the origin of a protein/gene, or a molecular machine), which is never.,,,
    The materialist reaction, in short, is unscientific and close-minded. NDE’s show fellows like Coyne at their sneering unscientific irrational worst. Somebody finds a crushed fragment of a fossil and it’s earth-shaking evidence. Tens of million of people have life-changing spiritual experiences and it’s all a big yawn.
    Note: Dr. Egnor is professor and vice-chairman of neurosurgery at the State University of New York at Stony Brook.
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....65301.html

    “A recent analysis of several hundred cases showed that 48% of near-death experiencers reported seeing their physical bodies from a different visual perspective. Many of them also reported witnessing events going on in the vicinity of their body, such as the attempts of medical personnel to resuscitate them (Kelly et al., 2007).”
    Kelly, E. W., Greyson, B., & Kelly, E. F. (2007). Unusual experiences near death and related phenomena. In E. F. Kelly, E. W. Kelly, A. Crabtree, A. Gauld, M. Grosso, & B. Greyson, Irreducible mind (pp. 367-421). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Near-death patients do see afterlife by JENNY HOPE – October 8, 2014
    Excerpt: The latest study, by Southampton University researchers, suggests the mind may continue to exist after the brain has ceased to function and the body is clinically dead.
    The research team studied 63 survivors of a cardiac arrest who were resuscitated at Southampton General Hospital after they had been clinically dead with no pulse, no respiration and fixed dilated pupils. Independent studies have confirmed that the brain ceases to function at that time.
    But seven out of the 63 survivors recalled emotions and visions during their unconsciousness, says a report in the journal Resuscitation. Four patients (six per cent) met the strict criteria used to diagnose NDEs.
    They recalled feelings of peace and joy, of time speeding up, heightened senses, lost awareness of body, seeing a bright light, entering another world, encountering a mystical being or deceased relative and coming to a point of no return.,,,
    It has been suggested that the experiences are hallucinations, the result of disturbed brain chemistry caused by medication, lack of oxygen or changes in carbon dioxide levels.
    But Dr Parnia said there was no difference in oxygen levels or drug treatment between the heart attack survivors who had not had NDEs and those who had.
    ‘In fact, the four patients who met the criteria for a true NDE actually had higher oxygen levels,’ he added.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/hea.....rlife.html

    And after blatantly ignoring the embarrassing fact that shutting down part of the brain associated with decision making leads to increased atheism, Me Think goes on to claim:

    “IOW, instead of preaching “God is loving”, a better way to keep members in a religious group would be to say “You will go to hell and suffer if you don’t follow what God preaches ””

    Yet. apparently contrary to what Me Think would “emotionally’ prefer to believe, there is actually very strong scientific evidence for the reality of hell (and heaven):

    Special Relativity and General Relativity compared to Heavenly and Hellish Near Death Experiences – video
    https://www.facebook.com/philip.cunningham.73/videos/vb.100000088262100/1113745045305094/?type=2&theater

    Entropic Concerns of Special and General Relativity and The Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the Dead is the correct solution for the “Theory of Everything” – video
    https://www.facebook.com/philip.cunningham.73/videos/vb.100000088262100/1121720701174195/?type=2&theater

  13. 13
    Me_Think says:

    BA @ 12

    And yet, despite such a seemingly confident claim by Me Think, Me think has no scientific evidence whatsoever that mind can be generated by matter

    Every drug that affects brain is evidence that mind is a consequence of brain’s neural activity. Every victim of date rate drugs – which obliterate not just self consciousness but even memory of events – shows how mind is not distinct from brain. ‘Spiritual’ experience of k – hole and Magic Mushroom proves chemicals can alter conscious reality. Can you show any research on dualism or spirit that supports your world view that mind is different from brain ?

  14. 14
    bornagain77 says:

    I have not denied a correlation, yet you erroneously believe correlation equates to causation. You are wrong in your assumption.

    Moreover, I have shown the evidence to you. It is not my problem that you do not accept the scientific evidence. That is your ’emotional’ problem.

    Of supplemental note:

    How Consciousness Points to the Existence of God – J. Warner Wallace – video – Sept. 2015
    (5 attributes of mind that are distinct from brain therefore, via the law of identity, the mind is not the brain)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ff1jiRpjko
    podcast – How Consciousness Points to the Existence of God – Sept. 2015
    http://coldcasechristianity.co.....adcast-42/

    Six reasons why you should believe in non-physical minds – 01/30/2014
    1) First-person access to mental properties
    2) Our experience of consciousness implies that we are not our bodies
    3) Persistent self-identity through time
    4) Mental properties cannot be measured like physical objects
    5) Intentionality or About-ness
    6) Free will and personal responsibility
    http://winteryknight.com/2014/.....cal-minds/

    Michael Egnor, professor of neurosurgery at SUNY, Stony Brook, states the irreconcilable properties of mind to brain, via the law of identity, as such:

    The Mind and Materialist Superstition – Michael Egnor – 2008
    Six “conditions of mind” that are irreconcilable with materialism: –
    Excerpt: Intentionality,,, Qualia,,, Persistence of Self-Identity,,, Restricted Access,,, Incorrigibility,,, Free Will,,,
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....super.html

    Of related note, Alvin Plantinga humorously uses the fact that we can imagine that we have a ‘beetle body’ to highlight the fact, via the ‘law of identity’, that the mind is not the same thing as the brain/body.

    Alvin Plantinga and the Modal Argument (for the existence of the mind/soul) – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOTn_wRwDE0

    “It (my body) looked like pretty much what it was. As in void of life.”
    Pam Reynolds – Extremely Monitored Near Death Experience – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNbdUEqDB-k

  15. 15
    Origenes says:

    Bornagain77,

    Thank you for your excellent posts #12 and #14.

    Bornagain77: I have not denied a correlation, yet you erroneously believe correlation equates to causation. You are wrong in your assumption.

    Indeed!
    Craig paraphrases Eccles on the topic of correlation:

    Eccles compared the relationship between the soul (or the mind) and the brain to the relationship between a musician and a piano. The musician can produce music by playing on the piano; the instrument (the piano) produces the music but not on its own. It is only at the instigation of the agent – the musician – who plays the piano. Eccles said in exactly the same way the self (or the mind, or the soul) uses the brain to think. It uses it as an instrument for thinking just as a musician uses a piano as an instrument to play music.

  16. 16

    At what point are parents going to be moved to demand their schools to teach that:

    1 freedom is in fact real
    2 expression of emotion with free will, thus choosing, is a valid way to form opinons about the subjective part of reality

    When do people start to move on this??????

