but your being doesn't. you are you. nothing will change that. you may change your way of thinking; where you live; your medical condition; anything and everything; but you will always be [your name]. no matter what bloody happens in your life; you will always be you.
you are not your name. it is just a label to distinguish you from the billions of others you share your existence with.
i think perhaps onelongsong because, and pardon me for being blunt, that you are damaged that your soul found another place to reside within your body. who's to say that everybody's soul lives within the same place.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Do you see the difference between a chemical being responsible for the emotion of love, and between you feeling love for a beautiful woman? Do you see a difference between the chemical and the whole experience of love being acted out in 3-d?
Yes, I can.
Can you tell me where the quotation marks go on the quote, please?
Ok, but that [you] is just a word to describe my current state of being. My state of being changes, and therefor the "you" or "me" of 5 years ago is not the "you" or "me" of now. It is neither mentally or physically the same.
We're talking about the essence of you that has remained the same, though. What is it, every seven years all of our cells have completely died off and new ones took their place. What essence or pattern of energy keeps it all together?
Also, I can hypnotize you and take you back to your 6th birthday and ask you to count each stair you climb that day, and you retain that. You still have all those experiences of 'you' inside you. While hypnotizing you, I can get you to stop in the memory in your mind, and talk to me about it as you see it occuring.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
In all these cases you still have a functioning brain, so you are still a person. It might not be functioning as it was supposed to, but it's still there and functioning.
Well actually no Collin. Parts of it may not be functioning. It may still be there but parts of it may be completely static.
Yes, but they are still in there Ahnimus. Regardless of the changes.
Still feel, still think, still "being" or "soul" regardless of whether they can communicate with the rest of us in a way that is understood or not.
Actually that's not true.
I keep trying to inform people of Christof Koch and Francis Crick's work, because they spend 30 years understanding the Neural Correlates of Consciousness (NCC).
Crick and Koch found that damaging specific parts of the brain actually terminates the individuals ability to experience consciously, which is what you are referring to.
Example, the visual system. Damaging the retina, occipital lobe, visual cortex, V1, V2, and VnV5 regions will not affect a person's ability to consciously visualize objects. It will only affect their ability to interpret photons from the external environment. However, damaging a specific group of neurons in the frontal lobe will terminate a person's ability to both see and visualize consciously. At that point, the individual has no conscious experience of vision, or visual imagination. That part of their "soul" is gone.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I keep trying to inform people of Christof Koch and Francis Crick's work, because they spend 30 years understanding the Neural Correlates of Consciousness (NCC).
Crick and Koch found that damaging specific parts of the brain actually terminates the individuals ability to experience consciously, which is what you are referring to.
Example, the visual system. Damaging the retina, occipital lobe, visual cortex, V1, V2, and VnV5 regions will not affect a person's ability to consciously visualize objects. It will only affect their ability to interpret photons from the external environment. However, damaging a specific group of neurons in the frontal lobe will terminate a person's ability to both see and visualize consciously. At that point, the individual has no conscious experience of vision, or visual imagination. That part of their "soul" is gone.
You know what mate? While I repectfully understand that you have a point of view on this which may very well be completely correct, right now as usual, you speak too much and my mind just shuts down. As it has right now.
So I'm gonna leave it at this, if you understand a human as the sum of all parts and an appendage of the brain only, that's fine with me. And if you want to believe or have faith in science and reason absolutely, that's cool with me too. But I will blindly or fanatically follow no thing or way of thinking. And I believe in a soul. And I can't see either of us changing our point of view. Can you? So I'll add this. I consider you my friend and I am always happy to hear what you have to say. But now you've hurt my head so I'm leaving this well alone. And I promise to keep your soul safe.
Two young children with hydrocephalus referred to Lorber presented with normal mental development for their age. In both children, there was no evidence of a cerebral cortex. One of the children died at age 3 months, the second at 12 months. He was still following a normal development profile with the exception of the apparent lack of cerebral tissue shown by repeated medical testing. An account of the children was published in Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology.
