128 réponses à ce sujet

[General User]

alex90c wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Souls do not exist.

^this

And if you disagree, find us ones shred of evidence proving that they do.

You want proof to a question that, since time immemorial, has baffled, confounded, and divided the greatest minds the human race is capable of producing?

You may be asking too much of BSN.

[slimgrin]

alex90c wrote...

I'll trash peoples' beliefs as much as I want until the day they can finally come up with a better reason than "it just is" in regards to the existence of certain things. In this case, souls, which is just a pile of BS.

[Lucky Thirteen]

alex90c wrote...

I'll trash peoples' beliefs as much as I want until the day they can finally come up with a better reason than "it just is" in regards to the existence of certain things. In this case, souls, which is just a pile of BS.

You are appearing to be just as they are. I am still seeing a lack of support for your opinion, just bitter hate without reasoning. An uncivilized arguement. You are demanding support of other's opinions and not supporting your own. Do you have support for your opinion or is your support "it just is"?

[S.A.K]

Shepard is too cool to need a soulB)

[alex90c]

Lucky Thirteen wrote...

alex90c wrote...

I'll trash peoples' beliefs as much as I want until the day they can finally come up with a better reason than "it just is" in regards to the existence of certain things. In this case, souls, which is just a pile of BS.

You are appearing to be just as they are. I am still seeing a lack of support for your opinion, just bitter hate without reasoning. An uncivilized arguement. You are demanding support of other's opinions and not supporting your own. Do you have support for your opinion or is your support "it just is"?

The way I see it, certain beliefs make the claim that souls exist. Burden of proof is on whoever is making the claim. No proof exists. No soul.

CASE CLOSED.

Whenever people put forward scientific theories they're required to show proof supporting them, I don't see religious beliefs as any sort of exception to this rule so I consider them a pile of sh*t. Am I being crude? Sure. But I'd be making exactly the same point even if I decided to dress it up in fancy words and politeness.

Modifié par alex90c, 25 septembre 2011 - 05:28 .

[slimgrin]

Lucky Thirteen wrote...

alex90c wrote...

I'll trash peoples' beliefs as much as I want until the day they can finally come up with a better reason than "it just is" in regards to the existence of certain things. In this case, souls, which is just a pile of BS.

You are appearing to be just as they are. I am still seeing a lack of support for your opinion, just bitter hate without reasoning. An uncivilized arguement. You are demanding support of other's opinions and not supporting your own. Do you have support for your opinion or is your support "it just is"?

He doesn't have to, he's not the one claiming souls exist.

Modifié par slimgrin, 25 septembre 2011 - 05:35 .

[Xilizhra]

If souls exist, then I believe Shepard has one, yes. I'm unsure on the matter myself.

[Lucky Thirteen]

alex90c wrote...
The way I see it, certain beliefs make the claim that souls exist. Burden of proof is on whoever is making the claim. No proof exists. No soul.

CASE CLOSED.

Whenever people put forward scientific theories they're required to show proof supporting them, I don't see religious beliefs as any sort of exception to this rule so I consider them a pile of sh*t. Am I being crude? Sure. But I'd be making exactly the same point even if I decided to dress it up in fancy words and politeness.

So your opinion is, there are no souls because there just isn't. You are prooving them wrong with nothing and saying "it just is." So why should they stop believeing? Just as you don't believe them because they don't have proof, they won't believe you because you have no proof.

My opinion is that there are no souls because when you die, you die. Flesh stops working, you stop. People are brought back all the time from death, granted they are usually dead for a few minutes. So why do we have control on this if there is an afterlife and spirits? How can we bring people back from death by shocking their heart with tools and pumping their lungs to breath.

Some people say they see heaven or hell in this time, they claim to have out of body experiences as spirits watching doctors work on their bodies. Scientist say this is hallucinations created by a malfunctioning brain.

What is your support for there not being souls? 

[Xilizhra]

Some people say they see heaven or hell in this time, they claim to have out of body experiences as spirits watching doctors work on their bodies. Scientist say this is hallucinations created by a malfunctioning brain.