  17. 17
    Aleta says:

    Do you think that schools don’t teach this? I worked in a public school for almost 40 years, and we assumed quite strongly that students were all those things. We expected them to be responsible for their actions, and to think carefully about forming opinions based on both facts and their values when that is applicable. We also had high expectations for lots of what some of those values should be: respect for others, honesty, general responsibility, etc.

    Why do you think schools don’t do this?

  18. 18

    Because I see what comes out of schools at internetforums. They don’t understand about freedom, and they refuse to accept it is real.

    I think that free will is regarded as a problem in philosophy reflects widespread denial among the population that freedom is real. It’s not just namby pamby philosophers denying free will, the denial is a common thing.

    Schools need to teach freedom is real as fact of nature, together with the other science, and not teach freedom as some kind of political or societal idea / fantasy.

  19. 19
    groovamos says:

    Me_think: Mind arises because of brain’s neurological activity. Without brain, there can be no mind. Mind is not a product of spirit or dualism.
    ….
    Every drug that affects brain is evidence that mind is a consequence of brain’s neural activity. Every victim of date rate drugs – which obliterate not just self consciousness but even memory of events – shows how mind is not distinct from brain. ‘Spiritual’ experience of k – hole and Magic Mushroom proves chemicals can alter conscious reality.

    Now you are traipsing into a subject in which yours truly is an amateur expert, and which you apparently know little. Now aside from the first sentence of the second paragraph quoted being nonsensical in that drugs are not evidence, you seem not to think the large professional organization MAPS would have relevance to the topic. There are thousands of professionals associated with this group and interested in the role of psychedelics in various fields such as anthropology, psychotherapy, addiction treatment, and generally any area of human growth. And guess what dude, your materialistic philosophy is not held in common with a single practitioner or author from this large group that I have either read about or read from, which I have been for 35 years. If you showed up at one of their symposiums and tried to spread your thinking on this you would be looked at askance.

    [MAPS -Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies]

    OK here is an interview with Albert Hofmann Ph.D, discoverer of LSD-25, by Charles Grob member of MAPS:

    https://www.erowid.org/culture/characters/hofmann_albert/hofmann_albert_interview2.shtml

    And if you were to read the autobiography of Hofmann as I have you would encounter an almost unbelievable series of coincidences that led him to the discovery.

    And if you think this is a fluke or just a bunch of bunk, then you need to explain to us why the US government and other Western governments have been licensing the use of psilocybin for psychotherapy for (in the case of the U.S.) the last 12 years. And the program is snowballing. Your philosophy is in big trouble

    Can you show any research on dualism or spirit that supports your world view that mind is different from brain

    Yes we can, have at it and check back: http://www.amazon.com/review/R93YN1VTGE33U

  20. 20

    @groovamus

    We don’t need to address nazi’s figuring people are predetermined by heredity, and forced by a law of struggle for existence, or communists who figure people are predetermined by class, and a law of societal evolution.

    We don’t really need to address anybody denying freedom is real. We just need to force students in school to learn that freedom is real. Teach the facts about the way things work.

    The denial is just playing mindgames. Playing games is a take it or leave it kind of thing. Having functional people, family, democracy, where people know how choosing works, is not a take it or leave it kind of thing.

  21. 21
    Me_Think says:

    BA77 @ 14

    I have not denied a correlation, yet you erroneously believe correlation equates to causation. You are wrong in your assumption.

    In case of brain, my assumption is not wrong. We don’t have invisible spirits attached to brains nor are spirits riding our backs !

    Moreover, I have shown the evidence to you. It is not my problem that you do not accept the scientific evidence. That is your ’emotional’ problem.

    NDE is not evidence of mind being separate from brain, it is evidence of chemicals effect on brain. Most cases of NDE have been discussed to death here at UD- every time it has been shown that there is nothing out-worldly about NDE.

  22. 22
    Me_Think says:

    groovamos @ 19

    There are thousands of professionals associated with this group and interested in the role of psychedelics in various fields such as anthropology, psychotherapy, addiction treatment, and generally any area of human growth. And guess what dude, your materialistic philosophy is not held in common with a single practitioner or author from this large group that I have either read about or read from, which I have been for 35 years.

    MAPS is involved in drug assisted Psychotherapy such as psychedelic’s effect on PTSD , Ibogine treatment for drug addiction and Medical Marijuana research. Again, it just proves how much chemicals can alter consciousness, and that mind is not a separate entity.

    Yes we can, have at it and check back: http://www.amazon.com/review/R93YN1VTGE33U

    From when did a 1975s book on amazon become a research paper ? Going by the review, the book cited is not a collection of research papers, but anecdotes on LSD effect on brain.

  23. 23
    Indiana Effigy says:

    Me_think: “NDE is not evidence of mind being separate from brain, it is evidence of chemicals effect on brain.”

    And scientists have been able to replicate NDE through manipulation of the brain. And at no time were the subjects “near death”.

  24. 24
    groovamos says:

    Me_Think: From when did a 1975s book on amazon become a research paper ? Going by the review, the book cited is not a collection of research papers, but anecdotes on LSD effect on brain.

    Oh but there are thousands of research papers on the successful use of psychedelics.

    Since when did anyone who was the director of research at a major psychiatric institute, in a country which allowed that kind of research program, and who conducted the research program for 16 years, not have some of the best available data on the nature of human conciousness? And consider he was not the only person there in the program. You want to find scads of staff people who were conducting the research with him, who over the years have refuted his books? Do it. But you should read the book or at least the review.

    Which leads me to say I don’t think you read the review. Tell us what is Grof’s concept of a COEX system, and why you think it should have been introduced in a “research paper” instead of a book.

    Principia Mathematica was not a “research paper” either, so your complaint is ridiculous. There are mountains of research papers that support many of Grof’s observations. If you are going to construct an exhaustive framework on a difficult topic, you do what he did and write a book in English which is not his native language.

    And besides you seem to be ignorant of the philosophical orientation of the people associated with MAPS because the Grof book is considered a classic in those circles. You are materialist and they are not, and you do not read the voluminous literature coming from these people or you would not be making ignorant arguments here, or listing a couple of broad thrusts of their work as if you are somehow very familiar with these fields of study and the people involved – when you are not.

    And BTW Grof was co-founder with Abraham Maslow of the Association for Transpersonal Psychology. Go ahead and express your negativity towards Maslow if you want: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Maslow

  25. 25
    Origenes says:

    Me_Think:

    Bornagain77: I have not denied a correlation, yet you erroneously believe correlation equates to causation. You are wrong in your assumption.

