What criticisms can be made of Athiests?

[Fantic]

Ah! soul, what exactly is a soul ?

As of yet there is absolutely no scientific evidence to prove that such a thing exists, is it what's deep in your heart that makes you a good person.....maybe, who knows, certainly not I or anyone else on this board knows that answer.:wink:

Not scientific evidence but this is the alternative:

''your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behaviour of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their assorted molecules"

As Lewis Carroll’s Alice might have phrased it: “You’re nothing but a pack of neurons''

Taken from here:

[/URL][url]http://www.arn.org/docs/williams/pw_abolitionofman.htm (http://www.arn.org/docs/williams/pw_abolitionofman.htm)

[Twa Cairpets]

Not scientific evidence but this is the alternative:

''your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behaviour of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their assorted molecules"

As Lewis Carroll’s Alice might have phrased it: “You’re nothing but a pack of neurons''

Taken from here:

[/URL][url]http://www.arn.org/docs/williams/pw_abolitionofman.htm (http://www.arn.org/docs/williams/pw_abolitionofman.htm)

I'm with Crick on this one Fantic. Are you suggesting that we are not in fact the net result of the molecular reactions of our bodies?

[Fantic]

I'm with Crick on this one Fantic. Are you suggesting that we are not in fact the net result of the molecular reactions of our bodies?

No. But are you suggesting that our spiritual soul is a result of molecular reactions?

Of course if you don't believe we have a soul then that's another matter.

[HibsMax]

I'm with Crick on this one Fantic. Are you suggesting that we are not in fact the net result of the molecular reactions of our bodies?

that's the mystery, isn't it. ;)

I'm all for science but there are still some things which mystify me. If all we amount to is a collection of molecules then I firmly believe that cloning, including life experiences and memories, etc., should be 100% possible.....when we get develop the technical ability. Imagine going to the hospital for what I'll call a brain dump on a regular basis; weekly for example. Then if you suffer some severe trauma and lose all body function, etc. it will only be a matter of repairing the brain and performing a system restore to that point in time. Any memories not backed up and residing in an area of the brain that has been destroyed would be lost forever.

Sounds like a ridiculous notion but if humans are "simply" very complicated machines, procedures such as this should be within the realms of possibility, even if they are impossible for us to fathom right now. I would go so far as to say that you could take someone else's memories and:
1. upload them to someone else - great for learning a new language instantly. Useful for learning anything actually.
2. upload them to a central computer and determine what they were doing at 9pm on Friday night (useful for solving crimes).
3. scan a person's brain and determine if they are likely to be a certain type of person.

I'm not talking about the morals of such things, just the plausibility. I doubt that the brain implements any sort of encryption to keep the nosy at bay so it's just a matter of decoding the puzzle...

...unless there is something we don't understand and the whole is greater than the sum of the parts i.e., we're more than just a collection of molecules...

This sounds like a philosopher's wet dream. :)

EDIT : or how about this....upload a person's brain to a (very super) computer...is the computer now an immortal being? ;)

[J-C]

that's the mystery, isn't it. ;)

I'm all for science but there are still some things which mystify me. If all we amount to is a collection of molecules then I firmly believe that cloning, including life experiences and memories, etc., should be 100% possible.....when we get develop the technical ability. Imagine going to the hospital for what I'll call a brain dump on a regular basis; weekly for example. Then if you suffer some severe trauma and lose all body function, etc. it will only be a matter of repairing the brain and performing a system restore to that point in time. Any memories not backed up and residing in an area of the brain that has been destroyed would be lost forever.

Sounds like a ridiculous notion but if humans are "simply" very complicated machines, procedures such as this should be within the realms of possibility, even if they are impossible for us to fathom right now. I would go so far as to say that you could take someone else's memories and:
1. upload them to someone else - great for learning a new language instantly. Useful for learning anything actually.
2. upload them to a central computer and determine what they were doing at 9pm on Friday night (useful for solving crimes).
3. scan a person's brain and determine if they are likely to be a certain type of person.

I'm not talking about the morals of such things, just the plausibility. I doubt that the brain implements any sort of encryption to keep the nosy at bay so it's just a matter of decoding the puzzle...

...unless there is something we don't understand and the whole is greater than the sum of the parts i.e., we're more than just a collection of molecules...

