dimitar_berbagod
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 2
Can't say I believe in reincarnation, but if it is real knowing my luck I'll come back as another bald bloke 
aussieavodart said:The materialist theory that consciousness is created by or dependent on the brain is full of holes. It's reasonable to be open to other ideas.
Bryan said:aussieavodart said:The materialist theory that consciousness is created by or dependent on the brain is full of holes. It's reasonable to be open to other ideas.
Tell me about some of those "holes" in the theory.
aussieavodart said:A pretty good example of what I'm talking about:
{snip video about a guy playing with a "brain wave" instrument}
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroplasticity
And I've already mentioned Dr Ian Stevenson's work.
Pimm Van Lommel's research is worth a look as well
Bryan said:aussieavodart said:A pretty good example of what I'm talking about:
{snip video about a guy playing with a "brain wave" instrument}
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroplasticity
And I've already mentioned Dr Ian Stevenson's work.
Pimm Van Lommel's research is worth a look as well
Huh?? I don't understand the point of all that. A guy looking at his "brain waves" with an electrical instrument...a detailed discussion of which parts of the brain have which functions...a slightly goofy scientist (?) who has a rather whimsical interest in proving the existence of reincarnation...a look at the occurrence of "near death experiences" in hospital patients...
What does ANY of that have to do with whether or not the brain is the source of consciousness?? :dunno:
aussieavodart said:Isn't it obvious?
The example of the youtube video clearly demonstrates that our thoughts aer capable of affecting the physiology of our brains.
aussieavodart said:Thought is immaterial and precedes neural activity in this case, unless you are wiling to contend that the brain is responsible for making the mind meditate which would be an incoherent position to take.
aussieavodart said:Your opinion of Ian Stevenson as a faux-scientist or a goofball is irrelevant. Science is supposed to be settled on evidence, not personal views about the character of the researchers. Why not read the man's peer-reviewed research before making up your mind?
Bryan said:aussieavodart said:Isn't it obvious?
The example of the youtube video clearly demonstrates that our thoughts aer capable of affecting the physiology of our brains.
Yes. So what? Our thoughts are capable of affecting not just the physiology of our brains, but the rest of our bodies, too. What's your point?
aussieavodart said:Thought is immaterial and precedes neural activity in this case, unless you are wiling to contend that the brain is responsible for making the mind meditate which would be an incoherent position to take.
I'm not sure what you mean by those first ten words. Please explain.
aussieavodart said:Your opinion of Ian Stevenson as a faux-scientist or a goofball is irrelevant. Science is supposed to be settled on evidence, not personal views about the character of the researchers. Why not read the man's peer-reviewed research before making up your mind?
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. It's probably going to take a lot more evidence than what Stevenson was able to concoct before I believe in reincarnation.
aussieavodart said:Bryan said:Yes. So what? Our thoughts are capable of affecting not just the physiology of our brains, but the rest of our bodies, too. What's your point?
That brain activity can be driven by something that can't be quantified or measured- it doesn't require brain activity to exist.
aussieavodart said:aussieavodart said:Thought is immaterial and precedes neural activity in this case, unless you are wiling to contend that the brain is responsible for making the mind meditate which would be an incoherent position to take.
I'm not sure what you mean by those first ten words. Please explain.
His brain activity was being manipulated through the use of his attention span. The activity we saw on the ECG was a product of something we can't measure but know exists.
aussieavodart said:Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. It's probably going to take a lot more evidence than what Stevenson was able to concoct before I believe in reincarnation.
What sense does it make to not review ANY of the evidence before demanding more of it?
Thats exactly how I feel about religion.Bryan said:I actually consider the existence of the "Loch Ness Monster" to be more believable than reincarnation, but I don't waste any time on that, either.
Cassin said:Some of you might enjoy this
![]()
"Buddhist Practice on Western Ground: Reconciling Eastern Ideals and Western Psychology [Paperback]"
Forum rules
This forum is for thoughtful and meaningful topics only. Do not use threads like a "chat room". Useless and off-color topics, trolling, vulgarity, and replies with no valuable content will be deleted. No discussions on Religion. Posts here will not increase your post count.
monty1978 said:Slightly off topic but wtf I'm bored! I dragged my *** through half of the Tibetan book of living and dying in an attempt to better myself only to find that sogyal rinpoche (spelling?) was an assaulter of women. Semi killed the whole buddhist thing for me :dunno:
monty1978 said:I hear you but he did apparantly do much good. His high standing and loose moral behaviour went far to dispariage the results of his teachings, I found it hard to marry the disparit, what's the word, ethics.
