Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 48 (9179 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,231 Year: 5,488/9,624 Month: 513/323 Week: 10/143 Day: 0/10 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   At what point should we look for a non-materialistic explanation?
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 57 of 160 (537980)
12-02-2009 11:31 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by cavediver
11-29-2009 7:39 AM


If you think there are large holes in any theory, then you develop a new theory which explains to better degree what we see. You don't go running off, crying - see, see, we need a non-materialistic explanation.
Right.
At what point should we look for a non-materialistic explanation?
I say we look for a non-materialistic explanation when current theory is violated.
Sorry for just bringing an anecdote, but I saw a TV show on out of body experiences where a guy had a surgery that he flat-lined during but was brought back. Afterwords, he asked the surgeon why he was doing the chicken dance during the surgery. The surgeon explained that sometime during surgery, when his hands are tied up, he'll point to things with his elbows and that he could see how it might look like the chicken dance. But the guy was not conscious during the surgery which is besides the fact that his head was covered during the whole thing. There was no way the guy could have actually seen the surgeon and it convinced the surgeon that the guy might have had an out of body experience. I think that was a legitimate place for the surgeon to look for a non-materialistic explanation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by cavediver, posted 11-29-2009 7:39 AM cavediver has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Straggler, posted 12-02-2009 1:57 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 103 by dwise1, posted 12-04-2009 11:18 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 63 of 160 (538004)
12-02-2009 2:46 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Straggler
12-02-2009 1:57 PM


Re: Chicken Dance
If we had all invoked the supernatural everytime something that didn't fit with current knowledge occurred we would still be living in caves.
Bullshit.
Look at the pyramids that the ancient Egyptians built in the face of their abundant supernatural beliefs.
A patient mentions the phrase "chicken dance", the surgeon interperets this as the patient seeing him point to things with his elbows whilst the patient is unconscious during surgery and this is evidence of the supernatural.
There was a little more to it than that and all I said was that it was a legitimate place for the surgeon to look for a non-materialistic explanation, not that it was evidence of the supernatural.
Quit being a dick.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Straggler, posted 12-02-2009 1:57 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by Straggler, posted 12-02-2009 3:56 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 69 of 160 (538031)
12-02-2009 5:03 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Straggler
12-02-2009 3:56 PM


Re: Chicken Dance
CS writes:
There was a little more to it than that and all I said was that it was a legitimate place for the surgeon to look for a non-materialistic explanation, not that it was evidence of the supernatural.
What on Earth is the difference.
How you define the word "evidence". As "a reason to believe something" there's no difference, but me knowing that you prefer the constraints of "objective empirical evidence" it should be obvious that I wan't saying that it was that.
Hence you being a dick.
But it comes so naturally........
From my end, it seems like you do put some effort into it

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Straggler, posted 12-02-2009 3:56 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Straggler, posted 12-02-2009 5:07 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 95 of 160 (538199)
12-04-2009 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by 1.61803
12-04-2009 12:55 PM


Re: You Need to learn to read
When you think: "I am going to move my arm", the brain outputs an electrical signal to move your arm. That signal can be received and translated to an actuator in a robotic arm.
Are you amazed at the point from where the thought of moving your arm becomes an output of an electrical signal? Or that that signal can be translated to an actuator?
If thoughts are simply a series of neurons firing, where are they non-material?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by 1.61803, posted 12-04-2009 12:55 PM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by 1.61803, posted 12-04-2009 10:00 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 140 of 160 (538828)
12-10-2009 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by dwise1
12-04-2009 11:18 PM


