Tags
Of course there are other things that can cause your Death besides Decrepitude and Disease. There’s always the possibility of the plane or more probable car crash, or falling off a ladder (at your age !), or getting done in by jihadists who have given the phrase “sticking your neck out” a whole new meaning. Whatever way it happens, it is, unlike so many other things, sure to happen. May as well look at it eyeball to eye-socket. Whether or not we eat, drink and be merry, tomorrow we die. You can bet your life on it.
Actually, I never think much about it, though more and more of my friends remind me of it by “passing away”. I don’t want or need a skull on my desk, like obsessed Saints of yore lest they forget. Que serà, serà. We know not the hour, and I don’t think I’d really want to. I’m not at all scared of it, but would much prefer not to have to face the decrepitude, the disease and the accidents that are the lot of most. A final painless heart or brain seizure during my sleep would be just what the Doctor of Theology (A.B.T.) ordered. I’ve been so lucky during my life that I may stay lucky as it ends. I just hope that no one spoils the fun at the cremation by God-talk. I will have heard and said enough about Him for the last eight decades to deserve, and give everyone else, a break, when the finis coronats the opus.
RIDENDA RELIGIO
Blind Faith: Blind Folly 
did you leave priesthood over a girl?
LikeLike
How incisive, Lula!
Did you figure that out without reading Frank’s candid book?
LikeLike
It was a wild guess. By 31 you cannot have accumulated enough cynicism to throw in the towel. I am sorry it happened of course.
LikeLike
I don’t know which to admire more : the pertinence of the comments in reference to the subject of the post which is DEATH, or the pejorative and terribly revealing implications of the question. I hope you are both intelligent enough not to need an exegesis.
LikeLike
ok Death! Well my mum has begun losing her ability to cognate or cogitate – that’s scary. She is still around but extremely vulnerable. The other thing that bothers me is that I’ve heard some priests talk about the restlessness of certain people approaching death – even though they are unconscious – so what part of them is restless? Bizarre (if you are a materialist!)
LikeLike
I’ve come across many non-sequiturs but Lula’s takes the cake.
And Frank will forgive me for setting the record straight – not that I think it is relevant. Frank left the priesthood and married and worked as the Director of Religious Education in America for a number of years before embracing the freedom which thinking for himself has provided. All this is on the public record in his book. It is a rather cheap and vicious shot that Jim tries to fire that says much about himself.
Jim tries to comforts himself with his groundless speculation that Frank and I have deep psychological problems.
If I was much much younger than I am I would suggest that Jim get a life.
LikeLike
Thank you for returning to the subject of the post, Lula. To show you my appreciation I refer you to page 42 of my book, where I recount my meeting with and marrying my wife. More to the point, I devoted a whole chapter of the book to death. I am particularly sensitive to the terminal illness of precocious senility : Alzheimers killed my brother, a Franciscan priest, at the age of 67. I suspect you are attributing the “restlessness” of which you speak to something to do with the “soul”. Sorry, but that’s hardly evidence …
LikeLike
Well at least it is evidence acquired by the senses which is ok for materialists usually.
Sorry but I hope that reading your book is not a pre-requisite to blogging here?
LikeLike
A question and an answer. The question : Evidence of what ? The answer : No.
LikeLike
You said : “I suspect you are attributing the “restlessness” of which you speak to something to do with the “soul”. Sorry, but that’s hardly evidence …” my response was that “restlessness” is seen by a number of priests (many have mentioned this). I asked you comment on the source of that restlessness inside the dying person, Dog owners don’t mention any restlessness on the part of their dying hound. So what’s it all about Frank ? If you could answer your own question “evidence of what?” would be interested in what you make of it.
LikeLike
I am not an expert on “restlessness” (I had never heard of it until you mentioned it) and believe Thom in one of his comments has said all that needs to be said on the subject. Let’s try to stick to the point of the post, accepting death for what it is : the definitive end of personal existence. Death-bed behaviour and nonsense about NDEs do nothing to disprove that fact.
LikeLike
I think the issue of death and mortality, although frightfully scary in some sense is a very important contemplative issue. I personally admire the saints for meditating on death. The skull which allowed them to contemplate their uncertain death assisted them in focusing on the things which really mattered, for example, making sure to serve others and help those suffering and in pain.