    Me_Think: In case of brain, my assumption is not wrong.

    So, you hold that the brain produces consciousness and reason. However you cannot support your claim by showing us a concept on how this is even possible. In post #12 we find this quote by Nick Herbert:

    “Science’s biggest mystery is the nature of consciousness. It is not that we possess bad or imperfect theories of human awareness; we simply have no such theories at all. About all we know about consciousness is that it has something to do with the head, rather than the foot.”

    and several other quotes which essentially say the same thing: we are unable to come up with a causal concept, in which the brain produces consciousness.
    A solution to this conceptual problem is unthinkable for several reasons. Allow me to provide a few examples:
    Matter is determined by physical law, so how does one get from there to freedom, control and responsibility which define consciousness?
    Matter is purposeless (non-teleological), so how does one get from there to purpose, which defines consciousness (and reason)?
    The behavior of matter is explained by physical law, so how does one get from there to laws of logic, which defines consciousness (and reason)?
    One clump of matter is not about another clump of matter, so how does one get from there to aboutness, which defines consciousness (and reason)?
    Matter is unconscious, so how … get to consciousness?

    Bottom line: matter is an insufficient cause for consciousness.

    Me_Think: We don’t have invisible spirits attached to brains (…)

    I’m not sure that I understand your argument here. Who is “we” in this sentence? Is “we” separate from “brains”?

    Me_Think: (…) nor are spirits riding our backs !

    Do you hold that this is a claim made by dualists? If so, you are mistaken. A dualist would rather hold that we are spirits that use a body and a brain. A dualist would reject the view that there are spirits attached to “us”, “our backs” or “brains” (which are supposedly us).

    Me_Think: NDE is not evidence of mind being separate from brain, it is evidence of chemicals effect on brain.

    Near-Death Experiences: Putting a Darwinist’s Evidentiary Standards to the Test – Dr. Michael Egnor – October 15, 2012
    Excerpt: Indeed, about 20 percent of NDE’s are corroborated, which means that there are independent ways of checking about the veracity of the experience. The patients knew of things that they could not have known except by extraordinary perception — such as describing details of surgery that they watched while their heart was stopped, etc.

    How is that “evidence of chemicals effect on brain?”

  26. 26
    Me_Think says:

    groovamos @ 24

    Oh but there are thousands of research papers on the successful use of psychedelics.

    Yes there are.So? How does drugs effect on brain prove mind is spiritual ?

    Which leads me to say I don’t think you read the review. Tell us what is Grof’s concept of a COEX system, and why you think it should have been introduced in a “research paper” instead of a book.
    Principia Mathematica was not a “research paper” either, so your complaint is ridiculous. There are mountains of research papers that support many of Grof’s observations. If you are going to construct an exhaustive framework on a difficult topic, you do what he did and write a book in English which is not his native language

    COEX is nothing more than matrix of nomenclature for Long Term and Short Term memory and a bunch of Chakras. Unlike Principia Mathematica, it is not a foundation of anything. The reason COEX System needs to be validated by research is because it describes non-existent energetic pathways called Chakra. Interestingly, even the Chakras are affected by drugs (Crown Stupifiers is nothing but alcohol, psychotic drugs and neurotoxins).
    What Grof describes as COEX’S root is nothing but long-term memory. Memory formation is a Physical process in brain with neural network change and physical changes of perineuronal nets. There is nothing remotely spiritual about the process.
    There is no research on what constitutes Crown, Heart , throat or Sacral Chakra so I can’t comment on that. All I can say is that the entire system described by Grof is affected by drugs and alters it, so I don’t find anything remotely non-physical about his Chakras.

  27. 27
    Me_Think says:

    Origenes @ 25

    Bottom line: matter is an insufficient cause for consciousness…..
    Do you hold that this is a claim made by dualists? If so, you are mistaken. A dualist would rather hold that we are spirits that use a body and a brain. A dualist would reject the view that there are spirits attached to “us”, “our backs” or “brains” (which are us).

    Matter is essential for consciousness. Mind is a product of Brain’s neural activity. If mind was spiritual, it can’t react with material brain. You need perturbation in fields and gauge boson exchanges at particle level for interaction. The fact that mind is affected by chemicals in brain proves that there is physical interaction, hence mind cannot be spiritual.
    Only particle, energy, field or force can interact. If we are spirits, we can’t interact with matter.

    Excerpt: Indeed, about 20 percent of NDE’s are corroborated, which means that there are independent ways of checking about the veracity of the experience. The patients knew of things that they could not have known except by extraordinary perception — such as describing details of surgery that they watched while their heart was stopped, etc.

    How is that “evidence of chemicals effect on brain?”

    The patients interacted with nurses and their relatives/friends who had watched the surgery. What the patients described was what they gathered from their conversation with others. The AWARE NDE study using placards debunked NDE. Not a single patient out of over 2000 passed the Placard test.
    You should be aware that Eben Alexander (from whose book Dr. Michael Egnor quotes) was kicked out of every hospital he worked in. He settled 5 malpractice cases in as many years. In two of the cases, he didn’t even know the difference between c4 and c5 vertebrae – he fused the wrong vertebrae and fudged records. His surgical license was cancelled. The last job he held was in a non-profit run by his friend.Forget about medical claims in his book, he even lied about simple incident when he said Chuck opened the parachute under him. When chuck stated no such incident happened, Ebener said it was some other friend and not Chuck. He refused to disclose the name of the friend and he couldn’t recall any other friends who could corroborate the incident.

  28. 28
    Origenes says:

    Me_Think,

    Me_Think: Mind is a product of Brain’s neural activity.

    Yet, you are unable to provide a concept on how this is even possible. I have provided a summary of several properties of matter which are irreconcilable with properties of consciousness.

    Me_Think: If mind was spiritual, it can’t react with material brain.

    Only if one assumes that spirit and matter are causally isolated from each other. How do you ground that assumption? I personally hold that all of reality is ultimately spiritual, so, I don’t have the interaction problem.

    Me_Think: You need perturbation in fields and gauge boson exchanges at particle level for interaction.

    Only if one assumes that such is the only mechanism of interaction. However this seems very unlikely, for instance, do you deny the reality of particle entanglement, which points to the existence of different mechanisms of interaction?

    Me_Think: The fact that mind is affected by chemicals in brain proves that there is physical interaction, hence mind cannot be spiritual.

    Only if one assumes that the interaction is indeed purely physical and that only purely physical things can have physical interaction.

    Me_Think: Only particle, energy, field or force can interact.

