Finding Hitler’s Soul

[Sheldon]

@rat_spit

If he wants to debate he can pick one thing and ask me the question. That’s how orderly discussion happens.

Read the article I linked demonstrating that storing and recalling memories is an entirely physical or material process, and is being explained by scientists currently studying that process, then tell us if you understand what that means for your claim to Nyarl about memories being stored and recalled being a psychic process, and thus cannot be explained science or natural laws?

@rat_spit

Would that relate to memories? Is not the act of recollection a psychic one? Even if they are stored physically, they are recovered as psychic phenomenon.

There’s your claim, now that’s one point and one question, so come on champ. lets see you dodge this one with another girlish rant, or are you capable of actual debate.

@rat_spit

Like how much does consciousness weigh? How much does a memory weigh? Fair questions. No tricks. Except that if you answer and you’re a materialist, then yer kinda fucked.

How much does a sneeze cough or laugh weigh? Are you seriously going to claim those are immaterial processes? Or will you trot out a special pleading fallacy maybe, or simply move the goalposts, what will you do, just resort to more name calling perhaps?

@rat_spit

They don’t weigh anything. Quid pro quo.

Ahem, does a blink weigh anything? How about an itch, Christ but you are screwing the pooch here.

@rat_spit

Poor use of fallacy fallacy.

If you didn’t have such a chip on your shoulder you might see that response for the pathetic and dishonest evasion it is, but you have and so you won’t. The fact remains you used a begging the question fallacy, you may be content to respond by making up BS, but that of course also speaks for itself.

@rat_spit

Memories don’t weigh anything. Brains do. How does that occur?

Does a sneeze way anything? Or a cough? How about a laugh? They all seem to be physical processes, or perhaps you disagree, enthral us with your acumen.

@rat_spit

What woo? The mind is non-physical. Evidence: it cannot be put on a scale and given a weight.

That woo woo, and the fact you think this makes the process immaterial is pretty funny, try applying that rationale to sneezing or coughing or laughing or winking, none of which can be weight, can they champ?

@rat_spit

Sound is a wave of energy that propagates through matter. It certainly has its origins in matter. What can’t be measured is the perception of sound. You can give sound a frequency and a wave length, but you cannot define the feeling you get when it enters you ear canal, strikes the drum, transmits information to the brain and is then “heared”. Can you weigh the perception of sound?

Is laughing a physical process or is it immaterial, how about coughing and sneezing or winking for that matter, none of those can be weighed after all? You seem to not want to answer. It was your rationale after all that being unable to weight the process derived from the physical brain makes them immaterial. You still haven’t commented on the article, or the one question you asked for?

@rat_spit

Here’s a razor for you. If you can’t put it on a scale, it doesn’t have mass. If it doesn’t have mass it’s im ma fucking terial.

Nope, that’s just an assumption you’re making. The processes occur in the physical brain, which has mass. Again a laugh sneeze or cough can’t be weighed, or a blink for that matter, by your rationale they would all be immaterial processes, I have to say I am dubious.

[David_Killens]

@rat_spit

Is not the act of recollection a psychic one? Even if they are stored physically, they are recovered as psychic phenomenon.

We have two competing positions. One is that many operations of the brain are explained by science, and the other by appealing to psychic and supernatural reasons.

There are many researchers who are diligently peeling away the mysteries of the brain, and we are slowly finding explanations. The second position does not have any explanatory powers, just an appeal to supernatural processes.

@rat_spit You seem to put a lot of weight on whether something has mass. At present I typed my message on my computer, it was transmitted to a server, and you recalled that message and are reading it. There is a flow of information.

How much mass was in that message? Zero.

[Sheldon]

@David_Killens

There are many researchers who are diligently peeling away the mysteries of the brain, and we are slowly finding explanations. The second position does not have any explanatory powers, just an appeal to supernatural processes.

Now those are some good darts.

[David_Killens]

IMO many societies foster the notion that we must understand everything. If we do not have a valid scientific explanation, someone makes up shit. To state “I do not know” appears to an admission of weakness. But personally I consider such an admission a sign of honesty and integrity.

When you fool others and yourself into believing a pure BS fabricated answer, then human progress stalls. Between the fall of Rome and the beginning of the Age of Enlightenment in the 17th and 18th centuries, scientific understanding stalled. And with that there was wholesale suffering and needless deaths.