I think if more people followed the Saints and contemplated their uncertain death they would want to help others more then focusing purely on themselves.
Death and mortality also expose the folly of atheism in that is proves that on the atheistic worldview, if one wishes to be logically consistent then life and all of these things happening right now – family life, love, compassion, human endeavor, are simply random acts of randomness.
Without a personal God, how are we humans anything other than the random, purely coincidental, purposeless miscarriage of nature, spinning round and round on a lonely planet in the blackness of space for just a little while before we and all memory of our futile, pointless, meaningless life finally blinks out forever in the endless darkness? Indeed, why does research, discovery, diplomacy, art, music, sacrifice, compassion, feelings of love, or affectionate and caring relationships mean anything if it all ultimately comes to naught anyway? In the end the Sun will expand and the Earth will be destroyed and eventually the entire universe come to a material and meaningless end.
I think I may join the Saints and take that skull to meditate on questions of eternity.
The great Lutheran philosopher Soren Kierkegaard (who would without doubt be Catholic if he was alive today) famously wrote in his classic ‘Fear and Trembling’ that “if there were no eternal consciousness in a man, if at the bottom of everything there were only a wild ferment, a power that twisting in dark passions produced everything great or inconsequential; if an unfathomable, insatiable emptiness lay hid beneath everything, what would life be but despair?”.
On the personal theistic view, all of the things we hold dear – helping others, loving our families etc etc – all have logical meaning.
LikeLike
Welcome back, Kotter, I mean Misty ! We all missed Misty, a misnomer for a reader of exceptional clarity of thought and expression. So, Mysterium Fidei, I know it’s tough to accept that death is a dead-end : this is the end and there ain’t no more. It sure would be great if it were just a transition from this life given us as an opportunity to learn to love, so as to be able to fully enjoy for eternity the Beatific Vision and all that heavenly jazz. People want desperately to believe it but it ain’t unfortunately so. Let’s settle for what we’ve got : a wunnerful world, a chance, albeit time-bound, to enjoy all those precious things like art, music, blogging (?), loving and being loved. I feel lucky with what I’ve got,and as long as I live intend to carpe the diem a max.
LikeLike
Frank comments:
‘Let’s settle for what we’ve got : a wunnerful world, a chance, albeit time-bound, to enjoy all those precious things like art, music, blogging (?), loving and being loved.’
Where do all those wonderful things come from? Art and beautiful music require a human intellect, above a mere material, programmed mind.
Loving and being loved require free will. There is no love without free will. Love is more than a fickle emotion, it requires a decision based on free will.
Intellect and free will are the aspects of the mind that can not be just material, as Aquinas ingeniously shows in his inimical logical argument.
LikeLike
Lula refers to “evidence acquired by the senses”. I trust Lula appreciates that all knowledge is mediated through the senses – imagine, for the sake of discussion, a theoretical neonate born with none of the five senses. This tragic hypothetical individual would never acquire any knowledge.
We all move about during sleep – the subconscious is alive and well even when we are unaware of its operation. REM sleep can be monitored by observing the movement of eyelids. Near death experiences are reported in all cultures and the details reported by those involved show clear cultural referents.
MRI imaging of the brains of those suffering from
Alzheimer’s show significant structural changes within the brain – but brain activity still occurs.
Philosophers, metaphysicians and theologians can tell us nothing of relevance regarding these matters. Science can and does.
On ABC TV tonight Professor Brian Cox, who could moonlight as a member of a boy band, was a guest on Stephen Fry’s QI. Cox commented in passing on the past/present/future conundrum of space-time that was mentioned by my eminent scientist friend in the previous topic.
LikeLike
Knowledge of the world around us comes via the 5 senses, but not all knowledge. For example, without the 5 senses, a person would have knowledge that they existed, also knowledge of hunger, thirst, pain. If a person with all 5 senses suddenly was deprived of those senses, they could still form ideas and concepts via their intellect and imagination.
LikeLike
What’s your point, Thom? The continuum of space time is nothing new. It is not a new revelation of your ’eminent science friend’.
