Evidence for God from Science

Make me a believer,explain it into the way I understand best which is facts.

what makes you think we would want to do that.

If you believe in souls then explain it to me into a scientific description.

Science is too young to understand the idea of the soul. It needs to go a long way. They are still trying to look inside quarks. I think when they reach the most sub atomic particle in the universe, perhaps that day you can ask what a soul is made up of.

Science is too young to understand the idea of the soul. It needs to go a long way. They are still trying to look inside quarks. I think when the reach the most sub atomic particle in the universe, perhaps that day you can ask what a soul is made up of.

Perfect!

CaptainBeatDown wrote:That's all lovely and such. Doesn't answer me though. I know I exist,if there's a cause and affect of my actions in this world. I am also aware that other things in this world do exist,I can die any moment just as anything else. I feel as if everything is extremely real,and I will not choose to believe that everything is "external" and could be an illusion. If I can see it and touch it,it's not an illusion unless I'm schizophrenic. But I have not been diagnosed with such an illness. Although the concept of a soul is an illusion,I do not see or touch it. I have not seen ghosts. I have to see and touch it. If not,then the idea of me believing in a soul is an idea that is an illusion. If you're telling me not to wonder about trivial things then what's the point of having a section called "Questions for Christians?" Or going in here and browsing topics and responding? Wouldn't that be as trivial too? You're telling me there's no point in trying and debate about things,but you put enough concern to read and reply to this topic. That's hypocritical. All I'm asking for is an answer,and as earlier I want science,none of this talk of illusions.

Let's just start from here... not that I think science is bad, nor is empiricism/rationality... but we have to realize that science already presupposes things and it can't be the basis for an intelligible worldview if it's foundation is already based upon another.. I can't give you a scientific answer because honestly, science is boring compared to how awesome philosophy is...which it presupposes... if we're talking about secular science, or the unbelieving worldview (i'm gonna assume that your an agnostic from the way you present your argument, if not, i'm sorry) they already presuppose freedom over their body, and their actions. But the cool thing about the soul is it is immaterial. It may seem stupid to believe in the soul but I think it's cool how it can be "proved to the contrary," as Greg Bahnsen once said. Science already presupposes things like logic, metaphysical truths like other minds exist, and self verification of the past so we have to work from there and then build a worldview that makes sense of logic and reason.

Let's start with the first premise, all we are is just matter in motion, which is most commonly the atheist worldview... it may seem like it's okay but in this worldview nothing can be known to be true other than one's own existence.

I'll hit on the first point

Reasoning-- How, within a universe where all there is is matter in motion can you justify any free decisions that you make? That is to say if all our thoughts are nothing more than biochemical responses to the world around us then everything is already determined to have a guaranteed result.. That's where you get into the idea that "choice" is just an illusion, and if that's the case then nothing can be known to the external world, think of the way an alka seltzer reacts to water, it's not "reasoning," nor are we.

the second point is

the senses (empiricism)- while it may seem like we can trust our reasoning and our senses and it seems like a silly question to even ask, if all we are are just matter then what we see may as well be illusory. Whenever you identify something, like a duck, or a car, you put that specific item into a category... that category is specific to that thing and is known as a concept. Concepts can be things you've never actually felt/tasted/seen/heard/smelled before, like numbers or letters... yet the universe obeys immaterial laws that we can conceive of. Concepts are by definition immaterial, so given your method of everything having to be physical or observable you cannot justify a system of thought to even get off the ground. The way you gain knowledge is through concepts... at the end of the day all you have is mindless matter in brain tissue and the end result isn't logic but rather mindless matter in motion.

I could go into more but it's getting late and people on here are WAY better at explaining things than I am.

In short, even Aristotle believed in a soul, the best way i can describe it is... if this material body can make sense of immaterial things like concepts it questions whether or not what we see, the fact that something is what it is and is not what it is not (consistency) says the same thing about us deep down inside. This consistent soul that never ceases to exist.

Maybe we can get more into solipsism, the forms, and other things later on but this is all i can write for right now. Stick around because this is an intriguing forum.

IS IT WRONG TO BE CURIOUS AND WANT TO MAKE SENSE OUT OF THINGS?

I have one question for you Captainbeatdown

WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF MEANING?

There was that one dude who measured the weight of the soul and nobody to date has been able to disprove it....

neo-x wrote:

Make me a believer,explain it into the way I understand best which is facts.

what makes you think we would want to do that.

If you believe in souls then explain it to me into a scientific description.

Science is too young to understand the idea of the soul. It needs to go a long way. They are still trying to look inside quarks. I think when they reach the most sub atomic particle in the universe, perhaps that day you can ask what a soul is made up of.

"what makes you think we would want to do that. "
Isn't this evidence of god from science,you're a member of this place,aren't you?
Many theoretical physicists are working on the Theory of Everything....
You will hear things like, "Science doesn't know everything." Well, of course science doesn't know everything. But, because science doesn't know everything, it doesn't mean that science knows nothing. Science knows enough for computers to be working, for quite extraordinary miracles to have taken place in terms of the harnessing of the physical world and our dim approaches towards understanding it.
'Whatever concept one may hold, from a metaphysical point of view, concerning the freedom of the will, certainly its appearances, which are human actions, like every other natural event, are determined by universal laws. '

neo-x wrote:

IS IT WRONG TO BE CURIOUS AND WANT TO MAKE SENSE OUT OF THINGS?