Later, a colleague at Sheffield University became aware of a young man with a larger than normal head. He was referred to Lorber even though it had not caused him any difficulty. Although the boy had an IQ of 126 and had a first class honours degree in mathematics, he had "virtually no brain". A noninvasive measurement of radio density known as CAT scan showed the boy's skull was lined with a thin layer of brain cells to a millimeter in thickness. The rest of his skull was filled with cerebrospinal fluid. The young man continues a normal life with the exception of his knowledge that he has no brain.
You know what mate? While I repectfully understand that you have a point of view on this which may very well be completely correct, right now as usual, you speak too much and my mind just shuts down. As it has right now.
So I'm gonna leave it at this, if you understand a human as the sum of all parts and an appendage of the brain only, that's fine with me. And if you want to believe or have faith in science and reason absolutely, that's cool with me too. But I will blindly or fanatically follow no thing or way of thinking. And I believe in a soul. And I can't see either of us changing our point of view. Can you? So I'll add this. I consider you my friend and I am always happy to hear what you have to say. But now you've hurt my head so I'm leaving this well alone. And I promise to keep your soul safe.
Yea... ok Jeanie. I respect you too, but that was such a contradiction.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Can you see how the concept or your personal experience of love is beyond being only the chemical? It's in a full loving experience, for example. That experience, at least to me, is so beyond the chemical. It's something that we can't put our finger on. Do you see yourself in the same way? Do you see that you far more than all of your parts added up?
You said:
Oddly enough I agree with what C.S. Lewis said:
You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body.
I am my brain.
Did CS Lewis say all of this, or part of it?
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Two young children with hydrocephalus referred to Lorber presented with normal mental development for their age. In both children, there was no evidence of a cerebral cortex. One of the children died at age 3 months, the second at 12 months. He was still following a normal development profile with the exception of the apparent lack of cerebral tissue shown by repeated medical testing. An account of the children was published in Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology.
Later, a colleague at Sheffield University became aware of a young man with a larger than normal head. He was referred to Lorber even though it had not caused him any difficulty. Although the boy had an IQ of 126 and had a first class honours degree in mathematics, he had "virtually no brain". A noninvasive measurement of radio density known as CAT scan showed the boy's skull was lined with a thin layer of brain cells to a millimeter in thickness. The rest of his skull was filled with cerebrospinal fluid. The young man continues a normal life with the exception of his knowledge that he has no brain.
As I said, a person can function with a brain the size of a pea. This article says "Virtually no brain" which is not "No brain". It actually states "CAT scan showed the boy's skull was lined with a thin layer of brain cells to a millimeter in thickness" so that is a brain.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
you are not your name. it is just a label to distinguish you from the billions of others you share your existence with.
i think perhaps onelongsong because, and pardon me for being blunt, that you are damaged that your soul found another place to reside within your body. who's to say that everybody's soul lives within the same place.
and by admitting the soul has movement; you've proved my point.
As I said, a person can function with a brain the size of a pea. This article says "Virtually no brain" which is not "No brain". It actually states "CAT scan showed the boy's skull was lined with a thin layer of brain cells to a millimeter in thickness" so that is a brain.
You've reached the homepage of Cody Hatch (often known as Dakota Hatch). Are you looking for my university website?
Who am I?
I'm a 22-year-old university student (resume, photo). My special interests are computer programming, economics (particularly as it impacts on society), and international relations. My hobbies are mainly playing computer games and reading books, both sci-fi/fantasy and non-fiction. By way of example, recent books that I have enjoyed include David Weber's Honor Harrington series, and William Shirer's The Collapse of the Third Republic, a great study of the politics of France between the fall of Napoleon III and the end of World War II.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Funny that the name Andrew Vandal doesn't appear in any scientific journals. In-fact it only appears on that site you linked and some discussion forums.