Some one called Cox mentioned it on TV. So? He could have been in a boy band? So?
I’m obviously missing something. Maybe Lula can help.
We also know that God, outside of space time, as was realised by Augustine and Aquinas, sees all past, present, future simultaneously. He actually created it 13.8billion years ago.
In eternity, we may also experience the same as God.
Frank is down on the beach, contemplating the mystery, providing that he has been programmed to do so by the phantom programmer..
LikeLike
Hey Thom! So glad you mentioned those near death experiences. Some mention hovering above their body in hospital bed whilst staff work feverishly trying to ‘bring them back’ and the relater of their near death experiences hears every word they say, sees what they are doing. So glad you mentioned REM sleep. The brain registers activity which involves any of the 5 senses in some way, the participation of any part of the body in some way. The brain is a physical organ responsible for coordinating movement and acting as triage with information. It isn’t the source of creative thought, decisions, prayer, but if those activities involve lifting a pencil, flexing shoulders in tension, it is all there lighting up those neurons. Neuroscience is going to help belief in God a lot!
LikeLike
Frank, you may claim to not be obsessed by your approaching death, so why do you keep returning to the topic, over and over?
It certainly is a revealing fact, which perceptive Lula has picked up in a flash.
Well done Lula! I know your real identity is Sherlock Holmes.
Thanks,Thom for your valuable advice to get a life.
However, I am quite happy, despite my Catholic shackles, and I would not wish for any change to my fulfilled present life andmy hope for eternal life, God willing.
Thank you, all the same, for your sincere advice.
I do, also, appreciate your loyalty to your besieged master. A friend in need is a…..
LikeLike
The subject of death is … vital to religious discourse. Take away death and not only would clerical stipends for funerals and Masses take a beating but religion would collapse. You keep telling me that I’d better get my act together and get myself right with God before I croak, because it’s as hot as Hell down there ! I prefer to laugh at death, recognize it for what it is, the definitive end of personal existence, and get on with my life. You and millions of believers do not like my ridiculing Requiems. But the title of the chapter in my book is a quotation from Saint Paul :”Death, where is they sting ?”
Not only is fear of death, and especially its supposed sequel, central to religious myth, but the hope for eternal bliss is what keeps people going to church and the money rolling in. To suggest that death is followed by … nothing, is not a popular message. Moreover, though they want eternal life, people would also (unless your name is Abbé Pierre) prefer that life lasts a lot longer. We have already made great strides in extending longevity. What if we could get science to make us … immortal ? What if we could, to use the misleading Christian expression based on the myth of Christ’s Resurrection, really “conquer death” ?
Tell me, distinguished Engineer-Scientist Jim : have you ever heard of turritopsis, formerly nutricula and now dohrnii ? Of course you have. Well let me inform less erudite readers that this tiny bell-shaped jellyfish, which lives in plancton in the Mediterranean and in the sea near Japan, is famous for being capable of “transdifferentiation”. Now hold on, this is NOT your incredible, invisible “transubstantiation”, but the real thing : this little guy’s substance really does visibly change to the point of becoming … quasi-immortal ! (I knew you’d love my still accurate use of the modifier.) It can actually change its cell-development process to revert to the polyp stage, equivalent to a bloke of, say, eighty, becoming a kid of eight, and doing this indefinitely unless he gets eaten along the way.
Can you imagine science doing this for us ? We’re both nearly four-score, mate. I’d love to be back in Brother Campion’s class at age eight. You, of course, would still be dux.
LikeLike
The Church is only in it for the money, Frank. A familiar theme for its enemies.
I recall the story of Cardinal Fulton Sheen, whose adjacent passenger on an aircraft, noting his clerical attire, launched into abuse of the Church.
I expect that the Cardinal had the perception of Iula. He turned to the man with the question”how much did you steal?”
Taken aback, a confession soon poured out. He had been a sacristan and had embezzled church funds. There arte many reasons for bitterness against the Church.
LikeLike
Thom, I did not say that you and Frank have deep psychological problems. I also don’t think you are morons, and would never stoop so low as to claim that you are.
