Jamaal-CA | Consciousness Is The Soul | The Atheist Experience 26.17

[@claudiasolomon1123]

Caller: I can prove it. Hosts: good, we are ready to hear your evidence. Caller: *The Bible SAYS SO!!* Hosts: This is not evidence. Caller: I don't understand. Hosts: we know.

[@c.guydubois8270]

Isn't that the standard believer's dialog when the deity concepts are critiqued ? Some guy's imaginative concepts that haven't any evidence told me so.

[@ciri151]

It just shows that they haven't ever questioned their blind faith, and looked at it with a sober mind. To them the bible is so undoubtedly true that they can't imagine otherwise.

[@darinb.3273]

Hello Claudia, Hello Claudia, The authority is between man and God. Man claims many things through science some are accurate and some are not. That presents a problem when man "claims" fact because scientists say so when all the while the definitions of science aren't even followed. According to man science is conducted through the 5 senses, correct? There's a problem when it comes to human consciousness, it cannot be explained nor is it detectable through the sciences no one has seen it, heard it, tasted it, smelled it or touched it, therefore consciousness doesn't exist right? Men of science claim the Big Bang theory as fact too coreect? The problem is no one saw, heard, tasted, touched or smelled the Big Bang yet it is claimed as fact. The same with the theory of evolution. Both of these are claimed as fact, yet the definitions of science cannot be followed, therefore they are not science or scientific. Consciousness is real because we can see evidence of it in a person because we can interact with them in many ways, therefore we know consciousness is real, yet it isn't scientific.

[@ClockworkMan13]

Once again the caller can't define it, can't explain it, can't prove it even exists but blames science for not "solving" it.

[@zacharyberridge7239]

And also sure seems to get his hackles up when encountering any amount of pushback on his unsupported beliefs.

[@steveanton763]

I was recently told by someone that they laugh at physicists because they claim to have solved the mysteries of the universe but can't explain ghosts. I asked why it would be up to physicists to prove the existence of ghosts and how one would even go about that task. I was told see science is limited because it can't make ghosts appear to be tested. I said it's like saying that carpentry had failed because it can't build a teleportation device.

[@geoffr4018]

Lol Nice Love the comment

[@TheSnoeedog]

@@steveanton763 Whenever I get one of these, "if you don't believe in god, then how do you explain this (insert major unsolved problem in physics/biology/etc....)?" I say, well, since you have a hotline to the source of all knowledge, what's the opposite of a duck? How much does one half of Tuesday weigh? The morning after my 21st birthday, as I slept through my hangover, what was the precise volume and chemical makeup of the third fart to squeeze out of my cheeks? Surely you're all knowing entity with whom you enjoy a personal relationship can answer any of these trivial questions, one of which I literally pulled out of my ass.....hmmmm? it's a little longwinded but it shuts them down in a hurry

[@IRGeamer]

And then gets defensive and hostile when criticized... Why am I not surprised? Never underestimate a narcissists burning lust to manufacture oppression for themselves when faced with even the most reasonable and minor criticism.

[@PastelOddity]

“You can’t prove that hunger comes from the brain.” Brother, I give you my word that if I burgled your brain, you would never feel hungry again.

[@DanteSolablood]

There are people who have passed out during g-force tests who have reported going through the "tunnel of light" and "meeting loved ones". These people were not dying and not in danger.. what happened was that their brains were very temporarily oxygen deprived. The fact that these near death experiences are scientifically replicable is in itself a good sign that its bunk.

[@phantasticmrphasma9874]

Yeah. Its funny how people only ever experience these things in a moment of greatly reduced capacity.. like, people have vivid hallucinations when high on some intoxications, this doesn’t make the hallucinations valid, it makes the fact that the intoxication causes them, valid.. But.. Matt is such a douche.. like i’ve seen more than enough videos of him to confidently state that. Whilst his brutal/savage deliverance might be entertaining at times, his inability to actually engage with people, due to what seems to be low EQ and inadequate theory-of-mind, can be painful and frustrating to experience. His ego is cringe-worthy to say the least and the same narcissism that drove him to be the centre of attention and gospel voice, at the christian alter, is the same that is driving him to be the same at the alter of atheism.. his dominance-seeking psychopathy doesn’t fit well in open, mutually respectful debate. Just saying..

[@anonymousjohnson976]

Exactly: The "near" death experiences are people who have been deprived of oxygen. They are not dead and that is why it is called a "near" death experience.

[@Steveman27]

I like how you reminded me of Top Gun: Maverick when you mentioned the g-force thing.

[@Nocturnalux]

A long time ago, someone on AE mentioned the case of a woman whose nde included the world of Star Trek. She grew up watching it with her father, it meant a lot to her, and religion had never factored in her life. So instead of the usual “ saw Jesus” experience, she was taken to the Starship Enterprise. So I guess Star Trek is real.

[@anonymousjohnson976]

@@Nocturnalux : Yes, and there was a show years ago called "Beyond and Back" about NDE's. One woman said she had an NDE and saw tall aliens and there have been some people who had an NDE and said they saw absolutely nothing at all.

[@jillum89]

“All that science you offer isn’t good enough!” “Wauw, you must have really high standards. So what was good enough to convince you?” “Well, this old book here says ...”

[@jamescampbell2521]

LOL

[@DemstarAus]

I have never seen wow spelled that way. Creative use of vowels.

[@STARFISHSLG]

Hosts: Here's a well thought out, fact based and reasonable statement. Caller: Rutabaga.