Try getting some real credible evidence dude.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Funny that the name Andrew Vandal doesn't appear in any scientific journals. In-fact it only appears on that site you linked and some discussion forums.
Try getting some real credible evidence dude.
there's more sites. just don't have time to find them.
and i suggest you get more credable evidence too. the rantings of a madman doesn't cut it with me either.
one last comment.
my grandmother died of melenoma. at the end the lesions were so bad they told us our grandmother was gone. it was only a body there.
just before she died she opened her eyes and with clarity spoke to everyone. she knew names and remembered things she couldn't just months earlier.
i've heard of other cases where this happens too.
You've reached the homepage of Cody Hatch (often known as Dakota Hatch). Are you looking for my university website?
Who am I?
I'm a 22-year-old university student (resume, photo). My special interests are computer programming, economics (particularly as it impacts on society), and international relations. My hobbies are mainly playing computer games and reading books, both sci-fi/fantasy and non-fiction. By way of example, recent books that I have enjoyed include David Weber's Honor Harrington series, and William Shirer's The Collapse of the Third Republic, a great study of the politics of France between the fall of Napoleon III and the end of World War II.
wrong site. i don't know what happened but i'm out the door.
later
His source doesn't state who they are. ARIN (American Registry of Internet Numbers) doesn't recognize the URL as being registered either. The source of the claims are unknown.
They refer to one subject as "James" and nothing else, no last name, no cited research. There is nothing linking these articles to facts. Several of the articles do not even mention names and the source seems to have an affinity for the paranormal.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Look up Anencephaly on wikipedia, no mention of any cases described in the article posted. In-fact it reads:
"In almost all cases anencephalic infants are not aggressively resuscitated since there is no chance of the infant ever achieving a conscious existence. "
Let's try Anencephaly.net they seem to know a lot about it
Nope, those names don't show up there either. I'm finding it really difficult to find corroborating evidence, especially from a scientific institution.
The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
"What is the prognosis?
The prognosis for individuals with anencephaly is extremely poor. If the infant is not stillborn, then he or she will usually die within a few hours or days after birth. [Editor's Note: The unborn child may have been diagnosed as having anencephaly, but be born with a less severe form of the disease, allowing the infant to live for years or more]"
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I've just cracked a bottle of chardy. So cheers big ears!
Now I'm going to go drink the lot and contemplate my navel.
I'm sure when I get back you'll both be still at it.
The clinical term is umbilicus
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
World would be worse off without faith in something greater than ourselves.
But faith in something greater than ourselves is something entirely different.
You ask what would stop us if no one believed in something greater. What stops atheists today? I seriously hope you don't mean Christians only do good because God is watching them and they might loose their ticket to Heaven if they do bad.
Good point about atheists. I don't know what stops them, I can't speak for as one for I am not one. I consider myself spritual but not religious. I understand that is vague and I often contradict myself with my beliefs, maybe part of being human.
I speak from things happening in my life that have led me to certain spots, I have felt watched over, comfortable, rescued and the like. I would like to think it is more than luck but maybe it is just that.
I do think that atheists might still believe in something greater than themselves, maybe reason not to destroy each other without religion, maybe compassion for the earth.
Again I did not intend for the statement to be specifically about religion although it could fit there.
"She knows there is no success like failure
And that failure's no success at all."
"Don't ya think its sometimes wise not to grow up."
"Cause life ain't nothing but a good groove
A good mixed tape to put you in the right mood."
Good point about atheists. I don't know what stops them, I can't speak for as one for I am not one. I consider myself spritual but not religious. I understand that is vague and I often contradict myself with my beliefs, maybe part of being human.
I speak from things happening in my life that have led me to certain spots, I have felt watched over, comfortable, rescued and the like. I would like to think it is more than luck but maybe it is just that.
I do think that atheists might still believe in something greater than themselves, maybe reason not to destroy each other without religion, maybe compassion for the earth.
Again I did not intend for the statement to be specifically about religion although it could fit there.
I believe in luck and fate. With a very solid scientific backing.