I'm curious: how does it manifesting physically as a malfunctioning brain disprove the existence of souls?

Of course, we need to define what a soul is first.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 25 septembre 2011 - 05:50 .

[Doug4130]

the argument that something "exists because it exists" or "doesn't because it doesn't" is the exact same argument. Neither carries any more weight than the other. It's like looking at the colour green and one person saying "it's not red" and the other saying "it's not blue" and arguing who is right.

Smarten up and realize that the world doesn't march to the beat of one drum, and if one person's beliefs aren't hurting anyone else then more power to them. Variety is the spice of life and such.

[slimgrin]

Doug4130 wrote...

the argument that something "exists because it exists" or "doesn't because it doesn't" is the exact same argument. Neither carries any more weight than the other. It's like looking at the colour green and one person saying "it's not red" and the other saying "it's not blue" and arguing who is right.

Smarten up and realize that the world doesn't march to the beat of one drum, and if one person's beliefs aren't hurting anyone else then more power to them. Variety is the spice of life and such.

I prefer common sense. And if someone makes the claim: souls exist, they should provide evidence. As far as souls not exisitng...well, there's plenty of evidence.

Modifié par slimgrin, 25 septembre 2011 - 05:54 .

[ZenJestr]

first we have to define what a soul is....certain people think it's your mind...in which case yes souls exist...certain people think of it as some spiritual form that goes into another plane of existence after you die...this definition has no evidence...

there are many more definitions based on the culture. The question is...whose definition are we using?

[YouthCultureForever]

I don't this subject should cause a flamewar. The project is called The Lazarus Project, that has religious implications. It's not called The Frankenstein Project

[PauseforEffect]

Perhaps it might be better to ask just how intact is Shepard's personality after the Lazarus project. Given the subjective nature of people's lives and the changes they undertake several times, that question is damn near impossible to determine. Since it's up to the player to decide the path change, that becomes moot.
Is Shepard the person we played in ME1? To me, she has become gradually more ruthless but that I think is more from events around her. She definitely wasn't able to hack a mech or be tapped into by an AI soooo, no, she's not who she was 2 years ago.
Kinda makes you wonder if Shepard's just advanced tech with a corpse's memories so that it supposed to think it's commander Shepard.

[alex90c]

So your opinion is, there are no souls because there just isn't. You are prooving them wrong with nothing and saying "it just is." So why should they stop believeing? Just as you don't believe them because they don't have proof, they won't believe you because you have no proof.

Person X believes in the flying spaghetti monster. Person Y doesn't believe in it. Person Y criticises Person X's belief of the FSM. Person Y states that Person X doesn't have proof of its non-existence therefore Person X's belief may actually be true.

I hope you realise how stupid that sounds, because that's exactly the kind of defense you're using. The point I'm making, is that for anything to be considered true, or even credible there needs to be a theory behind it WITH evidence supporting it. Souls don't. In fact religions as a whole don't have the slightest bit of evidence going for them, therefore for all intents and purposes it is safe to assume that they don't exist. The funny thing is, if we were discussing something which wasn't around religion and spirituality, you would probably be saying exactly the same things I am, asking people for proof. But of course, "God", "souls" and all that crap seem to get a get-out-of-jail-free-card.

[Iakus]

Not gonna comment on the possibility of Shepard having a soul. Just gonna say: might have been an interesting topic of discussion to have with some of the squad. A variety of opinions could have been shown.

[Lucky Thirteen]

Xilizhra wrote...
I'm curious: how does it manifesting physically as a
malfunctioning brain disprove the existence of souls?

Of course, we need to define what a soul is first.

Just like how when a person is very sick, with a high fever for
example. High fevers can effect and damage the brain, the brain reacts to the
threat and people commonly have hallucinations, strange dreams and
nightmares. 

A brain starving for oxygen and blood, would react the same way.
I imagine It is sort of like the brain is in a panic. It can try to comfort itself with a
positive dream like heaven, or in it's panic, it creates a nightmarish hell.

slimgrin wrote...