[@ornerybeefalo8387]

Yam

[@FourDeuce01]

All religious apologists: “When I use a word, it means just what I want it to mean, nothing more and nothing less.”🤡

[@ferocel]

Agreed. They blatantly change the actual definition of words like 'logic' and 'rational' to suit their agenda, bang square pegs into round holes then run away claiming victory after being relentlessly called out.

[@whatsittouya1937]

"Also, it only means whatever I want it to mean at this specific moment in time. Ignore any earlier times in our conversation when I wanted it to mean anything else."

[@cy-one]

"And sometimes, like with the word 'kind' I can't even say what it means! But it definitely means that macro-evolution is a religion!"

[@FourDeuce01]

@@cy-one Those gaps between vague definitions give them more places to hide their imaginary god.😈

[@cy-one]

@@FourDeuce01 What? Hide god? Naaah, he's totally roundabout at passenger plane cruise level height.

[@Lupinemancer87]

I like that the caller was just about to shoehorn his god in as an explaination, but Matt stopped him before he even could :D

[@nobeliefisok9174]

Its been a mainstay of Matt's technique with callers for a couple years now. When a caller starts to say "I don't know, thus god" Matt cuts him and off and prevents that caller from wasting anyone's time going down that rabbit hole of nonsense.

[@WhoThisMonkey]

@mental illness is _NOT_ a joke. Nor does he need to. Why aren't you getting this? You don't need an answer to disbelieve an answer that has insufficient evidence or justification.

[@amtlpaul]

@@WhoThisMonkey our messed up friend doesn't want to get it

[@69eddieD]

@bigot SAUSAGE

[@banonKING]

That was taking the long way to say "I know because the Bible told me so". They would NEVER accept that as a justification for anything else beyond their specific and cultural spiritual beliefs.

[@seanoconnell1120]

I know the "God of the Gaps" too! :) He's a great God, but getting smaller every year ...

[@tomterific390]

Caller claims "we don't have any understanding of what consciousness is." Wrong. we don't have a FULL understanding, but we now know a helluva lot more than this guy realizes.

[@gregorygarcia6542]

There is no such thing as a soul that transcends death. If the soul is anything it is literally the electricity in our bodies while we are alive. Once you die the electricity stops and you are done forever. However, every part of your body will be changed and transformed into something else whether it is smoke or food for worms. You are part of the universe forever. Literally.

[@tannermcateer1463]

That's why the hindus had a conception of God in which he/she was the cosmic actor, "playing the parts" of all physical phenomena.

[@kelseykjarsgaard5774]

Or it transfers to the ether and its conciousness

[@atum497]

Lie

[@atum497]

Prove it!

[@jaycobbina9529]

Yet there's no evidence for that either. There's no point making something up ... it makes an atheist no more right than a theist .

[@williamtarry4405]

Theists can claim anything they want. Until/unless they can provide evidence/scientific evidence to support their claims then all they've got is unfounded claims and opinions.

[@adamlangton1967]

It's too bad the entire American government is rooted in theism. Scary country.

[@williamtarry4405]

@@adamlangton1967 fortunately, atheist presence in government is on the rise. It's going to take some time to drag America away from the radical-theist perspectives/policies.

[@nellwhiteside3042]

-Life is a process (essentially a combustion process) and when that process ends, you end. It's like a candle flame - when the flame combustion ends, the flame ends.

[@NeverTalkToCops1]

Yep, there is no aftercandle life.

[@nagranoth_]

11:30 and there you have it. Matt tells him about actual tests done and the result, and the caller just dismisses reality ba thinking the facts are wrong and his fantasy is right. Because fuck facts when your comfort blanket is so cozy.

[@awilson1998]

Everything that one experiences is an interpretation of the brain gathered by the senses. This is why your nose doesn't always obscure your vision.

[@grimmstryke9627]

And your experience is always in the past.

[@doggiesarus]

Patient after coma: remembers really bright light and a person wearing white at the end of a long corridor. Doctor: turns off the high powered flashlight he has used to look at your eyes.

[@johnd.shultz7423]

Its quite possible that the intense,unexamined Fear of death /extinction hidden(somewhat) in the subconscious is the main reason why so many people cling to the idea of an afterlife or some form of consciousness that will exist after physical death, its so much easier to explain the unknown with a litany of words and concepts versus directly facing and accepting ones Fear of nonexistance...

[@cobalius]

I perceive consciousness as just an artifact of being able to process sensorical information. Like.. when you're putting a knife onto a grindstone, there will fly sparks. And neither are the sparks a feature of that rotating grindstone, nor are they a feature of that raw knife blade.

[@scottblack7182]

"I didnt say to FIND a SCIenTIST " 😂 Idk why i died when matt said that .

[@ilesalmo7724]

Beings who can reason beyond the immediate threat are more likely to survive. Beings who can make plans beyond the current day are more likely to survive. This is what is conciousness. But these capabilities require lots of "brain-power" which requires food, which is why most animals do not have them.

[@cps_Zen_Run]

The “hard problem “ of Consciousness might be many easier problems, or determined later as we gain more knowledge, or perhaps it is not a problem at all. None of these require “insert supernatural here.”

[@johnd.shultz7423]

Until the gap between thinker and thought,observer and the observed is absent( bridged) the mystery of consciousness will allways be, as we are living in an allmost constant state of inner division within ourselves and this inner division is mirrored in the outer world, but this division is actually" false" and only a persistant creation of thought...

