/lit/ - Literature

>>18841894
> materialist thought proves only the material exist

>>18841903
Not only that but these men have clearly never done dmt or shrooms or acid

>>18841894
Consciousness has also been ruled out at a particle level, yet I appear to have it anyway.

>>18841909
lol, imagine getting obliterated by a channer. goddamn.

>>18841894
>soul
>physical level
Cox didn't start with the Greeks

>>18841916
the immortality of the soul is an Eastern doctrine, Egyptians held it first

>an arbitrary system established by people have reached arbitrary limits
this is such a narrow-minded and sheltered view it makes me almost physically sick
do people really have their own heads up their asses?
how do we wake them up?

>>18841919
The Egyptians got it from the Atlanteans

>>18841919
get a globe and a compass

>>18841894
Obviously the soul isn't made out of particles, what a bunch of dumbfucks.

>>18841903
The church fathers would be preaching modern "materialist thought" if alive today. Why haven't you adapted?

I can't wait until they rule out the western canon on a particle level

>>18841907
The sheer arrogance of people who make statements like this in public is astounding. You’d think that scientists, who’s role is to utilize trial and error to understand the world would have a less solipsistic mindset

>>18841894
There is no such thing as god.

>>18841919
There is no way we can trace pythagorean and orphic conceptions of the immortality of the soul back to near eastern ideas with certainty even if some people have guessed at it.

Not saying Egyptians didn't have it first just that maybe it arises independently in different regions because it's true.

>>18841944
And if you had two wheels you’d be a bicycle

>>18841903
only material does exist...LOL I can't believe people in 2021 aren't materialists.

>>18841951
>Not saying Egyptians didn't have it first just that maybe it arises independently in different regions because it's true.
I've been reading Sumerian and other near-east bronze age mythology and the Egyptians seem to be the only ones who came up first with the immortality of the soul. The other mythologies just make a vague mention of the afterlife as some ugly and dark cave you'll never get out of.

I hate how smug scientists are when they deliver this news.

Could they at least adopt a sombre tone when telling us this awful news?

Why do they seem to revel in reducing the world to a meaningless nothing?

>physicists ruled out soul at particle level
>marine biologists ruled out soul at aquatic level
>meteorologists ruled out soul at atmospheric level
>local anesthesiologist ruled out soul being in his nitrous tank, either
>some car mechanic looked under the hood of a customer's car, didn't find a soul, must not exist
>checked under my shoe, no soul there, hmph

materialists be like

>>18841972
it supports their 'yolo'-tier attitude, justifying hedonism the view that nothing matters, so you can do anything
it is pure evil, evil of a level of a clueless 14-year old girl.

>>18841894
What would cocks even know about Life after Death?

>>18841982
kek

SOVLLESS

>>18841958
Define matter

>>18841894
Well he's going to be in for quite a surprise when he dies lol

>>18841972
Cox isn't even a scientist. By his own admission he struggled with high school level mathematics and physics. He's a brain let choosen by the powers that be to communicate the freshest pronouncements of basedience to the plebeians i.e. more of "we are made of stardust, life is a cosmic accident, nothing matters, fuck underaged children to cope with the void". I would kill all natural scientists if I could

I fucking LOVE basedience

>>18841926
We don't, we imprison them in concentration camps

>>18841926
>>18841939
>>18841948
Please explain why material drugs radically alter how your magical non-material soul functions.

Please also explains why injury to your brain corresponds directly with impairing the cognitive functions you use said part of the brain for.

Do people born with some form of mental retardations have magical normal experiences of an inner world that are just hidden to everyone else?

Is the soul unitary, indivisible per person? If so, why do people with severed connections between both brain hemispheres report different answers to questions depending on which hand writes the answer (corresponding to connections with the opposite hemisphere of the brain) but are unaware of the fact that they give differing answers?

If the soul controls the body, why does the initiation of voluntary movement begin demonstrably BEFORE the sensation of making a choice to move? Why do certain rare forms of brain injury make people feel movements outside their control (e.g. leaves blowing around) are their voluntary choices. Choices their soul chooses to make.

If the soul is magical and unitary, why does human behavior so closely follow the model of disperate specialized systems guiding behavior that we develop based on studying brains? If the brain and the soul interact, how do two things that share no observable interaction interact, and if the soul is perception, the Atman, why is it influenced by the brain?