    Aren’t these classical notions long refuted by quantum entanglement and other QM phenomena?

    Bill Vallicella: But why should we think that this ‘billiards ball’ model of causation fits every type of causation? Why must we think of causation as itself a physical process whereby a physical magnitude such as energy is transferred from one physical object to another? On regularity and counterfactual theories of causation there is no difficulty in principle with the notion of a causal relation obtaining between two events that do not make physical contact.

    Me_Think: If we are spirits, we can’t interact with matter.

    Your line of reasoning is only convincing if we choose to ignore the fact that there is no concept for matter producing mind, assume a metaphysics in which spirit and matter are causally isolated from each other and stick to classical physicalism & deny other forms of causality such as found in QM.
    – – – –
    Finally, here is an interesting read: Causal Interaction: A Problem for the Materialist Too!

  29. 29
    Me_Think says:

    Origenes @ 28

    Yet, you are unable to provide a concept on how this is even possible. I have provided a summary of several properties of matter which are irreconcilable with properties of consciousness.

    There is no one to one correspondence between brain and consciousness. The properties that you describe are the recall of neural network that you have – they aren’t constituent properties. Thus a baby with minimal neural network doesn’t have the awareness, freedom, control and ‘purposelessness’ 🙂 that we have. I hope you don’t believe baby spirits use brain differently than adult spirits.

    Only if one assumes that spirit and matter are causally isolated from each other. How do you ground that assumption? I personally hold that all of reality is ultimately spiritual, so, I don’t have the interaction problem.

    Spirit is not causaully isolated from matter, there is no spirit.

    Only if one assumes that such is the only mechanism of interaction. However this seems very unlikely, for instance, do you deny the reality of particle entanglement, which points to the existence of different mechanisms of interaction?

    Entanglement is a physical process. Entanglement is created using atomic cascade, quantum dot to trap electrons until decay occurs, parametric down conversion etc. Particles which are entangled are described by the same wave function. Where is a different mechanism in this process? There are no spirits involved.

    Aren’t these classical notions long refuted by quantum entanglement and other QM phenomena?

    No. In fact they are strengthened by QM.If you look up any Feynman diagram, you will know how true they are.

    Your line of reasoning is only convincing if we choose to ignore the fact that there is no concept for matter producing mind, assume a metaphysics in which spirit and matter are causally isolated from each other and stick to classical physicalism & deny other forms of causality such as found in QM.

    My reasoning works by knowing that there is no mysterious spirit which is part of matter. There is no evidence of dualism and spirit is not entangled with matter!

    Finally, here is an interesting read: Causal Interaction: A Problem for the Materialist Too!

    Philosophers talking about stove and burning sensation have no idea about individuals with Autistic Spectrum Disorder. Individuals with ADS experience sensory abnormalities related to sight, hearing, touch, smell, and/or taste. If painfulness was not related to brain, you won’t have altered sensations due to brain disorder.

  30. 30
    Origenes says:

    Me_Think: Entanglement is a physical process. Entanglement is created using atomic cascade, quantum dot to trap electrons until decay occurs, parametric down conversion etc. Particles which are entangled are described by the same wave function. Where is a different mechanism in this process? There are no spirits involved.

    Are you deliberately playing dumb? Ok, I explain the simple point one time. Further I demand your apologies or I’m out of this discussion.

    Wiki: In physics, action at a distance is the concept that an object can be moved, changed, or otherwise affected without being physically touched (as in mechanical contact) by another object. That is, it is the nonlocal interaction of objects that are separated in space.

    Did you get that? Do you now understand that “without being physically touched” implies that there is no “classical” mechanism involved and how this contradicts your claims?

    Fine, now start again by reading my former post.

  31. 31
    bornagain77 says:

    Excellent response Origenes!
    Me Think, as hopeless as materialistic explanations of consciousness are, it is not as if you had the tiniest clue how the brain itself could be created by unguided Darwinian processes and that you are now just filling in the details of how the brain generates consciousness after you have explained how the brain came to be. Not even close. You can’t even explain where a single protein of the brain came from!

    Yockey and a Calculator Versus Evolutionists – Cornelius Hunter PhD – September 25, 2015
    Excerpt: In a 1977 paper published in the Journal of Theoretical Biology, Hubert Yockey used information theory to evaluate the likelihood of the evolution of a relatively simple protein.,,,
    Yockey found that the probability of evolution finding the cytochrome c protein sequence is about one in 10^64. That is a one followed by 64 zeros—an astronomically large number. He concluded in the peer-reviewed paper that the belief that proteins appeared spontaneously “is based on faith.”
    Indeed, Yockey’s early findings are in line with, though a bit more conservative than, later findings. A 1990 study of a small, simple protein found that 10^63 attempts would be required for evolution to find the protein.
    A 2004 study found that 10^64 to 10^77 attempts are required, and a 2006 study concluded that 10^70 attempts would be required.
    These requirements dwarf the resources evolution has at its disposal. Even evolutionists have had to admit that evolution could only have a maximum of 10^43 such experiments. It is important to understand how tiny this number is compared to 10^70. 10^43 is not more than half of 10^70. It is not even close to half. 10^43 is an astronomically tiny sliver of 10^70.
    Furthermore, the estimate of 10^43 is, itself, entirely unrealistic. For instance, it assumes the entire history of the Earth is available, rather than the limited time window that evolution actually would have had.,,,
    http://darwins-god.blogspot.co.....ersus.html

    Much less Me Think can you explain how all the trillions upon trillions of proteins of the brain somehow, serendipitously, arranged themselves into the most complex structure in the known universe.
    Should you not first have a clue how the brain came to be by unguided Darwinian processes before you then go on to pontificate on how you think the material brain, all by its lonesome, generates consciousness? i.e. Scientifically speaking, you are putting the cart way before the horse!
    If ANYTHING ever cried out for God as an explanation as to how it came to be, it would certainly be the human brain that was crying out to God for its explanation.