It is,however, abundantly obvious, that you cling to each other for moral support and that the motives for your bitterness and mockery against your former faith is certainly not based on reason.
Reading Frank’s book gives a strong clue. Lula, without reading the book has quickly cottoned on. A refreshing new contributor!
I am amazed that there are not 34 supporters rebutting the attacks from a few new contributors in the past week. Where are your friends when you need them?
You wheel out an eminent gentleman for help, who has been more of a problem than asset for your quest; Frank is a programmed robot, lacking free will?
Not a good week for the atheist cause, I’m afraid!
Hanging question; Who is the programmer or puppet master? it cant be God, who allows free will.
LikeLike
Unless I’ve missed something I don’t see anything in what Jim has repeated (ad nauseam or ad infinitum – take your pick) or Lula’s contribution or MF’s cogitation on death that causes me any discomfort – so once again Jim I think you are deluding yourself – nothing new in that.
The purpose of the blog is not to provide a forum for personal abuse, nor to discuss the existence of “God”. It is rather to encourage others to think for themselves by pointing out how ridiculous religious beliefs are. Jim’s contributions might be considered perfect for this cause except that he keeps repeating himself ad nauseam.
LikeLike
I might mention the following just to lighten the tone a little and even shed a little light (perhaps not).
Jim says apropos the ABC TV broadcast of Stephen Fry’s QI program “… so someone called Cox mentioned it on TV….”. ( Jim’s comment in response to my mention of Cox’s reference to the past/present/future conundrum of the space-time continuum). Jim is presumably the only person on the planet not to have seen or heard of Professor Brian Cox OBE, particle physicist and Royal Society Research Fellow. Jim will however, I feel confident in saying, have heard of and possibly even prayed to Saint Catherine of Sienna who also got several mentions on the QI program. I mentioned this to Frank in an email and he alerted me to the possibility that Stephen Fry is reading his book as Frank on p169 talks of the venerable Saint. Fry mentioned the same details on his program but I will quote from Frank’s book : “…THE SACRED FORESKIN ….. Saint Catherine of Sienna received this precious part of the private parts of Jesus, as a token of her marriage with the Messiah, and found that when placed on the tongue the result was orgasm. In the Middle Ages at least fourteen churches in Europe boasted of having a gramme or two of this christic flesh. In the 17th century an Italian theologian, Leone Allaci, believed the foreskin ascended with its owner into Heaven, explaining why there were rings around Saturn.”
Professor Cox OBE. celebrated particle physicist and Royal Society Research Fellow had a marvellously witty quip when these facts (sic) were mentioned by Fry on his program.
LikeLike
St Paul Hebrews 6:4-6 (NKJV):
4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit,
5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,
6 if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.
LikeLike
Let me get this straight, Thom. You say that the purpose of this column is not to discuss the existence of God……’It is rather to encourage others to think for themselves by pointing out how ridiculous religious beliefs are.’
Do you think free thinking is possible, despite the persuading influence that you propose?
So, you would like to facilitate the wavering to think for themselves, which must be, in your opinion, to think as you do. You will not tolerate expression of argument against your opinions. The question of God’s existence is taboo. Stating, without justifying, that religion is absurd is allowed and encouraged. Mockery of religious practice is allowed.
You are, of course, making these pronouncements in the name of Frank, who owns the bat, in your role as his vicar.
No doubt, you have his sea, or do you?l.
LikeLike
Lula might enlighten us (me) on the relevance of her most recent comment. Saint Theresa of Avila also had a somewhat rhapsodic experience involving the sacred bit of flesh. But that’s another story.
Lula might also be interested in the following books by another friend (more an acquaintance really, friend of very good friend, but we have dined at the same table several times), Emeritus Professor Derek Denton, psychologist and medical scientist – “Consciousness and Self-Awareness in Humans and Animals”, Harper Collins, 1993 and “The Primordial Emotions: The Dawning of Consciousness”, Oxford University Press, 2008.
LikeLike
Sure I am happy to read what ‘experts’ are saying about consciousness and self awareness but I don’t expect to find a full answer in any one book. Included in consciousness I would expect to find a reference to human ability to reflect back on the past, and to imagine a future scenario; I will keep an open mind an hopefully he does not skip the hard questions. Thom, If you cant figure out the relevance of what you said and my response quote from Hebrews, zero in on the words “they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.” I think you did that in spades. It is all so unnecessary. You are so emotional in your responses. It is not necessary to answer a question that way.
LikeLike
I suggest, Iula,that you would find it more profitable to read Edward Feser’s “The Last Superstition-a refutation of the new atheism”.
If Frank or thom read Feser, with an open mind, they would see that they are barking up the wrong tree, wheeling out Emeritus Professors who don’t believe in free will. Even Frank was shocked at this bombshell
My recent comments have been censored. I don’t know when you’ll hear from me again.
LikeLike
Thom,
Please remember to answer my “hanging question” before I was censored:
Hanging question; Who is the programmer or puppet master? it can’t be God, who allows free will.
An additional question: Do you share Frank’s concern at the ’emeritus, good friend, eminent professor etc.etc.’, that we are programmed puppets, devoid of free will?
I am happy to answer a question of yours, in return. I hope that you have been programmed to provide one.
I would really prefer to be corresponding with a human, in possession of intellect and free will, but such a person would share Christian views and there’d be no debate.
LikeLike
A general comment directed to all and sundry.
I trust we can agree to set aside our philosophical differences to unite in condemnation of the psychopathic IS fundamentalists who seem to have recruited amongst some disaffected youths here in Australia.
It is also encouraging to witness rank and file members of Australia’s Islamic community
uniting in rejection of this movement.
LikeLike
I join you in the condemnation.
These terrorists are acting voluntarily through their own free will, against natural law,and so are to be held personally responsible for their vile, inhumane actions.
LikeLike
What has changed in near 1500 years?
Peaceful Otranto was attacked from the sea.
On August 14, 1480, a massacre was perpetrated on a hill just outside the city of Otranto, in southern Italy. Eight hundred of the city’s male inhabitants were taken to a place called the Hill of the Minerva, and, one by one, beheaded in full view of their fellow prisoners. The spot forever after became known as the Hill of the Martyrs.
In medieval warfare, the bloody execution of a city’s population was commonplace, but what happened at Otranto was unique. The victims on the Hill of the Minerva were put to death not because they were political enemies of a conquering army, nor even because they refused to surrender their city. They died because they refused to convert to Islam. The 800 men of Otranto were martyrs, the first victims of what was fully expected to be the relentless conquest of Italy and then all of Christendom by the armies of the Ottoman Empire. Because of their sacrifice, however, the Ottoman invasion was slowed and Rome was spared the same fate that had befallen Constantinople only 27 years before.
LikeLike
Lula might also try reading Sam Harris on free will. There is an interesting discussion of Harris’ arguments that there are only brain states and no mind states – in other words Harris does not believe that mind exists independently of brain – in Philosophy News – the only reference I now have is http://www.philosophynews.com/post/2012/05/An-Analysis-of-Sam-Harris-Free-Will.html
Not an easy read but it demonstrates that the debate about free will is far from over.
Lula also picked up on my incidental reference to NDEs. My understanding of contemporary views about such experiences is that they are fully explicable in terms of conscious/subconscious brain activity.
LikeLike
My apologies for the Sam Harris reference provided in my comment – it is incomplete. The article can be found by Googling “Sam Harris Free Will Philosophy News”. The author of the review of Harris’ small book “Free Will” does not agree with Harris but the review provides an interesting insight into the debate.
LikeLike
Thom this was for you…….If there is no free will, we have no choice. But earlier you referred to the choices we obviously make. You cant have it both ways so obviously you believe we do have choice, so obviously you believe in free will, so obviously you believe that we are part spirit.
LikeLike
The one line summary, given in Thom’s reference, first quoted, of this book by atheist, Sam Harris is :
“Sam Harris’ new book Free Will takes a somewhat unique, and I think ultimately inconclusive, approach.”
Hardly an endorsement!
I think we should trust Frank’s intuition after all ,that he does have free will, and is not a programmed lump of inanimate matter.
Thanks Thom for the tip.
