If you believe in gravity, then why not a soul, or spirit?

[Light]

Not measurable?  So then, since your sense-of-self is also not measurable, definable, or observable,  it must not exist?

In the interests of clarity, are you now using 'sense-of-self' as another term for 'soul' or have the goalposts moved?  How would you personally measure it and what units would you use?  Is mass, distance or time involved at all?  I'm not sure if you are actively arguing for the existence of the soul or not.

I'm trying to point out, that people seem to readily accept and rely on concepts which are intangible, not quantifiable, and non observable all the time.  So then , why would believing in a soul, or spirit, seem like such a stretch?

I can't show you gamma rays but I can show the effects of it. I can't show you a soul either, nor the effects of it. Equating "Gravity exists, therefore soul exists" is as idiotic as saying "Gamma radiation exists, therefore God".

Maybe the effects are your actions.

[Light]

We know that objects with greater mass exhibit stronger gravitational force.
We know that as the distance gets further, the gravitational force gets weaker.
We know this through empirical tests, modeled as mathematical formula used to accurately predict future observed events.

Your turn...

What if I were to say I can sense my spirit?  Not enough evidence? Ridiculous?

Let me ask everyone a question.  Have you ever been in love with anybody?  If so, I don't believe you.  Show me the evidence. I want to see it, touch it, measure it, quantify it.  I don't think you can do this so I think your 'love' is just some out-of-date belief based on superstition.  A delusion.  And so what do you think about that?

I'm using the same logic that an atheist may use towards a theist who claims to have a soul. 

[Asmodean]

What if I were to say I can sense my spirit?  Not enough evidence? Ridiculous?

What if I were to say I can sense you being delusional? Not enough evidence? Ridiculous?

[Velma]

We know that objects with greater mass exhibit stronger gravitational force.
We know that as the distance gets further, the gravitational force gets weaker.
We know this through empirical tests, modeled as mathematical formula used to accurately predict future observed events.

Your turn...

What if I were to say I can sense my spirit?  Not enough evidence? Ridiculous?

Let me ask everyone a question.  Have you ever been in love with anybody?  If so, I don't believe you.  Show me the evidence. I want to see it, touch it, measure it, quantify it.  I don't think you can do this so I think your 'love' is just some out-of-date belief based on superstition.  A delusion.  And so what do you think about that?

I'm using the same logic that an atheist may use towards a theist who claims to have a soul. 

You can see the effects of love on the brain using an MRI.  I have yet to hear of any such evidence for a soul.

[Light]

We know that objects with greater mass exhibit stronger gravitational force.
We know that as the distance gets further, the gravitational force gets weaker.
We know this through empirical tests, modeled as mathematical formula used to accurately predict future observed events.

Your turn...

What if I were to say I can sense my spirit?  Not enough evidence? Ridiculous?

Let me ask everyone a question.  Have you ever been in love with anybody?  If so, I don't believe you.  Show me the evidence. I want to see it, touch it, measure it, quantify it.  I don't think you can do this so I think your 'love' is just some out-of-date belief based on superstition.  A delusion.  And so what do you think about that?

I'm using the same logic that an atheist may use towards a theist who claims to have a soul. 

You can see the effects of love on the brain using an MRI.  I have yet to hear of any such evidence for a soul.

How do you know you're viewing love?  Because the person says that's what they're feeling?  How would anyone know that what they call 'love' is the same as what another person calls it?

My point is, something like love, is very subjective, yet seems so socially acceptable to believe in.  But, a sense of spirit, also subjective, but I suppose simply not very socially acceptable for some.   

[Light]

It's always fascinating when I hear atheists demanding objective evidence of God, spirits, after-life, etc., as if one could not possibly believe in such things without hard objective proofs.

Yet, at the same time, they can carry tons of strong beliefs in things that there is no objective evidence for.  Things just based on sensory experience and rationalistic ideas.

[Velma]

We know that objects with greater mass exhibit stronger gravitational force.
We know that as the distance gets further, the gravitational force gets weaker.
We know this through empirical tests, modeled as mathematical formula used to accurately predict future observed events.

Your turn...

What if I were to say I can sense my spirit?  Not enough evidence? Ridiculous?

Let me ask everyone a question.  Have you ever been in love with anybody?  If so, I don't believe you.  Show me the evidence. I want to see it, touch it, measure it, quantify it.  I don't think you can do this so I think your 'love' is just some out-of-date belief based on superstition.  A delusion.  And so what do you think about that?

I'm using the same logic that an atheist may use towards a theist who claims to have a soul. 

You can see the effects of love on the brain using an MRI.  I have yet to hear of any such evidence for a soul.

How do you know you're viewing love?  Because the person says that's what they're feeling?  How would anyone know that what they call 'love' is the same as what another person calls it?

My point is, something like love, is very subjective, yet seems so socially acceptable to believe in.  But, a sense of spirit, also subjective, but I suppose simply not very socially acceptable for some.   

The MRI of the brain of a person in love is different from the MRI of the brain of a person who isn't.  The MRI's of people in love light up in the same places.  If a person says they are in love and their brain doesn't light up in that way, you have reason to doubt what they are telling you.

Where is the evidence for a soul?

[Asmodean]

Yet, at the same time, they can carry tons of strong beliefs in things that there is no objective evidence for.  Things just based on sensory experience and rationalistic ideas.

Yes, like... What, exactly?

What do I believe in strongly, that is just based on sensory experience and rationalistic ideas?

[Light]

The MRI of the brain of a person in love is different from the MRI of the brain of a person who isn't.  The MRI's of people in love light up in the same places.  If a person says they are in love and their brain doesn't light up in that way, you have reason to doubt what they are telling you.

Where is the evidence for a soul?

If I'm in an MRI, and I say I sense my soul, and some electrical activity lights up,  there's your evidence, according to your standards.

[Asmodean]

If I'm in an MRI, and I say I sense my soul, and some electrical activity lights up,  there's your evidence, according to your standards.

If there is a medical professional here, do correct me if I'm wrong, but I do think that if you said "I sense me soul" during an MRI, your center(s) for speech would light up.

So does that make soul just another word for areas of the brain responsible for talking? Or is it a flow of electrons through neural pathways? In that case, this laptop has more soul than I do.

[Light]

Yet, at the same time, they can carry tons of strong beliefs in things that there is no objective evidence for.  Things just based on sensory experience and rationalistic ideas.

Yes, like... What, exactly?

What do I believe in strongly, that is just based on sensory experience and rationalistic ideas?

Ok, a couple examples,

If you were to describe how you feel right now, you'd believe that description would you not?  Yet, no one could prove objectively your assessment of that feeling is true.

You believe in mathematics, correct?  Well, mathematical truths can be created by a man in a room with a pen an paper.  They don't have to be based on anything objective.

[Light]

If I'm in an MRI, and I say I sense my soul, and some electrical activity lights up,  there's your evidence, according to your standards.

If there is a medical professional here, do correct me if I'm wrong, but I do think that if you said "I sense me soul" during an MRI, your center(s) for speech would light up.

So does that make soul just another word for areas of the brain responsible for talking? Or is it a flow of electrons through neural pathways? In that case, this laptop has more soul than I do.

Well, if electrical activity in the brain is the only element to love, then I suppose the laptop would also have love too.

[Asmodean]

Ok, a couple examples,

Do lets!

If you were to describe how you feel right now, you'd believe that description would you not?  Yet, no one could prove objectively your assessment of that feeling is true.

Oh, I think a trained medical practitioner would be able to prove my back pain quite nicely. The same person could probably demonstrate that I have overeaten slightly. My lust for a cigarette is not hard to demonstrate and verify either.

You believe in mathematics, correct?  Well, mathematical truths can be created by a man in a room with a pen an paper.  They don't have to be based on anything objective.

Mathematics is a tool. The language of physics, pretty much. Do I believe in mathematics? What does that even mean? Like saying "Do you believe in a hammer". I do not - hammer is a fucking tool, ok? The word "belief" hardly applies within the wording of your question.

Do I believe in verified mathematical facts? (See? "Believe" is suddenly a relevant term to use) Not really. I just use them until and unless a demonstrably better tool is at my disposal. You could call it "belief" in a sense, I suppose, but then we're back to the broadness of your working definition of the word.

[Asmodean]

Well, if electrical activity in the brain is the only element to love, then I suppose the laptop would also have love too.

No, it's MY laptop, so I doubt it knows how to do that. Wasn't build to love shit, but it certainly has a lot of electrical activity going on inside it. Enough to like... Run Skyrim, for example. Should be enough for your MRI-definition of a soul, yes?

[Light]

You believe in mathematics, correct?  Well, mathematical truths can be created by a man in a room with a pen an paper.  They don't have to be based on anything objective.

Mathematics is a tool. The language of physics, pretty much. Do I believe in mathematics? What does that even mean? Like saying "Do you believe in a hammer". I do not - hammer is a fucking tool, ok? The word "belief" hardly applies within the wording of your question.

Do I believe in verified mathematical facts? (See? "Believe" is suddenly a relevant term to use) Not really. I just use them until and unless a demonstrably better tool is at my disposal. You could call it "belief" in a sense, I suppose, but then we're back to the broadness of your working definition of the word.

I didn't really mean it was a belief, but more specifically , do you believe it's a valid source of knowledge, and I guess you do.