What convinces you that there is more than the physical?

[wildflower]

I hope this is an okay topic.

For those that believe in something beyond the tangible, I'm interested in knowing what it is that tells you in your heart (or mind).

Throughout life I've often drifted back to agnosticism and even toward atheism, but at other times, there are three main things that tell me there may be something more.

1) Scientific studies on the effectivness of prayer. For example, in one study, seeds prayed for were far more likely to germinate than seeds not prayed for.

2) Near death experiences. Studies have shown them to be consistent across religions and cultures.

3) That which initiates life. While it may be possible for scientists to provide scientific explanations for (1) and (2) above, I haven't seen anything that can explain this one. Here's what I mean:

It was in my experience with the deaths of people close to me that I started to wonder what starts and stops life. For example, if you have a car with broken parts, you can put in new parts, then start up the gas and make it go.

But if a living being dies, you could replace all organs, even every single cell, but you can't "turn it on." What "turns on" life and what shuts it off? I hope this is making sense.

So I'm interested in hearing from others: what tells you in your heart or mind that there is (or is not) more than the physical in this life?

-wildflower

[Maat]

1. I think that you hit the nail on the head, so-to-speak.

In my faith (CRS), instead of saying, 'I pray for peace on Earth,' or 'There will be peace on Earth,' one says, 'Yes, there IS peace on Earth, and it has begun with me.' We are encouraged to use 'is' and 'will always be,' rather than begging for something in the future (no offense - I'm not saying that is what others do or do not do).


So, when I close my eyes, I feel 'the power' so to speak. It is like a divine human interconnectness and energy. It feels like utilizes something powerful in the human mind, to me. I feel like I'm doing something very positive, and visualizing success.

I hate to say it, but perhaps when someone dies, they have, at some level (maybe that we do not understand), decided to move on. I don't pretend to understand why, or how it works, but I think that it is a special energy (their soul) that moves on. But 'it' finds some way to keep in touch with those souls that are important to them.

[Ranec]

2. I don't think that there is an answer either way.

This is a question that is very difficult for me to answer because I am strongly of two minds.

On one hand, I have a ultra-rational intellect that tells me that only what I see is real. Experiences that are beyond my understanding only illustrate the limits of my understanding.

But there is another side of me that feels the energy that exists within people. At times when I have felt great joy, I feel like I can share that energy with everyone who is around me. I feel a power among some people that I can refer to only as spiritual.

I'm not sure how to reconcile this opposing experiences of the world. Sometimes, I tell myself that the spiritual is just a metaphor for subtle psychological truths. Most of the time though I try to accept the contradiction. I have been surprised how comfortable and rewarding it has been to accept the fact that both sides exist in me and they are both equally right and relevant.

The result of this thinking is that rational arguments in support of the spiritual leave me feeling unsatisfied because they are dealt with by my rational self that is aware of the limits of the evidence. If I want, my skepticism can quickly dismiss all of the physical proof that might be offered.

So I look for evidence in the interactions between people (something which I admittedly am not an expert in.) My friends and my wife are my best teachers about the universe.

I remember someone once asked me, "How can you be an atheist in the face of the beauty of that mountain?" At the time I thought he was a nut. But now I can see how that is the proof that can only be understood by a feeling, spiritual person.

[Maat]

4. I think you made some great points.

I, too, in one way, see a thin line between the spiritual and the physical, in that I'm sure there's a 'scientific' explanation for both, ultimately. It doesn't mean understanding today.

[Az]

5. Understanding the rainbow does nothing to destroy its beauty

Same goes for the mountain. There are 3 locations I have been to that have reduced me to tears because of how beautiful they were. One was climbing a mountain and watching nature play out above and below me. Just because I understand that the accumulation of moisture in the atmosphere accompanied by prevalent wind patterns leads to a build up of clouds on one side of the mountain until sufficient pressure builds up to send then entire formation cascading over the top of the mountain does not mean it is not an absolutely humbling experience (now thats a sentence).

[Az]

3. Life only started once on this planet

Everything since then has been a continuation. Life is matter undergoing a process. Once matter is folded into the continuation of that process it becomes part of life. It is still the same matter it was before. It merely is now part of the dance of life.

Incidently we have conducted experiments in labs where we have switched life on and off. Studies with very primitive life forms (bacteria and virii) have reverse engineered the process. Scientists have knocked out wrungs on the chromosomes of these primitive life forms to see when they shift from alive and functional to static and dead. They then reverse the process and add the link back in.

We are constantly replacing our cells. In about seven years you completely replace your body. You are not the cells. You are not any particular atom in your body. You are the process of atoms and cells in action. Switching you off is bring that action to a halt. The matter and cells continue to exist. Break the process and you destroy the life.

