Physical universe vs spiritual realm

Tayla

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 30, 2017
1,694
801
USA
✟147,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
first, you have to prove a soul exists and that conciseness can exist outside of the body.
as far as I see the soul is nothing but the metaphorical sentience that higher thinking beings possess.
Thank you for you comments.

I have written an article with more detail here. Please feel free to read it.

Yes, you are correct. Currently there are scientists and philosophers considering subjective consciousness, and some of these are dualists; meaning, consciousness or mind is distinct from matter as we currently understand it. I am expanding on this from a Christian perspective by postulating a spiritual realm as distinct from the physical realm, and placing everything nonphysical there, as I describe in the OP.

I realize I can never prove any of this to the satisfaction of a materialist and I have no interest in attempting to do so. I suppose you could say I start with the assumption of dualism.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Tayla

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 30, 2017
1,694
801
USA
✟147,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
This means that when the final state of the qubits is measured, they will only be found in one of the possible configurations they were in before the measurement.
Yes, they will be found in one of the random state allowed that satisfies the probability equation over the long run. But each specific event could be guided, thus, allowing for spirits and souls to control the functioning of matter significantly from the spiritual realm.
 
Upvote 0

Tayla

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 30, 2017
1,694
801
USA
✟147,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
How is that an example of emergent properties?

Does the spiritual realm have new and different properties that are not completely explicable in terms of God? Is the physical universe not explicable in terms of the rules that govern God or the spiritual realm?

Sequence in time or creator/creation does not imply emergent properties.
God before the creation of the spiritual realm is different than God afterwards, because God in someways imbues the spiritual realm with his nature.

Similarly when considering consciousness as an emergent property; something new has been added. This implies that matter has creative powers analogous to those God has; to create something where before there was nothing.
 
Upvote 0

Tayla

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 30, 2017
1,694
801
USA
✟147,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
How about if we call the spiritual realm another dimension. Will that be more acceptable to the scientific community?
Thank you for your comment.

I think the problem with this is that dimensions as conceived by science are part of the physical universe. The spiritual realm I am proposing is more like the concept of the subjective experience of consciousness by some dualists.
 
Upvote 0

Tayla

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 30, 2017
1,694
801
USA
✟147,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
In any case, what I am talking about hasn't anything to di with the accuracy of the term dimension as much as it does with the propensity of being averse to anything religious which borders on the psychologically pathological. That can come from being fed too many ideas which have absolutely no foundation in reality, have never been seen to occur in nature, can't be proven in a lab and yet are put forth glibly as if they are indisputable fact.
Yes, certainly materialistic science assumes materialism, so anything outside is rejected. However, in considering the question of the subjective experience of consciousness, some scientists and philosophers are embracing various forms of dualism.
 
Upvote 0

Tayla

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 30, 2017
1,694
801
USA
✟147,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
If you are talking about the vast body of evidence, collected over the course of more than two centuries, from the fields of palaeontology, botany, zoology, microbiology, embryology, anatomy and genetics that support the reality of evolution and the modern synthesis that accounts for it
Yes, I agree with all this. My view is based on assuming science as true and incorporating it with Christian metaphysics. There are two "gaps" or cracks in science allowing this:
  1. The subjective experience of consciousness which some scientists and philosophers explain with some form of dualism.
  2. The randomness of quantum mechanics which is perhaps not so random after all as I briefly describe in the OP.
 
Upvote 0

Tayla

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 30, 2017
1,694
801
USA
✟147,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Debra Hiehoff Phd (neurobiologist) wrote: "The language of life" that talks about how cells communicate. The language of life is based on chemistry. Up to 60 chemicals are involved in one cells communication with another cell. 60 trillion cells function as a single organism.

If we look at the Prairie Vole we see a rodent that mates for life. This gives us some insights into love in humans. Just how hormones like oxytocin shapes who we are. Oxytocin is a hormone that plays a role in bonding, [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse], trust, and maternal instincts. There are oxytocin receptors in the heart that play a role in regulation of the heart.
Thank you for your comments.

Yes, I agree the brain and body are doing amazing things. And I propose that the subjective conscious experience of love (for example) resides in the spiritual realm, and interacts with the body as I describe in the OP.
 
Upvote 0

Tayla

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 30, 2017
1,694
801
USA
✟147,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
What function is that?

My understanding is their function is to produce the feelings in our mind. But that would indicate that the feelings are part of the physical brain complex.

If the feelings "live" in the supernatural realm, then there's no need for oxytocin and similar, unless we can discover some necessary physical function that they perform.
Some points:
  1. Just because there are physical components as you note doesn't mean there can't also be spiritual components.
  2. These biological chemical functions do more than merely produce feelings in the mind.
  3. Subjective conscious experience is not physical; is has no mass or energy, and doesn't obey the laws of physics.
  4. Science has not proven whether or not the subjective experience of consciousness or love affect the physical functioning of the brain or body. They merely assume it can't.
 
Upvote 0

durangodawood

Dis Member
Aug 28, 2007
23,408
15,555
Colorado
✟427,872.00
Country
United States
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Some points:
  1. Just because there are physical components as you note doesn't mean there can't also be spiritual components.
  2. These biological chemical functions do more than merely produce feelings in the mind.
  3. Subjective conscious experience is not physical; is has no mass or energy, and doesn't obey the laws of physics.
  4. Science has not proven whether or not the subjective experience of consciousness or love affect the physical functioning of the brain or body. They merely assume it can't.
1. I agree.

2. I also agree. But IF these chemicals are proven to affect the mind, then that capacity would be redundant to a mind/consciousness that lives/feels in a non-physical realm.

3. I think subjective experiences are something that the mind does. Like "running". Yes, legs and feet have mass. But "running" doesnt. So even in a strictly materialist view I wouldnt expect consciousness to be a physical thing.

