Some people don't have internal monologue - TomoNews

Isn't This A Problem?

I saw this little comic strip on Tumblr and it asks the questions that Atheists seem to do their utmost to avoid answering. It's not Theists that have an unsurmountable epidemiological problem but atheists do. Most are more than willing to admit that not only that we do not understand how our brains work or where human intellect and consciousness comes from but wants to believe that we can really trust what we know that we can't really trust. Why? How do they know Some even go as far as asserting that we should assume that our minds are capable of rationality because it is the best option we have. This however is not true. God has given us the better option - trusting Him.

Neo video games: mind controlled or mind control? - National Worldview and Science | Examiner.com

Mariano has posted an interesting article on mind controlled video games. I think he raises some valid points. I think that is a human mind can be read and manipulate a computer, I see no reason why it can't go the other way to some degree. Given the technology companies like Google are working one like Google's Glass, there is some evidence that things are going to be going this direction more and more..Some film-makers have created a short-film about how such technology would eventually look like. I would like  to point out that like all technology, this doesn't have to be evil or used nefariously. It can be used to help people and move us forward...provided we don't do with it as done at the end of the film.

Read Mariano's article here:

Neo video games: mind controlled or mind control? - National Worldview and Science | Examiner.com

And watch the short film I referenced here:


If you would like to know more about Google Glass check out this link and videos.
Project Glass: what you need to know

Related articles

• MICROWAVE MIND CONTROL by Tim Rifat
• Some have probably seen shows about mind control
• Mind Control With Light
• Military Vets Suing CIA Over Mind Control
• Ten Methods of Modern Mind Control | Wake Up World

The Secular Outpost: 20+ Questions for Theists #8 and 9 and 10

John Loftus has posted a link to a  list of questions for theists from another blog. Rather than answer all of them in a single post, I will take each of them one at a time. Today:


8. Why would God desire to create embodied moral agents, as opposed to unembodied minds (such as souls, spirits, or ghosts)? Why is the human mind dependent on the physical brain


I gave a response to this one before the post was edited at:  http://mmcelhaney.blogspot.com/2012/06/secular-outpost-20-questions-for.html


9. Did Australopithecus have a soul? What about homo habilis? Homo erectus? Neanderthals? Why or why not? (HT: Keith Parsons)


I'm not sure if we can really conclusively prove that  Australopithecus,  homo habilis, Homo erectus, or Neanderthals  were fundamentally different from us or represent the varying stages in human evolution. It is am interesting fairytale that I just don't think that there is enough evidence to accept as fact. Therefore being asked about whether or not they had souls is not appropriate. Many people who raise this question don't think modern people have souls either, so it's just sad attempt to make people doubt their own soul's existence based on not being able to answer the same question about "ancestors" that we don't really have much information about. For the sake of argument let's say that these earlier hominids did exist, how would you go about testing their cognitive functions? How would you talk to them about their hopes and dreams? On this subject, if you accept evolution, agnosticism is the only honest position. Concluding that they had souls and that they did not have souls would be a move of blind faith - believing something that you have no evidence for. 


10. How do souls interact with physical matter? Do you have any answer that is not tantamount to "I don't know?" (HT: Keith Parsons)


Souls interact with physical matter in their bodies that God gave us. Easy peasy. 

The Secular Outpost: 20+ Questions for Theists

The Secular Outpost: 20+ Questions for Theists #2

John Loftus has posted a link to a  list of questions for theists from another blog. Rather than answer all of them in a single post, I will take each of them one at a time. Today:

Why would God desire to create embodied moral agents, as opposed to disembodied minds (such as souls, spirits, or ghosts)? Why is the human mind dependent on the physical brain?

These questions contradict one another. If mind is dependent on a physical brain than there can be no souls, spirits, or ghosts (there are no ghosts from a Biblical worldview). The second question assumes that the first can't be answered because it assumes that there are no disembodied minds. There is no conclusive proof of that because there is no real way to experiment to find out what happens to a human mind after death. Also from a Biblical worldview, there is no reason to conflate mind and spirit. The Bible discusses mind, spirit, and soul as separate categories. The other thing is that God did create minds, souls, and spirits as well as  "embodied moral agents" so the question doesn't make sense. The question also presupposes the existence of minds, souls, and spirits. These questions are ill posed and pointless to answer. If anyone would care to rephrase it, I'd be happy to further discuss it.


²⁷ Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, ²⁸ so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.- Hebrews 9:27,28

The Secular Outpost: 20+ Questions for Theists

Mindwave + Arduino = Mind-Controlled Car [Video]

B-Reel Performs Mind Tricks from B-Reel & B-Reel Films on Vimeo.

Mindwave + Arduino = Mind-Controlled Car [Video]

Free Will - Comparison; Will A Man Rob God?

