Only three Theories explain the Relation between our Soul and Matter

[Siemens]

Originally Posted by Altair

Okay.. so now it's ''perception''.

It is about the generation of perception (= hallucination, visualization, dreaming,...).

Originally Posted by Altair

I don't have any proof for C, I simply know there's matter and there's 'spirit', and both are real to me. .

Okay, fine. You say you know it but in the same line you say you have no proof. How can that be?

Do you mean you just can’t prove it to others, or do you mean you haven’t even proof for yourself? It would be a problem if it were the latter. Because you can’t KNOW anything that you can’t even prove for yourself.

Originally Posted by Altair

The world exists with or without a creature perceiving it. If there's no life on planet Mars for instance, it didn't suddenly came into existence just because we all conjured it up. The people whom you will never meet, they still exist.

All you do is repeating your dogma. I already understand that you do not believe that what we perceive as material universe is a virtual visualization inside the soul but rather a substance outside the mind. I already got that. You don’t need to repeat your belief in every post again.

The question I ask is not:
“Do you believe that it is more likely that matter is a substance then a hallucination inside the soul/mind”?

The question I ask is:
“WHY do you believe that it is more likely that matter is a substance outside our soul then a hallucination inside the soul/mind”?

You permanently repeat: I believe in C. I believe in C. I believe in C. I believe in C. I believe in C.....
But you still didn’t came up with just one single argument that would support your belief. Stop confirming your belief. Instead answer the question for the foundation of your belief: Why do you believe that it is more likely that matter is a substance then a hallucination inside our souls? Especially when you have no proof?

[Siemens]

Originally Posted by EdmundJohnstone

Ok. So can you answer this please?
For Atheists, there was the Big bang, the Universe was created by this chance, life emerged by chance on this planet starting with bacteria, evolving into marine life then earthly life, and finally flying species. The apes ancestor evolved into humans.

Originally Posted by EdmundJohnstone

Some atheists just don't want to live anymore after they die, what will be their fate then?

You mean what or where Atheists will be after death? They will be what we all will be: Souls in the beyond. Outside of what we perceive as the material world.

[EdmundJohnstone]

Originally Posted by Siemens

You mean what or where Atheists will be after death? They will be what we all will be: Souls in the beyond. Outside of what we perceive as the material world.

Thanks for the reply.
Most atheists would defend A as it would be the easiest to explain as there is just material proof out there.
I heard some atheists just want to be dead and gone after they die, what will happen to them then?

[Altair]

Originally Posted by Siemens

Do you mean you just can’t prove it to others, or do you mean you haven’t even proof for yourself?

The former.

Originally Posted by Siemens

All you do is repeating your dogma. I already understand that you do not believe that what we perceive as material universe is a virtual visualization inside the soul but rather a substance outside the mind. I already got that. You don’t need to repeat your belief in every post again.
The question I ask is not:
“Do you believe that it is more likely that matter is a substance then a hallucination inside the soul/mind”?
The question I ask is:
“WHY do you believe that it is more likely that matter is a substance outside our soul then a hallucination inside the soul/mind”?
You permanently repeat: I believe in C. I believe in C. I believe in C. I believe in C. I believe in C.....
But you still didn’t came up with just one single argument that would support your believe. Stop confirming your belief. Answer the question for the foundation of your belief: Why do you believe that it is more likely that matter is a substance then a hallucination inside our souls? Especially when you have no proof?

I gave my reasons. Things exist independently of any separate individual's mind. It doesn't take a perceiver in order for a planet to exist. And that is WHY I reject your beliefs. So I am answering your question. If I am repeating then it is simply because you are not paying attention.

And you cannot bring any proof to the table either, none of the three explanations can provide scientific proof. We can however say that A is most parsimonious for it does not assume existence of the soul, but only that which can pass the test of repeatability, so from any scientific point of view agnosticism is sensible.

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by Altair

Okay.. so now it's ''perception''. Doesn't change things though. The world exists with or without a creature perceiving it. If there's no life on planet Mars for instance, it didn't suddenly came into existence just because we all conjured it up. The people whom you will never meet, they still exist. The planets whom you'll never see or hear about, they will still exist. The planet Mars exists with or without a perceiver. It was already there before humans came into the picture. The other life forms didn't perceive Mars yet it was there, billions of years before us. Yes, it's mad to suggest existence depends on our (human) thoughts.

You do wear me out, by the way....
I don't have any proof for C, I simply know there's matter and there's 'spirit', and both are real to me.
For years now I'm wondering how the two co-exist and influence each other, they do but I don't know how it all works. Wish I did.

How do you know?

If you had this discussion in one of your dreams, what would you think about that now, when you're awake? Is the "material" world form your dream material, made of "material substance"?

How do you know you aren't now in a dream of an "awake" you?

