There is NO PROOF of a SOUL!!! Sam Harris & Matt Dillahunty
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 вер 2024
- There is NO PROOF of a SOUL - Sam Harris & Matt Dillahunty
Full discussion here: • GOD, TRUMP & #metoo - ...
#samharris #mattdillahunty #soul #body #brain
Pangburn Philosophy - A Celebration of Science & Reason Phoenix with Sam Harris & Matt Dillahunty.
This event occurred on February 23rd, 2018 at the Comerica Theatre. Over 2500 people were in attendance.
Copyright - Pangburn Philosophy
Full discussion here: ua-cam.com/video/ZC-DzA631NQ/v-deo.html
Those chairs were a terrible choice
LOL I noticed that too. Their arms are so high up.
They're Chesterfield style chairs.
Apparently commissioned by the Earl of Chesterfield for unwanted guests to sit so they would be uncomfortable and wouldn't outstay their welcome.
I'm not saying Dillahunty and Harris are unwelcome guests.
✌️🤟🤘
The chairs look ridiculous
too small?
They look comfy AF
Why are the chairs comically large
Plot twist, the people sitting in them are comically small 😏
For fun 😂
@@MrE073I want to get in them and bounce!
Because Dillahunty can’t be taken serious.
Cheapest ones
I really wish they had cups they had to hold w/ 2 hands just to complete the look.
The inability of a Sunday school teacher to explain what and where my soul is was my 1st step on the road to atheism. I was seven years old.
I was atheist most of my life until experimented with psychedelics. Now I know there is consciousness that exists separately of my body. And now I also ran in NDE stories that can not be explained. That just reinforces my beliefs.
@@JulianBashir-8472what is an example of an NDE that isn’t explained by brain activity after the moment of death?
@@timothybrown5999 it’s not at the moment of the death. It’s 10-20-30-40 mins after someone has died and their brain stopped functioning period. There is no activity. They have the brain hooked up to monitors that prove there is 0% activity. No blood or oxygen. The heart has stopped. Yet these people come back with perfect clarity and have a memory of this time. And most nde are very similar. If it was hallucinating everyone’s nde would be wildly different. Then you have the people who died and can watch the whole scene unfold in perfect clarity and recall every important detail with 100% accuracy recounting information there is no way they could know. If none of this is obvious to you, there is really no discussing it. You’ll just find out for yourself someday. I am not religious and was a rigid for most of my life btw. I still don’t believe in religion. But listening to doctors and people tell their stories has opened my mind.
@@timothybrown5999 another revelation I had was its like another form of human arrogance to think life only exists right here right now what our physical eyes can see. Same mentality as earth is center of universe or we’re alone in the universe. If life can exist in this dimension, why can it not exist in another dimension? Humans have believed in a consciousness for 100000 years. Every culture. Egyptians, Mayans , incans, Buddhists , Hindus put their best minds to work thinking about it for 5000 years or more , I’d trust them more than I’d trust a human that hasn’t given it more than a few hours thought their entire life. More than a few hours thought entire life.
@@JulianBashir-8472 I asked for one example. Can you please point me to a source talking about just one NDE and how it couldn’t be explained naturally?I’m curious, how long do you believe the human brain can remain active after a person has been pronounced dead?
You claim that NDEs all line up perfectly, but they in fact do vary greatly. Most see a light and hear voices, however they are usually under lights being examined by ER doctors when this occurs. I’ve only ever known one person who died for several minutes before being revived, he says he remembers nothing. He died and went black then he came back to life, no experience whatsoever.
I’m going to try to find a link, but they did test for these things awhile back. Though formerly dead patients can often remember conversations that happen around them, they never notice the things left out to test them. When the brain is low on oxygen, hallucinations follow and to many these are so profound they think them to be miraculous.
10% of the comments: discussing the concept of the soul.
The remaining 90%: “chairs too big.”
I don't recall from where. But I heard something interesting recently. If the soul is eternal. And ghosts are by extension, proof of the soul. Then why are ghosts never naked? Does that mean clothes are eternal as well? Do garment have souls?
Ha! Good one.
What a silly question,
No, they get sheets to wear
I think it’s funny that people even debate this subject. The fact that you feel like you have to try to convince someone of your beliefs is silly. Kind of a childish immature mindset. Definitely not a mindset I’d drop all my beliefs and switch over for.
@@JulianBashir-8472 You make a very odd statement when you say;
"I think it’s funny that people even debate this subject. The fact that you feel like you have to try to convince someone of your beliefs is silly."
Who are you directing your comments to? No one introduced this subject but Dillahunty and Harris. Is you criticism directed at them? It's Dillahunty and Harris who are as you say trying to "convince someone" because they are the originators of this post. If you really feel that it's "funny that people even debate this subject" then why did you choose to participate? When you describe others as having a "childish immature mindset" and then run away without any explanation as to why you disagree, it's you Julian who is showing intellectual immaturity. Hit and run comments such as yours always say more about who makes them than anything else.
We have two soles, most of us. But no one has a soul in the "person or mind without a body" sense. Exactly zero evidence for this in all of human history.
Tell Dillahunty that. He has a DEVOUT belief in invisible, undectable "souls", which somehow define "your TRUE self", "your REAL identity", on some spooky, mystical level, which despite the 100% absence of evidence, (somehow?!) out-ranks verifiable, empirical evidence... Matt has just re-titled your "soul" to your "gender", and also adds the EXTRA magical property (still with zero evidence, ofc) of somehow rendering the evidence-based truth of some people's biological sex "not the REAL truth"... But the core idea is identical, whether you call it your "soul" or your "gender"- ie [evidence-free McGuffin, with ultimate power, even greater than physical evidence, to define "your TRUE identity"]
...except, I've never seen a Christian be SO intolerant of non-believers, and SO authoritarian, to demand that EVERYONE needs to use language that affirms "souls" as being """"truth"""", the way Dillahunty routinely does, with his authoritarian belief in faith-based, "just a social construct", 100% evidence-free, undetectable "genders"... Or use their faith-based beliefs to demand robbing women and girls of their right to fair sports... Or to demand the irreversible chemical sterilization of 100% healthy children, using ZERO evidence-based diagnostic criteria... Or demand that fully-intact male convicted raapists share cells with female shoplifters and weed-smokers, in women's prison...