[@victorvelie3980]

It is impossible to describe the difference between the subjective experience of the color red and the experience of the smell of coffee using the mathematical models of physics. The difference is not a matter of numbers or structure, particles, waves or fields, in fact it is impossible to explain these experiences to someone who does not experience them. Even if you could show exactly how each and every neuron involved acts in order to process these cognitions, it still would not convey the fundamental nature of what it is like to experience them. If you don't agree then I'd be happy to hear how you explain them. Physics and qualitative experience are simply two completely different things. This suggests that there is an aspect of reality that is not explained by reducing things to their currently physically observable properties. This doesn't prove a soul or anything else but it does make hard materialism irrational in my view

[@violeth2255]

The experience of the color red is what happens when an organism's visual receptors receive a roughly defined range of wavelengths of light. The resulting electrical signal causes a chemical cascade in one or more cells of the organism the exact parameters of which will vary even between members of the same species as minor differences in genetics and variations in previously received sensory inputs alter the exact composition, intensity, and duration of the cascade. As consciousness is an emergent property of these cascades and these cascades deviate between organisms, the conscious experience necessarily deviates between individuals as well. Me not being able to generate in your brain a duplicate of my exact cascade of chemicals resulting from a particular sensory input into my particular brain structure doesn't suddenly justify ruling in an undemonstrated extra "thing."

[@victorvelie3980]

@@violeth2255 I am aware, my point is that, no matter how complex the process, it fundamentally consists of electromagnetic forces acting on particles and fields through their geometric relationships in space and time, and a description of these interactions simply does not describe what it is like to experience something. This is because experiential qualities differ in ways that that are not merely matters of geometric structure or quantity. It is not rational to deny subjective experience in favor of objective observations because subjective experience is the only thing we can actually be certain is real; everything else is built off of secondary logic. (ie: I seem to experience an external world, therefore an external world is the most rational explanation for my experience). What does it mean that consciousness is an emergent property of chemical cascades? How does that explain anything? A whole cannot be more than the sum of its parts. If the conscious experience of redness exists, then the components of that experience are among the components of reality. Subjective experience is sufficient evidence to demonstrate the existence of the subject, and even some of the subjects properties.

[@violeth2255]

@@victorvelie3980 A description of the processes may not convey the experience, but all evidence indicates that inducing those processes will induce the experience. Were it not for variations in brain structure and intercellular signaling resulting from differing genetics and past sensory inputs, evidence indicates that the experience induced would be the same as well. Like it or not the processes described seem to be what experiences are. You can complain all you want that the description doesn't inherently convey the experience itself (because the description doesn't induce the process), but that's a non-sequitor. Whole's are often more than the sum of their parts. Water is made of hydrogen and oxygen, yet it possesses traits neither element has and lacks traits those elements do. Atoms are made of protons, neutrons, and electrons, and possess qualities their parts do not because of how those parts are arranged. Paintings and drawings are just a canvas and pigments, yet they can portray creatures and scenes existent and not by virtue of how those pigments are arranged onto the canvas. By all evidence we have, consciousness and the experiences of it appear to be what happens when certain arrangements of matter do their thing in response to stimuli. Acknowledging this doesn't deny the subjective experiences had or the consciousness generated. It merely recognizes our best understanding of the nature of the subject in question barring the issue of hard solipsism (which we ignore for practicality until it is demonstrated).

[@drg8687]

Took like 20 minutes to get to his evidence and it ended up being "the bible says so." 🤦‍♂🤦‍♂

[@rrpostalagain]

Please can we look at this great “science” that this guy is citing. It’s gotta be good. Edit… yep it’s good. It’s also 70 year old science from a very devout man who was looking for a very specific result to come from his research. He wasn’t trying to find an answer, he knew the answer and looked for things to support it, almost exactly like this caller. When you are desperate to make reality fit your perceptions, you wind up in dark places (like Fox News- and to mostly lesser degrees every other news source these days).

[@wunnell]

I always find it funny when theists claim that they can "explain" something simply by saying "god did it". That's no more an explanation than "the brain did it" or "it happened naturally". Unless they can tell us HOW god did it, that's not an explanation, especially when they can't even show that the god they claim did it even exists in the first place.

[@TheTruthKiwi]

Claiming god did it is worse than saying it was natural because claiming god is invoking whole different unfalsifiable entities from other dimensions. Natural is a process that already exists and isn't a huge jump to be possible and likely.

[@ToniTheMink]

Simpsons did it!

[@haydendavid6169]

The "how" is always so much more interesting than "why"

[@cy-one]

@@TheTruthKiwi For me, it's worse because saying "God did it" still doesn't answer the "how" but the "who", which false under r/nobodyasked.

[@TheTruthKiwi]

@@cy-one That's a good point

[@vladtheemailer3223]

This caller is completly lost. Why can't people come up with a rational argument before calling in?

[@hegyak]

That, is asking a LOT. See, MANY MANY MANY other Callers and our Resident Theist Trolls. Not to be Confused with Resident Evil. Though, they may be. Because, they refuse to denounce Slavery and Genocide.

[@goldenterrorfan]

@@hegyak Troll lives matter

[@amtlpaul]

@@goldenterrorfan At least you know how to advocate for yourself

[@nobeliefisok9174]

@@goldenterrorfan Rational reply

[@goldenterrorfan]

@@nobeliefisok9174 troll lives REALLY matter

[@ChosenOne41]

I've never had a near-death experience, but I have been light-headed and saw stars. Just because I experienced seeing stars doesn't mean they were actually there, it was just a side effect of the meds I was taking at the time. Near-death experiences to me seem like that same sort of thing, just taken to an extreme. It doesn't prove anything more than brains can have us experience things that are not really there. Having some sort of external evidence is needed to prove something isn't just a product of the mind.