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by EdmundJohnstone

Thanks for the reply.
Most atheists would defend A as it would be the easiest to explain as there is just material proof out there.
I heard some atheists just want to be dead and gone after they die, what will happen to them then?

What would those atheists think about they-in-their-dreams wanting to be dead when they wake up? They wouldn't care, would they?

Same with them wanting "to be dead and gone after they die".

The YOU who incarnated as you, and to WHOM you'll wake up when you'll die, isn't the you who "lives" here and now. You are like one of its dreams for that YOU.

By the way, atheism is faith based too, as any other religion.

[Siemens]

Originally Posted by Altair

I gave my reasons. Things exist independently of any separate individual's mind. It doesn't take a perceiver in order for a planet to exist. And that is WHYI reject your beliefs. So I am answering your question. If I am repeating then it is simply because you are not paying attention.

Okay, fine. I do pay attention but I think you have problems with logic reasoning. In essence I asked:
Why can’t the world you currently perceive be a dream of your soul?

And your answers were:
“Things exist independently of any separate individual's mind.”
“It doesn't take a perceiver in order for a planet to exist.”

You don’t have to be a genius to realize that your answers are pure circular arguments. I take it slowly, step by step. But please think about it carefully:

I think you agree that you, as a conscious being, have the ability to dream (what you sometimes do when you sleep). So in a dream you perceive a 3-dimensional world that theoretically can take any form. As long as you are inside the dream-world this dream world seems “real” to you. You can walk around, interact with things, you have a body,... In this dream-world you can do and have everything you can do and have in the world you are currently in (while you are awake). I think you agree so far.

Further, for this dream-world the arguments you gave above aren’t true:
“Things exist independently of any separate individual's mind.”
-> is not true for a dream-world because things in the dream-world indeed do not exist independently of the dreamer’s mind.

“It doesn't take a perceiver in order for a planet to exist.”
-> is not true for a dream-world because it indeed does take a perceiver for a dream-world to exist.

I think you still agree. But you think that’s not relevant because you think we aren’t in a dream-world now. And this is the point were you start to be circular: Thus far we don’t now if we are in a dream-world or not. We are just asking the question if or if not. Both are possible so far.
The crucial point is, that if we were in a dream, everything could look like as if we weren’t in a dream. From inside a dream you can’t assess if you are in a dream or not.
I fear you still don’t understand what I’m trying to say but at the moment I don’t know how to explain it easier.

The following question could also help you:
What you would answer if someone would ask you: “Is the world around you real or a dream?” while you were dreaming? Of course, you would insist that you are not dreaming in the same way you do it now. Obviously your judgement were wrong. So, how can you be sure that your judgment isn't wrong right now?
Got it?

Originally Posted by Altair

And you cannot bring any proof to the table either, none of the three explanations can provide scientific proof.

This is true. And I never said that I have the proof that we live in a dream-world. I just said it is at least as likely as dualism.

Originally Posted by Altair

We can however say that A is most parsimonious for it does not assume existence of the soul.

This is wrong. But since we haven't resolved your circular reasoning I will talk about that later.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by Siemens

But since we haven't resolved your circular reasoning I will talk about that later.

Is 1+1+1 circular reasoning or is it Boolean Algebra?

[Altair]

@Siemens; Your beliefs rest on the assumption that the world is a dream. Have you any evidence of this? No you do not. It is a brain exercise that does not pass the test of reality. You still go on about a dream-world and it needing a perceiver in order to exist. Well guess what, Mars and Venus didn't need perceivers to exist, they were already there before animals were, or even conscious ones that can see these planets, i.e. us. Things can simply exist independently of your or a human mind.

The things you do to support your beliefs are just mental exercises but they just do not bear relevance to reality.

There are also people whom I'm sure would take your ''option B'' because they believe there are different worlds and perceptions, but this does not negate duality nor does it mean one world is a fake dream and the other is real.

[Busby]

Life is made up of the physical world in which each of us resides after having left our mother's womb and the mental world which we can understand as being consciousness.

There is nothing else at the stage we call 'being human'. We couldn't be anything other than what we are. The world/universe reflects in its individual physical forms the quality of its basic stages and levels of responding energies. Responding that is to the fluctuations of experience and information. The world we see outside ourselves is the result of each individual information load.

Birds of a feather.

We are all standing on the same platform at the moment because this is where the train of life has brought us so far. There are many other platforms and many other stations. Our journey will never end.

Our bodies, made up of energies stemming from below the atom but using atoms to convert, belong to the physical world where nothing can avoid change.

Our minds our our true reality and form everything inside and outside physicality. Your mind formed your own self in your mother's womb.

Consciousness fills nothingness and is yours to do what you like with. It's up to you - the result is karma - otherwise known as evolution.