    Human brain has more switches than all computers on Earth – November 2010
    Excerpt: They found that the brain’s complexity is beyond anything they’d imagined, almost to the point of being beyond belief, says Stephen Smith, a professor of molecular and cellular physiology and senior author of the paper describing the study: …One synapse, by itself, is more like a microprocessor–with both memory-storage and information-processing elements–than a mere on/off switch. In fact, one synapse may contain on the order of 1,000 molecular-scale switches. A single human brain has more switches than all the computers and routers and Internet connections on Earth.
    http://news.cnet.com/8301-2708.....2-247.html

    The Half-Truths of Materialist Evolution – DONALD DeMARCO – 02/06/2015
    Excerpt: but I would like to direct attention to the unsupportable notion that the human brain, to focus on a single phenomenon, could possibly have evolved by sheer chance. One of the great stumbling blocks for Darwin and other chance evolutionists is explaining how a multitude of factors simultaneously coalesce to form a unified, functioning system. The human brain could not have evolved as a result of the addition of one factor at a time. Its unity and phantasmagorical complexity defies any explanation that relies on pure chance. It would be an underestimation of the first magnitude to say that today’s neurophysiologists know more about the structure and workings of the brain than did Darwin and his associates.
    Scientists in the field of brain research now inform us that a single human brain contains more molecular-scale switches than all the computers, routers and Internet connections on the entire planet! According to Stephen Smith, a professor of molecular and cellular physiology at the Stanford University School of Medicine, the brain’s complexity is staggering, beyond anything his team of researchers had ever imagined, almost to the point of being beyond belief. In the cerebral cortex alone, each neuron has between 1,000 to 10,000 synapses that result, roughly, in a total of 125 trillion synapses, which is about how many stars fill 1,500 Milky Way galaxies!
    A single synapse may contain 1,000 molecular-scale switches. A synapse, simply stated, is the place where a nerve impulse passes from one nerve cell to another.
    Phantasmagorical as this level of unified complexity is, it places us merely at the doorway of the brain’s even deeper mind-boggling organization. Glial cells in the brain assist in neuron speed. These cells outnumber neurons 10 times over, with 860 billion cells. All of this activity is monitored by microglia cells that not only clean up damaged cells but also prune dendrites, forming part of the learning process. The cortex alone contains 100,000 miles of myelin-covered, insulated nerve fibers.
    The process of mapping the brain would indeed be time-consuming. It would entail identifying every synaptic neuron. If it took a mere second to identify each neuron, it would require four billion years to complete the project.
    http://www.ncregister.com/dail.....evolution/

    Data from the Salk Institute shows brain’s memory capacity is in the petabyte range, as much as entire Web – January 20, 2016
    Excerpt: “This is a real bombshell in the field of neuroscience,” says Terry Sejnowski, Salk professor and co-senior author of the paper, which was published in eLife. “We discovered the key to unlocking the design principle for how hippocampal neurons function with low energy but high computation power. Our new measurements of the brain’s memory capacity increase conservative estimates by a factor of 10 to at least a petabyte, in the same ballpark as the World Wide Web.”
    http://www.salk.edu/news-relea.....y-thought/

    Component placement optimization in the brain – 1994
    As he comments [106], “To current limits of accuracy … the actual placement appears to be the best of all possible layouts; this constitutes strong evidence of perfect optimization.,, among about 40,000,000 alternative layout orderings, the actual ganglion placement in fact requires the least total connection length.
    http://www.jneurosci.org/conte.....8.abstract

    “Complexity Brake” Defies Evolution – August 8, 2012
    Excerpt: Consider a neuronal synapse — the presynaptic terminal has an estimated 1000 distinct proteins. Fully analyzing their possible interactions would take about 2000 years. Or consider the task of fully characterizing the visual cortex of the mouse — about 2 million neurons. Under the extreme assumption that the neurons in these systems can all interact with each other, analyzing the various combinations will take about 10 million years…, even though it is assumed that the underlying technology speeds up by an order of magnitude each year.
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....62961.html

    The Puzzling Role Of Biophotons In The Brain – Dec. 17, 2010
    Excerpt: In recent years, a growing body of evidence shows that photons play an important role in the basic functioning of cells. Most of this evidence comes from turning the lights off and counting the number of photons that cells produce. It turns out, much to many people’s surprise, that many cells, perhaps even most, emit light as they work.
    In fact, it looks very much as if many cells use light to communicate. There’s certainly evidence that bacteria, plants and even kidney cells communicate in this way. Various groups have even shown that rats brains are literally alight thanks to the photons produced by neurons as they work.,,,
    ,,, earlier this year, one group showed that spinal neurons in rats can actually conduct light.
    ,, Rahnama and co point out that neurons contain many light sensitive molecules, such as porphyrin rings, flavinic, pyridinic rings, lipid chromophores and aromatic amino acids. In particular, mitochondria, the machines inside cells which produce energy, contain several prominent chromophores.
    The presence of light sensitive molecules makes it hard to imagine how they might not be not influenced by biophotons.,,,
    They go on to suggest that the light channelled by microtubules can help to co-ordinate activities in different parts of the brain. It’s certainly true that electrical activity in the brain is synchronised over distances that cannot be easily explained. Electrical signals travel too slowly to do this job, so something else must be at work.,,,
    (So) It’s a big jump to assume that photons do this job.
    http://www.technologyreview.co.....the-brain/

    Of related note to “It’s certainly true that electrical activity in the brain is synchronised over distances that cannot be easily explained”, the following paper comments on ‘zero time lag’ in synchronous brain activity:

    ,,, zero time lag neuronal synchrony despite long conduction delays – 2008
    Excerpt: Multielectrode recordings have revealed zero time lag synchronization among remote cerebral cortical areas. However, the axonal conduction delays among such distant regions can amount to several tens of milliseconds. It is still unclear which mechanism is giving rise to isochronous discharge of widely distributed neurons, despite such latencies,,,
    Remarkably, synchrony of neuronal activity is not limited to short-range interactions within a cortical patch. Interareal synchronization across cortical regions including interhemispheric areas has been observed in several tasks (7, 9, 11–14).,,,
    Beyond its functional relevance, the zero time lag synchrony among such distant neuronal ensembles must be established by mechanisms that are able to compensate for the delays involved in the neuronal communication. Latencies in conducting nerve impulses down axonal processes can amount to delays of several tens of milliseconds between the generation of a spike in a presynaptic cell and the elicitation of a postsynaptic potential (16). The question is how, despite such temporal delays, the reciprocal interactions between two brain regions can lead to the associated neural populations to fire in unison (i.e. zero time lag).,,,
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pm.....MC2575223/

  32. 32
    bornagain77 says:

    In the following video, Stuart Hameroff, who is an anesthesiologist, comments on the ‘spooky’ zero time lag synchronization of the brain and the permanence (i.e. conservation), of quantum information..

    Quantum Entangled Consciousness – Life After Death – Stuart Hameroff – video (1:58 minute mark)
    https://youtu.be/jjpEc98o_Oo?t=117

    Moreover, when we sleep the non-local, beyond space and time, coherence displayed by the waking brain disappears.
    At the 18:00 minute mark to about the 22:15 minute mark of the following video, an interesting experiment is highlighted on the sleeping brain in which a fairly profound difference in coherence is shown in the way the brain ‘shares information’ between different parts of the brain in its sleeping state compared to how the brain ‘shares information’ in its waking state. In the sleeping state, the brain shares much less information with different parts of the brain than the brain does during our waking state.