Thank fvck there's still SOME atheists who still have a spine, and critical thinking skills, like Richard Dawkins, Michael Shermer, Maria McLachlan, Peter Boghossian, etc, who still care about basic rights, harm to children, and simple, evidence-based truth, more than they care about getting called """transphobe""" by Matt's fellow religious zealots...
...because the deafening silence (or worse, like Dillahunty, actively cheerleading for the evidence-free beliefs, and child mutilation...) of 99% of atheists and self-declared """skeptics""", on the spread of this harmful, 100% evidence-free pseudo-sciencw, has been disgusting.
You saying there is no soul is just as invalid as someone else claiming that there is a soul.
Lack of evidence isn't evidence of lack. There used to be no evidence for bacteria, that doesn't mean that it didn't exist.. Just because we don't currently have evidence for a soul doesn't mean souls don't exist. It's not rational to default to saying something doesn't exist because there isn't currently evidence. The rational belief is to say "I don't know" until evidence proves it one way or the other.
@@UndergroundMadeoncool. Well keep looking and until you can prove it (much like bacteria was proven) then we'll talk l.
@@UndergroundMadeon It's true that lack of evidence isn't evidence of a lack. But when there has been no single objective empirical evidence for the existence of something, not one iota, in the entire history of the world, the law of parsimony makes the most rational position adopted being that the thing does not exist. You're right, no one knows. Just like no one knows whether there is an invisible purple wizard living inside your stomach. But since there is not a single shred of evidence for that purple wizard, the rational position is that it does not exist until some, any, sort of evidence suggests that it does. That which is asserted without any evidence can be dismissed without any evidence.
It's true that lack of evidence isn't evidence of a lack. But when there has been no single objective empirical evidence for the existence of something, not one iota, in the entire history of the world, the law of parsimony makes the most rational position adopted being that the thing does not exist. And the irrational position is to assume that it does exist. You're right, no one knows. Just like no one knows whether there is an invisible magical purple wizard living inside your stomach. But since there is not a single shred of evidence for that magical purple wizard, the rational position is that it does not exist until some, any, sort of evidence suggests that it does. That which is asserted without any evidence can be dismissed without any evidence.
Fascinating and clearly there is no soul. Humans have to just accept reality and we move on knowing more than before.
Knowledge is good for the soul.
You profess that there is no soul but you cannot discern the self nor logic itself. There is a soul, and you are badly mistaken.
There are no human rights either and yet atheists insist in humanism.
Wife: We need new furniture!
Me watching this video: Suuuure, hon... I got ideas
I have a soul……..an R-soul.
💀
👞🍩
This joke works best with a British accent
WHAT . . . is an R-soul ??????????? Never heard of it. Explain for all us ignorant folks.
@@piehound Are you being sarcastic I can’t tell.
They should sit in comically oversized beanbags instead.
Somehow I get the uncomfortable feeling these chairs are like trap-flowers and will eat Sam and Matt 😮
I'm don't have split brain personality, and neither do I
what is up with those chairs anyway???
It represents their fall into nihilism
Corpus callosotomy patient: "I'm half the man I used to be."
The Problem of Consciousness and Subjective Experience:
Current issue: How does subjective experience arise from physical processes?
Theorem: Consciousness emerges as a high-level description of complex information processing systems.
Proof sketch:
1. Define an information processing system: S = (I, P, O)
Where I is input, P is processing, O is output
2. Define integrated information: Φ(S) = min{I(M₁:M₂)}
Where M₁ and M₂ are complementary subsystems of S
3. Define consciousness measure: C(S) = f(Φ(S), I(S))
4. Subjective experience emerges when C(S) > C_threshold
5. Qualia are high-level descriptors of information states
This provides an information-theoretic framework for understanding the emergence of consciousness.
Matt says his take on morality is much like Sam's: I don't know specifically what that is but as a raised Christian and now agnostic atheist, it's very clear that the necessity of religion always over estimates the purpose of morality to benefit it's own gain.
Any purpose in existence, isn't a moral cosmic conflict that needs to be resolved. End justice, like an afterlife, is a fantasy.
It's ironic that the ones who have repeatedly demonstrated that they have no soul are the ones who are pushing that concept the most.
Those less likely to have a soul are most likely to not believe in it. Atheists selling themselves as morally superior does not make them any better.
What’s your point?
What's with the novelty grad ceremony chairs?
Definition of soul:
1. The spiritual or immaterial part of a human being or animal, regarded as immortal.
2. Emotional or intellectual energy or intensity, especially as revealed in a work of art or an artistic performance.
So yes, the soul does exist. It's just not what most people think. The soul is an outdated term that is more accurately described as someone's character in today's language. And your character does survive your death through others who have taken in your character as part of their own.
Going with the second definition, art can reveal the soul (character) of the person who created it.
These two are confusing souls with consciousness or subjectivity. Which is understandable since religious zealots are confusing the terms in the same way.
Interesting perspective. However, what you describe as the soul (meaning the character) has been easily explained for decades by a combination of brain circuits that develop and grow over time, plus genetics. So nothing immaterial about that.
@@eduardezeanu8307 True, however it's important to note that the ancient people who wrote the books of the Bible did not know about these correlations. And modern religious people as well as non religious people are arguing from a modern perspective essentially trying to fit old puzzle pieces into a new puzzle. This is the language barrier and why both sides of the argument sound ridiculous.
So from a certain perspective one's character is definitely not material. In the same way that the subjective experience of red or the subjective experience of taste isn't material. Sure, they have correlations in light wave frequencies and such but the color red as well as taste isn't "out there" somewhere.