[@mitchhaelann9215]

Consciousness is easy. It's an emergent property arising from the combination of self-referential analog memory, spatial recognition and sensing ability, and communication skills. Mix those three together and you get basic awareness and the capacity for rational thought. Boom, done.

[@sergejromanov4945]

That means, a robot , with sensoric input ( cameras, mic, heat/pressure sensors etc. ) , with a huge memory and voice synthesizer has got consciousness ?

[@mitchhaelann9215]

@@sergejromanov4945 If the memory is self-referential and capable of forming new connections, then yes, eventually it will develop consciousness. Big shock.

[@darkyodd]

I’m not seeing where subjective experience/sense of “self” comes into play here. All of these properties can be simulated on a Macbook Pro with no indication that there is a “self” in the machine experiencing anything; just a program crunching numbers. How is it that some combination of these properties gives rise to qualia? What’s the basic organizing principle of matter governing the emergence of qualia?

[@kingbidenmypres]

@@darkyodd you think using the word qualia is so big and fancy it's going to make someone go "oh he said a big word, there must bea God".. Consciousness may be more naturally organic than a Mac book but a Mac book Isa lot more accurate, so neither one is all-encompassing perfection which is what the definition of a god would have to be... What would that even look like and of what use would it be? The entire cosmos could be forced into that definition but that's never what a believer is referring to when they reference god

[@darkyodd]

@@kingbidenmypres Well I used the term qualia because it’s the philosophical term that I think best illustrates why the hard problem of consciousness is so hard. A lot of people seem to conflate complex information processing and phenomenal consciousness, essentially claiming that either consciousness is the magical result of that processing or that the two are identical, and I think that’s wrong; you could have a perfect simulation of a human brain running on a computer, down to the actions of each individual neuron, and all you would have is a _simulation_ of a brain processing information, because a simulation is only analogous to the thing that it simulates. As far as my views on God, I do actually believe the universe as a whole is God so you were on the right track there.

[@amtlpaul]

The troll going by the name of Uncle Carmine clearly fears a discussion of this topic and so is attempting to distract from it. Don't indulge them...

[@ladyselenafelicitywhite1596]

Thanks for the heads up 🙋🏼‍♀️

[@johnd.shultz7423]

@@ladyselenafelicitywhite1596 "Uncle Carmine" is a spiritual mafioso figure for fallacious claims for the afterlife...

[@WhoThisMonkey]

@Mental illness is NOT a joke. Your point? Logic and consciousness aren't the same thing.

[@amtlpaul]

@transmission so what?

[@amtlpaul]

@transmission that logic and consciousness are different things does mean something. Your hatred of Matt Dillahunty may mean something very important to you, but to me, it is irrelevant to the issues under discussion

[@Nine28457]

In my 20’s I was part of a group of individuals who attempted to explore and understand brain states like near death and out of body experiences. I’ve had OBEs since I was a child, so it was a familiar process. I’ve informally tested my experiences over and over again. For example: In one instance, I induced an OBE, and found myself in what appeared to be my home. I walked around a bit, and noticed that someone left the refrigerator door slightly open. The door didn’t catch fully, and the light was still on. Wanting to take advantage of the circumstances, I “ran” back to “my body” and woke myself up immediately to check. Since everyone in the house was sleeping, this could be evidence that OBEs took place in reality. When I checked the fridge it was closed. My OBE experience did not match up with reality. I’ve personally tested this time and time again, as have others who are able to induce the state of mind required to produce the OBE experience. OBEs can be replicated fairly simply in the right state of mind, and if you’re familiar with the process. They can be induced during brain surgery by stimulating certain parts of the brain. But no one has ever been able to experience reality, and bring back evidence of it. OBEs occur during a malfunction in the process of falling asleep. Part of the brain that is supposed to shut down during sleep doesn’t. Parts of the brain are in a state of being awake and aware, and asleep, at the same time. Our consciousness is met with this paradox and doesn’t know how to interpret it. It “believes” it is awake, and should be receiving information. It creates an OBE - essentially, a replication of what it expects to see coming from the environment around you - in order to rectify this paradox. The same seems to occur with NDEs. The brain is shutting down due to impending death. The brain, an organ, can not understand the concept of death. It’s attempting to rectify issues similar to OBEs, when the brain hasn’t shut down completely for sleep. Both of these are fascinating states of mind. And to be honest, OBEs can be a lot of fun when you’re able to control them. Attempting to resolve its errors, the brain has created a virtual reality environment for you to explore. But they are in no way supernatural.

[@jezzatakla]

Trish. Really good post. One of the best I've seen on KZbin.

[@Nine28457]

@@jezzatakla thank you!

[@DemstarAus]

The way you describe the process seems exactly the state induced during lucid dreaming and the same bits of the function of sleep and consciousness involved in sleep paralysis. That to me says out of body experiences are essentially lucid dreams.

[@Nine28457]

@@DemstarAus yes. They’re another state of sleep, akin to lucid dreaming. They’re described differently as both have different fluctuations in levels of awareness and brain state at the time of occurrence. ie: the term “OBE” is a descriptor. No one actually leaves their body.

[@NeverTalkToCops1]

"Anyway, let me get to the point." Let me get to the toilet.

[@SecondaryHomunculus]

"You cant explain it to my satisfaction, so my mythology is correct" has got to be the laziest, dumbest argument for religion.