    Through The Wormhole s02e01 Is There Life After Death – video (17:46 minute mark)
    https://youtu.be/xpi5lLxJwZw?list=PLUfsLhmqv8mOKW0d4ldRZGL-9Zpu9633S&t=1066

    As well, it should be noted that Hameroff’s Orch-Or model for quantum consciousness has fairly strong preliminary confirmation

    Penrose/Hameroff’s infamous Orch-Or model for quantum consciousness has preliminary confirmation from the first direct test for it. In a fascinating new study, the chemical anesthetic 1-azidoanthracine was administered to tadpoles and found to work by disrupting microtubules in the nervous system. A second chemical which repaired the microtubules was found to restore consciousness.,,,
    Direct modulation of microtubule stability contributes to anthracene general anesthesia. – 2013
    Excerpt: Recently, we identified 1-aminoanthracene as a fluorescent general anesthetic. To investigate the mechanism of action, a photoactive analogue, 1-azidoanthracene, was synthesized. Administration of 1-azidoanthracene to albino stage 40-47 tadpoles was found to immobilize animals upon near-UV irradiation of the forebrain region. The immobilization was often reversible, but it was characterized by a longer duration consistent with covalent attachment of the ligand to functionally important targets.,,,
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23484901

    And further confirmation for Hameroff’s model is found here:

    New Study Favors Quantum Mind – Quantum coherence in brain protein resembles plant photosynthesis – 18-Sep-2014
    Excerpt: Photosynthesis, the ubiquitous and essential mechanism by which plants produce food from sunlight, has been shown since 2006 to routinely utilize quantum coherence (quantum coherent superposition) at warm temperatures.,,,
    Back in the brain, microtubules are components of the cytoskeleton inside neurons, cylindrical lattice polymers of the protein ‘tubulin’.,,, now it appears quantum mechanisms eerily similar to those in photosynthesis may operate in tubulins within microtubules.
    In an article published September 17,, a team of scientists,, used computer simulation and theoretical quantum biophysics to analyze quantum coherence among tryptophan pi resonance rings in tubulin, the component protein in microtubules.,,,
    (They) mapped locations of the tryptophan pi electron resonance clouds in tubulin, and found them analogous to (the quantum coherent superposition of) chromophores in photosynthesis proteins.,,,
    Along with recent evidence for coherent megahertz vibrations in microtubules, and that anesthetics act to erase consciousness via microtubules, quantum brain biology will become increasingly important.,,
    http://www.newswise.com/articl.....sone_share

    Of related note:

    Molecular Biology – 19th Century Materialism meets 21st Century Quantum Mechanics – video
    https://www.facebook.com/philip.cunningham.73/videos/vb.100000088262100/1141908409155424/?type=2&theater

    Verse and Music

    Matthew 22:37
    Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’

    EVANESCENCE – Wake me up Inside
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdGMjSPDjR8

  33. 33
    bornagain77 says:

    Me Think, you, (materialistic caveat: if there were even such a person that was called ‘you’ for me to address instead of just an illusion of a brain who thinks it is a person), YOU, despite being shown scientific evidence to the contrary, again dogmatically and falsely claimed that mind does not interact with matter. So to repeat and add to the evidence of mind interacting with matter:
    ‘Brain Plasticity’, the ability to alter the structure of the brain from a person’s focused intention, has now been established by Jeffrey Schwartz, as well as among other researchers.    

    The Case for the Soul – InspiringPhilosophy – (4:03 minute mark, Brain Plasticity including Schwartz’s work) – Oct. 2014 – video
    The Mind is able to modify the brain (brain plasticity). Moreover, Idealism explains all anomalous evidence of personality changes due to brain injury, whereas physicalism cannot explain mind.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBsI_ay8K70

    Moreover, completely contrary to materialistic thought, mind has been now also been shown to be able to reach all the way down and have pronounced effects on the gene expression of our bodies:

    Scientists Finally Show How Your Thoughts Can Cause Specific Molecular Changes To Your Genes, – December 10, 2013
    Excerpt: “To the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper that shows rapid alterations in gene expression within subjects associated with mindfulness meditation practice,” says study author Richard J. Davidson, founder of the Center for Investigating Healthy Minds and the William James and Vilas Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
    “Most interestingly, the changes were observed in genes that are the current targets of anti-inflammatory and analgesic drugs,” says Perla Kaliman, first author of the article and a researcher at the Institute of Biomedical Research of Barcelona, Spain (IIBB-CSIC-IDIBAPS), where the molecular analyses were conducted.,,,
    the researchers say, there was no difference in the tested genes between the two groups of people at the start of the study. The observed effects were seen only in the meditators following mindfulness practice. In addition, several other DNA-modifying genes showed no differences between groups, suggesting that the mindfulness practice specifically affected certain regulatory pathways.
    http://www.tunedbody.com/scien.....ges-genes/

    Moreover, Dean Radin, who spent years at Princeton testing different aspects of consciousness, recently performed experiments testing the possible role of consciousness in the double slit. His results were, not so surprisingly, very supportive of consciousness’s pivotal role in the experiment:

    Consciousness and the double-slit interference pattern: six experiments – Radin – 2012
    Abstract: A double-slit optical system was used to test the possible role of consciousness in the collapse of the quantum wavefunction. The ratio of the interference pattern’s double-slit spectral power to its single-slit spectral power was predicted to decrease when attention was focused toward the double slit as compared to away from it. Each test session consisted of 40 counterbalanced attention-toward and attention-away epochs, where each epoch lasted between 15 and 30 s(seconds). Data contributed by 137 people in six experiments, involving a total of 250 test sessions, indicate that on average the spectral ratio decreased as predicted (z = -4:36, p = 6·10^-6). Another 250 control sessions conducted without observers present tested hardware, software, and analytical procedures for potential artifacts; none were identified (z = 0:43, p = 0:67). Variables including temperature, vibration, and signal drift were also tested, and no spurious influences were identified. By contrast, factors associated with consciousness, such as meditation experience, electrocortical markers of focused attention, and psychological factors including openness and absorption, significantly correlated in predicted ways with perturbations in the double-slit interference pattern. The results appear to be consistent with a consciousness-related interpretation of the quantum measurement problem.
    http://www.deanradin.com/paper.....0final.pdf

