GutzGuitar
The Legendary Guest
GutzGuitar
The Legendary Guest
GutzGuitar
The greatest mistake a man can make is to think that all is known.
What does this have to do with the concept of "the soul"?
Not everything can be explained right now or by current means. In the 60-70s people didn't even know what HIV, AIDs, Lime Disease, most mental illnesses, or things like aspergers or anything were. People didn't understand radiation or pollution either. For anyone to claim they know if a soul is real or not is just foolish, you can't know - there is no possible means for the current world as it is to understand anything ethereal at all. Remember, people can't hear ultra-high frequencies either, we can't see ultra-violet, if there is something greater - it would always be simply too great for our physical bodies to experience or properly comprehend.
OK but here's the thing - we can demonstrate that ultra-high frequencies exist, as well as ultra-violet, and other things which we cannot detect with our unassisted senses. There was evidence to indicate that we should look for these things, and using science, we have found the answers, using these same physical bodies to operate instruments that allow us to exceed our senses. The answers are natural, and we can demonstrate the results repeatedly. The same cannot be said for the notion of a soul. There isn't evidence for any such thing outside of religion and myth. Every time we have gone searching for answers, the answers we have found have always been "not magic". I am not sure the notion of some immortal substance such as a souls is described to be, is not simply an appeal to "magic" without some type of evidence that it is "not magic".
When it comes to knowing all the answers, religion has that covered. There is a reason we have a period of history known as the Dark Ages - and that reason is religion.
Yes but the amount of time it takes to discover things equates to centuries - several millenniums.
What "things" take centuries to discover? What are you talking about? The entire Common Era is only two millennia, what's this "several millennia" you think it takes to "discover" anything? So things take time - so what?
Quote:
In 4000 years of recorded human history - there is about 20-30 years where science discovered or thought of anything at all.
Nonsense. Source that claim, if you can. Last I checked, Archimedes was working on engineering principles during his lifetime.
Quote:
We still discover new insects, animals, fish, and more daily - we don't know everything, we don't look for anything.
Finding new species is making discoveries.
Medical research continues successfully.
Research in general continues successfully. We continue to look, have you not been paying attention to the reports coming from the rover
Curiousity?
Quote:
No scientist or engineer would actively build a 'soul finding machine' because they wouldn't know what to look for or where to measure anything like that.
And that would be because there is no evidence for such a thing existing.
A doctor actually tested for a "soul" using pre-death vs. post-death weight loss as the evidence. Nobody has been able to reproduce the results of his experiment and the study itself has been discredited, but that's how science works. You follow the evidence.
Quote:
Do you believe in Steven Hawking?
Steven Hawking is demonstrably real. He exists whether or not I believe in him.
Quote:
Do you know everything he publishes has always been simply theory?
Are you seriously using the common usage of "theory" in the place of the term "scientific theory" and thinking that I don't know the difference?
Quote:
And I find it completely idiotic for anyone to think that you have to believe in a religion to have any association with a soul or god.
I personally find it idiotic that you're attempting to burn a strawman here. I did not say that you had to believe in a religion to have any "association" (whatever that means) with "a soul or god".
Quote:
Not to mention, there are more religions then Theism - always has been.
Definitely a strawman. Who claimed that there were not other religions besides theistic religions? Oh yes - not me.
Quote:
Completely short sighted to judge by the merits of Christianity and Catholicism, which we all know have a habit of reworking their scriptures and beliefs to suit their needs.
Would that be more or less short sighted than making up a strawman argument to attack rather than addressing what was actually posted, in your esteemed opinion?
Quote:
Look it up, America wasn't even founded on those principles - Washington and etc were all Deists who believed in god but not religion.
I know that. I just posted about it within the last week. I also know this is completely irrelevant to my post. Do you have an actual point or did you just come to froth at the mouth?
200
200
100
100
200
200
200
100
200