Epistemological idealism makes sense of course, and all knowledge is shaped by the laws of semiotics, but the positing of magical forces in the material realm has no basis outside feel feels as far as I have seen.

Please answer the questions without referring to me and other eliminativists as bugmen please. Thanks.

>>18842038
unironically this, you can't reason with these lizards

>>18842019
>i.e. more of "we are made of stardust, life is a cosmic accident, nothing matters, fuck underaged children to cope with the void".

Audible kek this is what I come to /lit/ for. God I hate w*stoids so fucking much it's unreal bro

>>18841944

I know. Materialism is Catholic fabrication.

>>18842049
>the music stopped after the radio broke, radio wave fags btfo

>>18842049
bugman

Everyone in this thread should read pic related. He talks to scientists and philosophers of science like Popper and Feyerabend about what they think science is and whether it's "finished." He's not a scientism fag. Great writer too.

He also slam dunked Lawrence Krauss' head into a toilet on the subject of this thread
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/is-lawrence-krauss-a-physicist-or-just-a-bad-philosopher/

>>18842049
bugman

>>18842049

Mostly parallelism.

>>18842049
Also, if any materialists want to argue conciousness is an emergent, but efficient function, please give any example where the actual experience of conciousness is essential to any action of the brain.

Epiphenomenonalism, the idea that conciousness is just an accidental biproduct of information processes should hold as the default theory until such time as conciousness can be shown to take any part in effecting actions.

>scientists literally agree that humans took a series of miracles to exist
checkmate atheists

>>18842098
Which also means everything is predetermined...

Basically epiphenomenonalism with the unwarranted extra step of positing magic on the subjective end.

Our energy just moves on and shifts form. Consciousness is a quirk, that happens given enough time and space.
Spirituality is in human nature, but it's crazy thinking the Bible is actually a word of the God. I don't believe it is, but it is a good story.

>>18841894
buddhism is correct
there is no self to be found in anything experienced including the perception of such

>>18842049
>My thesis now is this: that, when we think of the law that thought is a function of the brain, we are not required to think of productive function only; we are entitled also to consider permissive or transmissive function. And this the ordinary psycho-physiologist leaves out of his account.

>Suppose, for example, that the whole universe of material things—the furniture of earth and choir of heaven—should turn out to be a mere surface-veil of phenomena, hiding and keeping back the world of genuine realities. Such a supposition is foreign neither to common sense nor to philosophy. Common sense believes in realities behind the veil even too superstitiously; and idealistic philosophy declares the whole world of natural experience, as we get it, to be but a time-mask, shattering or refracting the one infinite Thought which is the sole reality into those millions of finite streams of consciousness known to us as our private selves.

>"Life, like a dome of many-colored glass,
>Stains the white radiance of eternity."

>Suppose, now, that this were really so, and suppose, moreover, that the dome, opaque enough at all times to the full super-solar blaze, could at certain times and places grow less so, and let certain beams pierce through into this sublunary world. These beams would be so many finite rays, so to speak, of consciousness, and they would vary in quantity and quality as the opacity varied in degree. Only at particular times and places would it seem that, as a matter of fact, the veil of nature can grow thin and rupturable enough for such effects to occur. But in those places gleams, however finite and unsatisfying, of the absolute life of the universe, are from time to time vouchsafed. Glows of feeling, glimpses of insight, and streams of knowledge and perception float into our finite world.

>>18842129
>Admit now that our brains are such thin and half-transparent places in the veil. What will happen? Why, as the white radiance comes through the dome, with all sorts of staining and distortion imprinted on it by the glass, or as the air now comes through my glottis determined and limited in its force and quality of its vibrations by the peculiarities of those vocal chords which form its gate of egress and shape it into my personal voice, even so the genuine matter of reality, the life of souls as it is in its fullness, will break through our several brains into this world in all sorts of restricted forms, and with all the imperfections and queernesses that characterize our finite individualities here below.

>According to the state in which the brain finds itself, the barrier of its obstructiveness may also be supposed to rise or fall. It sinks so low, when the brain is in full activity, that a comparative flood of spiritual energy pours over. At other times, only such occasional waves of thought as heavy sleep permits get by. And when finally a brain stops acting altogether, or decays, that special stream of consciousness which it subserved will vanish entirely from this natural world. But the sphere of being that supplied the consciousness would still be intact; and in that more real world with which, even whilst here, it was continuous, the consciousness might, in ways unknown to us, continue still.