    Psychophysical (i.e.,  mind–matter) interactions with a double-slit interference pattern –
    Dean Radin, Leena Michel, James Johnston, and Arnaud Delorme – December 2013
    Abstract: Previously  reported  experiments  suggested  that  interference  patterns  generated  by  a double-slit  optical  system  were  perturbed  by  a  psychophysical  (i.e.,  mind–matter)  interaction. Three new experiments were conducted to further investigate this phenomenon. The first study consisted of 50 half-hour test sessions where participants concentrated their attention-toward or -away from a double-slit system located 3 m away. The spectral magnitude and phase associated with the double-slit component of the interference pattern were compared between the two attention conditions, and the combined results provided evidence for an interaction,,,. One  hundred  control  sessions  using  the  same  equipment,  protocol  and  analysis, but   without   participants   present,   showed   no   effect,,,.
    The second experiment used a duplicate double-slit system and similar test protocol, but it was conducted over the Internet by streaming data to participants’ web browsers. Some 685 people from six continents contributed 2089 experimental sessions. Results were similar to those observed in the first experiment, but smaller in magnitude,,,. Data from 2303 control sessions, conducted automatically every 2 h using the same equipment but without observers showed no effect. Distance between participants and the optical system, ranging from 1 km to 18,000 km, showed no correlation with experimental effect size. The third experiment used a newly designed double-slit system, a revised test protocol, and a simpler method of statistical analysis. Twenty sessions contributed by 10 participants successfully replicated  the  interaction  effect  observed  in  the  first  two  studies.
    http://deanradin.com/evidence/.....ys2013.pdf

    Moreover, there is the Quantum Zeno effect

    “It has been experimentally confirmed,, that unstable particles will not decay, or will decay less rapidly, if they are observed. Somehow, observation changes the quantum system. We’re talking pure observation, not interacting with the system in any way.”
    Douglas Ell – Counting to God – pg. 189 – 2014 – Douglas Ell graduated early from MIT, where he double majored in math and physics. He then obtained a masters in theoretical mathematics from the University of Maryland. After graduating from law school, magna cum laude, he became a prominent attorney.

    ‘Zeno effect’ verified: Atoms won’t move while you watch – Oct. 22, 2015
    Excerpt: One of the oddest predictions of quantum theory – that a system can’t change while you’re watching it,,,
    Graduate students Yogesh Patil and Srivatsan Chakram created and cooled a gas of about a billion Rubidium atoms inside a vacuum chamber and suspended the mass between laser beams. In that state the atoms arrange in an orderly lattice just as they would in a crystalline solid. But at such low temperatures the atoms can “tunnel” from place to place in the lattice. ,,,
    The researchers demonstrated that they were able to suppress quantum tunneling merely by observing the atoms.
    http://www.news.cornell.edu/st.....-you-watch

    Interaction-free measurements by quantum Zeno stabilization of ultracold atoms – 14 April 2015
    Excerpt: In our experiments, we employ an ultracold gas in an unstable spin configuration, which can undergo a rapid decay. The object—realized by a laser beam—prevents this decay because of the indirect quantum Zeno effect and thus, its presence can be detected without interacting with a single atom.
    http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2.....S-20150415

    The Mental Universe – Richard Conn Henry – Professor of Physics John Hopkins University
    Excerpt: The only reality is mind and observations, but observations are not of things. To see the Universe as it really is, we must abandon our tendency to conceptualize observations as things.,,, Physicists shy away from the truth because the truth is so alien to everyday physics. A common way to evade the mental universe is to invoke “decoherence” – the notion that “the physical environment” is sufficient to create reality, independent of the human mind. Yet the idea that any irreversible act of amplification is necessary to collapse the wave function is known to be wrong: in “Renninger-type” experiments, the wave function is collapsed simply by your human mind seeing nothing. The universe is entirely mental,,,, The Universe is immaterial — mental and spiritual. Live, and enjoy.
    http://henry.pha.jhu.edu/The.mental.universe.pdf

  34. 34
    Me_Think says:

    Origenes @ 30

    Are you deliberately playing dumb? Ok, I explain the simple point one time. Further I demand your apologies or I’m out of this discussion.

    I couldn’t care less.

    Did you get that? Do you now understand that “without being physically touched” implies that there is no “classical” mechanism involved and how this contradicts your claims?

    Hmm… No. May be Spirits help?

    Fine, now start again by reading my former post.

    I am used to giving orders, not taking orders from others- especially people who think spirits are shrink-wrapped on body.

  35. 35
    Me_Think says:

    BA77
    Your personal incredulity is not a proof against evolution. Do you think the Creator personally designed and fixed brains in our heads?

  36. 36
    bornagain77 says:

    says the man whose only argument boils down to one of personal incredulity

    i.e.

    “Hmm… No. May be Spirits help?”

    The hypocrisy is stunning!

  37. 37
    groovamos says:

    Me_Think: From when did a 1975s book on amazon become a research paper ? Going by the review, the book cited is not a collection of research papers, but anecdotes on LSD effect on brain.

    From when did an 1853 book on Amazon become a research paper? The book is not a collection of research papers but anecdotes on trips to exotic lands and the postulated effects of environments on species. Unlike Principia Mathematica, it is not a foundation of anything. Yes you got that right.

    COEX is nothing more than matrix of nomenclature for Long Term and Short Term memory and a bunch of Chakras. Unlike Principia Mathematica, it is not a foundation of anything. The reason COEX System needs to be validated by research is because it describes non-existent energetic pathways called Chakra. Interestingly, even the Chakras are affected by drugs

    You know nothing of this. The history of these brave patients undergoing radical psychotherapy is their stories which you have chosen to view as invalid. These patients describe chronic psychological problems as being tied together with clusters of traumatic memories of which the child’s psyche generates personality disorders. The patients themselves describe these traumatic memories as clustering around the disorder to which they suffer. These UNCONSCIOUS (until therapy) memories form a dynamic system with the disorder. You can try to refute this until you are blue in the face, but you are essentially telling us that these patients over a 16 year period of a research program know less than you.

    This is the way it works with these substances, and the success with the treatment for addiction is the calling card for this field of research.

    Can you show any research on dualism or spirit that supports your world view that mind is different from brain

    That’s what I have been doing, and you are proving to be hostile to the evidence because of your philosophical commitment (which has nothing to do with science BTW). This is not reductionist science I am discussing. There is no way reductionist science can refute this evidence, because it is akin to any of the social sciences. The evidence must be taken as the huge body that it is and you are hostile towards it. And I noticed you did not find any of Grof’s research associates in Europe to refute his book and the conceptual framework it contains.