 

This graphic shows considerable ignorance as to what the Bible teaches us about God's character and how God relates to people. Equating a robber robing someone of material wealth that the robber does not deserve or own to God demanding worship is simply stupid. When we are commanded to worship God, it's a matter of God getting from us what He deserves and owed from us. When we worship God we fulfill the purpose for which we were brought into existence. There are as many different ways to worship God as there are people.

I think "Free Will"  is confused here with "Free Choice". They are not synonymous. While we can and do choose to obey God or disobey, we cannot choose to submit ourselves to God on our own. We are enslaved to sin. No matter how much you try you are unable to be sinless on your own without the Holy Spirit empowering you and even then its still a struggle. Without God, there is no struggle because we have no reason struggle against our natures.

⁵ Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. ⁶ The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace. ⁷ The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. ⁸ Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God.- Romans 8:5-8

God doesn't send people to hell because we all go to hell by default. It is a gift of God  to submit to His will and repent of our sins. We are unable to do it for ourselves.All you have to do is respond to the offer God is offering us and you will be saved. No one gets saved without making a conscious choice.

⁴⁰ For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”
 ⁴¹ At this the Jews there began to grumble about him because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” ⁴² They said, “Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, ‘I came down from heaven’?”
   ⁴³ “Stop grumbling among yourselves,” Jesus answered. ⁴⁴ “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day. ⁴⁵ It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me. ⁴⁶ No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father. - John 6:40-46

 ⁸ For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— ⁹ not by works, so that no one can boast. ¹⁰ For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.- Ephesians 2:8-10

irReligion.org » Free Will

Related articles

• Jesus, The Wisdom Of God (pastorht.wordpress.com)
• YES their ARE Apostolic MOTHERS By Apostle Ricardo Butler (reasondisciple.wordpress.com)
• A Few Thoughts on Free Will (richicc.wordpress.com)
• First contact (pastorayres.wordpress.com)

Near Death Experiences As Evidence for the Transcendance of the Human Mind

Recently the controversy of the human mind versus the human brain has become very important. The question: Is the human mind just an extension of the human brain or is the mind distinct and transcends death? The question has many implications. The issue is many atheists desire to define the mind as indistinguishable of the brain because then they can argue that there can't be any mind without a brain and no soul  - casting serious doubt on the existence of God. They desire to think of a human as being composed of nothing more than a physical body. They reject the Biblical descriptions of humans having having souls. They even try to say that there is no evidence to the contrary that supports that the mind transcends death and continues to exist or that the mind is not the same as the brain. They say that the fact that brain injury can cause changes in personality and behavior that the mind and the brain are the same thing. Is this true? Does it make sense?

What we have is a false parallel. The argument is designed to making you choose between the prospect that the mind and the brain are so tied together that they are the same thing or that they are so separate that the what happens to the brain doesn't affect the mind. The thing is that there is no reason to conclude that if  the mind is affected by what happens to the brain that the mind/soul do not live on after the physical body (brain) dies. There is no evidence that the relationship should be so. I have yet to read or hear anyone successfully argue why we should make that assumption. It seems that there is no reason why they both can't be true - that the mind is affected by what happens to the brain  and that the mind/soul survives physical death - brain death in other words.

A lot of people admit that if near-death experiences (NDE) are proof that the mind/soul survives death, then it's proof that the mind and the brain are not the same thing. This is why many atheists argue very hard against NDE's. They recognize that if accept the possibility that our minds survive the death of our bodies it puts their atheism in a precarious condition because we can't really know anything about what happens after we die using our own natural ways of observing the material world. Worse than that.  It means that all truth cannot be determined using the natural methods many of them have pinned their faith on. It means you have to truly consider if the Bible is true. You have to admit that it matters if the Bible is true or not.

Is there proof that NDEs are true experiences? I think they are  and not because I need them to be true to validate the Bible. I think that a good place to start looking at these issues is to look at the work of Gary Habermas. Here is an audio lecture on the subject of NDEs.

Dr. Gary Habermas gives a talk about data reported in peer-reviewed medical journals involving near-death experiences.