As to the continuity of NDE's (near death experiences) they have some shared symptoms but they are largely biological in origin. The so called tunnel effect for example is experienced by pilots in hi-G manuevors. As the blood drains from the head due to loss of pressure or gravity, the senses begin shutting down. In the case of the eyes the rods shut down before the cones. This results in the high contrast tunnel vision. One of the last parts of the brain to shut down is the hearing.

Another aspect comes into play when the body goes into shock. The brain begins losing functions. When consciousness leaves the system the other senses are sometimes still collecting information. But the data is not be delivered to a conscious mind. Thus chaotic images and memories get stored in shor term memory until consciousness returns.

Because the brain processes whatever is in memory these images bypass consciousness and enter directly into memory. One of the aspects of memory is it often places homonculi in our mental images of our own body. This is to give the memories a point of reference. Thus this event that was never experienced by the waking brain is remembered with the image of us as seen from above.

Learned social and religious implications of these events are attributed to them. There are numerous such mental disconnects that the brain undergoes in varying situations. Stress and shock are major instigators of alterations of mental states.

[Maat]

6. I really like your quote here.

"We are constantly replacing our cells. In about seven years you completely replace your body. You are not the cells. You are not any particular atom in your body. You are the process of atoms and cells in action. Switching you off is bring that action to a halt. The matter and cells continue to exist. Break the process and you destroy the life."

It reminds of my pastor, Reverend Patricia, when she says that we are more than our bodies. I believe so.

There is a continuity going on in what you describe - a continuity of a 'soul' if you will. It doesn't mean that we have to believe in Hell and Damnation, though. Neither I nor my faith believe in those concepts.

[Az]

7. We are more than just our bodies

But without our bodies we are not. It is our bodies doing. Being. Actively being that defines us.

[Maat]

8. I like the way you put that.

I so agree. This is very compatible with my b.s. (belief system - couldn't resist that).

[wildflower]

9. Hello Az, thank you for your opinion and info. I hadn't heard...

about the experiments in which dead bacteria and virii were made alive. That's remarkable. Can you tell me more about them?

Regarding NDEs, I've heard the G-force and shock explanations (as well as several others). I should probably start a new thread on this topic. It's a very interesting one.

Thanks,

-wildflower

[Az]

10. TIGR

The Institute for Genetic Research. They began the studies some time ago. They put the project on hiatus for a time once they had reverse engineered some basic life forms. They did this because they were about to pass a threshold and wanted to put the issue before some ethical review boards. After they reviewed their agenda for about a year they proceeded to reinsert genetic material and the former inanimate objects returned to a functional state.

[wildflower]

11. I found an Institute for Genomic Research also called TIGR;

is that it or a different one? I'm having trouble locating these studies; if you have a link, please let me know.

Thanks,

-wildflower

[Az]

12. They are a couple of years old now

Not sure if links are still available.

[Az]

14. Here is a link to some of the early stages of the research

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/12/991213052506.htm

[Deep13]

21. I don't think so.

"Life only started once on this planet"

I'm no biologist, but I know about as much as any other non-expert. It seems that the picture of early life that is being portrayed by the evidence is that life was an emergent property on the early Earth. The physical conditions of the times simply caused it to happen. The old notion that some extaordinary event caused it, like bolt of lightning hitting a tidal pool that just happen to contain the right chemicals, is loosing favor. Among the reasons for this are the fact that life begain on Earth as soon as it was physically possible. Another reason is simple probability. Creating a self replicating molecule by chance is kind of like throwing a perfect Yahzee (five dice all with the same face on top). It is pretty unlikely. With a million people each throwing a set of five dice at once, however, the unlikely becomes inevitable. Someone in that group will throw all boxcars. The chemical reactions of organic (carbon-based) chemicals on the early Earth occurred trillions of times a second all over the planet. Perfect "Yahzees" must have been occurring quite regularly. Once molecules began replicating, natural selection took over.

[davidinalameda]

13. its called faith

I just do believe that there are forces out there at work

I recently attending the UU Church and I can "feel" an energy at work there--whether it's some divinity or the collective love of these people, there is something there

[Pacifist Patriot]

15. This may seem like a strange reason, but I believe there

is something that is greater than the sum of all tangible objects because the human brain is structured to "experience" it. I think it has to do with my appreciation for efficiency. It galls me to think of a capability that is misleading or wasteful. LOL!

These books have influenced or explain my thinking.

Boyer, Pascal. 2001. Religion Explained: The Evolutionary Origins of Religious Thought. New York: Basic Books.

Newberg MD, Andrew, Eugene D'Aquili MD and Vince Rause. 2001. Why Got Won't Go Away: Brain Science and the Biology of Belief. New York: The Ballentine Publishing Group.

Goswami, Amit and Richard E. Reed and Maggie Goswami. 1993. The Self-Aware Universe: How Consciousness Creates the Material World. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons.