@@justinbyrge8997 you forgot soul music, soul food and soul plane.
@@ShadowveilFox 😂 My bad
Definition 1 is the real thing. Everything else is secondary
What supports such a claim. Then, what is the relationship to the body/brain? If say the soul is the seat of consciousness, what happens to the sould when the brain is damaged, compromised, unconscious...? The Bible doesn't 'teach' anything. It tells stories in which bald arse assrlertions are made, the majority of which cannot be investigated and run contrary to methodolgical naturalism. For the Bible tells me so is no better than the voices in my head told me to do it...
Can the conscious be removed from the being??
@realitywave I'd agree with this, too 🤣🤣
The only real soul is that exhibited by James Brown. The rest is horse pucky.
Man, you beat me to it...
The only 'soul' you have has got an 'R' in front.
To say you do not have a soul means you will not become a ghost when you die.
Ghosts don't exist...so what is your point?
To say the moon isn't made of green cheese . . . means you won't go see Sergio.
Opening assumptions decide the parameters of conclusions.
And opening assumptions are based on personal experience.
That goes for both theists and atheists.
The key issue is the interaction of the material and immaterial, and that subject is now settled. Thirty years ago, proposing that there were god, devil or soul forces interacting with us, was at least plausible. No longer. Over the last two or three decades QFT (Quantum Field Theory), a century old theory, has been tested as technology became available to do so (particle accelerators, etc.), and has been found to be the most accurate theory in terms of the results it presents, that has ever been developed. Based in part on QM (Quantum Mechanics) and Relativity, it tells us what we and our natural, material world are made of (mostly quark and electron fields), and it tells us what interacts with that stuff. It even tells us what does not interact with that stuff, including the trillions of neutrinos flowing through all of us continuously without interacting with us. We know today, beyond reasonable doubt, that there are no god, devil, soul, ghost or spirit forces, fields or particles (vibrating fields) interacting with the stuff we are comprised of. That means that even if these things somehow exist outside space and time, they have nothing to do with us. If a god created our universe, for some odd reason, he gave it rules that do not permit him to participate.
Most people think of the soul as "who we are" which is the sum of all of our thoughts, knowledge, experiences, memories, feelings, sensations, etc. over the course of a lifetime. Every one of those experiences is produced by neurons firing in complex patterns. No neurons firing = no thoughts. All the "information" resulting from that activity is tied up in the quarks and electrons the neurons and everything else are made of. When we die, all that "information" goes back into the material world through decomposition, cremation or whatever your favorite way to be dead is. There is no way for it to go anywhere.
This article provides more detail: secularhumanism.org/exclusive/no-one-pushing-quarks-around-souls-and-quantum-field-theory/
Heard someone say that your soul stops “aging” at 25. They were full of crap, but got me wondering why that’s the age cutoff. What about people who die before 25, what age is their soul? I also wonder why souls often are clothed, shouldn’t they just be like a spirit?
The perception of soul it depends of the person, some have and some don't. It is like evolution theory for some people make sense, for some don't.
What we human beings do is interpretation of our perceptions, this is constantly changing, that's why we're always changing the way we think the world. Theories that make sense in our context today will not make sense anymore in the future, this always happened
You can’t compare evolution to a made up idea “soul”
There’s actually evidence of evolution.
As far as I'm aware, the 'soul' is life or consciousness. It's not immortal and ceases to exist on death. Whether God will restore life to certain individuals in the future is another topic.
How did you become aware of all this and which god are you referring to?
Sam looks like Fay Wray sitting in the middle of King Kong's palm.
Those chairs like making them look like a little child making me laugh so hard 😂😂😂😂
"At this point, I'm totally fed up with the voices in my head. They owe me money, you know. And I can tell they are home-I can hear them giggling in there when I knock."-Dale Jones
These are silly circular arguments ... it cant be proven or disapproven... so you are just arguing over opinions... whats up with their seats
Why is the video very clear and logical and all the comments seem bat shit crazy?
How are these circular arguments? And also most people believe that a soul definitely exists and people say it millions of times a day on thousands of UA-cam videos every day do you ever go on there and tell them to cut it out because the soul cannot be proven?
They are saying the soul makes no sense scientifically or either isn’t possible or doesn’t seem to be possible. Is the soul not a supernatural concept? And is it not true that once we go into the supernatural literally any belief at all can be justified?
Why could burning witches at the stake not be justified? It obviously could be if you just appeal to the supernatural. It not only could be it has been.
So if anyone ever strings you up and burns you alive, don’t complain because you have no basis to argue against their supernatural beliefs .
Not in the least circular. The “soul” is imaginary. There is no evidence of it.
If it can't be proven then where's the good reason to believe it exists?
@@BubbaF0wpend The “null hypothesis” here is that the soul does not exist, just as unicorns do not exist. It is no more than Laplace’s response to the Emperor Napoleon when asked why he did not include gods in his mathematics of planetary motion: “Je n’avais pas besoin de cette hypothèse.”
I think in casual speech we might extend the term “null hypothesis” beyond its technical use: Wiki says, “In scientific research, the null hypothesis … is the claim that the effect being studied does not exist.The null hypothesis can also be described as the hypothesis in which no relationship exists between two sets of data or variables being analyzed. If the null hypothesis is true, any experimentally observed effect is due to chance alone, hence the term ‘null’.”
Theories predict not only what does happen, but also what does not happen, so a theorist is very concerned what sort of entities the theory contains, and does not contain. Currently, the “soul” serves no purpose; worse, if we let it into the theory, our theory would no longer have any explanatory power, as it would have introduced Magic. Now, if we all saw the Second Coming tomorrow, and the dead jumped blinking out of their graves, we would revise the theory and include souls…and a bunch of other stuff too! And we would stop trying to understand anything.
