What happens when we die?

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by jeffporfirio

Didn't say that. My point was that, the known smart minds that experienced the concentration camps didn't have their faith shaken by it, in fact from their writings, it seems quite the opposite.

This doesn't sound like shaken faith? This is from Night by Elie Wiesel:

“Blessed be God's name? Why, but why would I bless Him? Every fiber in me rebelled. Because He caused thousands of children to burn in His mass graves? Because he kept six crematoria working day and night, including Sabbath and the Holy Days? Because in His great might, He had created Auschwitz, Birkenau, Buna, and so many other factories of death? How could I say to Him: Blessed be Thou, Almighty, Master of the Universe, who chose us among all nations to be tortured day and night, to watch as our fathers, our mothers, our brothers, end up in the furnaces? Praised be Thy Holy Name, for having chosen us to be slaughtered on Thine altar?”

That is clearly questioning faith.

I think it's a slap in the face of those killed and the survivors of the holocaust for you to say the smart ones didn't have their faith shaken.

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

So when we evolved from apes, at what point did we have a big enough brain to have a soul? Where is the demarcation point?

Actually, brain size has nothing to do with making us human. Brain size is usually related to the overall size of the species. Whales and Elephants have larger brains than we do and overall, more neurons in their brains because of it. What separates us is the number of neurons we have in our cerebral cortex. The part of the brain responsible for giving us consciousness. It's unique to the human species.

[jeffporfirio]

Originally Posted by Sliver

This doesn't sound like shaken faith? This is from Night by Elie Wiesel:

That is clearly questioning faith.

I think it's a slap in the face of those killed and the survivors of the holocaust for you to say the smart ones didn't have their faith shaken.

Thank you. Proven wrong.
Serves me well for generalizing.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by jeffporfirio

Didn't say that. My point was that, the known smart minds that experienced the concentration camps didn't have their faith shaken by it, in fact from their writings, it seems quite the opposite.

Well, the ones that survived....

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

Actually, brain size has nothing to do with making us human. Brain size is usually related to the overall size of the species. Whales and Elephants have larger brains than we do and overall, more neurons in their brains because of it. What separates us is the number of neurons we have in our cerebral cortex. The part of the brain responsible for giving us consciousness. It's unique to the human species.

It was just a response to Peter's comment about brain size being important. And waitjustaminute, mister monkeyman. Is see what you are trying to do here...

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Sliver

I think soul in the most basic terms would be the consciousness that magically doesn't have a physical form yet somehow contains all of the feelings, emotions, memories that, in reality, require a physical body to experience.

Wouldn't animals fall under this too?

[Fuzz]

Simple, there is no soul. It's a human construct. Consciousness exists, a soul doesn't.

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Simple, there is no soul. It's a human construct. Consciousness exists, a soul doesn't.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Simple, there is no soul. It's a human construct. Consciousness exists, a soul doesn't.

So what would be the definition of conciousness?

I just really struggle with what actually separates us from most other species. The only thing I can think of is the ability to question our own existence (as is shown by this thread). But who's to say other species don't?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Consciousness is a huge question. But ascribing it to a "soul" is pure God-of-the-gaps thinking. There are lots of things we don't understand - we need to be comfortable with the fact that "I don't know" is a reasonable answer to a question, particularly since it then usually leads to filling that gap with something meaningful, based on evidence and reason. If we pretend we know the answer and just assert something based on nothing, that then slows human progress and understanding.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by MattyC

So what would be the definition of conciousness?

I just really struggle with what actually separates us from most other species. The only thing I can think of is the ability to question our own existence (as is shown by this thread). But who's to say other species don't?

Greater intelligence and the ability to manipulate our environment in far more extensive ways than other animals. We aren't mentally much different than animals, it is merely the scale of our intelligence. There are countless behavioral studies that show animals exhibiting the same characteristics we do. I'm not sure what the need is to struggle with what separates us. Think of it like a continuum, with us on one end, and paramecium and Westboro Baptists on the other. You can try to find logical breaks between species, but that is just more human constructs.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Greater intelligence and the ability to manipulate our environment in far more extensive ways than other animals. We aren't mentally much different than animals, it is merely the scale of our intelligence. There are countless behavioral studies that show animals exhibiting the same characteristics we do. I'm not sure what the need is to struggle with what separates us. Think of it like a continuum, with us on one end, and paramecium and Westboro Baptists on the other. You can try to find logical breaks between species, but that is just more human constructs.