[@arthurunknown8972]

Using his logic, I know caller is delusional because I have faith in it. Difference is, I also have facts & evidence as proof.

[@Elysium_the_Bard]

I think where Jamaal is heavily confused, when it comes to when Matt and Everyday Atheist talking about science, is the difference between "the science" and "a scientist said..." or "scientists have said..." To put this a different way, it's like the two of them are looking at the math equation on the board and talking about mathematics, while Jamaal is looking at the mathematics professor who wrote the equation and talking about mathematicians, as if they are the mathematics itself. Maybe next time you can ask him how exactly he thinks science comes to a consensus to determine a fact about reality.

[@Dragonblaster1]

We know the following facts about consciousness and memory: 1. Many body actions are initiated before the thoughts are found 2. REM sleep is where memories are modified to strengthen an existent rule, modified to create a new rule, left alone or deleted. You can see that dog and cat dreams are all about hunting, because that is what keeps wild dogs and cats alive to reproduce. Humans, however, have complex lives in comparison, so our dreams are varied and often crazy. From these known facts, I hypothesise that consciousness is like a spotter plane overflying a combat zone after a battle. It assesses the consequences of actions, and as you grow, the lessons learned and modified by your dreams drive you towards a predictable, stable personality who will more likely than not live to reproduce. This would be favoured by natural selection.

[@STGFilmmakers]

When someone get Alzheimer’s does that mean their “soul” is fading away lmao

[@DCronk-qc6sn]

Hosts are so patient - you are Marvel hero tough. Holy crap....

[@grimmstryke9627]

Consciousness is an emergent property of the brain how wet is an emergent property of h2o

[@Anglomachian]

Why is emergence, the idea that we are more than a sum of our parts not a good explanation when the complaint is that we’re not just flesh and blood? You don’t get to posit the soul as an explanation until you’ve proven that the soul exists.

[@CyberBeep_kenshi]

People should add 1 word to the 'we don't know'. Try 'we don't know YET'. There is no point assuming 'god did it' before you prove a god first, and then you can research if consciousness comes from a god or whatever. Not before!

[@johnd.shultz7423]

these NDE people keep coming up with false" proof" from totally unreliable( most likely made up studies) that they cant verify or provide peer reviewed proof from honest researchers,they Never come up with solid evidence, but only claims that some "researcher" has allready "proved" the existance of out of the body experiences by dying/ dead people who supposedly have seen themselves hovering above their bodies while doctors /emergency techs worked on them, but this kind of scenario is to be expected and doesnt take a disembodied witness to prove,the problem arises when actually honest researchers have placed letters or simple number sequences up above operating tables etc. that would be readily seen by someone who truly was out of their body would see and remember,yet None of these tests have resulted in a positive result.

[@WhoThisMonkey]

@mental illness is _NOT_ a joke. Strawman fallacy. 🙄

[@robertallen591]

we have developed this habbit of listing words that we presume to mean the same thing but every word describes something slightly differant , logic insures that nothing including words can simultaniously have two meanings a thing is what it is

[@loneprimate]

The "gotcha" to me was where Jamaal said he "experienced" hunger. What do you use to "experience" something, Jamaal? It's YOUR BRAIN.

[@Dragonblaster1]

"We don't know what consciousness is; therefore, we know what consciousness is."

[@crazyprayingmantis5596]

Science can't prove that Zorg doesn't exist, but I read a book about Zorg and I liked it so I believe Zorg exists now. In your face Science

[@gregoryh9442]

Yeah I don’t know. Leave the music on in the background caller🤦🏻‍♂️

[@conradlorgar5508]

"Science can't explain it" 15 minutes later "science has explained it"

[@dukeemzworth3005]

There is no consciousness absent a brain. Even in a NDE, there is a brain present before, during & sfter the event.

[@KirkSH52]

“Matt, have you ever read about how bad soda is for your digestive track?”

[@johntuel2375]

Now I wonder if carnivorous plants have hunger. Thanks haha

[@aaron2891]

The scientists Jamaal referred to probably are actual scientists who did actual peer-reviewed work that confirms that consciousness affects future brain states. But what Jamaal is leaving out is the fact that prior brain states lead to your present consciousness, which then leads to future brain states. The fact that consciousness affects future brain states is akin to the fact that letting go of a ball from the top of a skyscraper will affect whether it falls to the ground or not.

[@HybridGib]

For all the people who argue that consciousness can be independent of the brain, it's interesting to point out that, demonstrably, the opposite is true: the brain can exist/function independent of consciousness (unless/until you die and it completely loses all functioning). If you're in a coma or having dreamless sleep (especially if you're anesthetized to undergo surgery), you've lost consciousness, but your brain is still functioning, as you're still alive. The fact that the brain can still carry out other functions just fine without processing consciousness is pretty strong evidence that it's a product of the brain.

[@HybridGib]

@@thevulture5750 Right 😂

[@HybridGib]

@@thevulture5750 False equivalency; if consciousness is merely correlated to the brain and originates from a different source, what would that be, and how can it be objectively observe it in a quantifiable form? We can't be sure with anecdotal stories of people's subjective experiences, though tests have been done much like the examples given in the video with the sheet of paper on top of the shelf. As far as an afterlife goes, we can't be sure, though I'm not personally convinced of afterlife claims anymore due to the lack of testability. If it all comes down to interpretation, then you'd be arguing for an unfalsifiable position, which doesn't allow for conclusions to be drawn either way.