>You see that, on all these suppositions, our soul's life, as we here know it, would none the less in literal strictness be the function of the brain. The brain would be the independent variable, the mind would vary dependently on it. But such dependence on the brain for this natural life would in no wise make immortal life impossible,—it might be quite compatible with supernatural life behind the veil hereafter.

>>18842011
Is God or Jesus going to be mad? Wait they’re the same right?

>>18842049
Bugman

>>18842109
Did the creation of God require miracles? Or can we just assume he exists?

>>18842112

Was this part of the initial question?

>>18842049
i have only two issues with what you said, and no arguments,
>If the soul controls the body, why does the initiation of voluntary movement begin demonstrably BEFORE the sensation of making a choice to move?
This is by no means proven, and even if it was it doesn't necessarily make any difference, and on top of that, Libel himself didn't consider his own experiments (which he thought did show what you just said) to be evidence against conscious free will because outside of the window of decision (500ms) the participant could just as well decide not to twitch his wrist.

and,
>Epiphenomenonalism should hold as the default theory
This is not how this works. There is no evidence that it doesn't, and both theories are claims needing evidence. The conscious brain may just as well be providing feedback into the unconscious, and vice versa, for whatever that means. All claims on any side of an argument need evidence

>>18841894
I doubt he actually proved anything except that the soul isn't a physical organ, which was never claimed. But I doubt he can comprehend the metaphysical.

Why is total negation such a lame concept.

>>18842049
I, too, have eaten shrooms and such, but I still don't believe in soul (which supposedly is everlasting, undying). Ego is a human constract and as such, can well be shattered and be rid of.
I absolutely believe there's more out there than our senses could ever record, but I don't think it's layed out to us on man made religions either.

>>18842049
The great thing about Hegelian mysticism is that it is compatible with the physical sciences.

The problem for many physicalists is that they forget that their physical terms are just abstractions of mind. To be is to be known. The truth is the whole and the whole is the Absolute.

>>18842073
This

>>18842230
Oh, and the Absolute is God. I am that I am, das sein.

>>18842073
Bad analogy. Radio waves are observable.

The comparable analogy would be if you claimed music was made of unobservable Musicon particles, and I was claiming that music was just compressed air waves.

>>18842049
>Please explain why material drugs radically alter how your magical non-material soul functions.
It "functions" by existing as the unchanging pure awareness which underlies all mental states, in actuality the mind undergoes specific functions while the soul doesn't "function" but rather simply rests in its natural and inalienable state, and thereby provides a foundation for the mind to function.
>Please also explains why injury to your brain corresponds directly with impairing the cognitive functions you use said part of the brain for.
Because cognition occurs within the mind and not within the soul, the soul is the pure awareness that underlies cognitions. In each cognition the awareness which knows it is completely identical with the awareness in every other instance of cognizing, and also the awareness in-between, before and after those cognitions; changes to cognition have no impact on this foundational awareness, being cognitions and mental states are different from it.
>Do people born with some form of mental retardations have magical normal experiences of an inner world that are just hidden to everyone else?
No, there is a problem with their biological brain, but their underlying soul of pure awareness is the same as everyone else's
>Is the soul unitary, indivisible per person?
The soul is unitary and indivisible period, not per person. It's all-pervasive, the same soul dwells in all bodies at once.
>If so, why do people with severed connections between both brain hemispheres report different answers to questions depending on which hand writes the answer (corresponding to connections with the opposite hemisphere of the brain) but are unaware of the fact that they give differing answers?
Because problems in the biological brain impact cognition functions which use the brain like thinking and memory, that's not a change in pure awareness which is the soul, they are not reporting an actual difference in their awareness itself, but its just showing how harming the brain impacts thinking and memory, neither of which are the soul.