But currently the theory predicts that the Second Coming and like events discussed in other faiths will not and cannot happen. For the time being, there appears to be no a priori reason why we cannot hope to explain the universe, life, and humans in a naturalist theory, without reference to souls and the supernatural.
@@BubbaF0wpend There isn't one. But there's also not a good reason to spend effort arguing that someone shouldn't believe in something if they don't have a good reason to believe. I believed in stuff before that I didn't have good reason to believe, and it happened anyway. Nothing big and supernatural, but it doesn't have to be big and supernatural to qualify as unreasonable.
I have two soles. 👣
In the Hebrew scriptures, the word translated as soul is derived from the root word breath or to breath. In the bible, any creature that breaths is said to have or be a soul. In the passage of Adam, it claims God breathed life into the man. Quite literally, God put breath into the man, or his soul.
Similarly, the ancient Hebrew concept or death was very inline with their understanring of the soul being the breath or a creature. Back then, there was no concept ot an eternal soul that continued living after death. They believed all who died, both good and bqd, went into the pit. The pit was a symbolic place as death was viewed as a state of nonexistence. In death, it was believed it was as if one was in a deep sleep they could not wake from. No thoughts or feelings.
Again, the base meaning of the word shows their belief. When one dies, their breath simply ceases to be. In the very same way, they viewed the soul as ceasing to exist just like the breath at death.
Instead of the place of death being a place souls live on, the place of the dead was more like God's memory of the dead. It was believed God could easily raise someone from death, even if their body was gone. He could just make them a new one. They didn't think the people were consciously waiting for God to bring them back, but that the only thing that existed ot the dead was God's memory of them.
There are a number of scriptures that say that a person and their soul are one thing. More that speak of the soul dying or its destruction.
While some faiths may continue the Platonic ideas of an eternal soul separate from the body, the bible does not entertain such notions. Even in the Greek scriptures, when discussing those going to heaven, it is said that they will need a body. There are passagws that speak about how our physical bodies are incompatible with the spirit realm, so anyone going to heaven will be remade in a spirit body.
Heck, even the eternal fires spoken of in the scriptures lend to this. The eternal flames spoken of are symbolic of complete destruction. One of the things people get wrong about the flames is that they don't understand ancient people and how they lived. Many times, to get rid of refuse, they would burn it. If there was a plague and the bodies of thr dead were causing problems, they would burn them. Similarly with animal carcasses that were rotting.
As such, most people back then would jabe known just how difficult it would be to burn something completely. It may not be obvious to us, but it was obvious to people back then that it is incredibly difficult to completely destroy a carcass by fire. They are filled with water. One would have to continually add fuel to the fire over a long period of time. Even in todays crematoriums, it takes a long time and a lot of fuel to cremate bodies, and even then, there are still small chunks of bone that haven't been conpletely destroyed.
So, the eternal flames that never go out, aren't about eternal torment, but complete destruction. Any carcass thrown inot them will have no part not entirely consumed.
Symbolically, this wae to tet across to people that even the memory God has of the person will be destroyed. He will not remember them, and they will never be able to be raised from the dead again.
This concept is backed in Revelation 20. It says that all those in the sea, death, and Hades are brought out. Those places of the dead are destroyed. Anyone dying after that point ends up in the eternal flames, or second death. The death there is no return from.
Live a good life. If there is a god you will be rewarded. If there is no god you die with the satisfaction of having lived a good life. - Stocism
The way I explain this soul stuff, is there is no science to justify "me" continuing after my brain is dead. We. go back to where we were before we were conceived--nowhere. It'll be the longest nap I ever take.
I think believing there needs to be an afterlife is the height of entitlement. It's not enough that you somehow got here--it's got to go on even after you die? I've heard people with a bit of delusion are a bit happier than average...
Do those chairs have a soul
🤣 I hope not....
Heavens on Earth by Michael Shermer.The Self Illusion by Bruce Hood..People are who they are in their time and place and history.How can all that survive ?What do souls do waiting to reconnect to their bodies and brains at the supposed resurrrction of billions of persons ?
He may not have practice radical meditation. Stopping your thought has noting to do with radical meditation. Radical meditation comes after radical understanding.
Soul comes from the Greek word psukhe which translates to the word psyche in Latin. Your soul is the psychological self, your mind. Y’all do not have a mind?
We don't speak ancient Greek anymore and no one goes with that definition anymore. "Soul" implies a spirit or something supernatural. There's nothing supernatural about having a mind and there is no evidence that the mind travels outside of the body after death.
It implies that there is a ghost in the machine. Do you believe in ghosts?
The bible says the soul is the whole of a human being, not just some invisible section of it. When we die all parts die including the thinking spiritual awareness ability. It then comes a belief that God will raise our spiritual awareness for judgement.
So someone suffering complete brain damage would be that way for eternity? I’m not sure you’ve thought this through.
Thats a strange response. Im not sure how you got that from what I wrote, maybe you could elaborate. Part of the resurrection for believers is a new body. Any phisical ailes we have in this life will be replaced with old for brand new
It's consciousness that we are God of own reality and we can get to the highest point which is Christ's consciousness.
Whenever I see roadkill I think...there is no soul.
“We are all cadavers with tiny souls”.
Consciousness is what religion associates with soul and we have yet many things to ask about it... Religious or not,the problem of the mind is important. I don't get why you mad eit about theology or God.
Yes, there is proof, and it's beyond anyone's comprehension , the truth is here now.
calm down and get back on your meds!
The Dillahunty Dodge.
If we admit a core field of subjectivity ( as noted by Bernardo Kastrup) then we can explain lots of things .
Explaining stuff is meaningless. Religions explain stuff. But they don’t make precise predictions. And they never define the infinite set of things that do not happen.