[@HybridGib]

@@thevulture5750 Technically, that's correct, though that also means you cannot conclude that consciousness *doesn't* originate from the brain; again, emphasizing the pointlessness of unfalsifiable claims. But regardless, all the quantifiable evidence we have ever been able to observe would have us conclude that it does. If it doesn't originate from the brain, I am asking you again, where do you think it originates? Even if our conclusion is wrong, it's still currently the most rational conclusion we can make, since it involves everything we can possibly observe.

[@HybridGib]

@@thevulture5750 Rational to admit that it's a possibility? Yes. Rational to conclude that that's the case? Not without sufficient observable evidence, so I don't. I'm certainly open to it if better evidence is found, though.

[@peterskove3476]

Even if someone left their body it doesn’t prove consciousness went with them.

[@swigglemcbiggle2577]

can someone link me the tests matt was talking about? with the paper and the person saying what's on the paper being wrong, I couldn't find it, I wanna show it to some people so they can stop claiming that someone saw shoes on a roof while they were on the operating table.

[@brucewilliams4152]

Never witnessed an independent consciousness wandering around.

[@vladtheemailer3223]

I win, I win!

[@ladyselenafelicitywhite1596]

You do 🙋🏼‍♀️ virtual hugs and kisses 🤗😘💋 for Vlad the Victorious 🙋🏼‍♀️

[@Iheartdog666]

Title-“The soul QUICKLY debunked” Length of video- almost 25 minutes

[@JayMaverick]

I was just waiting for the answer to be "gaahwd" said in that Southern slippery apologist voice.

[@tedgrant2]

I've just put some birdseed on the bird table in my garden then came back into my mansion. I looked out of the window and saw three birds already tucking into the food. It is obvious that they are conscious, just like us superior beings.

[@TheCountBlackula1978]

What a nervous tic laugh😂

[@tedgrant2]

My dog is conscious ! So according to the caller, he has a soul, just like me ! Which means, if he is a good god, he will go to Heaven and I'll be with him for ever !

[@aaronkuntze7494]

We have Quantum mechanics as proof. "The first sip from the glass of natural science makes you an atheist, but God is waiting for you at the bottom of the glass. " Heisenberg Pantheism: everything is connected everything is divine.

[@JohnnysCafe_]

always searching for signs of God and always coming up short .

[@ronthered138]

Phineas Gage had a metal rod driven through his brain and this changed his personality completely. Does this mean that his soul changed? He went from a hard working pleasant soul to a mean hard drinking son of a soul. So the soul, which can be damaged by an iron rod, can survive death and fly around? WTF?

[@Ben-no4lz]

There was another case that was even weirder. Cant remember the guys name but he ended up with the 2 seperate hemispheres of his brain forming 2 distinct personalities. One had control of speech and the other communicated through writing. They could do this simoultaneously on unrelated topics. The best part of all - One of the personalities was a Theist and the other was an Atheist!

[@theamazingchannel470]

Consciousness needs the physical brain to operate in the physical dimension. It's just like paralysis or blindness or whatever else. Just because a car accident can't damage the soul doesn't mean you won't have life-altering injuries.

[@awilson1998]

God of the gaps over and over.

[@chriswaters926]

Why is this concept of consciousness so hard to grasp? Animals have to deal with world around them . They all have different levels of consciousness. The more intelligent the higher level of consciousness. It is just an understanding of the world around you and how you fit.

[@cps_Zen_Run]

Chris, a difference between us and other conscious mammals is that we are aware that we are aware. Ex. You see a red cup and also you are also aware that you see a red cup.

[@chriswaters926]

@@cps_Zen_Run Many animals are self aware is that so different. How would you know they don’t know they know they are seeing a red cap. Say that 5 times fast.

[@kimsland999]

@@chriswaters926 I agree with you regarding the sliding scale of consciousness depending upon neurological intelligence. We can ask: The human baby born (and grows to be an adult) with an extremely corrupted brain, has their consciousness flown away? A dog who runs and hides from the unknown flying beast up in the sky (we call a helicopter) clearly they are aware that unknowns could eat them, and if they want to survive they better run in circles. Just like Christains!

[@joelonsdale]

Consciousness is a survival mechanism that has evolved through evolution. I'm not sure what more explanation anyone should need. Organisms are as "conscious" as they need to be to survive.

[@TheDahaka1]

Out of body experiences are such a red herring. We have other senses than sight, and we know that in some cases unconcious people (such as coma patients) can retain memories of what happened around them while unconcious. We could suppose that some people under anesthesia are unconciously aware of their sorroundings mostly through sound, and then the conscious brain, afterwards, tries to piece everything together, giving a false vision based memory, since imagination is more often than not image based. You can read a book and imagine places and people that never existed through just words. How hard is it to imagine that what you hear while unconcious gives you a memory of places and people that you have already seen?

[@lucofparis4819]

I think the caller simply confuses explanations with causes. Given a phenomenon like consciousness, the caller believes in a soul causing this consciousness in the brain. Explanations make things clear and understood. The soul here however turns consciousness into a mysterious phenomenon generated by an even more obscure entity of unknown origin, location, and nature, using an equally obscure process to do so. Hardly what anyone would call an explanation.

[@tomaszkantoch4426]

Don't want to be brutal but i've never seen hungry dead man :D

[@thomasgallipoli8376]

If consciousness depends upon an intangible immortal “soul”, then why does consciousness fall prey to brain damage from strokes or injury or even by taking hallucinogenic drugs-all things that are materialistic i.e. exists in the real world?