>>18842049
>If the soul controls the body, why does the initiation of voluntary movement begin demonstrably BEFORE the sensation of making a choice to move?
The soul doesn't control the body, volition inheres in the mind which is based on the brain. The soul is non-volitional, it is the inner light which illumines the mind and the minds volition.
>Why do certain rare forms of brain injury make people feel movements outside their control (e.g. leaves blowing around) are their voluntary choices. Choices their soul chooses to make.
See above
>If the soul is magical and unitary, why does human behavior so closely follow the model of disperate specialized systems guiding behavior that we develop based on studying brains?
Because human behavior is determined by the human brain/mind, and not the soul or Atman.
>If the brain and the soul interact, how do two things that share no observable interaction interact, and if the soul is perception, the Atman, why is it influenced by the brain?
The brain and soul don't interact because the soul is unchanging, if one thing remains completely unchanged it's not an interaction, (Interaction is a kind of action that occurs as two or more objects have an effect upon one another. The idea of a two-way effect is essential in the concept of interaction, as opposed to a one-way causal effect - wikipedia). The soul observes the brain but observation by definition isn't an interaction. The soul/Atman is not influenced by the brain whatsoever, the brain and mind only induce changes in things which are not the soul.
>Epistemological idealism makes sense of course,
How does it make sense? Can you give an example?
>Please answer the questions without referring to me and other eliminativists as bugmen please. Thanks.
Done

>>18842049
漏洞男人

>>18842265
To clarify the answer to the first question: drugs and surgery etc induce no change whatsoever in the soul which is the underlying pure awareness, they only induce changes and produce impacts on the mind and its mental states.

>>18841894
Yeah

>>18842263
>Radio waves are observable.
this is where radio wave fags are unironically btfo

>>18842263
Consciousness is the condition of observation, how do you suppose we would observe that?

>>18842263
sloppy thinking, grade: C

>>18841894
another scientist doesn't get dualism, again

>>18841894
Brian we all over here chilling with our souls you fucking nerd the only lack of soul you discovered is your own. Honestly if this nerd was right in front of me I would have to beat him up, can't stand these nerds who don't understand soul

Nigga you need to shut your ass up on the particle level

>>18842277
What does it mean for the soul to illuminate the mind?

If the soul has no interaction with the brain, how does it illuminate it?

If the brain causes cognition, and the soul has no interaction with it, how does it do anything at all related to an individual?

And most importantly, what evidence is there for the soul?

>>18842109
>theorise

So, nothing.

>>18842230
kill yourself tranny

>>18842438
everything is a theory, brainlet - even me fucking your mother (even we all "know" it's a fact)

>>18842452
>tautology

Oof.

>>18842129
>>18842136
James was so based. He redeems pragmatism if you forget the damage done by Rorty

>>18842323
So why do you keep comparing it to something observable? Anyways, there are a number of observations we can make, from brain activity to responsiveness to determine if someone is conscious.

>>18841894
Not so fast, stemlords.

>>18841894
No matter your thoughts about religion or spirituality, there is something incredibly sad about the profoundly suicidal and human-hating nature of scientific materialism.
>Yep, sorry buddy but my calculations say you have no "soul", when you die you are literally low quality food for worms, morality or love isn't anything but a uhh reaction between the chemicals in your brain. See, love... pepperonitin and mozzarellitin, see look at this chart, they combine with provolinitin and frenchfrytin when you see her gait and the way she pulls the hat on her head and the way the corners of her mouth look when she smiles and bam, you are infatuated, yeah this is very dry and really reductive if you look at it through the nuance of human experience but lol science is always right, it's not like you need love to survive lol I have never seen a vagina
but boy do I love knowing all the fascinating pop science facts that almost always translate IRL into creating horrible consumerproducts I hate for a society I hate and new inventive ways to make the world worse and worse

>>18842049
Reddit spacing, didn't read

>>18842049
>Is the soul unitary, indivisible per person? If so, why do people with severed connections between both brain hemispheres report different answers to questions depending on which hand writes the answer (corresponding to connections with the opposite hemisphere of the brain) but are unaware of the fact that they give differing answers?

But that's not the case, recent data shows that the consciousness isn't split in such cases

https://academic.oup.com/brain/article/140/5/1231/2951052

>>18842077
John Horgan and Avi Loeb's pieces are the only things worthwhile in Scientific American anymore, I highly recommend them both.

>>18842709
Science isn't really telling us how we should feel about it. You also managed to shove consumerism in there. Humans misuse technology of their own free will. Pepperonitin and mozzarellitin sound delicious though.