    Dude the body of evidence for dualism in this field is so huge and overwhelming that your argumentation is nothing. None of the players in the field from this country are philosophical materialists. I’ll quote from Grof chapter 4. Remember, Maslow formed his partnership with Grof after reading the book. Here is the short definition of the transpersonal realm from the review: In short, the mind is experienced as existing beyond the confines of space-time.

    Grof chapter 4: “The individual comes to realize, through these [perinatal] experiences, that no matter what he does in his life, he cannot escape the inevitable; he will have to leave this world bereft of everything that he has accumulated and achieved and to which he has been emotionally attached. The similarity between birth and death-the startling realization that the beginning of life is the same as its end-is the major philosophical issue that accompanies the perinatal experiences. The other important consequence of the shocking emotional and physical encounter with the phenomenon of death is the opening up of areas of spiritual and religious experiences that appear to be an intrinsic part of the human personality and are independent of the individual’s cultural and religious background and programming. In my experience, everyone who has reached these levels develops convincing insights into the utmost relevance of the spiritual and religious dimensions in the universal scheme of things. Even hard-core materialists, positively oriented scientists, skeptics and cynics, and uncompromising Marxist philosophers suddenly became interested in a spiritual search after they confronted these levels in themselves. (pp 95-96)

    See here is the thing working against you. There are almost a dozen requests per day from psychiatrists in the West for information to undergo training in this field. The training requires the practitioner to undergo experiential sessions with psilocybin. You can argue all day with the extensive findings in this huge and growing field. Your arguments are nothing, because you are ignorant of the field of study.

  38. 38

    @Me_think

    The term spirit is a subjective term, it is the foundation for other subjective terms such as beauty.

    Obviously one cannot make the concept of subjectivity work without terms referring to things, the existence of which things is a matter of opinion.

    You cannot make the concept of subjectivity work with everything in existence being a matter of fact issue, the fact being it exists, or the fact being it does not exists. Subjectivity works with opinion, not fact.

    You said you accepted freedom is real. Then why wouldn’t the existence of some things in reality be established in a free way? That you are not forced by evidence to the conclusion it exists, but that you establish the existence of it by expression of emotion with free will, resulting in an opinion that it does, or does not, exist.

    http://creationistischreveil.nl/creationism

  39. 39
    Me_Think says:

    groovamos @ 37

    From when did an 1853 book on Amazon become a research paper? The book is not a collection of research papers but anecdotes on trips to exotic lands and the postulated effects of environments on species. Unlike Principia Mathematica, it is not a foundation of anything. Yes you got that right.

    I wonder how many peer reviewed journals were there in 1853 and in 1975 ?

    This is the way it works with these substances, and the success with the treatment for addiction is the calling card for this field of research.

    That is not a reason to not validate Chakras – if they exist at all.

    Dude the body of evidence for dualism in this field is so huge and overwhelming that your argumentation is nothing. None of the players in the field from this country are philosophical materialists. I’ll quote from Grof chapter 4. Remember, Maslow formed his partnership with Grof after reading the book. Here is the short definition of the transpersonal realm from the review: In short, the mind is experienced as existing beyond the confines of space-time.

    Drug users do enter the k-hole zone routinely because of chemicals effect on brain. How did Grof go from there to concluding that mind is beyond space-time? There is no methodology that describes how he arrived at this profound conclusion.

    See here is the thing working against you. There are almost a dozen requests per day from psychiatrists in the West for information to undergo training in this field. The training requires the practitioner to undergo experiential sessions with psilocybin.

    I am surprised that there are just dozen requests for getting stoned legally.

    Your arguments are nothing, because you are ignorant of the field of study

    It seems the proponents themselves are ignorant – they have no idea of Chakras mechanisms or of how mind becomes something beyond space-time.

  40. 40
    Me_Think says:

    mohammadnursyamsu @ 38

    You cannot make the concept of subjectivity work with everything in existence being a matter of fact issue, the fact being it exists, or the fact being it does not exists. Subjectivity works with opinion, not fact.

    So spirits might exist for you but not for me, since it is subjective opinion and not a fact ? I am fine with that.

  41. 41
    tjguy says:

    Materialist scientists can make up all the stories they want to about Multiverses, abiogenesis, space aliens, how this and that evolved, etc., but until they can demostrate their stories are true, there are many people who will not be convinced.

    Science will never replace religion. The battle is not between religion and science but between Materialism and Judeo Christian worldviews.

    Materialism cannot prove it’s origins beliefs scientifically any more than Christians can prove theirs scientifically.

  42. 42
    bornagain77 says:

    semi related:

    A Christian Perspective on Brain-Computer Interfaces
    April 11, 2016 By Dr. Fazale Rana
    Excerpt: Even though Rosemary Johnson and other members of the Paramusical Ensemble haven’t been able to communicate for nearly 30 years because of brain damage, they still retained the ability to conceive music. Thanks to the brain-computer interface, that capability is unleashed, anew.
    If human cognitive ability is merely the manifestation of brain activity, then how is it that Johnson’s damaged brain still has the capacity to compose music? And why would she have such a deep-seated desire to do so? Without the benefit of brain-computer interface studies, it would be tempting to view the communication disability of brain-damaged patients as a loss of cognitive capacity. But this is clearly not the case. Instead, it appears to me that Rosemary Johnson’s identity and musical capabilities have been retained, in spite of the damage to her brain. To put it another way, it appears that her mind is distinct from her brain, consistent with the tenants of Christian theology.
    Brain Relates to Mind Like Hardware Relates to Software
    The results of the brain-computer musical interface studies can be interpreted through a hardware-software analogy. Accordingly, the brain corresponds to the computer hardware and the mind to the software. For a computer system to operate, both the hardware and software have to be functional and must work together. In like manner, I argue that both the brain and the mind have to be intact and working in combination for a human being to be fully functional and expressive. If computer hardware is damaged, the software can’t execute. Accordingly, if the brain is damaged, the mind becomes trapped, though it may still function perfectly. When the researchers from Plymouth University and the Royal Hospital for Neuro-disability produced the brain-computer music interface, they used it to bypass the disabled musicians’ brain damage, creating a conduit for the mind to manifest.
    On the other hand, if human capability stems from brain activity alone, then when the hardware is damaged the lost capabilities should be non-retrievable. And yet, they are.,,,
    http://www.reasons.org/article.....interfaces

  43. 43

    @Me_think

    You are not understanding how subjectivity works (hint: it works in a different way as objectivity works)

Leave a Reply