[@zak2659]

a way to answer this is because the brain and body is merely a representation of subjective inner experience (the soul). Subjective experience correlates with its representations, I.e, a damaged brain is the representation of a changed conscious experience. There isn't a causal link, only representations. Remember, all we have are correlations between brain and mind to speak of. You are begging the question when you assert that there exists the material. Known to us, there is only consciousness to speak of as a metaphysical substance. Drugs and knifes are then interpreted as representations of mental activity, not a thing that has stand alone existence.

[@atheismisrightforever7008]

it’s confirmed that Atheism is right good job Matt for proving that its right

[@AGoodBuzz]

*"The Atheist Experience 26.17 for April 24, 2022 _with Matt Dillahunty and Matt Dillahunty_*" There. Fixed it.

[@Brock_1025]

Save yourself 20 minutes. Here's his "proof"... 20:14

[@diggyhill741]

An unconscious person can be hungry. If a person is in a coma and is not fed eventually the stomach will make noise and eat it’s self to keep living. Like when ur stomach rumbles when hungry.

[@timothyhowson2775]

I would like to know at what point in evolutionary time did god decide which particular evolving primate he would insert a `soul`.

[@brucesuchman1253]

Neurology is about the mechanics. It says nothing about consciousness not being connected to the brain. Consciousness IS explained. Heck it's explained so well that there are multiple types of consciousness. A plant is conscious at a rudimentary level. A human is conscious at one level when asleep, at another level when awake, and brain mechanics completely affects consciousness. We even know how to turn consciousness off, anesthesiologists do this all the time.

[@DrMonty-yr1kc]

Dude, or course we understand some things about consciousness…thats not the argument, but do you know exactly where it is located? Can you explain exactly how it came to existence? You cannot do all of that….thats the point, we know is “there” but we don’t know EXACTLY how or where

[@DrMonty-yr1kc]

Your explanation is good, dont get me wrong, but we dont know exactly where and how consciousness exists

[@brucesuchman1253]

@@DrMonty-yr1kc I see your point. Here is the perspective and understanding that I have. The "where is consciousness located?", Is like asking "where inside of a building is the one place that the entire building resides?" A building is an emergent property of the combination of materials. No single material is the building, so it can't be found at that level. Similarly consciousness is an emergent property. It can't be found in any one location because it only exists when multiple processes or locations are combined. The how is more complicated. From an electrochemical view. Low level consciousness is the result of a network of if/then processes and the need for management of more than one if/then at the same time. Consciousness itself is an if/then management of multiple individual if/then processes with efficiency.

[@chartranddave]

If there are studies or "scientists" that support the caller's position, they why doesn't he FUCKING CITE OR PRESENT THEM?!?!.....instead of saying "I heard of something.... "

[@NeverTalkToCops1]

They are actually stupid, inebriated with fear from early religious indoctrination. I could be wrong.

[@Ultimime]

God bless them they always think they know what they're talking about. The indignance.

[@pete6769]

Leaving your body! Wtf does that mean without your brain doing it…Jamal?

[@ffsno9078]

At the beginning of the time of placement a great sound will ring out to the land . The face of the laws will bare the rod for the many in order for the multitude to continue unabated. The lesser gathering of pillars will betray falsehoods waiting to consum the whole. The good man will fade away giving placement to his favor. The next conference will show the truth to the grounding of those who cried out in anguish.

[@KynMites]

"Their consciousness influences the brain." What the fuck does that even mean? Does he mean the software on the computer can change what the operating system does? Or that it can change the data stored in the computers memory? Is he trying to say that there is a person sitting at the computer influencing it? If so I'd love to see the study that showed THAT since we have no way to detect that sort of thing.

[@philipdillon83]

Everyday Atheist (justin) seems like a nice guy.

[@Truth-Be-Told-USA]

It's interesting people accept the fact so easily that they were such a crappy creation that they should suffer forever for punishment. They never question why the creator did not accept responsibility. LOL

[@DemstarAus]

God created everything and knows everything. He sees the future. He knew what would happen and where his plan would go. He created humans to betray him. He created Satan to defy him. He gave Satan power to influence. He created Hell. He created Sin. Why is he angry at us?

[@greenjelly01]

Isn't it odd that people can believe in an all knowing all powerful God who is the author of morality, and still be so dishonest?

[@rbwinn3]

The body and the spirit are the soul of man, and the resurrection of the dead is the redemption of the soul.

[@tedgrant2]

As I was driving home one night, I saw a cat starting to cross in front of my car. It stopped half way across the road, looked at me, turned around and ran back to the sidewalk. Cats, of course, haven't got souls, yet they manage to be aware of danger and make decisions.

[@Mewse1203]

So...right to the argument from ignorance then..."science can't prove it so I'm right" Super sweet

[@marywollstonecraft2855]

Buddhism has a doctrine of 'no soul'. The Pali term is 'anatta'. The concept of soul seems to need a deity who collects souls like a tourist buying souvenirs. Then we have a place on the mantlepiece of a god. Eternally. I'll pass on that.

[@vertigo4236]

But the problem is that Buddism has the cycle of rebirth, which means "something" has to come from the old incarnation to the new. Or it wouldn't be a rebirth without a connection.

