Posted on 11/11/2004 3:44:08 AM PST by Lindykim
And I would argue that pain and emotions, though they may have their source in bodily troubles, are not experienced as such by the body, but by the mind.
But I imagine this cuts no ice with you, js1138, for the simple reason that you make no distinction between body and mind, seeing the latter as mere epiphenomenon of the former. But this strikes me as a grostesque reductionism. For the mind often (usually) works independently of organic processes taking place in the physical body, most of which we are typically unaware of in any case. To that extent, indeed the mind "had a life of its own." And we can freely direct it to the objects we wish to think about, without having to get the body's "permission" first, so to speak.
It's good that you don't believe everything that passes by. Apply that skepticism to the materialistic version of origins.
I did some checking and Voltaire's time-frame was 100 years till the demise of Christianity (not a couple of generations) which would have come to pass around 1880. His house was turned into a center for the distribution of bibles within 50 years of his death.
At first glance this seems to be axiomatic. If a finger felt pain without the mind, a severed hand should react the same as an attached hand to an external pain stimulus like flame.
Let me know when you have a credible source.
If I might add one other point - pain is relative. One person may shake off an event that immobilizes another. Likewise, one might feel pain without any physical cause at all - dread, loneliness, Kerry's loss, etc.
So we've actually observed the curvature of space-time? What kind of instrument do you use to see this? Which instrument is it that allows you to observe quarks? Which one allows you to observe electrons? There is a whole lot of indirect evidence for all of these things, but there is no direct observation of them whatsoever.
No, I take stances that show strength, determination, and conviction.
WHEN I'M RIGHT.
Sorry, look, you have the right to think what you want, I guess I'll leave it at that.
If you are an 'evolutionist' then that "hilarious story" is Your creation story.
I've debated many atheists, agnostics, and Christian Humanists. One thing I've discovered is that virtually None of them truly knows the true extent of their worldview......and certainly not the consequences of it. They know of the theories, and can discuss those, just as evolutionists in here can. But when the debate goes beyond the theories to the "first principle" {creation story}, almost every one I've debated reacted with shock and even derision......."I don't believe that....you must be crazy!!!". And my response to them is what it is to you: do some research. Connect the dots between the 'godless' theory of evolution to the "matter is all there is" creation story and its consequences...... understood very well by the likes of Nietzsche, Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, and that cabal.
Excellent points, Alamo-Girl! And certainly true, based on obbseration and experience.
No matter how sophisticated and/or advanced the technology is, in the end it is as much a captive of mankinds' 'senses' as is man.
We can only know what our senses allow us to know. We are completely blind, deaf, and dumb to anything that exists beyond the outermost reaches of our senses.
There could be a dozen more primary colors in addition to the 3 we know, but we would be blind to them.
Mankinds science is good for some things, but we should never allow it to become the final authority, since it can only know what mans' senses allow it to know.
snip..."Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends. There are some things we don't want to know. Important things.
As I said in another response in this thread, science can only know what mankinds' 'senses' allow him to know. There are levels of sound which we believe exist by virtue of how animals react......but we can't hear them, and in the final analysis, we can only speculate/theorize that they exist. For all we know in our ignorance induced by our senses, another dimensional realm could be in co-existence with ours right now and we would never know it.
Don't worship science {man}.
Awe and wonder will never cease; there are no concrete answers when it comes to this World.
The profundity of your response was as deep and as informed as a blank sheet of paper.
The discerning mind would not confuse mathematical theories with speculative ones.
snip....WHEN I"M RIGHT
In this one you are wrong. Do some reasearch on the "creation story" of the evolutionists and you'll discover not just its existence, but that I was poking fun at it by speaking of it sarcastically.
Of course you are absolutely correct. It was not science that gave birth to darwinism but the philosophy of materialism.
A missing limb that itches or feels pain should, under normal circumstances, convince the reasonable person that those sensations occur in the mind.
You would think so, Dataman! Thanks for the great observation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.