>>18842263
Music has been enjoyed for far longer than its constituent parts have been known to be observable.

>>18842426
Youre using the term interaction in an incorrect manner, which the person you're quoting clearly defined

>>18842049
reddit spacing

>>18841972
They just have unresolved issues from being forced to go to church by their parents when they were kids. They don't care if disbelief in God turns the world into a nihilistic shithole, yet for some reason we must still care about justice, fairness, rights, and equality.

>>18842426
>What does it mean for the soul to illuminate the mind?
The soul (consciousness) is the unchanging and self-revealing pure awareness-presence which is the foundation of all mental activity. In every instance of any sort of thought, memory, sensory knowledge, emotion etc, there is always pure awareness that is present there at the same time, these things like thoughts can only be known to begin with *because* they are presented to a presence who precedes, coincides with and remains in their absence. This immediate and constant presence "illumines" the mind when the sentient presence of consciousness whose presence is uninterruptedly revealed to itself provides for the taking place of the mind like how space provides extension for objects, when the mind-functions take place in the same moment as consciousness, it allows the observed object to seem to be integrated via an illusion into the unity of that self-revealing presence, so that it falsely seems to be one with that presence, characterizing it, affecting it, or a part of it despite it being something which because of its non-conscious nature is inextricably different from consciousness.

"Pure consciousness illuminates the material thought-forms of the buddhi (the non-conscious intellect), thereby yielding the appearance of sentient states that are directed towards particular objects and cognitive contents. But from the perspective of pure consciousness this directedness is merely an appearance. Consciousness as such is not directed towards these objects, it has no intention to illuminate the limited material structures in question, and it is completely independent of the mental phenomena upon which its light happens to fall. As exposited by Karl Potter, "whereas ordinary awareness not only has an object but also requires it as the occasion for that specific piece of awareness or judgment, pure consciousness has no more relation to its objects than does the sun that shines on everything without being in the least affected by or dependent on things. (1981, p. 93)."

>>18843160
>If the soul has no interaction with the brain, how does it illuminate it?

A) "Interaction" is a relationship where two or more objects or parties affect (induce a change in) one another
B) Interactions are hence a mutual casual relation (causal effects flow in both directions)
C) Mutual causal relations are to be strictly distinguished from one-sided causal effects, e.g. whatever object is hit by the light emitted by the sun, it makes no impact on the sun, it's a one-sided causal effect that the sun imparts unto other things without itself being impacted or changed thereby in return.
D) The sun illuminating distant objects like Earth and Pluto is not an interaction between the sun and Earth or Pluto for the above reasons, it's a one-sided causal effect or relation.
E) Just as the sun can illuminate planets without being in an interaction (= mutual) with them, just so, consciousness can illuminate mind-contents like thoughts etc without being in an interaction with them. Imparting luminosity to consciousness is an accurate analogy, as just like light, consciousness both reveals itself, as well as non-luminous/non-conscious objects by its light or awareness.
F) Space is also another appropriate analogy for demonstrating how consciousness and thoughts can be different yet coincide, in the example of space, it and the objects it contains coincide without even being in a causal relation, much less a one-sided one.

>If the brain causes cognition, and the soul (consciousness) has no interaction with it, how does it do anything at all related to an individual?
Because specific cognitions which are produced by the brain and which come and go like thoughts are essentially non-conscious material objects. That they are known at all is only because of them coinciding at the same time as consciousness, when these two coincide, it allows these thoughts to falsely seem to the indiscriminating that these thoughts themselves are conscious and self-knowing, instead of them being appearances given to consciousness as objects that are foreign to it. Thus, consciousness (the soul) relates to the individual by being the foundation of awareness underlying and providing for the changing experience of peoples minds by themselves; without which the mind couldn't be known.

>And most importantly, what evidence is there for the soul?
Examples which can be considered as pointing in that direction include the hard problem of consciousness, the self-revealing nature of awareness (nothing else reveals or produces it), and the inability to empirically demonstrate that consciousness (and not the mind) is affected by anything whatsoever, also the research showing many documented cases of likely rebirth/transmigration like Ian Stevenson's research.