[@johnd.shultz7423]

@@vertigo4236 When the Hindu Brahmins asked the Tathagata/Buddha about reincarnation (which is actually a Hinduistic invention) he refused to supply a positivistic anwer,he said nothing, but the Hindustic holders of tradition(the Brahmins) created their own distortions around the Buddha's message, ignoring some of the statements he did say and making up statements that werent his.Buddhism or The Buddhas words were forced through the filter of a Hinduistic mind that frequently did not agree with him and /or wanted to dismiss him entirely ,karma is another fallacy attributed to Buddhism which is completely false, as the rationalistic doctrine of Cause and Effect was the Tathagata's reply to karma,as the Buddha was totally against the Hinduistic caste system or anything that supported it, as the Hinduistic doctrines such as karma and reincarnation- beliefs which supported the caste system,til the present day there are still fallacies in Buddhism that were placed there by Hindu religionists.The last insult by Hinduism was to absorb Buddhism like a sponge into its polythiestic pantheon,and place The Enlightened One as a minor incarnation of the Hindu father god Rama .

[@JamesRichardWiley]

Consciousness is a function of the brain. No brain means no consciousness. The souls is hard to locate. Please show me my soul.

[@sergejromanov4945]

I thought we had a scientific explaination for consciousness

[@amtlpaul]

Not a full explanation, no

[@tybeeislandgoat1402]

Seems to be a process of billions of neurons with trillions of processes. Like an electrical grid that when electrically charged at the correct amount in the correct way engages the brain to work, heart to pump, and arms to move. It's like a car really. The ECU is the brain, engine is our muscles, wires are our nerves and hoses are our veins, oil pump is our heart.... it is a pretty okay analogy but obviously not perfect. Its the best we have and easiest way to explain to people. A series of impulses and firing orders that "operate or run" our parts and components and kind of like Artifical intelligence but vastly more complex and a lot more advanced it has become intricate enough to experience emotions and feelings we have adapted to feel based on working out and advancing muscles and processes we do often or don't do and they fall off or get weaker. Our consciousness is relative. Is a brain dead person conscious? When I overdose and pass out of fentanyl but still breath I am still alive. When I take Xanax and drink I am still alive but barely. Certain things shut down at least to an extent we can black out and lose consciousness at a certain point. Consciousness is the label we put on a level of awareness that allows us to fit in to a section of intelligence and sophistication and capability we determine "normal" based on our own values. Is a dog conscious. Is a bug? Is a sleeping person? Is a brain dead person that can still breath and accept food and water but can't feel, hear, move, or willfully do anything that we label normal in regard to human behavior? I think consciousness starts at recognizing the basic needs of what it takes to live like breathing, pooping, and drinking fluids, then builds to recognizing surroundings and comparing and contrasting things. It's learned. A fetus is conscious in the womb unfortunately but just barely. In a perfect world maybe we could stop abortion but sadly too many dumb people have too many kids which makes the few that make mistakes unable to efficiently and quickly give their child up foe adoption. If people didn't have so many kids the "accidents" would be happily paid for by other wanting the child and we would never have to abort children. Too bad so many people have multiple kids. IT should be the one time rule. Abortion is illegal, after you have one child which another can pay you for, you must get your tubes tied or keep it. Tube tied after one accident. You get one freebie. Then if it happens again we tie them. I guess tied after second accident really. That's it. And you must make enough money to warrant having the children otherwise you get tunes permanently tied if it accidentally or intentionally happens without being wealthy enough to provide foe the child. Something like that. Would be a better planet in 300 years. No joke.

[@stephenjackson7797]

It's been explained completely, scientifically for the non-illiterate in "The Origin Of Consciousness In The Breakdown Of The Bicameral Mind", in 1978, by Julian Jaynes. There's no more debate needed since he fully explained it. But ignorant people ignore his book and pretend there's more we need to know than what Jaynes put forth.

[@NeverTalkToCops1]

@@tybeeislandgoat1402 All of that is wrong. Worse, it is not even fancifully wrong.

[@tybeeislandgoat1402]

@@NeverTalkToCops1 prove to me that it is wrong? It's stated as an opinion. Good luck. A better way of responding would be to give me your ideas or thoughts on what consciousness is.

[@KeyFrame11Media]

If he was trying to cite Eccles work in neuroscience then he may have a difficult time find correlation between the brain and consciousness since his work is the general consensus of the functions rather than any abstract labels of our totality.

[@jaygill5582]

Greetings from atheist California. No need for God, guns or hate!

[@JustAMagicDuck]

Cool. Let me just mark “god of the gaps” off on my bingo card.

[@probablynotmyname8521]

The trouble with consciousness = soul is that it means that all animals also have a soul. If you really mean self-awareness then you still problems since dolphins, chimps and gorillas fit into that definition. A better view of consciousness is that it is an emergent property of complexity.

[@Heathen.Deity.]

Jamaal simply doesn’t have a clue what was happening in this call. Arrogant ignorance at its finest.

[@FakingANerve]

Jamaal's argument is proven to be absolutely absurd _every day._ "Consciousness isn't shown to be an emergent property of the brain." Oh, really? How exactly is one rendered unconscious? If the answer isn't obvious, ask a football player.🤦‍♂️

[@Stevenafoe]

Christian: let’s do this quickly…. ‘Insert god of the gaps here’. So there, atheists.. Lol.

[@emptyhand777]

We know a brain exists, so we can say a brain interacts with what we call consciousness. We don't know a soul exists, so we cannot claim the soul exists with consciousness.

[@gordonlynn8300]

the soul or spirit interacts with the brain ? what material are they made of ? To exist in this Universe you have to be constructed of the elements of this Universe , a spirit, if it exists couldn't think without a brain or move without legs or the wind or speak without a mouth etc. Once again this caller is obviously thinking about the Supernatural, which has never been proven or experienced by myself and most other people , especially Scientists.

[@DAYBROK3]

interactionism doesnt mean what he thinks it means, google is our friend. its a philosophy