Listen to the talk at the following link: Near-Death Experiences: Evidence for an Afterlife? - Gary Habermas MP3 Audio

Also he has a FAQ section on NDEs on his website. Read it at http://www.garyhabermas.com/qa/qa_index.htm#nea

Related articles

• Near Death Experience (NDE) and 'Embraced By The Light' by Betty Eadie (photographess.wordpress.com)
• Near-Death Experiences (alpup.blogspot.com)
• Scientists probe brief brushes with the afterlife. Jan 12, 2011 by G. Jeffrey MacDonald (RNS) (juanfilpo.com)
• What Happens When You (Almost) Die? (huffingtonpost.com)

FacePalm of the Day #54 - Debunking Christianity: Quote of the Day

Given that John Loftus posted the following:

Given the proliferation of religious delusions that seem to be growing around the globe in an age of weapons of mass destruction, atheists must start breeding like rabbits. ;-)

I'd like to assume he is just making a joke but it is to stupid that it just isn't funny. It made me wonder if he really knows deep down abortion is wrong. If a person claims to be religious and still thinks that abortion is not wrong than they are being inconsistent. However the reason why an atheist has little problem with abortion because according to their world view the unborn child is not a person and therefore not worth the same as a born human being. I admit if life doesn't begin at conception, and if there is no soul or minds that transcend death then maybe they have a point. After all if the mind and brain are the same thing, how can a fetus have a mind if it doesn't yet have a brain? This is one of the reason that, by definition, atheists must discount the unborn as human beings. However there is a point to consider: If atheists do have more children they will be obeying the divine mandate to be fruitful and multiply and giving us more people to share the Gospel with. He also commits the fallacy of thinking that this world would be a better place if everyone agreed with him.

In the comments section, Loftus also wrote:

Eight million Christians killed each other during such wars as the thirty years war, even though your God could've easily settled their disputes since he supposedly had foreknowledge they would do so. Why didn't he communicate through his so-called inspired authors what Christians should believe more clearly?

First, I'd like to know how he came up with the number eight million dying during wars waged by Christians? Second, although he claims to understand history, does Loftus really think the causes of the Thirty and Hundred Years wars all come down to people who disagreed on Biblical Theology? I'm trying really hard not to laugh at such an absurd claim. Third, Why doesn't it occur to Loftus that some of the people who fought in those wars could have ignored God's Word even as he does today?

Debunking Christianity: Quote of the Day

Debunking Christianity: A Listing of Cognitive Biases

My Common Sense is tingling again. John Loftus recently posted the following:

Cognitive bias is a general term that is used to describe many distortions in the human mind that are difficult to eliminate and that lead to perceptual distortion, inaccurate judgment, or illogical interpretation. Link

Why do I keep writing about this? Because we know humans are prone to these biases. We know this. So we should all become skeptics. We should all ask for positive evidence for that which we accept as true. We should adopt a science-based reasoning rather than a faith-based reasoning. Dr. James Alcock defined faith-based reasoning as "belief in search of data." Given the cognitive biases this is simply a wrong-headed approach if we want to know the truth.

Unless John Loftus is not human (I'm assuming he is and I hope that is not a cognitive bias),  isn't he also prone to cognitive bias? How does he know he has eliminated his biases against the Bible and God? I'm skeptical that he can or has. I don't even think he can see his perceptual distortions, inaccurate judgments, or illogical interpretations. Why shouldn't science-based reasoning also have the same level of skepticism as faith? There are things about reality that we all agree are true yet can't be substantiated or examined using the scientific method.  They can't be weighed, counted, or measured. John Loftus seems to draw the line to stop his skepticism, entrenching his own biases, at the points he is capable and not just unwilling to change but also unable to change.


Debunking Christianity: A Listing of Cognitive Biases

FacePalm of the Day #48 - Debunking Christianity: The Mind/Brain Problem

John Loftus has been been commenting a lot on Dr Victor Reppert's blog lately. His latest driv...er attempt is responding to nature of mind and matter (the brain). My comments will be in italics.


Okay, Okay, I've been participating in a guilty pleasure by visiting Victor Reppert's Blog lately. Vic argued

I am suggesting on principled grounds that a careful reflection on the nature of mind and matter will invariably reveal that there is a logical gap between them that in principle cannot be bridged without fudging categories.

I'm glad Loftus has been reading Reppert's blog, maybe God can use it to reach him.


My responses so far:


You're arguing that we cannot get to a mind from the fact that there is only a brain.


So, let's talk about the mind. If there is a mind can we get to a brain? Think about this. You have merely reversed the argumentation but it leads to the same conclusion. I maintain that there is no logical connection between the mind and the brain. If we presume there is a mind then how does it tell the brain what signals to send to the arm such that it moves? Logically, unless there is a point of contact between them, the mind cannot interact with the brain. You know the problem.


Loftus does not say why this must be true he merely asserts it. I think a good analogy are computers. The hardware - the processor - is like our brain. In this analogy the mind is like the operating system/software that runs the computer. The analogy breaks down quickly but let's ride it for a moments as far as it can carry us. How is the software connected to the processor? It's not in the same way the hardware is connected. I think it's here where the analogy starts to go off the rails. I don't know how the mind and brain are connected. No one really does. Are they connected? Yes. Is the brain all there is? I don't think so? We do have people who have had near-death experiences and while they were brain-dead for few moments, they still reported consciousness.