Even the intelligence question for me can get muddied. Every species has natural tendencies, that we don't have, built into their physiology. Birds fly south, to some predetermined destination, every year, along the same path without even really being "taught" it. My dog can differentiate between cars that are minutes from my house purely by, what must be, differences in sound, and recognize them as cars that he knows (IE he will begin getting excited that my brother is coming home probably 5-10 minutes before he walks in the door). Is that intelligence any more or less what we have? Sure we can build civilizations, but so can ants (and much more efficiently).

Is that intelligence that much different than our own? Is it the very fact that we can KNOW things and choose to reject them a sign of intelligence? And through that rejection we adapt our environment vs adapting ourselves? (IE, it's pretty easy to see that people exist in places which they should not. Animals tend to leave their habitats when that happens, but we seem to stay and try to adapt our surroundings to suit us.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by jeffporfirio

Still though, as mentioned in my post non-Christian historians wrote about Jesus, and that alone debunks most of Erhman's points.

They were not contemporary to the time of Jesus, and whatever they did relate was hearsay.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Even the intelligence question for me can get muddied. Every species has natural tendencies, that we don't have, built into their physiology. Birds fly south, to some predetermined destination, every year, along the same path without even really being "taught" it. My dog can differentiate between cars that are minutes from my house purely by, what must be, differences in sound, and recognize them as cars that he knows (IE he will begin getting excited that my brother is coming home probably 5-10 minutes before he walks in the door). Is that intelligence any more or less what we have? Sure we can build civilizations, but so can ants (and much more efficiently).

Is that intelligence that much different than our own? Is it the very fact that we can KNOW things and choose to reject them a sign of intelligence? And through that rejection we adapt our environment vs adapting ourselves? (IE, it's pretty easy to see that people exist in places which they should not. Animals tend to leave their habitats when that happens, but we seem to stay and try to adapt our surroundings to suit us.

Well yes of course some animals have adaptations that we don't. Your dog recognizing a sound, I wouldn't call that intelligence so much as a reaction. A lot of what you describe is instinct, but it could also be placed no the intelligence spectrum. Plenty of animals live in places they shouldn't and evolve to it or die out.

I guess my point is we aren't all that much different from animals, what sets us apart is what I mentioned before.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Well yes of course some animals have adaptations that we don't. Your dog recognizing a sound, I wouldn't call that intelligence so much as a reaction. A lot of what you describe is instinct, but it could also be placed no the intelligence spectrum. Plenty of animals live in places they shouldn't and evolve to it or die out.

I guess my point is we aren't all that much different from animals, what sets us apart is what I mentioned before.

Couldn't all of our intelligence (or the evolution of our intelligence) be attributed to instinct as well?

As I kind of alluded to, is the ability to ignore instinct and actually act against our own interest (or the interest of our species) a sign of greater intelligence?

[jeffporfirio]

Originally Posted by troutman

They were not contemporary to the time of Jesus, and whatever they did relate was hearsay.

Pliny - b 23 ad
Josephus b 37 ad
Tacitus b 56 ad

Not eons from the time of Jesus

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Couldn't all of our intelligence (or the evolution of our intelligence) be attributed to instinct as well?

As I kind of alluded to, is the ability to ignore instinct and actually act against our own interest (or the interest of our species) a sign of greater intelligence?

OK, I see what you are saying. Though I'm not sure that alone is enough to make us" different". I won't say "intelligent" in that regard because, and I haven't looked into this, but I assume there are plenty of examples of animals ignoring their basic instincts for whatever reason. I could be wrong on that. And some might argue ignoring our instincts (such as, instinctively, destroying the environment you live in would be wrong, or, uhm, voting for Trump) makes us less intelligent.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by peter12

This is a massive, massive, massive difference. Irreconcilable.

About the same massive difference between the brain of a Dolphin and a Seal, in the end they are still mammals.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by jeffporfirio

Pliny - b 23 ad
Josephus b 37 ad
Tacitus b 56 ad

Not eons from the time of Jesus

Were they babies when they wrote their accounts?

That is weak evidence to hold your hat on.

Textcritic has made a very strong circumstantial case here before for a historical Jesus, not relying so much on the accounts of these historians. If I understand it correctly, we can't say with absolute certainty that there was a historical Jesus, but the probability is likely (somewhere between a balance of probabilities and beyond a reasonable doubt).

Unless we are Bible literalists, it should not matter to us either way. It is the message that is important, not the symbol.

[Frequitude]

The electrical activity that drives our consciousness, senses, feelings, heart beat, motor functions and pretty much everything ceases to operate and we become an inert pile of molecules no different that a pile of firewood.