SciFiBoy said:
Kantor said:
SciFiBoy said:
I would define those things as "delusions" or "hullicinations", which are biological unless im mistaken.
1) how are they not biological? 2) why would I believe in something that is unscientific?
|
1) They are connections between neurons in the brain, so of course they're biological. But can we say for sure that they are purely biological? What causes those specific neuron connections which lead to a specific dream?
2) Because the scientific knowledge of humanity has enormous holes in it, and thus something which is unproven isn't necessarily "unscientific". How can a group of people on a rock orbiting a smallish star in one of several billion galaxies that make up our universe possibly know everything there is to know about any aspect of science? Indeed, for all we know, the entire Big Bang Theory could be completely false, but let's not go there. The point is that, until there is concrete evidence that consciousness ceases after death of the body, nobody can say that they "know" anything about "afterlife", or lack of it.
|
1) how can they not be biological though? surely the why would be biological also?
2) I know that, but dont we have theories for thoose things? which are themselves based on evidence?
|
1) That's where we go into unchartered territory. Because we genuinely have no idea. All we can do is speculate.
2) Yes, we have theories based on evidence. Those theories could be completely wrong, especially those that involve the greater universe. How do we know that gravity and electromagnetism don't work differently, 30 billion light years from here? And I would think that those theories are almost certainly correct. They are based on solid evidence, and have no real contradictions. My point is that you can't dismiss something as "unscientific" when modern science knows very little about the matter. Human psychology and the make-up of the brain is an area which science has only really scratched the surface of.