Question: who chose the sofa’s chair for this talk? They must be sa uncomfortable to hold arms like Sam does, Matt is only one hand, arm , looks so uncomfortable, what you suppose to do with arms? Just observation 😂
Creo que he dejado la situación suficientemente explicada. Estoy deprimido, no estoy como para ir a trabajar, necesito vacaciones, y he descubierto que Dios existe. Se ha descubierto que Dios existe. Soy un psicólogo, no soy un predicador, soy un pensador racional como Spinoza. El futuro solo puede ir a mejor si se entiende que el universo fue creado. De repente todo lo que hacemos y pensamos cuenta. Estas constantemente observado y escuchado. Como un Gran Hermano donde se sabe todo sin secretos. El pasado es imperfecto, se cometen errores. El pasado no se puede cambiar. Se tiene que intentar la perfección, y si no se logra se vuelve a intentar. Se hace lo que se puede con lo que se tiene con buenas intenciones y eso es todo, ahí reside el secreto de la felicidad. Vivimos para sobrevivir felices. Vivimos para disfrutar. Dios es perfecto porque se tiene que vivir para disfrutar y de ese modo te ganas el cielo eterno. Hay que pasárselo bien. Vivir se trata de cuidar la creación de Dios pasándoselo bien. Vivir sin molestar a los demás. Vivir para experimentar y aprender conociendo la realidad. La verdad que te salva literalmente la vida en una situación peligrosa es el ateísmo es una falacia lógica que asume Dios es la idea religiosa del creador de la creación y concluye erróneamente que el creador no existe porque una idea particular de Dios no existe. Tú decides. Gracias.
The problem with the religious functional metaphor soul is based on the believe in materialism. If we step on the toe of reality we will experience that reality is a function of what we think a „Soul“ has to be. In modern therms a „Soul“ is the fundamental „player“ consciousness of the virtual „Avatar“ we call human. We are fundamental now, but we are the player of the virtual avatar, not the avatar we identify with. We are part of the consciousness system. The religious metaphor was „god“. Yes, „son of god“ is a functional metaphor too. For each player not an privileged one. This all we can find out ourself. This reality isn‘t build on matter but information (a virtual reality) we 24/4 operade out of the nonlocal frame some of use think of the „beyond“. So science and religion are wrong. And this virtual reality does have a purpose beyond any belief. We can‘t learn anything as long we believe something.
We can learn to exit this VR by denying the datastream of reality (information). Meditation is a proper path for 1000 of years.
Good game everyone!
The Sam Harris Delusion, great book.
Why this chesterfield coach 😂 so big I can see them.
We don't have a soul that survives after death. But I think we can define "soul" as a set of brain processes that exist while we live.
Exactly!
Atheists are so brave, how do they cope with the possible reality or in their case the only reality of there not being anything ever again after they perish?
@@Randomyoutubecommenter What if there is life after death but we can't know what we were before?
@@LeonardoPisano-sn2lp sounds like you're referring to reincarnation, either way I feel like religion gives people the courage to live life because life is inherently risky and if you don't believe there's a reason for it then why would you want to risk anything? Unless you're incredibly brave by genes alone is the only way I see it being possible.
@@Randomyoutubecommenter If the only reason you're moral is because of punishment/reward by the omnipotent dictator then you reveal youself as immoral. As for as living forever maybe the test is to see if you can be good and possibly brave without being a cuck who thinks they will live forever.
Is it just me or are those armchairs like ridiculously big. So much so I find them distracting lol.
..probably both of thse two have cortical blindness...Soul or Seed or Spirit or Sprite ..is the Soul ..it is just The Operating System of Life consist of 2 words: One and Two and series of Infinite combinations to make us alive..Our Soul is even upgradeable for your info.
We're all ginger now..
I have many souls and the proof is there all on the bottom of my shoes ;)
Doesn't matter if any could prove it, these 2 would not accept it any way. Apparently personal experience isn't proof ! But it is proof to those that have experienced it.
Try harder, whine less.
So everything that schizophrenics experience is real?
Yep and only to them what's your point revelation is necessarily to one person only
When I listen to those discussions I doubt that there is a proof of brain existence
any time people mention the concept of souls, I show them TheAmazingAtheist's Do dogs have souls video. also these comments are such braindead trash. nobody is giving context to what they're on about or they're just saying random nonsense or asserting some fact or whining about wokeness. what a clown world. it's a good thing matt is here to help people fight theism and delusion.
You don't have to step in dog shit to know it's going to stink.
Keep in mind he’s married to a man and refers to him as she.
What would the proof look like ?
All depending on the claim
@@Lordidude Well, just for the claim as stated.
@@tomgreene1843 Which stated claim?
@@Lordidude The one in the heading.
@@tomgreene1843 There is no claim attached there. What kind of soul are you talking about.
There is no proof of consciousness either......That doesn't mean it's not.
"I think therefore I am".
The fact that we are able to doubt our existence is in itself, proof that we have consciousness. There might be nothing else, but consciousness is the only thing that passes the doubt test.
Honestly, not a single thing that was said here registered in my brain. Any word besides ''chair' & the words following it are automatically rejected by my brain in this scenario; it has no choice.
eh
I mean if anything split brain shows the unity of the human condition, kinda showing the physical limits of the human brain vs the living experience of a conscious upon that self.
How biologically we can be conflicted but functionally each individual organism serves as one life, one self.
The only way I could prove my thoughts on consciousness in this situation is if I was a split brain patient - which I am not.
Could it not be suggested we already experience life from multiple paths and appearances? We are the same self we were when we were younger but our brains and memories changed.
If one conscious can experience multiple streams of consciousness in its life, what's stopping us from silently experiencing multiple at the same time?
But there's no possibility there is no self, as that would run paradoxical to the fact that we experience at all from a perspective of a self individually from other living beings.
Materialism cannot create an observer to existence, yet we all observe existence as ourselves, tied to this physical world.