I did say semi though. I do follow many of the principles of buddhism, at least try to. Suppression of ego is the one I find hard lol!
monty1978 said:oni said:monty1978 said:I hear you but he did apparantly do much good. His high standing and loose moral behaviour went far to dispariage the results of his teachings, I found it hard to marry the disparit, what's the word, ethics.
I did say semi though. I do follow many of the principles of buddhism, at least try to. Suppression of ego is the one I find hard lol!
Bit like the doctor nipping out for a cigarette......................but still... :whistle:
Weren't they assaults of young vulnerable women though? Not exactly a cigarette smoking doctor. I mean I read that they were manipulated by him to do his bidding as a result of his standing. I mean for me that sounds great lol but seriously he's supposed to be whiter than white!
Bryan said:Huh??? Of course brain activity can be quantified and measured! Certainly in principle! In fact, the "brain wave" machine that guy was using in the video was doing that, although it obviously wasn't doing it at a very high level. Not high enough to show what the guy was actually thinking.
What in the world makes you think we can't measure it (in principle)??? :dunno:
Sure, I'll do my best to keep an open mind, but I just don't have the time to read a huge amount of material devoted to something I consider to be highly unlikely (like the possible existence of leprechauns). If someone like Stevenson is serious about believing in the possible existence of reincarnation, I'll have to let his peers comment on what he says, before _I_ waste any time on it.
Is the Brain Really Necessary?
This was the question asked by British neurologist John Lorber when he addressed a conference of pædiatricians in 1980. Such a frivolous sounding question was sparked by case studies Lorber had been involved in since the mid-60s. The case studies involve victims of an ailment known as hydrocephalus, more commonly known as water on the brain. The condition results from an abnormal build up of cerebrospinal fluid and can cause severe retardation and death if not treated.
Two young children with hydrocephalus referred to Lorber presented with normal mental development for their age. In both children, there was no evidence of a cerebral cortex. One of the children died at age 3 months, the second at 12 months. He was still following a normal development profile with the exception of the apparent lack of cerebral tissue shown by repeated medical testing. An account of the children was published in Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology.
Later, a colleague at Sheffield University became aware of a young man with a larger than normal head. He was referred to Lorber even though it had not caused him any difficulty. Although the boy had an IQ of 126 and had a first class honours degree in mathematics, he had "virtually no brain". A noninvasive measurement of radio density known as CAT scan showed the boy's skull was lined with a thin layer of brain cells to a millimeter in thickness. The rest of his skull was filled with cerebrospinal fluid. The young man continues a normal life with the exception of his knowledge that he has no brain.
http://flatrock.org.nz/topics/science/i ... essary.htm
monty1978 said:Slightly off topic but wtf I'm bored! I dragged my *** through half of the Tibetan book of living and dying in an attempt to better myself only to find that sogyal rinpoche (spelling?) was an assaulter of women. Semi killed the whole buddhist thing for me :dunno:
aussieavodart said:Bryan said:Huh??? Of course brain activity can be quantified and measured! Certainly in principle! In fact, the "brain wave" machine that guy was using in the video was doing that, although it obviously wasn't doing it at a very high level. Not high enough to show what the guy was actually thinking.
I didn't say brain activity couldn't be measured.
aussieavodart said:What in the world makes you think we can't measure it (in principle)??? :dunno:
Brain activity was being measured, not consciousness.
aussieavodart said:Now, if you are of the opinion that brain activity IS consciousness then Wilber (the guy in the clip) would have been either dead or unconscious, he wasn't either of those things.
aussieavodart said:Sure, I'll do my best to keep an open mind, but I just don't have the time to read a huge amount of material devoted to something I consider to be highly unlikely (like the possible existence of leprechauns). If someone like Stevenson is serious about believing in the possible existence of reincarnation, I'll have to let his peers comment on what he says, before _I_ waste any time on it.
Fair enough, even though I'm no fan of science by consensus or what is culturally acceptable.
Bryan said:So what exactly would you consider to be a measurment of consciousness, and not just "brain activity"?![]()
oni said:Cassin said:Some of you might enjoy this
![]()
"Buddhist Practice on Western Ground: Reconciling Eastern Ideals and Western Psychology [Paperback]"
Forum rules
This forum is for thoughtful and meaningful topics only. Do not use threads like a "chat room". Useless and off-color topics, trolling, vulgarity, and replies with no valuable content will be deleted. No discussions on Religion. Posts here will not increase your post count.
:uglylol: