>>Without a brain one cannot be aware of the world, but that's not a big deal<<

Correction: without a brain one cannot be aware of anything. Or nothing. Without a brain one cannot be aware. Or unaware. Without a brain one cannot be. Which you probably don't think is a big deal because you don't attach much importance to being.

There is an idea in philosophy called 'solipsism': the denial not only of material existence but also the existence of other minds. For the solipsist the self is the only existing reality and and all other reality (and non-reality) are representations of that self and have no indepedent existence. Cogito ergo sum - I think therefore I am - is the alpha and the omega.

Your position goes a step further and says that just because you think it doesn't mean you am. You are less certain of your own being than solipsists are of your not being: bearing this in mind I would ask you to consider the possibility that you are just the figment of some solipsist's imagination.

Cheers,

Tony

Yuyutsu,

Thanks for answering the questions. I have a better idea now how you ‘tick’. Quite often and mostly in conversation with someone with a faith position, it is difficult to ascertain a full point of view as there are so many contradictory ideas out there.

I thought a few answers slightly odd and didn't suit the religion/political situation extant but everyone is entitled to their opinion unless it causes strife to others and then such opinion should be challenged. Your vagueness was evident and not helpful to others in society in a few of these answers, such as legal voluntary euthanasia and the role of education etc. It’s best to work with what we have instead of trying to reinvent the wheel.

I really don’t want to go into it but your ideas on a ‘God’ and a ‘soul’ has no evidence in support. Subjective evaluation is not good enough evidence for lots of folk. Good enough for you, so it would seem, but not for me. Wishing stuff to be true to back-up childhood spooky teaching or personal ‘spooky’ experience will not make it true. And, of course, personal ‘spooky’ experience cannot be used as proof of anything to others.

Shall we leave it there?

David

Dear Tony,

I have no clue where you get this idea as if without a brain one cannot be aware of anything.

Sure, without a brain there is no memory, hence one wouldn't remember their experiences: this however doesn't make it probable that there wouldn't be any experiences whatsoever, albeit one's experience without a brain could be very different than what we experience via a brain.

There are other reasons why I consider your suggestion improbable, but nevertheless, even if you are correct and there is no awareness, no experiences, without a brain, still I am who I am, with experiences or without them, so indeed this is probably no big deal.

Dear David,

Sorry about the vagueness due to time and space constraints. If there are any more details you still want to know about my views, don't hesitate asking.

It was never my intention to prove God's existence as I myself am convinced that He doesn't exist (I suppose this technically makes me an atheist).
If there had been (God forbid!) any evidence of God, then He wouldn't be God, but a mere idol, a deity, a god with a small 'g', and that is of no interest to me.

While I am not trying to convince anyone that my views are true, it is important for me to present a consistent model of what I stand for, to demonstrate that it is not in contradiction with objective facts. This is necessary for any religious person who is not under an umbrella of a strong religious organisation in order to survive (and not be locked up in a mental hospital) in a country where nearly everyone is either secular or Abrahamic.

You say that subjective evaluation is not good enough for you, likewise objective evaluation is not good enough for me and my love of God does not depend on that.

We can leave it here if you want.

Sorry, Yuyutsu, but it is obviously pointless to continue this discussion. I'm very happy living on this planet and maybe you should contemplate paying it a visit sometime.:))

David

>>this however doesn't make it probable that there wouldn't be any experiences whatsoever, albeit one's experience without a brain could be very different than what we experience via a brain.<<

How are you going to experience things Yuyutsu? Are you expecting that your appendix will step up and take the plate?

You're right about one thing: having no brain doesn't make it probable that there wouldn't be any experiences whatsoever. It makes it certain. Without your brain you're just a decaying lump of organic matter.

>>without a brain, still I am who I am<<

No you're not. Without a brain you have nothing to generate your sense of personal identity unless it's that magic appendix of yours again.

Cheers,

Tony

Dear Tony,

<<How are you going to experience things Yuyutsu? Are you expecting that your appendix will step up and take the plate?>>

Ever stopped to consider the miracle of how the brain, a lump of organic matter, is able provide us with experiences?

For our appendix, also a lump of organic matter, to provide us with experiences is no more a miracle than the brain doing the same.

As the appendix is built differently than the brain, it shouldn't be surprising that experiences via the appendix would be different than experiences via the brain. The brain for example supports memory, which the appendix probably doesn't. The brain supports thoughts, which the appendix probably doesn't. We don't know what experiences are in store for us via our appendix because even if we had them already we can't remember them, but different experiences do not mean no experiences.

<<Without a brain you have nothing to generate your sense of personal identity>>

That sense is commonly called 'ego' - wouldn't it be wonderful for once to be without one?