This sounds like a philosopher's wet dream. :)

EDIT : or how about this....upload a person's brain to a (very super) computer...is the computer now an immortal being? ;)


Surely all this you are saying is the human being evolving and cloning, etc is all part of our evolution. We all know that due to medical breakthrough we can live for a lot longer nowadays, new heart, kidney, liver, why even I've got a hip implant which has helped me get back to full fitness again.

Think of where we were around 250years ago, stealing bodies from graves so as the surgeons at that time could experiment and gain knowledge.

We fly through the skies and into space, swim for hours underwater with breathing aparatus and even cure diseases with a single jab of a needle.

Surely this all proves we are evolving as a species, just like the thousands of other species around this planet of ours.

[Twa Cairpets]

There have been a fair few references to Richard Dawkins on this thread. This link YouTube - Richard Dawkins on Q&A (1/6) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtVZ23GfmDo&feature=related)to the Australian version of Question time shows him to be in a different league to his opponents.

Whether or not you think you like him or not, he is streets ahead of everyone else on the panel who are mealy mouthed or evasive at best.

[LiverpoolHibs]

There have been a fair few references to Richard Dawkins on this thread. This link YouTube - Richard Dawkins on Q&A (1/6) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtVZ23GfmDo&feature=related)to the Australian version of Question time shows him to be in a different league to his opponents.

Whether or not you think you like him or not, he is streets ahead of everyone else on the panel who are mealy mouthed or evasive at best.

He's hardly pitted against the finest minds the world has to offer there, is he?

Arguing with the Family First chap is like shooting fish in a barrel. I'd have been slightly embarrassed at the standard of 'opponents' if I was Dawkins.

I'd genuinely love to see a debate between R.D. and Dan Hind, author of The Threat to Reason (http://www.versobooks.com/books/ghij/h-titles/hind_d_threat_reason.shtml), that would be amazing.

[Twa Cairpets]

He's hardly pitted against the finest minds the world has to offer there, is he?

Arguing with the Family First chap is like shooting fish in a barrel. I'd have been slightly embarrassed at the standard of 'opponents' if I was Dawkins.

I'd genuinely love to see a debate between R.D. and Dan Hind, author of The Threat to Reason (http://www.versobooks.com/books/ghij/h-titles/hind_d_threat_reason.shtml), that would be amazing.

Although on paper a Government minister, the Deputy leader of the Opposition and the "Australian of the Year" would suggest that it was decent. The Family first guy was just embarrasing I'll agree.

Different atheists, same outcome - Archbishop John Onaiyekan and Ann Widdencombe MP v Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry. Fry is brilliant, and Widdecombe just deeply awful. YouTube - The Intelligence Squared Debate, Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry vs The Catholics (1 of 5) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XpGyHJZ9b0&feature=PlayList&p=7CF8AFD815FFA216&index=0)

[LiverpoolHibs]

Although on paper a Government minister, the Deputy leader of the Opposition and the "Australian of the Year" would suggest that it was decent. The Family first guy was just embarrasing I'll agree.

Different atheists, same outcome - Archbishop John Onaiyekan and Ann Widdencombe MP v Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry. Fry is brilliant, and Widdecombe just deeply awful. YouTube - The Intelligence Squared Debate, Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry vs The Catholics (1 of 5) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XpGyHJZ9b0&feature=PlayList&p=7CF8AFD815FFA216&index=0)

I came across that a while ago but I'm afraid a panel involving the disgusting Christopher Hitchens, Stephen Fry (apparently I'm the only person in the world who can't stand him) and Anne ****ing Widdecombe rendered it unwatchable. I don't doubt that Hitchens and Fry destroyed them, however.

His back-and-forths with Terry Eagleton make much more interesting reading, as he's actually debating with someone on or about his intellectual level.

[PeeJay]

There have been a fair few references to Richard Dawkins on this thread. This link YouTube - Richard Dawkins on Q&A (1/6) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtVZ23GfmDo&feature=related)to the Australian version of Question time shows him to be in a different league to his opponents.

Whether or not you think you like him or not, he is streets ahead of everyone else on the panel who are mealy mouthed or evasive at best.

Just like to say thank you TC for posting these links - I thoroughly enjoyed lstening to Dawkins on the Australian Q&A. Now about to watch/listen to the "Intelligence squared debate ..." - :thumbsup:-
Considering the meltdown the Roman Catholic church is currently undergoing here in Germany, it is a huge pity that Dawkins does not speak German - he could enlighten a few people here too.

[Phil D. Rolls]

What about the viaducts?