Anyone interested in a clear exposition of free will, intellect and human soul should read the clear and relatively simple “Philosophy of the Mind” by contemporary eminent Professor Edward Feser.
LikeLike
If there is no free will, we have no choice. But earlier you referred to the choices we obviously make. You cant have it both ways.
LikeLike
A snap shot of the Christian concept of mind, an intimate interworking of the material, or animal imaginative part and the intellect, or conceptual part.
All animals and humans have imagination. this is a function of the material mind, or brain. We form mental pictures of things that we perceive through our senses. Thom quite rightly has said that our knowledge of all that we perceive in the material world comes via our senses, and is physically stored in the imagination as particular mental images. When we think of a dog, we form an image of a particular dog, not dogs in general. When we think of something more abstract, e.g. Law, we picture a particular aspect of law, like a judge, or lawyer or court room. Always, our imagination stores particular mental images, not a general concept of e.g. law.
Our intellect, which is non physical, and particular to humans only, differs from the imagination, in that it contemplates general concepts, like ‘law’, not a particular representative picture; I.e. the intellect deals with generalities, the brain stores particular images.
“Triangle” would appear in the imagination as a particular triangle, of a particular shape, size, colour. The intellect can contemplate the more general idea of triangularity, which encompasses all shapes, sizes, colours and the related geometric theorems of Euclid, Pythagoras etc.
Concepts are incapable of storage in memory cells like particular instances. The intellect, related to the non physical human soul, is the source of the higher human thought capabilities above the instinct driven material mind. Art, music,mathematics, religion, love, truth , unique to humans derive from this non material intellect.
The Christian concept is not the dualism of Descartes, which thought of 2 separate boxes for the material and spiritual parts. Catholic philosophy sees an intricate intertwining of the two, there are not 2 different compartments, like Descartes believed. The intellect is part of the immortal human soul. Read Professor Edward Feser for a clear, simple expose, in E.g. Philosophy of the Mind.
LikeLike
Jim that is so great. All that info is so helpful
LikeLike
Jim You said ” The intellect, related to the non physical human soul, is the source of the higher human thought capabilities above the instinct driven material mind.” did you mean to say “instinct driven material imagination” ?
LikeLike
Lula ,the answer is yes and no!
I see your point, and I probably should have said “the instinct driven material part of the mind” which pretty well corresponds to the imagination. The word ‘mind’ is a bit loose and people mean different things when speaking of it. By material mind, I include any aspect that is not related to intellect and will.
The main thing is that there are 2 components, the one is just a superior animal mind, and the other, intimately connected, is the non material, non animal, part comprising intellect and free will, which is makes us unique, and not just advanced animals. It is part of our immortal soul.
Even pagan Aristotle,in 300BC, through metaphysics, showed that the human soul, including intellect is immortal. St. Thomas Aquinas continued to develop this conclusion.
In Aristotle terms, everything is either form plus matter or purely form. Matter is the material that makes the thing, and the form is the pattern of the matter. E.g. A chair may be made of wood or steel or plastic or some combination , and this is the matter part. The chair itself is the form. God is pure form, as He is not material.
For humans, our physical body, including material brain is the matter. The soul, including intellect, is the form. At death, the matter decomposes, and the form, or individual soul, lives on. Even during life, our cells are being renewed constantly, so our matter keeps completely renewing, whereas the non material form remains intact, and is the “real us”.
Returning to the intellect and imagination: It is quite understandable that the imagination can store images, like a particular triangle, in memory cells, in the same way as a computer memory operates. There will be some coded form of putting the information into material memory cells, just like computer memory. More complex figures , like octagons or decagons may be stored similarly, but what about a hundred sided figure or a thousand sided figure, and imagining the difference between a thousand sided and a thousand and two sided figures. Of course,we can not store distinct images that will separately recognise them. However, our intellect can conceptualise the difference between regular figures of 1,000 sides and 1002 sides.
Tis is a trivial example, but it illustrates the vast difference between conceptualising generalities in the intellect and imagining particularities in the physical part of the mind.
The statement “snow is white” can be conceptualised as a general notion, but only imagined as , say, a snow flake,or snow covered ground or a snowman. or some remembered, or imagined experience of snow.