>>18842049
Look into hylomorphism, there are options besides Cartesianism if you want to believe in an immaterial soul

>my concept that doesn't literally exist rules out your concept that doesn't literally exist
these people are just trolling now come on

>>18842049
It doesn't matter about souls and consciousnesses, what that guy said was retarded and a anti-intellectual.

>>18842049
>Please explain why material drugs radically alter how your magical non-material soul functions.
They alter you perspective, not your soul.

>>18842011
Was the person who made you believe in that alive, perhaps? Possibly?

By chance?

Maybe?

>>18842049
Based bugman btfoing magical thinkers. All they can respond with is muh reddit spacing and muh feels

>>18843160
Qualia don't exist. Dennette 1993.

>>18843166
Photons can be measured passing from the Sun to Pluto. Nothing like that for muh soul exists.

>>18841894
it's surreal that these people haven't even looked into the dictionary what the soul is meant to be.

>>18841944
>sources familiar to the thinking of the church fathers say...

>>18842109
>It would have taken many lifetimes to have happened elsewhere!

>>18841894
Anyone who has gone paranormal investigating for long enough knows that ghosts are 100% real.

What they are? Who knows, but the supernatural exists, for sure.
>pic related where I saw spirit energy manifest

>>18842049
Easy, the body is the antenna for the soul, damage the body / mind and the soul cannot interact with the body / mind property.

>>18843333
quads confirm

>>18843333
Evidence?

I'll stick with the physicist who has accomplishments we can directly see, that is, getting men to the moon and sending a bunch of anglos to their fiery deaths.

>>18843256
>Qualia don't exist. Dennette 1993.
Sounds like a silly position to take since the qualia of the mind experiencing sound and color seems undeniable. I'm not talking about qualia though, which are not consciousness but rather part of the non-conscious observed content presented to consciousness; you don't need to commit to any position on the reality or unreal of that qualia to acknowledge that the unchanging colorless, odorless, soundless etc awareness which knows those qualia as blue etc cannot be denied except by a fool, because if you deny that you are aware of the changing particular knowledges like thoughts and sight etc, then you would not be able to have a conversation and put forward arguments.

>Whilst being what makes any objects whatsoever manifest, consciousness can never itself be made an object, for, as Ram-Prasad fittingly states, “[W]hatever is seen, consciousness is not seen, since it is always and only the seeing” (Ram-Prasad 2007, 98; cf. Gupta 1998, 99). Nevertheless, its presence is indubitably and immediately established, since it is the undeniable basis of our knowing anything at all. As the Advaitin Vidyāraṇya says: “As it is shameful for a man to express doubt if he has a tongue or not, so also it is shameful to say, ‘I do not know what consciousness is’” (1967, III.20). It is the ever-nonobjective ground of any objects coming to appearance (including ourselves qua empirical persons together with our mental states).

>>18843262
>Photons can be measured passing from the Sun to Pluto. Nothing like that for muh soul exists.
Because the soul in It's true nature as pure immediate and indeterminate consciousness is the basis of all empirical experience and hence cannot be grasped as an object of empirical experience, nor can it be measured since the awareness which knows the sense-organs is itself undetectable to any of the bodies senses, it is invisible etc like space. People naturally infer that it exists in living beings aside from themselves because of how other living beings behave, and people are forced to due this because of how their awareness never directly encounters another awareness as an object like a seen shape or heard sound, they just see physical beings which seem to be animated by an invisible awareness.

I believe in NPCs. If someone insists they have no consciousness I have no problem believing them. They are just announcing that they are quest givers, lore characters, or XP fodder. Nothing wrong with that. All my friends have souls.

how the fuck does something like this happen by accident?

>>18843358
Right here *unzips dick*

>>18842517
>Anyways, there are a number of observations we can make, from brain activity to responsiveness to determine if someone is conscious.
Tell that to conscious comatose people

>>18843375
Indeed.

>>18843452
No biggie. It just comes together, like. Just natural like.

>>18843493
>Tell that to conscious comatose people
If I do a part of their brain will light up.

>>18842049
You can tell how based a post is by the amount of seething coming from /lit/

>>18843452
Really easy, actually. The flagella is an incredibly simple mechanism at its core, iteratively honed over millions of years. Most of that diagram is extra bits that make it work better and allow it to start, stop, move in certain motions, etc. The simplest just whip around wildly.