I have one question for you Captainbeatdown

WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF MEANING?

: ) I asked a question first,but people were doing the run around.
It's the study of the nature of being and reality.

Computers can have artificial intelligence that can give them personalities,because it's programmed.
Whose to say our personalities aren't programmed in our brains? BY DNA,and amongst other biological factors.
Whose to say we're not nature's robots? Whose to say our minds are computational because we try to make things into meaning and purpose? Whose to say it's not hardwired into our brains to want to make meaning and purpose? Maybe that's why we're so keen on trying to believe in a god,because it's what makes best sense and meaning to us,as well as a soul.
If robotics and computer science created a Humanoid robot that was given abilities to process meaning,and abstract thoughts. Could it perhaps have a soul? I mean since they've programmed that robot into believing concepts,having memories,and etc.
Assuming that artificial thought does not and will never have what appears to be a 'soul'- something by it's all of your definitions cannot be measured, included, or excluded. I think this only reinforces the ambiguity where does the line between man and machine lie? So far a soul just seems as if it's a symbol that denies the absence of meaning.

CaptainBeatDown wrote:Whose to say we're not nature's robots? Whose to say our minds are computational because we try to make things into meaning and purpose? Whose to say it's not hardwired into our brains to want to make meaning and purpose? Maybe that's why we're so keen on trying to believe in a god,because it's what makes best sense and meaning to us,as well as a soul.

CaptainBeatDown wrote:So far a soul just seems as if it's a symbol that denies the absence of meaning.

If we're indeed DNA robots, then your disbelief in the existence of God/soul/purpose is also hardwired into your brain, just as our positive belief.

You forget that DNA doesn't "program" us, it just regulates the production of proteins. Our brains function spontaneously, without a cause that science can pinpoint, and the proteins and "other biological factors" are merely used by our minds to control our bodies in different ways.

kmr wrote:You forget that DNA doesn't "program" us, it just regulates the production of proteins. Our brains function spontaneously, without a cause that science can pinpoint, and the proteins and "other biological factors" are merely used by our minds to control our bodies in different ways.

I said DNA AND other biological factors. that means biological factors and dna are both contributors,not that one solely determines everything. DNA is a huge contributor since chromosomes are composed of both protein and DNA. Which plays a huge role in genes. Our DNA is a mixture of the DNA of both parents and passes on hereditary traits.
A single abnormal gene, the basic biological unit of heredity, produces HD. Genes are composed of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), a molecule shaped like a spiral ladder. Each rung of this ladder is composed of two paired chemicals called bases. There are four types of bases--adenine, thymine, cytosine, and guanine--each abbreviated by the first letter of its name: A, T, C, and G. Certain bases always "pair" together, and different combinations of base pairs join to form coded messages. A gene is a long string of this DNA in various combinations of A, T, C, and G. These unique combinations determine the gene's function, much like letters join together to form words. Each person has about 30,000 genes--a billion base pairs of DNA or bits of information repeated in the nuclei of human cells--which determine individual characteristics or traits. Genetic disorder is an illness caused by abnormalities in genes or chromosomes,you know things that can lead up to neuro-genetic disorders.
Tests are showing that the nervous system of the psychopath is markedly different — they feel less fear and anxiety than normal people. One carefully conducted experiment revealed that "low arousal levels" not only causes impulsiveness and thrill-seeking, but also showed how dense sociopaths are when it comes to changing their behavior.
Genetics and physiological factors also contribute to the building of a psychopath. One study in Copenhagen focused on a group of sociopaths who had been adopted as infants. The biological relatives of sociopaths were 4-5 times more likely to be sociopathic than the average person. Yet genetics don't tell the whole story; it only shows a predisposition to antisocial behavior. Environment can make or break the psychopathic personality.
To add on and correct myself,not only DNA and biological factors. I say Environment,social standings,memories,culture and experiences are also a contributor to people's predispositions of concepts of meaning,souls and etc.
I feel it's very true that biological theories threaten notions of free will. : )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dhj2gRvWn3w

Do these people with huntingtons look like they have much control? HD results from genetically programmed degeneration of nerve cells in certain areas of the brain. This degeneration causes uncontrolled movements, loss of intellectual faculties, and emotional disturbance.

I wrote a huge response to you captainbeatdown and nobody has responded to it, haha. It took me a good while to write that

spartanII wrote:

CaptainBeatDown wrote:That's all lovely and such. Doesn't answer me though. I know I exist,if there's a cause and affect of my actions in this world. I am also aware that other things in this world do exist,I can die any moment just as anything else. I feel as if everything is extremely real,and I will not choose to believe that everything is "external" and could be an illusion. If I can see it and touch it,it's not an illusion unless I'm schizophrenic. But I have not been diagnosed with such an illness. Although the concept of a soul is an illusion,I do not see or touch it. I have not seen ghosts. I have to see and touch it. If not,then the idea of me believing in a soul is an idea that is an illusion. If you're telling me not to wonder about trivial things then what's the point of having a section called "Questions for Christians?" Or going in here and browsing topics and responding? Wouldn't that be as trivial too? You're telling me there's no point in trying and debate about things,but you put enough concern to read and reply to this topic. That's hypocritical. All I'm asking for is an answer,and as earlier I want science,none of this talk of illusions.