I guess you could consider that greater than I.
I don't think it's an atheist's goal to make themselves the top of the food chain. I think it's to uncover the truth beneath the fiction.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Comments
you are not your name. it is just a label to distinguish you from the billions of others you share your existence with.
i think perhaps onelongsong because, and pardon me for being blunt, that you are damaged that your soul found another place to reside within your body. who's to say that everybody's soul lives within the same place.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Yes, I can.
naděje umírá poslední
Also, I can hypnotize you and take you back to your 6th birthday and ask you to count each stair you climb that day, and you retain that. You still have all those experiences of 'you' inside you. While hypnotizing you, I can get you to stop in the memory in your mind, and talk to me about it as you see it occuring.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Well actually no Collin. Parts of it may not be functioning. It may still be there but parts of it may be completely static.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Actually that's not true.
I keep trying to inform people of Christof Koch and Francis Crick's work, because they spend 30 years understanding the Neural Correlates of Consciousness (NCC).
Crick and Koch found that damaging specific parts of the brain actually terminates the individuals ability to experience consciously, which is what you are referring to.
Example, the visual system. Damaging the retina, occipital lobe, visual cortex, V1, V2, and VnV5 regions will not affect a person's ability to consciously visualize objects. It will only affect their ability to interpret photons from the external environment. However, damaging a specific group of neurons in the frontal lobe will terminate a person's ability to both see and visualize consciously. At that point, the individual has no conscious experience of vision, or visual imagination. That part of their "soul" is gone.
brain damage: still a functioning brain
Down's syndrome: brain is definitely functioning
Alzheimer's: brain is still functioning
naděje umírá poslední
You know what mate? While I repectfully understand that you have a point of view on this which may very well be completely correct, right now as usual, you speak too much and my mind just shuts down. As it has right now.
So I'm gonna leave it at this, if you understand a human as the sum of all parts and an appendage of the brain only, that's fine with me. And if you want to believe or have faith in science and reason absolutely, that's cool with me too. But I will blindly or fanatically follow no thing or way of thinking. And I believe in a soul. And I can't see either of us changing our point of view. Can you? So I'll add this. I consider you my friend and I am always happy to hear what you have to say. But now you've hurt my head so I'm leaving this well alone. And I promise to keep your soul safe.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
The parts that are damaged do not function.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
http://www.flatrock.org.nz/topics/science/is_the_brain_really_necessary.htm
Two young children with hydrocephalus referred to Lorber presented with normal mental development for their age. In both children, there was no evidence of a cerebral cortex. One of the children died at age 3 months, the second at 12 months. He was still following a normal development profile with the exception of the apparent lack of cerebral tissue shown by repeated medical testing. An account of the children was published in Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology.
Later, a colleague at Sheffield University became aware of a young man with a larger than normal head. He was referred to Lorber even though it had not caused him any difficulty. Although the boy had an IQ of 126 and had a first class honours degree in mathematics, he had "virtually no brain". A noninvasive measurement of radio density known as CAT scan showed the boy's skull was lined with a thin layer of brain cells to a millimeter in thickness. The rest of his skull was filled with cerebrospinal fluid. The young man continues a normal life with the exception of his knowledge that he has no brain.
Yea... ok Jeanie. I respect you too, but that was such a contradiction.
You said:
Did CS Lewis say all of this, or part of it?
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Blame it on my brain damage!
Who knows? Isn't it human nature to be contradictory?
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
As I said, a person can function with a brain the size of a pea. This article says "Virtually no brain" which is not "No brain". It actually states "CAT scan showed the boy's skull was lined with a thin layer of brain cells to a millimeter in thickness" so that is a brain.
and by admitting the soul has movement; you've proved my point.
read the rest of the site.
OK....
You've reached the homepage of Cody Hatch (often known as Dakota Hatch). Are you looking for my university website?
Who am I?
I'm a 22-year-old university student (resume, photo). My special interests are computer programming, economics (particularly as it impacts on society), and international relations. My hobbies are mainly playing computer games and reading books, both sci-fi/fantasy and non-fiction. By way of example, recent books that I have enjoyed include David Weber's Honor Harrington series, and William Shirer's The Collapse of the Third Republic, a great study of the politics of France between the fall of Napoleon III and the end of World War II.
Funny that the name Andrew Vandal doesn't appear in any scientific journals. In-fact it only appears on that site you linked and some discussion forums.
Try getting some real credible evidence dude.
glad i could be of service.
could you clarify what that point was please.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
there's more sites. just don't have time to find them.
and i suggest you get more credable evidence too. the rantings of a madman doesn't cut it with me either.
one last comment.
my grandmother died of melenoma. at the end the lesions were so bad they told us our grandmother was gone. it was only a body there.
just before she died she opened her eyes and with clarity spoke to everyone. she knew names and remembered things she couldn't just months earlier.
i've heard of other cases where this happens too.
wrong site. i don't know what happened but i'm out the door.
later
http://www.flatrock.org.nz/topics/science/is_the_brain_really_necessary.htm
it worked for me.
No, that is the same site. If you investigate who made the site, you'd see what I posted.
His source: http://www.mysteries.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
His source doesn't state who they are. ARIN (American Registry of Internet Numbers) doesn't recognize the URL as being registered either. The source of the claims are unknown.
They refer to one subject as "James" and nothing else, no last name, no cited research. There is nothing linking these articles to facts. Several of the articles do not even mention names and the source seems to have an affinity for the paranormal.
http://www.myspace.com/brain_of_c
Look up Anencephaly on wikipedia, no mention of any cases described in the article posted. In-fact it reads:
"In almost all cases anencephalic infants are not aggressively resuscitated since there is no chance of the infant ever achieving a conscious existence. "
Let's try Anencephaly.net they seem to know a lot about it
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=andrew+vandal+site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.anencephaly.net%2F&meta=
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=james+site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.anencephaly.net%2F&meta=
Nope, those names don't show up there either. I'm finding it really difficult to find corroborating evidence, especially from a scientific institution.
The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
"What is the prognosis?
The prognosis for individuals with anencephaly is extremely poor. If the infant is not stillborn, then he or she will usually die within a few hours or days after birth. [Editor's Note: The unborn child may have been diagnosed as having anencephaly, but be born with a less severe form of the disease, allowing the infant to live for years or more]"
I've just cracked a bottle of chardy. So cheers big ears!
Now I'm going to go drink the lot and contemplate my navel.
I'm sure when I get back you'll both be still at it.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
The clinical term is umbilicus
Good point about atheists. I don't know what stops them, I can't speak for as one for I am not one. I consider myself spritual but not religious. I understand that is vague and I often contradict myself with my beliefs, maybe part of being human.
I speak from things happening in my life that have led me to certain spots, I have felt watched over, comfortable, rescued and the like. I would like to think it is more than luck but maybe it is just that.
I do think that atheists might still believe in something greater than themselves, maybe reason not to destroy each other without religion, maybe compassion for the earth.
Again I did not intend for the statement to be specifically about religion although it could fit there.
And that failure's no success at all."
"Don't ya think its sometimes wise not to grow up."
"Cause life ain't nothing but a good groove
A good mixed tape to put you in the right mood."
Great choice!!!
And that failure's no success at all."
"Don't ya think its sometimes wise not to grow up."
"Cause life ain't nothing but a good groove
A good mixed tape to put you in the right mood."
I believe in luck and fate. With a very solid scientific backing.
I guess you could consider that greater than I.
I don't think it's an atheist's goal to make themselves the top of the food chain. I think it's to uncover the truth beneath the fiction.
Is fate greater than yourself, since you cannot control it? Or can you contorl it?
And that failure's no success at all."
"Don't ya think its sometimes wise not to grow up."
"Cause life ain't nothing but a good groove
A good mixed tape to put you in the right mood."