Well then prove astral projections and ndes and parnaormal not true
LOL Since 'soul' (seele) simply means living animal and psychology (anima/ psyche) then you prove only that neither you nor I 'exist' .. somewhere/ somehow amid time, space and relative dimension of 'reality' (the matter, form, expression, and purpose of .. material it-ness). And the only proof, logical in character, that I can offer you that 'you' or indeed 'I' exist - are ensouled material beings (aka animated and with a conscious mind) is to point to you, and ask you if you are self-conscious. If not, then I merely imagined 'you', if yes, then 'I' am conscious of both myself and you (regardless of your level of self-consciousness or psychological awareness).
Yey!
Keep the Faith; tell the truth, shame the devil, and let the demons shriek.
God bless. ;o)
P.S. Trying pointing to the exact place where 'you' are, as a being, existent, material and thinking, alive .. animated and mindful, and ask someone else if they can see you .. as a living soul.
Two of my favorites in one video!
May be you have to look what they means. There is nothing gibberish about radical understanding.
Hubris and arrogance are amazing things. Life is NOW, eh?
Spend a night or two in the most haunted places on earth ..maybe you'll change your mind about it
Maybe you should tell that to Shane from Buzzfeed Unsolved....
My soul wants to vote republican, so I will put it up for sale
There is no proof and thus anyone intelligent enough should not believe that such a thing exists. At least this is what I hear from the title of the video and I am pretty sure the contents of this video is pretty much at that. Well proving is a quality of mind and anything that mind doesn't understand doesn't exist to it. Therefore we say "God exists" or "God doesn't exist", we make God part of existence. In such context "God doesn't exist" makes more sense, because such a being wouldn't be part of existence, but whole existence, the seen and unseen. Same for the soul/inner self or whatever we call it: Saying soul/inner self exists or does not exist makes it part of existence, suggesting that perceivable reality is greater than anything else, while in reality it is the other way around but our minds will never understand because this goes beyond the mind, because the mind analyze and you can't analyze something that is not visible. This isn't about faith or religion, it is about the nature of reality...
I remember when there was no proof that the Amazon company would one day exist. Yes, I'm that old. I pre-date Google also.
i have an undetectable invisible unicorn floating above my house. you cant prove its not there
Saying you don't have a soul telling you dont have any 5 sense's 😂😂😂😂
Woot 🤦
@@--Snowy-- robots don't have feelings
@@JeanMarcelino-qr9ju How do you know?
@@--Snowy-- Emotions and feelings are based on a complex mix of physiological and psychological responses to external stimuli, and robots simply do not have the necessary biology or consciousness to experience them.
@@Stabsnipers How do you know?
This is so confused as to be confusing. That there are changes in personality has little to do nothing to speak of the soul per se. Also, this is unproblematic. Those changes are also very problematic in its own narrative: they are very few, isolated cases, with no closed variables, etc... The thing about the hand writing is a big... "yes... and?" How does that even begin to disprove the soul or anything like that?
The thing Sam said about the multiplicity in the brain, that's fine, but who is saying the soul is in the brain. Like "whaaat?" What does that have to do with anything anyone has ever written or thought about the soul? In fact, it can't be due to the brain for the brain lacks unity, not just because of what he says but strictly temporal. There is no temporal unity for the brain, nor spatial, nor in its configuration, nor in its functions. PRECISELY that's why nobody argues that it's in the brain. This is so confused on so many levels, that I am puzzled as to why they speak so confidently in front of such a large audience with next to no serious rebuttal.
There isnt even a coherent definition of a soul, so how can we even talk about it let alone defend it?
Maybe we shouldn’t have shown kids Casper the ghost cartoons when we were kids because now as adults, we seem very confused .
@@joecheffo5942 What's incoherent about the normal definition? The metaphysical substance of individuation and vital faculties?
@@natanaellizama6559 yet those "vital faculties" (i.e. who your soul "is") in this supposed "metaphysical substance" can be changed by physically damaging the brain.
@@natanaellizama6559 Normal in the middle ages maybe.
@@natanaellizama6559 I think he said the soul, which I am sure he is very skeptical of, would have to interact with the brain if it existed and there has been no evidence of that.
(^_^)v you can explore your brain with gas chamber technology. It's impossible to master evolution without it. Your baby brain is still there. It's great fun but they won't entertain someone with it. My first memory I could see my soul at the edges of the memory. It's white .
Your soul doesn’t exist in the universe so of course there’s no proof, but if you have a few whiskeys and put on Bob Marley and squint in the mirror you might see something.
Just because you don't understand it or how it works, does not mean it doesn't exist.
@@toombo11
Do you understand it or know how it works?
That's what scientists teach about the Universe.
@@ThomasNoonan-qc8vp Wrong. No sane person disputes the existence of the universe. There is ample empirical evidence that the universe exists. There is exactly zero empirical evidence that souls exist.
Just because you and many others like the idea, does not mean that it does exist. We can both play this game.
All they’re asserting is that there’s not verifiable evidence for a soul, which is true.
I notice so many people, such as Matt Dillahunty, "deconstruct", but are unable to "reconstruct".
The assertion that the "soul" does not exist is pure hubris. The reason is the existence or nonexistence of the soul is bound up with and entirely dependent on whether or not God exists and this can never be proved or disproved. To say I know the soul is nonexistent is tantamount to me saying I know life doesn't exist any where else in the cosmos. How can I make such an unsupportable statement? I can't and remain logically consistent because the incontrovertible reality is that I just don't know, just as these two, Harris and Dillahunty don't know. While it's true the existence of the soul can never be proved, the nonexistence of the soul can also never be proved.
The mistake Harris and company make is interpreting this question as being a religious question when in fact it isn't. It's a philosophical question and the difference is critical. Lets examine this question more closely and most importantly with an open mind.
The question of the souls existence is contingent on whether or not God exists. This is not easy to answer and was once left solely to religion for providing meaningful answers. Instead religion relies on dogma, superstition and conformity while discouraging genuine curiosity and free thinking. Religion in it's traditional sense is poison to the human mind. It's primary vehicle to spread its dogma throughout the Christian world community is the bible with all its ridiculous fables of people being raised from the dead and flying through the air after they die. These things never happened, and have nothing to do with the existence of God.