>>18841894
>>18841903
ops brain been ruled out at particle level
imagine being a christcuck tho

>>18842049
>Please explain why material drugs radically alter how your magical non-material soul functions.
They dont lol, they just change senses and perceptions, if anything they confirm and expose the unchanging underlying soul, that's what ego death is about

>>18841916
>Hey, what about my imagination, hu?
Ruled out

>>18841972
This isn't news. They just zoomed in a bazillion times and found nothing there. They are just mad that they couldn't find a fundamental particle meaning they do not have any more of an understanding of reality than Christians.

>>18843543
Hearing isn't conciousness
Try again

>>18842049
Materialists are quick to say the soul isn't real, but will they say the same of the psyche? They don't even realize the two are the same things described by different ideologies.

>>18842263
music directly touches the soul, anybody arguing against Musicon particule is a bugman

>>18842049
honestly panpsychism makes a lot more sense than either materialism or dualism

>>18841972
>this awful news
for them it isn't even news, just confirmation of the notion they have held all their life and never really doubted

>>18843683
Psyche is generally considered an emergent property of material, not a magical force that is eternal, guides conciousness, but is unobservable.

>>18841907
based and mckenna pilled

>>18842049
Quality cope and seethe produced.

>>18842709
Man, those evil scientist telling us we aren't the center of the cosmos and that we descend from ape

>>18843452
a billion years of trial and error

The soul is not physical. As long as you are alive, you can only sense the physical with maybe a once in a while contact with the supernatural. All the machines you make to detect physical things cannot detect the immaterial. This study is quite pointless and stupid.

reminder that materialismdoesn't mean anything for our current understanding of physics is incomplete in major way, and that a complete theory would by definition include everything

>>18843358
Have you gone to any "haunted" places for yourself?
I thought it was a joke until I had my first experience

>>18841894
>Brian Cox

he looks like a fag and has no muscles. I would defeat him in a fist fight

>>18842049
tl;dr
Kill yourself tranny. Ywnbam or woman.

>>18841903
If we have souls it would be made from a material.

Read this every night, finished it in 9 days. Its not that difficult, you don't need any complementary text. Anyone with a high school education should be able to read this. If you really want a challenge then read it in its original language.

>>18841958
Quantum mechanics kinda disproves materialism though. "Materialism" is rooted entirely in Newtonian mechanics that break down on a small enough level.

>>18843555
>Really easy, actually
care to elaborate?

>>18841894
Retroactively refuted by Guenon (pbuh):
>Besides, it is very easy to expose the contradiction inherent in atomism, the basic error of which lies in supposing that simple elements can exist in the corporeal order, whereas all that is bodily is necessarily composite, being always divisible from the very fact that it is extended, that is to say subject to the spatial condition; in order to find something simple or indivisible it is necessary to pass outside space, and therefore outside that special modality or manifestation which constitutes corporeal existence.

>If, as must be done in this instance, the word atom be taken in its true sense of 'indivisible', a sense which modern physicists no longer give to it, it may be said that an atom, since it cannot have parts, must also be without extension; now the sum of elements devoid of extension can never form an extension; if atoms fulfill their own definition, it is then impossible for them to make up bodies.

>To this well-known and moreover decisive chain of reasoning, another may also be added, employed by Shankaracharya in order to refute atomism: Two things can come into contact with one another either by a part of themselves or by the whole; for atoms, devoid as they are of parts, the first hypothesis is inadmissable; thus only the second hypothesis remains, which amounts to saying that the aggregation of two atoms can only be realized by saying that the aggregation of two atoms can only be realized by their coincidence purely and simply, whence it clearly follows that two atoms when joined occupy no more space than a single atom and so forth indefinitely; so, as before, atoms, whatever their number, will never form a body. Thus atomism represents nothing but sheer impossibility.

Brian Cox? Yeah more like Brian needs a cock up the ass

>>18842709
This is mostly just how scientists are portrayed by the non scientists who write articles about stuff they don't understand. It's an illusion created by reporters out of resentment. The more I read actual scientists, what I thought was anti-humanism was mostly just a sense of humor around constantly having to describe things literally, and them thinking of absurd tautologies

>>18842102
>Epiphenomenonalism
Consciousness is essential to think that consciousness is not essential. If consciousness had no impact, then these thoughts wouldn’t exist.