There is a very good reason many assign the label “The Dark Ages” to that period in European history.

[Sheldon]

Interesting article here: “The aim of this paper is to outline a principle according to which consciousness could be explained as a physical process caused by the organization of energy in the brain”

LINK

[MrDawn]

“I don’t know” is the fastest way to piss off Christians in a debate. But it is the RIGHT answer versus the lies and misinformation they spread. Just because we’re Atheists doesn’t mean we ASSUME to know everything like they do in their church.

[Nyarlathotep]

@rat_spit

Would that relate to memories?

It means your memory memories must be physical.

P.S.: It suggests anything that contains information is physical. Now you can often represent physical systems with abstractions who’s physical underpinnings aren’t as obvious, but you are just fooling yourself, imo.

My position is:
If it isn’t physical, it doesn’t contain information. If it doesn’t contain information, it is useless (and might as well not exist, and probably does not [exist]).

[Tin-Man]

All I want to know is who will be the Best Man at Ratty’s and Shelly’s wedding? Oh, and I do hope it’s casual dress. I hate wearing a suit.

[skriten]

@Sheldon

Interesting article here:

Yes it is. Thanks Sheldon.

[David_Killens]

@MrDawn

Just because we’re Atheists doesn’t mean we ASSUME to know everything like they do in their church.

And that is their weakness they are unaware of. If one admits “I do not know” many theists then launch into the “ah hah, but I do know”. And when pressed hard in explaining why they take this position, it eventually devolves into “you must have faith”. But If I claim I have reasonable certainty about a subject, if pressed, I can go down layer after layer in the history and what we learned about said subject.

[skriten]

@Tin-Man

Oh, and I do hope it’s casual dress. I hate wearing a suit.

Wait, was that casual or causal? I have experienced some forms of dress which were definitely causal. We would probably be willing to make an exception for you if you would at least agree to wear a tie and some garters…

Edit Tin Man panties

[David_Killens]

Oh fuck, another wedding …

[skriten]

@David_Killens

And that is their weakness they are unaware of.

Yes, among many. There is a dearth of understanding of humility and humble recognition of that which is either not presently recognized as “known” or even arguably “unknowable”. I have adopted a stance of not discussing some subjects with people unwilling or unable to admit the limitations of their “knowledge”.

[Nyarlathotep]

@Nyarlathotep

My position is:
If it isn’t physical, it doesn’t contain information…

That might seem like a controversial statement, but it is actually extremely “safe”, imo. The point being: to demonstrate that what I said is incorrect, you would need to essentially do a (physical) measurement (which always returns a real number and a physical unit like meters, seconds, grams, etc) on something that isn’t physical! While I can’t be 100% sure I’m right: it seems that even if I’m wrong, it will be impossible to ever demonstrate I’m wrong. That is what I mean by “safe”.

[MrDawn]

@rat_spit

My panties are SO WET RIGHT NOW. You are the king of insults.

Get a grip, he’s only trying to help you.

[Sheldon]

@Tin-Man

All I want to know is who will be the Best Man at Ratty’s and Shelly’s wedding? Oh, and I do hope it’s casual dress. I hate wearing a suit.

I am never marrying again, and certainly not without a pre-nup, I barely kept my house the last time, and I have had to pay for it twice now. However if it helps I would always prefer a casual dress code.

[David_Killens]

@Sheldon

I would always prefer a casual dress code.

Blue shirt, green pants, and bring a LARGE bottle of refreshment.

[Tin-Man]

@Sheldon

However if it helps I would always prefer a casual dress code.

Oh, good! In that case, I’ll be happy to do the catering. Beer, pretzels, and eggnog sound good?

[MrDawn]

@Tin-Man

Oh, good! In that case, I’ll be happy to do the catering. Beer, pretzels, and eggnog sound good?

That’s the best you can do?

NO! You will bring a 20 ounce sirloin, mashed potatoes, green beans, and corn on the cob with a glass of milk.

edit: fingerlickinggood

[skriten]

@Nyarlathotep

That is what I mean by “safe”.

Uh, seems pretty safe to me. Any direct measurements “seem” very unlikely, unless, perhaps, you could demonstrate multiple and varied manifestations, including a non-physical one, possessed by the “element” in question, which would also require evidence of the multiplicity and correlation of manifestations. Even then, an extrapolation would still be required, so uh, after all of that rambling, still seems “safe”.

Edit huh?