[Az]

16. Of course we are more than the sum of our parts

We are the sum of our parts in action. The increase in potential due to action is astronomical. We are not just a body. We are a being. Being is a verb. We are action. We are potential.

[Pacifist Patriot]

17. That's exactly why I consider myself a panentheist rather than a

pantheist. Well said.

[AlienGirl]

18. Similar minds using different sorts of brains!

I know I am conscious and I know I have a mind. I can reasonably assume you also have a mind, because your brain looks so much like mine. Our brains look like this:



But I can speak to a mind that is using a brain that looks like this:



and discover that the mind using it works much the same way mine does. We categorize things similarly, are both able to use abstract information, and we can both learn to take small parts of information (like letters) and combine them to form new information (like words). We can even learn to speak the same language.

"Thus we are trying to get him to sound out refrigerator letters, the same way one would train children on phonics. We were doing demos at the Media Lab for our corporate sponsors; we had a very small amount of time scheduled and the visitors wanted to see Alex work. So we put a number of differently colored letters on the tray that we use, put the tray in front of Alex, and asked, "Alex, what sound is blue?" He answers, "Ssss." It was an "s", so we say "Good birdie" and he replies, "Want a nut."

Well, I don't want him sitting there using our limited amount of time to eat a nut, so I tell him to wait, and I ask, "What sound is green?" Alex answers, "Ssshh." He's right, it's "sh," and we go through the routine again: "Good parrot." "Want a nut." "Alex, wait. What sound is orange?" "ch." "Good bird!" "Want a nut." We're going on and on and Alex is clearly getting more and more frustrated. He finally gets very slitty-eyed and he looks at me and states, "Want a nut. Nnn, uh, tuh."

Not only could you imagine him thinking, "Hey, stupid, do I have to spell it for you?" but the point was that he had leaped over where we were and had begun sounding out the letters of the words for us."--Irene Pepperberg

Even stranger brains seem to support a mind of some sort. Octopuses are able to work out complex puzzles that are different from anything they'd see in the wild, including figuring out how to open the locks on their aquariums! And they aren't even vertebrates.

The software that is Mind runs on such different hardware platforms that I am compelled to believe it exists independent from the wetware of the brain.

Tucker

[sans qualia]

19. Multiple realizability

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/multiple-realizability/

Functionalism holds that a mind is comprised of a collection of mental processes. While a given process is performed by a physical thing, it is not identical to its realization; rather, its salient characteristics are its relations to other processes. Therefore, a given mind (or kind of mind) can be realized using any medium capable of performing its constituent functions, be it electronic, biological, mechanical, whatever.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying that the mind existing "independent from the wetware of the brain" isn't necessarily incompatible with materialism.

[Digit]

20. I have left my body by accident a few times...

That kind of did it for me!
I am not my body....I am just along for the ride.

[Deep13]

22. nothing

>>"I hope this is an okay topic."

Sure, why not.

>>"1) Scientific studies on the effectivness of prayer. For example, in one study, seeds prayed for were far more likely to germinate than seeds not prayed for."

I am unaware of any such studies. If they exist, I doubt they were proper double-blind scientic studies. In other words, it is important that the variable group (with prayers) and the control group (no prayers) have identical growing conditions and that those collecting the data do not know which is which.

>>"2) Near death experiences. Studies have shown them to be consistent across religions and cultures."

That suggests a physiological explanation and, in fact, the nuerological causes of NDE have been explained by medical science as anoxia in the visual area of the cerebral cortex.

>>"3) That which initiates life. * * *
But if a living being dies, you could replace all organs, even every single cell, but you can't "turn it on." "

How do you know that?

>>"What "turns on" life and what shuts it off? I hope this is making sense."

It does, but it is just chemical processes. We do not know all the details, of course, but that does not make them inexplicable. The 'off' part is pretty easy. When the machinery no longer functions to support the organism, it stops. Plain and simple.

[sans qualia]

23. "That suggests a physiological explanation...

... and, in fact, the nuerological causes of NDE have been explained by medical science as anoxia in the visual area of the cerebral cortex."

I think that's a dangerous claim to make. The mere fact that certain physiological changes in the brain are associated with NDEs does not prove them to be non-veridical. Looking at my computer screen causes measurable activity in parts of my brain; that does not mean that my computer is an hallucination.

[Deep13]

25. "I think that's a dangerous claim to make. "

Dangerous? :shrug: I can only hope no one has been hurt.

We do not suppose that computers are hallucinations because we know them to be real. We have no such reason to suppose that going-to-the-light is anything more than a hallucination. No one has ever seen this "heaven" anywhere but in dreams and NDEs. There are no artifacts from "heaven." No one has ever been there and brought back reliable accounts, photographs or other evidence. No observable phenomenon requires the existence of heaven for an explanation.