I prefer common sense. And if someone makes the claim: souls exist, they should provide evidence. As far as souls not exisitng...well, there's plenty of evidence.

You are making claims to souls not existing and not providing evidence. You are making your arguement invalid, especially since the OP isn't claiming anything but asking a quesiton of what people think happened when Shepard died. Yes they used the word soul, they want to hear opinions of people who believe in souls, but they left it open for other opinions. You simply went form the word soul and turned it into an arguement over their existence.

Instead of saying, I don't believe in souls, this is why, this is what I think happened when Shepard died. You and others are saying, you are wrong, souls don't exist, end of story.

[Mims]

There is a simple equation here. If you believe Shepard to be religious [or are envisioning this from the standpoint of a religious character's perception of Shepard], you must realize two things: A.] This person believes in a higher power. B.] Higher powers are not bound by rational law.

Honestly, I don't think Shepard's faith [if she/he has any] would be as tested by coming back to life, as it might be realizing that possibly billions of years and lives have been destroyed by the Reapers without any interference. Coming back to life is not a hard concept for most religious to believe. [Almost all religions have an element of miracle to them.] But eons and eons of neglect is much more slanted towards deism, and unless Shepard ascribes to that belief, may be hard to swallow.

Modifié par Mims, 25 septembre 2011 - 06:16 .

[TheMakoMaster]

brain_damage wrote...

Nope. Irenicus has it.

  Just staked Bodhi in my first BG2 playthrough

[Kaiser Shepard]

Have you seen Shepard dance? No way that guy has soul.

[slimgrin]

Claiming souls exist is like saying garden gnomes exist. The probability is the same.

[Lucky Thirteen]

slimgrin wrote...

Claiming souls exist is like saying garden gnomes exist. The probability is the same.

But garden gnomes do exist? They are ugly figurines people like to put in their lawns and gardens.

[Youknow]

alex90c wrote...

So your opinion is, there are no souls because there just isn't. You are prooving them wrong with nothing and saying "it just is." So why should they stop believeing? Just as you don't believe them because they don't have proof, they won't believe you because you have no proof.

Person X believes in the flying spaghetti monster. Person Y doesn't believe in it. Person Y criticises Person X's belief of the FSM. Person Y states that Person X doesn't have proof of its non-existence therefore Person X's belief may actually be true.

I hope you realise how stupid that sounds, because that's exactly the kind of defense you're using. The point I'm making, is that for anything to be considered true, or even credible there needs to be a theory behind it WITH evidence supporting it. Souls don't. In fact religions as a whole don't have the slightest bit of evidence going for them, therefore for all intents and purposes it is safe to assume that they don't exist. The funny thing is, if we were discussing something which wasn't around religion and spirituality, you would probably be saying exactly the same things I am, asking people for proof. But of course, "God", "souls" and all that crap seem to get a get-out-of-jail-free-card.

But that's exactly how logic works. If it doesn't exist, then there should be evidence that leads to the conclusion that it does not exist. For instance, using your FSM example, you could say that the FSM doesn't exist because spaghetti is a man developed product. Then there's the fact that you can settle on the definition of "monster" that by definition "monster" is defined by being "an imaginary creature." These are enough to debunk a person that states the FSM exist, because they have nothing to support such a claim outside of their own belief. But

Even in reality, things that are considered to not exist have support and claims for why they don't. Or in the event that you cannot prove that it doesn't exist, then can assume that such an event DOES exist and find a contradiction with their proof. Like if you were to say God doesn't exist, you would prove he doesn't exist by assuming that he does exist and then finding a contradiction. As there's no real way to start arguing by assuming he doesn't exist without coming to a "he doesn't exist because he doesn't exist." But with the assumption there is one...? You have somewhere to go and logically lead your audience to the conclusion. 

[DarkDragon777]

slimgrin wrote...

Claiming souls exist is like saying garden gnomes exist. The probability is the same.

............

[BatmanPWNS]

Shepard has no soul. He is the son of Satan (You heard it folks)

Modifié par BatmanPWNS, 25 septembre 2011 - 06:51 .