finley wrote:Tempo Gain wrote:This? Pretty interesting.
I wasn't aware there's still research activity on the subject, but it was originally discovered a long time ago when US researchers had a lot more leeway to do horrible experiments on mental patients (60s-70s). Some patient had electrodes implanted in his brain for some unrelated reason (possibly epilepsy research) and the medics were poking around in there. Stimulating one particular area produced "intense religious experiences", IIRC.
I don't remember the precise details - I did my degree 25 years ago.“I get attacked by everyone,” says Patrick McNamara, associate professor of neurology at Boston University and author of The Neuroscience of Religious Experience. “Atheists hate me because I’m saying religion has some basis in the brain and fundamentalist Christians hate me because I’m saying religion is nothing but brain impulses.”
It's definitely tough being a scientist, and I'm not being facetious.
I would be astonished if it did. It generally takes a high caliber person to recognize the necessity for controlling one's senses in this day and age.
Also it's a cliche to me to constantly watch the vapidity rise to the surface as the fire of youth fades in people. It becomes too apparent to themselves that they wasted most of their lives in nothingness.
The Old Testament scares the crap out of me - it's enough to put anyone off religion - but I've always found the decalogue interesting because it did apparently come from nowhere. I've mentioned this before: it resembles no contemporary moral code. Not even remotely. The 'rules' are utterly alien to the culture of that time and place - you can easily figure this out from the other stories in the O.T
Tempo Gain wrote:There's nothing wrong with that, but can you blame me? I have a worldview as well, which I've given considerable consideration to.
triceratopses wrote:BrentGolf is also completely confused on the topic
Dennett denies qualia (subject awareness/experience) and says we are mechanical machines (mindless zombies) with illusions of experience. Our current actions were determined and set in motion 3/10000000 of a second after the big bang. Thats scientific materialism.
marasan wrote:BrentGolf wrote:On the one side, even if science backs God into the tiniest little corner to the point where it's absurd to believe, and we could prove scientifically how life began and what happened before the big bang, that still wouldn't disprove God.
When it comes to the question of whether there is a God (which when defined for debate purposes as a creator of the universe), it seems to me that sometimes the atheist wins and other times the theist wins, precisely because I don't think science can take us any further. The Big Bang theory tells us that the universe was created ex nihilo. There was nothing (meaning no matter, no space, no time), and in an instant everything. So what happened before there was nothing? Who knows?! It's one philosophy against another.
Forumosans browsing this forum: No Forumosans and 0 guests