Hey Dave, how's it goin'?
Sorry for just bringing an anecdote, but I saw a TV show on out of body experiences where a guy had a surgery that he flat-lined during but was brought back. Afterwords, he asked the surgeon why he was doing the chicken dance during the surgery. The surgeon explained that sometime during surgery, when his hands are tied up, he'll point to things with his elbows and that he could see how it might look like the chicken dance. But the guy was not conscious during the surgery which is besides the fact that his head was covered during the whole thing. There was no way the guy could have actually seen the surgeon and it convinced the surgeon that the guy might have had an out of body experience. I think that was a legitimate place for the surgeon to look for a non-materialistic explanation.
Or to learn that someone on the surgical team, such as the anesthesiologist {snip} had muttered a comment about the surgeon looking like he was doing the "chicken dance". Eyes may be covered or taped shut {snip} but not the ears. While the patient could not have seen anything, he could still hear.
Doesn't mean that that has to have been what had happened, but it is a very reasonable and likely non-non-materialistic explanation.
Likely? What are you basing this likelihood on?
The anesthesiologist didn't mention anything like that. And you can't even breathe on your own when under general anesthesia, let alone hear stuff. The only thing I found after searching was people claiming some hearing loss after general anesthesia. I don't find your scenario very likely, nor reasonable, at all.
But we know, a priori, that it couldn't have been an out of body experience, right? Your scenario is just a post hoc rationalization for materialism, isn't it?
In all honesty, we just don't know how it/what happened. Insufficient data. But it must have been something that could be explained materialistically, right? Shouldn't that count as pseudo-skepticism?
People say things like 'the model works' or 'the coin always comes up heads', but in this case we don't know what side the coin has landed on (its still in the air). Still though, you've offered a post hoc material rationalization and given it a positive likelihood. But by the nature of this case, we cannot perform a scientific investigation (what are we gonna do? flat-line people on purpose and control the variables ) so we just don't know. But people still come up with these off the cuff 'explanations' and maintain that there's no reason to look for a non-materialistic one. Seems dubious to me.
The point is that the doctor would have jumped to assuming a non-materialistic explanation very prematurely, without having investigated all possible natural explanations.
But he is unable to investigate all possible explanations. This (specific) case can't really mature any more. The general case of out of body experiences is still in the air. But the surgeon is commenting on this specific case. What I said was:
quote:
I think that was a legitimate place for the surgeon to look for a non-materialistic explanation.
And I still think it is. The phenomenon seemed to defy materialistic explanation and my criteria for looking to the non-materialistic was this:
quote:
I say we look for a non-materialistic explanation when current theory is violated.
I think I've maintained my position.
To the original question, we start looking for non-materialistic explanations when we have completely given up on ever learning the truth.
I think you're close here... The non-materialistic explanation is left as just a possibility, but it doesn't mean that we have to completely give up on learning the truth. The surgeon could meet with other ones who have had patients claim out of body experiences and they could look for correlations or commonalities, etc.
Not only does jumping to this conclusion put an immediate halt to any further investigation, but once that leap has been taken then it becomes imperative to prevent any further investigation
I'm ignoring all the ID stuff we agree on and applying this line (admittedly out of context) to the case I've brought forward. I think further investigation does not have to be halted just because a non-materialistic explanation has been presented.
There's even a research foundation for the phenomenon: OBERF - Out of Body Experience Research Foundation
Aren't they performing "further investigation"? (I haven't really looked into that website much)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by dwise1, posted 12-04-2009 11:18 PM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by dwise1, posted 12-11-2009 9:34 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 141 of 160 (538829)
12-10-2009 1:50 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by 1.61803
12-04-2009 10:00 PM


Re: You Need to learn to read
If thoughts are simply a series of neurons firing, where are they non-material?
Where are the thoughts which are a series of nuerons firing getting the marching orders from?
From previous nuerons firing, which come from previous nuerons firing, which goes all the way back to the first firing in utero when the brain develops. And that first firing, I suppose, comes from the mother's nuerons firing.
Everything that exists is manifested from energy. Energy of which mankind has yet been able to explain. Energy that can be both material and inmaterial. At what point do quantum waves manifest physical reality? At what point do quarks or strange charms or any other massless particle become material? I realize that simply saying goddit is not that answer.
But pretending the question is irrelvant does not keep me from wondering nevertheless.
That's all fine and dandy.
Now, back to this robot arm. Can you see now that in this specific case it is all material?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by 1.61803, posted 12-04-2009 10:00 PM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024