Quantum Philosophy | Can Neurotheology Explain the Resurrection?

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 14 січ 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ • 6

  • @narcissisticnihilist9718
    @narcissisticnihilist9718 15 днів тому

    So "a watched pot never boils" has more to do with scientific principal than just through relativity? The observer effect can change and maintain quantum systems, so the act of watching the water will maintain its physical state in the quantum regardless of outside stimulus? So tell me, why arent UNwatched pots, galsses, bowls, etc., of water spontaneously boiling all around us?

  • @geraldhansen2227
    @geraldhansen2227 16 днів тому

    The Universe is infinite, no beginning, no end, no Big Bang, no centre, no time, unknowable.
    The brain of God if you will. And we are an essential part of it with a brain that is a microcosm of the infinite.
    This truth supersedes everything on this planet.

  • @WibterSoring
    @WibterSoring 15 днів тому

    Well I've been about as positive as I can when the only return I get is negative it's real difficult

    • @javsld568
      @javsld568 13 днів тому

      Because you need to rewire your brain. That requires actual work. Its not just about positive thinking, its about patterns and repitition in your actions and being self deciplined.

  • @ShiyrChadash
    @ShiyrChadash 13 днів тому

    Reality Check:
    Reality = That which is.
    Life = That I am.
    Reality/Life = That which is/That I am.
    Life functions consciously and unconsciously simultaneously. Therefore, consciousness is how something does something (adverb) - not what something is (noun). Reification is a popular logical fallacy.

  • @AlethicAvenger
    @AlethicAvenger 9 днів тому

    while neurotheology is a legitimate field of study, this video presents a distorted and pseudo-scientific view of it, misinterpreting scientific findings, invoking unscientific concepts, and making unsubstantiated claims about the relationship between the brain, consciousness, and spirituality. it's important to distinguish between legitimate scientific inquiry and speculative interpretations that lack empirical grounding.