It's modern science and especially cosmology and astrophysics that provide the most compelling evidence for the wholly credible assertion that God is real, not the god of the bible which is a concocted fantasy of an eternally vengeful figure somewhere up there keeping a scorecard on how we live our lives. This propaganda was devised to frighten people into submission and works very effectively.
Always choose science over religion in any question of meaningful significance and this is the most meaningful question we can ever ask because it pertains to a fundamental understanding of what and who we are as sentient beings. Most would agree that if God is a reality, it's very likely or at least easier to accept the idea that what we call "soul" is also real. Only a sentient and powerful supervening reality could have created a universe so perfectly balanced, exactly calibrated, and totally formulaic that we see all around us.
To assert the nonexistence of the soul is tantamount to asserting the nonexistence of God, and this assertion lacks any corroborative evidence to substantiate its claim. However the opposing assertion supporting the belief in a supreme being is buttressed by what many accept as persuasive evidence. Atheism studiously ignores all scientific evidence that points to a transcendent agent of consciously lucid power at the heart of creation. Instead atheism prefers to aim it's scornful criticism at religion and it's poisonous dogma which is worthy of scorn and derision.
If Harris and company ever had to argue against someone asserting an "evolved conception" of God the weakness of their position would be fully exposed, but it's always the same tired old players, usually from the Catholic Church who show up at these so called "debates" offering the same old tropes about their personal experience of being "saved" and how we should all go to church and do the same, so we can learn about Adam and Eve, and Noah's Ark. In other words the silly fables of religion are preventing people, especially the young from grappling with this essential question. By alienating so many with their stultifying dogma, traditional religion strengthens and lends credibility to atheism and the result is hearing ridiculous statements like the one that Mr. Dillahunty offers in his first sentences.
Does he honestly believe that the topic of the soul is currently the most "dead" of all topics in religion? Really? Most human beings throughout history, and most alive today would likely say they believe the soul is a reality. What world is Mr Dillahunty living in?
Don't let dogmatists like Harris and Dillahunty whose minds are closed on this subject sway your thinking on this question. You and only you can ponder this vital question and you are equipped to find an answer. Intelligence and just as important is your intuition. Above all keep an open mind.
All that verbiage for nothing. The existence of a "soul is not contingent on YOUR definition of a god. At all. A soul - however one chooses to define it -could exist as a feature of the universe without the existence of a judeochristian deity. The point is that there is zero evidence for a soul as described by contemporary Christians and the concept itself didnot even exist for jews and 1st century Christians and was not preached by Jesus, an apocalyptic jew. The concept of a soul as we now understand it evolved over many years for reasons that are well understood by anyone with knowledge of greco Roman ideas about the afterlife, any introspection into human nature,fear of death, etc
@@dahveed72 I never asserted the concept of a soul is or should be
defined in terms of a "judeochristian deity" as you call it. These are your words. Your points are not very well stated, but you are correct when you say my or any definition of what we call soul needn't be contingent on the existence of God, but you couldn't make a convincing case for that point of view. Most and possibly the overwhelming majority of people when asked would say there is an afterlife and it therefore follows that if humans are capable and I think destined to experience that afterlife it must be in a mode or form that is non physical. You can call it quantum entanglement if you want but there have been countless examples of what's credibly called out of body experiences, NDE's being the most common.
You're a skeptic and so it's enough for you to say "no" and walk away. For you skepticism is and end in itself. Nearly all skepticism is grounded in a petulantly stubborn attitude of refusing to consider what might be possible. Skeptics are generally atheists also and often as close minded as any fundamentalist believer. It's safe to say that those who deny the existence of God also deny the possibility of soul or spirit.
The title of this youtube post states there's no "proof" the soul exists. I agree, and there's also no "proof" the soul does not exist. It's unrealistic to assume there's any dispositive proof to settle this question. So what? I say again this question is synonymous with the larger question of whether God exists and only the individual can answer this riddle to their own satisfaction.
The scientific studies of near death experiences, including out of body experiences, end of small children with memories of past lives, make it much more likely than not that there is a consciousness or soul which survives death. Clearly, there is no proof that there is no soul.
I can’t stop laughing at this comment. Must be a joke
We laffing baldman ague shy shrivel no hare tac tic
Buddhism addresses this phenomenon pretty well..
There is no proof of life in other planets. The logical conclusion is we can be sure there is no life in other planets.
Except we know life exists, and that the chemical building blocks are common in the universe, and other planets capable of supporting life exist. That’s enough evidence to warrant a belief in the possibility of life existing elsewhere. There is no evidence to even suggest a a soul COULD exist.
@@jaysmith7062 it is just your opinion. Do you deny God? Or you deny only the soul?
@@KMMKdathe end may be opinion, but much of his post, particularly in the beginning, was fact
@@SinbadAkina yes. He decided to believe there may be life in other planets. And he decided to believe there can be no soul and no God. Just his opinion.
@@KMMKda but look at the reasons why he gave them
I lean more to having a soul than having a 'spirit'. The spirit world is murky and we are of the earth. I do believe ultimately in a Creator, but in this system we are in, that is unknowable. Our souls interact with nature and nature when it has revealed something to us, it is something that elevates us.... but the spiritual stuff removes you from this transference and we then experience disconnection and wanting always to escape or be do or have something other than what is there!!!!
"Only those who believe that the World has a soul may have one of their own, but those who believe the World is a machine will themselves become machines."
~Galahad Eridanus
I bet you think that is evidence for a soul...
a clear twisting of words. Some day computers will be programmed to show emotions. But they still won't have consciousness.
Thats a Deepity. Empty words meaning nothing.
Every word you say proves my point.
@@piehound Enjoy your robotic life. I don’t envy a single programmed moment of it.