Read a Feser book for a clear, simple understanding.
LikeLike
A collection of interesting comments from well known, mainly non Christian, sources.
“Atheism is a disease of the soul before it becomes an error of understanding.”
Plato
“Atheism is so senseless and odious to mankind that it never had many professors”
Isaac Newton
“I’m not an atheist, and I don’t think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn’t know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God.”
Albert Einstein
LikeLike
Just briefly responding to one of Lula’s comments/questions.
The mind/brain dichotomy is still the subject of debate by scientists and philosophers. I believe the evidence points to the brain being the locus of thought, emotion, feeling etc. If “mind” is intended to suggest an immortal soul there is no evidence, apart from religious belief, for any such entity.
With regard to free will, it is fair to say that this subject is also still hotly debated. The protagonists of the NO FREE WILL argument readily concede that we appear to make choices and that we must be held accountable for the choices that we appear free to make. The article I referred to provides a useful overview.
LikeLike
Thom, do you believe that humans have free will, in that they have the ontological ability to free choose a non-materially determined action or thought?
LikeLike
I think I need to dive into different explanations of mind and brain. Might need to wait for a future post about the mind to appear again before I’ve got it under wraps. Regarding nde’s, the Rosicrucians (out of the radical enlightenment) practised or attempted to practise what they call “astral projection” which pretty much corresponds with descriptions of the nde’s of some – i.e. spirit outside body, hovering, moving about, fully ‘conscious’ of others in room, what is being said etc. Years ago, a friend was very much into the whole Rosicrucian thing and was reading about how to astral project – apparently , she said, it is dangerous though. She was NOT a religious person. Her approach was pretty matter of fact. There are probably millions of people who believe in spirituality but not religion. people instinctively know they have a spiritual side and it is not about Mozart and Van Gogh.
LikeLike
Thom, you are only looking at the scientific investigation of neuroscience. Of course, their analysis is confined to material aspects of the brain/mind. That is natural.
What you constantly assume is that there is nothing to discover, outside the purely material. Catholic philosophy does not deny the role of the material brain, closely interworking with the non material intellect.
However, the conceptual functioning of the mind can not possibly be explained by a totally material mind. There’s absolutely no way.
There is, contrary to what you claim as an axiom, philosophical argument, not based on religious grounds, but on pagan reason, dating from 2300BC, and never seriously countered by subsequent philosophical reasoning.
There is no genuine debate on mind/brain dichotomy among philosophers, as far as I know, and science is a different field to philosophy. Science can only work out the way the material brain works, not on its relationship with the non material intellect. So science, alone, will never give an answer. The human soul, including the human intellect, had to be immortal, as was evident to pre Christian Aristotle, through rigorous reasoning. It’s not just something that Catholic theologians pulled out of the air.
We still acknowledge the reasoning power of ancient Greek mathematicians like Pythagoras, so it’s not valid to write off Aristotle, as you tend to do, just because we are now in the 21st century with all that beaut technology.
Summary: You are totally misinformed to claim that the evidence for an immortal human soul is only religious belief. WRONG!!
If you are open, I can direct you to rigorous philosophical argument, to which you might care to respond and prove me wrong. You should also find the answer to your Free Will dilemma, in the process.
What do you say?
LikeLike
The most simple search will show conclusively that the brain/mind debate continues and that science continues to provide impartial input into the debate.
And the same can be said in connection with the free will issue.
I provided the Sam Harris reference precisely because the reviewer did not accept Harris’ thesis. For that reason alone Lula might well find the overview interesting – and a useful counterpoint to Feser who cannot be regarded as a disinterested participant in the debate.
I believe that Harris’ view is correct. We do not have any control over the countless multiplicity of influences that operate to determine how we act.
With regard to the “soul” question, the claim that we humans uniquely are possessed of some immaterial entity which survives our deaths and is eternally immortal is, like the “God” hypothesis, a hypothesis at the core of religious belief. The onus is on those proposing this “Immortal Soul” hypothesis to produce some, any, credible evidence in support of their hypothesis. It is my contention that they have failed to do so.
LikeLike