Let's just start from here... not that I think science is bad, nor is empiricism/rationality... but we have to realize that science already presupposes things and it can't be the basis for an intelligible worldview if it's foundation is already based upon another.. I can't give you a scientific answer because honestly, science is boring compared to how awesome philosophy is...which it presupposes... if we're talking about secular science, or the unbelieving worldview (i'm gonna assume that your an agnostic from the way you present your argument, if not, i'm sorry) they already presuppose freedom over their body, and their actions. But the cool thing about the soul is it is immaterial. It may seem stupid to believe in the soul but I think it's cool how it can be "proved to the contrary," as Greg Bahnsen once said. Science already presupposes things like logic, metaphysical truths like other minds exist, and self verification of the past so we have to work from there and then build a worldview that makes sense of logic and reason.

Let's start with the first premise, all we are is just matter in motion, which is most commonly the atheist worldview... it may seem like it's okay but in this worldview nothing can be known to be true other than one's own existence.

I'll hit on the first point

Reasoning-- How, within a universe where all there is is matter in motion can you justify any free decisions that you make? That is to say if all our thoughts are nothing more than biochemical responses to the world around us then everything is already determined to have a guaranteed result.. That's where you get into the idea that "choice" is just an illusion, and if that's the case then nothing can be known to the external world, think of the way an alka seltzer reacts to water, it's not "reasoning," nor are we.

the second point is

the senses (empiricism)- while it may seem like we can trust our reasoning and our senses and it seems like a silly question to even ask, if all we are are just matter then what we see may as well be illusory. Whenever you identify something, like a duck, or a car, you put that specific item into a category... that category is specific to that thing and is known as a concept. Concepts can be things you've never actually felt/tasted/seen/heard/smelled before, like numbers or letters... yet the universe obeys immaterial laws that we can conceive of. Concepts are by definition immaterial, so given your method of everything having to be physical or observable you cannot justify a system of thought to even get off the ground. The way you gain knowledge is through concepts... at the end of the day all you have is mindless matter in brain tissue and the end result isn't logic but rather mindless matter in motion.

I could go into more but it's getting late and people on here are WAY better at explaining things than I am.

In short, even Aristotle believed in a soul, the best way i can describe it is... if this material body can make sense of immaterial things like concepts it questions whether or not what we see, the fact that something is what it is and is not what it is not (consistency) says the same thing about us deep down inside. This consistent soul that never ceases to exist.

Maybe we can get more into solipsism, the forms, and other things later on but this is all i can write for right now. Stick around because this is an intriguing forum.

I'm sorry that I didn't respond earlier,thank you very much for your response and your thoughts. And taking the time to type it out. I agree philosophy is very awesome,and the fact we are able to reason and explore possibilities and imagine is amazing.

" Concepts are by definition immaterial, so given your method of everything having to be physical or observable you cannot justify a system of thought to even get off the ground. " Never thought about it like that,interesting,thanks. It's very insightful and the way you broke it down makes it very easy to grasp. Again,thank you.

Your welcome. The best person to listen to is Greg Bahnsen, here he goes into concepts and how the materialist can't make sense of his or her own worldview.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5_aS4EG ... er&list=UL

If we can have a topic about "the forms" (as plato put it) one day that'll blow your mind...

Our Soul is our Mind, Will and Emotions-
Animals also have souls-They have a mind, a will and emotions-They have a personality of their own.
However, animals are not spiritual beings.

There are a lot of people that don't understand the Spirit, Soul and Body connection-The three parts of a human being-
God is Spirit and we are made in His image-
We are also a Spirit being- We are made up of three parts-Spirit, Soul and Body-
Our Spirit lives forever and will never die.
Our Soul-is our Mind, Will and Emotions-
Our physical body is like our house {aka} temple, that houses our Spirit and Soul-
Whenever the Spirit and Soul depart the physical body there is no more life contained within the physical body-For Life is in the Spirit-
Whenever the spirit and soul of mankind depart the physical body, this is called "physical death".
For those who have never been born-again they are spiritually dead-This is why they do not understand the things of the spirit and/or spiritual things-
Adam and Eve walked in the spirit until they stole the fruit off the tree that God had told them not to touch.
Our sanctification begins when the spirit of man is recreated through the new birth (John 3:3).

Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit, soul and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."
(1 Thessalonians 5:23)

"And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being [nephesh – soul]."
(Genesis 2:7)

Mankind is a tri-partite being – which consist of spirit, soul and body. It is with his/her spirit that a man worships God.

Life is in the Spirit and the Spirit never dies!

I Hope this helps-

Well said Tiffany