Would you please define a mind for me? If that definition does not include material properties then how is this not a logical problem? What's your solution?


The mind is our desires, personalities, memories, emotions, consciousness - it's the sum total of everything that makes you who you are. This is more than what you are. When you talk to someone you are interacting with their mind not their brain.


Let's say you have none, or at least, let's say I'm not persuaded. Then we are at a logical impasse.


What to do then?


I'd like to know why does John Loftus think that his persuasion would make it true. Something can be true even if he doesn't think it is.


Trust the sciences. Science repeatedly disconfirms that there is a mind. Drugs, strokes, electromagnetic probing, and a nail through the brain can and does change a person's emotions, ideas, thinking patterns, and a man's personality itself.


Science does no such thing. If a computer's hardware is damaged or changed, don't you think it would change the software? Saying that mind and brain are not the same thing is not the same thing as asserting that they are not connected. Some people get brain damaged or head trauma or even lobotomies and experienced no change in who they are. Just because a person's emotions, ideas, thinking patterns, and personality are affected by changing the brain does not mean there is no mind. I don't know why anyone would expect the mind and body to be totally separate. Making a distinction does not mean making a separation.


In fact, as neurologist Sam Harris has said, if there is a mind there is no reason for God to have created us with brains. If the mind tells the brain what signals to send to the arm then it can by-pass the brain altogether and simply send signals to the arm.


Sam Harris sure likes making assertions that he can't prove. If the mind is your intentions and thoughts then you want to move your arm and the brain sends the signal. To argue that either the brain or mind is unnecessary is a really silly idea and no reason can be found for that.


The brain ends up being unnecessary on the hypothesis there is a God who created the mind. Or you could perhaps give me one function of the brain that could not be performed by the mind if there was one.


Just one.


That is not what theists argue. God created mind and brain - in fact all of reality. We don't understand ourselves or the universe to determined what is unnecessary just yet. As for one function of the brain that could not be performed the mind is the wrong question. The question that Loftus and people like him are afraid of is the question: Where does consciousness come from? I think computers again help us here. Is anyone really willing to argue that if we made a computer with enough circuits and connection (like the human brain) consciousness would result? I don't think so. I don't think consciousness comes form the brain. However research is currently being done that will prove it as our computers become more sophisticated.


I also maintain that on the supposition of a creator god that the vastness and age of the universe isn't necessary. He could have created a world on a flat disk for this. The question at that point is why did god create unnecessary things? The burden of proof is on the theist to show why unnecessary things were created.


I think that Loftus is seriously mistakenly. He failed to show the mind or anything is unnecessary. He first has to prove that the mind is unnecessary.


To the Christian objection that we need our senses and the brain as a storage unit to process the senses I argue that you theists do not take your theology very seriously at all. If there is a mind then it can sense the empirical world on your own assumptions. If there is a mind we do not need our senses. Get it? If there is a mind that can interact with the brain then it can control the brain. If it can control the brain then it knows what the brain is doing. How it does this is left unexplained, but if we take that position seriously it can. Now if it can sense the brain then it can sense the outside world and so we do not need the five senses.


I don't know anyone who thinks that the mind can sense the empirical world. He offers no proof or explanation that the mind and brain are related to one another the way he says it is. It is silly conclude that if the mind can sense the outside world we don't need the five senses. Our five senses organs are like hardware on a modern computer. Microphone of ears. Speakers for mouth. Cameras for eyes. We even have peripherals that sense force so it is like touch. Without software to make sense of analyze the input, all those senses are useless. Same thing with brain and mind. The brain processes the data but the mind makes of the data and determines its values and importance.


You people need to be more consistent here. Consistency, that's all I ever ask.


I'll be happy when Loftus offers such consistence.


But let's assume God created us with senses anyway. The mind supposedly has the characteristics of memory storage, critical thinking, decision-making and so on. What need then of a brain? I simply don't see it based on theistic grounds.


I wouldn't say that the mind store memory. Memory storage is a function of the brain. I believe science has been able to show that. But when it comes to thinking and consciousness there has been no proof that it's only the brain responsible for that.


Why is it that atheists like Loftus Harris are invested in denying the existence of the human mind? Simple. They know that if there is no mind and if all that means that all that there is (to them) is a material world and you can't have a consciousness without a body which (to them) would mean that there in no way could be a god as described in the body. They are trying to get around the scripture, and perhaps not even consciously.

²⁴ “The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. ²⁵ And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. ²⁶ From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. ²⁷ God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. ²⁸ ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’


²⁹ “Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by human design and skill. ³⁰ In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. ³¹ For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.”
- Acts 17:24-31

Debunking Christianity: The Mind/Brain Problem