I cannot demonstrate that there is no heaven, afterlife or whatever. I am merely saying that NDEs with the familiar going-to-the-light story is not evidence of its existence.

[bonito]

24. first , everything is thought ,i think therefor I am, I think.

[Deep13]

26. Then thought is reality.

Not all thoughts are reality, however, because only those thoughts that are based on observations of the outside world have objective consequences that others will observe. What is created in my head stays there unless I act on it. What occurs in the world occurs whether I notice it or not. If I dream I can fly unaided, it may look the same as the real world (although it usually does not). When I wake up, however, no amount of flapping of arms will get me off the ground.

The whole cognito ero sum argument is an attempt to answer those who suppose that all of reality is a dream of god or whatever. That may be true, but if so we are entirely enclosed in that dream. To us, therefore, the dream is real and the dreaminess of reality can have no discernable consequences. The principle of economy, therefore, requires removing it from the theory. In Hawking's Brief History of Time, he mentions a philosopher (name??) who tries to respond to the same query by stating, "I refute it thus," and hit his toe on a rock. His point is that if the world seems real in every practical way, then it is for every practical purpose.

[murray hill farm]

27. If you think about it, the body is a limited thing...

a human body experiences only what it can sense with its human senses...and all reality is limited to those senses. It would seem to me to be rather chauvinistic to conclude that if we cannot sense it as humans, then it must not exist. I once heard this story...that explains it better than i can. It goes....that dogs do not see in color...soooooo..ha...say we could talk to dogs..and we would say to them....honestly..i know this is hard to imagine, but there is color to things, not just black and white. well...the dogs would say...no way...things are only black and white..because their senses do not allow then to experience color. i believe it is the same with us, we cannot see all that is..we are limited by our particular senses...but, that for sure does not mean that what we can sense is all there is...we just cannot see it.

[Domitan]

28. It's my life journey

I was raised as a Christian where my father was an Anglican minister. My beliefs stood very strong for most of my childhood and early adulthood. I did have bouts of doubts (e.g., my first exposure to evolution vs creationism).

During my late 20's, I drifted into being a very liberal Christian, then to being deistic...until I reached a point of agnosticism. Perhaps, for fleeting moments, I touched atheism...but I just felt that we really did not know. What could we be certain about? Life's experiences, my search for the truth, and reading rational arguments/essays about science influenced my journey. The Bible and organized religion were crushed under the unrelenting wheels of rationalism. I dared question to the point that I went to the "other side". It didn't significantly change my personality, perhaps except that I don't do dinnertime prayers anymore.

If something is really there, it's there no matter what we say, think or do. If something is not really there, it's not there no matter what we say, think, or do. Our knowledge of the universe is akin to a tiny flake off the corner of one page compared to the vast volume of information on a mega-metropolis phonebook.

A couple years ago, I began to experience another round of existential anxiety. I've had them a number of times during my life. Ironically, the current Iraq war propelled my frantic search for information. The governments proved less trustworthy than imagined. I scoured for information, doing a balancing act between researching legitimate information and weeding out disinformation or mere speculation. That questioning stance led me to research religion, science, and fundamental issues of life. I do my best to be an open-minded skeptic without being a kneejerk debunker or being caught up in emotions stemming from my need for security or escape from thinking of possible oblivion.

Right now I believe that there is something out there. Exactly what...I don't know.



Here are a few things that led me to consider the possibility of us being more than our fleshly life here.

a) Near-Death Experiences: I've done much research on this topic. This is now being taken seriously by some in the scientific circles. Please see Dr. Pim van Lommel's article in the Lancet. There are tons of anecdotal evidence to go with it. Just enough to make me go, hmmm. If the stories are genuine, especially where totally blind people (since birth) can see, where multiple people share the same NDE, and distant viewing occurs...that is very compelling in itself. Remarkable also are accounts by atheists who have had NDEs and came back changed (see Howard Storm and Alfred Ayers)

b) Ghost stories: laugh, laugh...I understand if some of you laugh. However, I've read disciplined accounts that leave me wondering if it may reflect something more than mere hallucinations or fabrications. Society for Psychical Research from the late 1800's to early 1900's have produced good studies on this.

c) Reincarnation: Dr. Ian Stevenson has done decades of compelling work to make the reincarnation hypothesis worthy of investigation and further studies. He does not claim to have full proof, but shows how this hypothesis is no mere fanciful thinking. Even the skeptics were impressed by his method of research, even if they do not accept his conclusions at this point.

d) Alternative models of the universe: I've only touched on this, but I am intrigued by the Holographic Universe theory, interpretations of quantum physics and others that suggest living beings as energy beings beyond that of our fleshly matter. I'm not latching on this as my "gospel" but something intriguing to explore further.