4. I do agree that science is not at all conclusive on this matter. But our current state of knowledge, to me, seems to point to some other realm as being likely redundant. We dont need it to explain things. I do think that consciousness/mind is a sort of emergent property of a highly complex brain/organism. But I'm not 100% sure. Just seems that way so far.
 
Upvote 0

Tayla

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 30, 2017
1,694
801
USA
✟147,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I also agree. But IF these chemicals are proven to affect the mind, then that capacity would be redundant to a mind/consciousness that lives/feels in a non-physical realm.
Thanks for thinking so hard about these interesting topics.

That's like my saying, if I do something having an effect on someone else, their experience of it is redundant and serves no purpose.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Tayla

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 30, 2017
1,694
801
USA
✟147,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I think subjective experiences are something that the mind does. Like "running". Yes, legs and feet have mass. But "running" doesnt. So even in a strictly materialist view I wouldnt expect consciousness to be a physical thing.
Yes. This is the kind of argument that materialist scientists and philosophers use in considering the subjective experience of consciousness. I find this unsatisfying and at odds with Christian metaphysics.
 
Upvote 0

Tayla

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 30, 2017
1,694
801
USA
✟147,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I do agree that science is not at all conclusive on this matter.
Yes, my only point is to oppose the premise that science opposes such and such. I don't mean to say it will always be the case. If science demonstrates something in the future I will wholeheartedly embrace it.
 
Upvote 0

Tayla

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 30, 2017
1,694
801
USA
✟147,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
But our current state of knowledge, to me, seems to point to some other realm as being likely redundant. We dont need it to explain things. I do think that consciousness/mind is a sort of emergent property of a highly complex brain/organism. But I'm not 100% sure. Just seems that way so far.
Yes, I understand the emergent property view. I think it is a reasonable view to hold.

It seems to me there is no such thing at all of emergent properties; they are all better explained as categories, or interpretations, or groupings of the mind. For example, physics doesn't depend on the notion of the wetness of water. And evolution doesn't depend on considering an organism as an emergent property of cells.
 
Upvote 0

durangodawood

Dis Member
Aug 28, 2007
23,408
15,555
Colorado
✟427,872.00
Country
United States
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Yes. This is the kind of argument that materialist scientists and philosophers use in considering the subjective experience of consciousness. I find this unsatisfying and at odds with Christian metaphysics.
Well thanks! ....because I'm neither scientist nor philosopher, and I thought that up all on my own.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Tayla
Upvote 0

durangodawood

Dis Member
Aug 28, 2007
23,408
15,555
Colorado
✟427,872.00
Country
United States
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Thanks for thinking so hard about these interesting topics.

That's like my saying, if I do something having an effect on someone else, their experience of it is redundant and serves no purpose.
For sure. These are very interesting topics.

With human interactions you have feelings about the actions of someone else.

But with some of these hormones, you are not having feelings about the hormones. Instead, they are directly inducing feelings. Sort of like a drug.

My point is that if the production of feelings (about whatever) occurs in the supernatural realm, then whats the need for the chemical in the physical realm? The only answer I can see is that the activity of the chemical does not in fact cause feelings, but has some strictly material purpose that closely associates with feelings. But given how much work these hormones do in the brain, that seems unlikely to me.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

joshua 1 9

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 11, 2015
17,420
3,592
Northern Ohio
✟314,577.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thank you for your comments.

Yes, I agree the brain and body are doing amazing things. And I propose that the subjective conscious experience of love (for example) resides in the spiritual realm, and interacts with the body as I describe in the OP.
So much of love is little more then the hormones in our Body. Romantic love has more to do with what makes people feel good. God's love is a sacrificial love. God sacrificed His Son for us. Jesus sacrificed Himself for the joy set before Him and because of His love for the Bride. This is why a Christian husband is to sacrifice himself for his wife the way Jesus sacrificed Himself for the Church.
 
Upvote 0

Tayla

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 30, 2017
1,694
801
USA
✟147,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
My point is that if the production of feelings (about whatever) occurs in the supernatural realm, then whats the need for the chemical in the physical realm? The only answer I can see is that the activity of the chemical does not in fact cause feelings, but has some strictly material purpose that closely associates with feelings.
I think you stated the question perfectly. Ignoring the clearly biological effects of hormone production, and focusing only on induced feelings: yes. That is their purpose. To induce feelings which other aspects of the mind use as inputs for their work.

For example, a hormone triggers the feeling of love in my soul, in the spiritual realm. This activates memories stored also in the spiritual realm (bypassing the body altogether), reminding me to express gratitude and planning just how to do this. This feeling engages the will (also in the spiritual realm) which communicates back to the body, which then dutifully picks up the phone and dials their phone number.
 
Upvote 0

Tayla

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 30, 2017
1,694
801
USA
✟147,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
So much of love is little more then the hormones in our Body. Romantic love has more to do with what makes people feel good. God's love is a sacrificial love. God sacrificed His Son for us. Jesus sacrificed Himself for the joy set before Him and because of His love for the Bride. This is why a Christian husband is to sacrifice himself for his wife the way Jesus sacrificed Himself for the Church.
Yes, so true. All of what you mention occurs in the spiritual realm, except the chemical biological components. All of the important aspects of life occur in the spiritual realm, in the soul and spirit.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

joshua 1 9

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 11, 2015
17,420
3,592
Northern Ohio
✟314,577.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yes, so true. All of what you mention occurs in the spiritual realm, except the chemical biological components. All of the important aspects of life occur in the spiritual realm, in the soul and spirit.
Sounds like Kabbalah teaching to me. They try to explain the connection between the spiritual and the physical.
 
Upvote 0