Matter and souls lost in matter can not prove a soul . ever. Thank god. You would have to believe...not out of free will and understanding. Not good for your live way. Live can't die. We in the body are more dead than alive. You have to get the answer your self. Not because i say so. Untill that day peace and love for you all❤
No soul, spirit or god, guess you have to believe in yourself.
I believe in God as well as in myself
@@kofidan9128 Yourself does not need the help
Just educate yourselves about idealism and physicslism and you will quickly satisfy yourself that physicalism is just a nonsense. We do have souls, and there are experiences that can confirm this to individual. Belief that humans dont have souls is 200 years old, the other one has a history of 100 000+ years. 😂 Dont just swallow what these "intellectuals" are showing down everybodies throat. Check for yourself, dont believe anyome or anything, go for direct first person experiences.
@@realitywave Wrong. Since shamanism emerged, humanity believed in souls. They were all idealists. Check out ancient egypt, ancient greece, ancient india, tibet. All around the world this was known. Since Rene Descartes divided world into primary and secondary qualities in 18th century humanity started to dismiss soulness of the world. Physicalism is unproven, contradictory and just plain stupid, and even Rene Descartes knew that but he had no choice cause of the christian church was at their necks. You have a paper written by him that tells that he know that physicalism is not quite true, but they have to leave to soul to church, and they contiuned with materialism/physicalism.
@@realitywave its actually not fading, its growing. 👌 Modern science is investigating consciousness and different states of it, mystical experiencec, psychedelics etc. And the main argument is; you will feel the truth when you die. 😂👌
@@realitywave yup, i dont believe anything. What i do have is experiences that just destroyed my "truths". Truths you have.
@@realitywave to you too, youll remember this at the moment of your death. 😂😂😂😂
@@realitywave Nope, a fairy tale is believing that mind arises from the brain, memory also. Do you know that modern science cannot locate memories anywhere in the body? And that every atom in your body is swapped out every 6,7 years except neurons? And memory is not located in neurons. 👌😂 And mind too. Look at Michael Levins work, he cuts off heads from micro worms and they still have minds. 👌 Just give a look, and be open minded. Dont just swallow and accept anything you havent checled for yourself.
The soul is non-physical .
typo? it‘s spelled: non-existing
@@LudwigFeuerbach-uf7ri Some people believe non-physical means non-existing. Like the people who believe numbers aren't real.
@@theboombody some people can apparently survive without a functioning brain
@@LudwigFeuerbach-uf7ri That seems to be encouraged in Hollywood.
So not real 🤷🏻♂️
Instead of straw man attacking the idea that the soul is nonsensical ghost-shaped glowing blue soul stuff, it would be nice if they considered the possibility that the soul is the billion billion tiny pieces of casuality that shape you. You're the evolving cloud-shaped nexus of that effectively infinite complexity, not just a clothes wearing monkey, after all.
Some of those pieces of casuality are thousands of years old, some come from the other side of the world, some are very current and originated in the room you're sitting in. That's why the 'soul' is immaterial - it's made from casual relationships, and yet it's also cleraly wedded to your physical form - they're your billion+ casual relationships. And it's why it's in some sense indestructible, you can't take a knife to an abstract relationship like the relational is a loaf of bread.
You can try to just dismissively say, oh, that's just 'casuality' or your 'conditioning', but doing so is rather unsatisfying. It's the arrogance and sophistry of hanging a too simple single word symbol on a phenomenon that's too vast and paradoxical and complex to fit neatly in a word symbol. The mystery doesn't go away because you try to say, oh, that's just "casuality". You don't even understand things that are sized 10000 details large. You certainly don't understand something a billion+ sized.
That's why, even though the idea constantly corrupts into glowing blue soul stuff, that it resurfaces again and again in one religious subform or another. There's a genuine thing/intuition, behind any particular religious corruption that mixes it with wish fulfillment or the fear of death or etcetera, that people are not so much a clump of cells as also a billion pieces of casuality coalesced and in dynamic motion.
That's why it changes, sometimes unpredictably. The past is always subject to reinterpretation, because you never fully understand all it's near infinite components, and as it moves in the present, you see it in new light.
That's why your soul, bafflingly transformed, survives your death. Those billion pieces of casuality that you were the cloud like moving center of don't go away, they richochet and ripple on, transformed by your death, but not vanished. They don't continue on as your little monkey ego, or stay affixed in your body shape, and no one understands it, but pieces of your soul propigate, like a cloud breaking up into other cloud shapes.
The thing is, this kind of casuality soul doesn't have a religious doctrine to push. It doesn't sit in your head like a ghost spouting commentary.
But pretending it's not a thing at all, is just atheists being lazy. You should deal with the way we're all billions of pieces of casuality without just pretending there's no mystery there. You're not dealing with it adequately by waving your hands about some electricity firing in a neuron. That's not the scope of the thing at hand.
AI word salad? Billion billion tiny pieces of causality must sound fine in an AI matrix but not in reality.
@@skiesmith8450 When you ask people about the stars in the sky, they sometimes guess that there's a few thousand of them, and not the 200 billion galaxies there actually are. And if you point out there really are that many galaxies, sometimes they're like, nuh uh. That's AI hallucination. No way. That's too many.
The thing is, contemplating casuality too closely makes people uncomfortably aware they aren't as stable and fixed as they'd like to be. If there's actually a mystery to you, and tiny details and fractal boundaries can overturn the course of your life unpredictably, then your situation is always much more precarious than the monkey ego would like to admit.
You can ad hominem attack that if you want, but it doesn't actually make the precariousness go away.
Yes Matt, old Wise Matt who believes his boyfriend is actually a real woman.
Shows he is the last person we should be taking advice on for anything, especially life's most important questions.
No soul in two idiots, indeed.
Is this the guy that ran away from Andrew Wilson to be with his boyfriend?
Good ideas live on.