Do you believe in the immortality of the soul?

[Drew]

My point is that it would be inconsistent for a Christian to believe that interactionism is a problem and at the same time believe the Bible.

I think you still need to defend this point. The view that I have presented in this and other threads avoids the interaction problem (I think) and it is also consistent with the Bible (at least my reading of it). I probably don't need to point out that more than one "theory" can be consistent with a set of "facts" (or in this case, with a body of scripture).

Let's say that we all agree that the scriptures contain truth about things. Obviously, if we all agreed the scriptures clearly preached substance dualism, we would be forced to deal with interactionism issues. We would then be in a bit of a bind - namely that of explaining away the seeming problems of interactionism. Am I correct in assuming that you simply dismiss these problems because you believe the Bible teaches substance dualism to the exclusion of all other possibilities (including property dualism)? This might be an acceptable position to take in the "Christian world" but to the secular world, it will seem like trying to fit a square peg into a round whole. Why? Because there are reasons to reject interactionism (I think) which I have touched on earlier - namely that it seems conceptually awkward to give an account for how an immaterial thing can "push physical buttons". If the "soul" really is immaterial it starts to look suspiciously like a material thing if it start getting into the business of introducing changes in neural states of the brain (for example).

Besides, I do not believe there are any defenders of substance dualism in the academic world. Does this not seem suspicious to you? What motive would all these philosophy experts have to reject substance dualism? One might argue that a conscious or unconscious desire to "push God out of the picture, thereby avoiding their need to repent" is responsible. This is possible, but I am inclined to give them more credit than that. Besides, think of the academic prestige that would go along with being the first to argue credibly for substance dualism. I admit this is all highly debatable.

Don't get me wrong. People in my "camp" also have some big problems to solve, the biggest one probably being that "full-blown" materialism might be a more defensible position in that it takes away some big problems such as the famous problem of free will (you see I cling tenaciously to the notion of free will).

Let me return to your task of writing a paper. Even in a Christian college, I would expect that the profs would expect some kind of a "secular/philosophical" rather than strictly a Biblical defence for certain challenges such as the interactionism that comes along with substance dualism.

 

[Soma-Sight]

Let's say that we all agree that the scriptures contain truth about things. Obviously, if we all agreed the scriptures clearly preached substance dualism, we would be forced to deal with interactionism issues. We would then be in a bit of a bind - namely that of explaining away the seeming problems of interactionism. Am I correct in assuming that you simply dismiss these problems because you believe the Bible teaches substance dualism to the exclusion of all other possibilities (including property dualism)?

Let me help you out on this "problem" of dualism you call the interaction of the non-physical with the phisical......

Although the Bible plainly supports soul death or sleep with body death, a dualist argument in support for the interation of the spirit and flesh is.....

The Pineal Gland.

This gland regulates the interaction of the spirit and flesh.

Humurously enough, the sheep in the pews of the Sunday service do not realize they are being brainwashed by the mysteries of Babylon and the "Enlightened Ones".

TOO BAD SUNDAY DENOMINATIONS ADHERE TO A DOCTRINE THAT ORIGINATED IN THE OCCULT PRACTICES. THAT OF THE SEPARATION OF BODY AND MIND. JUST GO LOOK AT A TOOL ALBUM COVER FOR MORE "ENLIGHTENING" FACTS.

 

[Drew]

Let's say that we all agree that the scriptures contain truth about things. Obviously, if we all agreed the scriptures clearly preached substance dualism, we would be forced to deal with interactionism issues. We would then be in a bit of a bind - namely that of explaining away the seeming problems of interactionism. Am I correct in assuming that you simply dismiss these problems because you believe the Bible teaches substance dualism to the exclusion of all other possibilities (including property dualism)?

Let me help you out on this "problem" of dualism you call the interaction of the non-physical with the phisical......

Although the Bible plainly supports soul death or sleep with body death, a dualist argument in support for the interation of the spirit and flesh is.....

The Pineal Gland.

This gland regulates the interaction of the spirit and flesh.

Humurously enough, the sheep in the pews of the Sunday service do not realize they are being brainwashed by the mysteries of Babylon and the "Enlightened Ones".

TOO BAD SUNDAY DENOMINATIONS ADHERE TO A DOCTRINE THAT ORIGINATED IN THE OCCULT PRACTICES. THAT OF THE SEPARATION OF BODY AND MIND. JUST GO LOOK AT A TOOL ALBUM COVER FOR MORE "ENLIGHTENING" FACTS.

Huh? (or to use the Canadian form: Eh?) :o

 

[Soma-Sight]

Huh? (or to use the Canadian form: Eh?)

For the foriegner I would say......

Dualism is an occultic philosophy that has found its way into the modern day evangelical Church in the form of the "imortality of the soul doctrine".

Drink some "aya" for a do it yourself perspective on the occultic notions of dualism including OBE's and astral projection.

 

[Free]

The Pineal Gland.

This gland regulates the interaction of the spirit and flesh.

Humurously enough, the sheep in the pews of the Sunday service do not realize they are being brainwashed by the mysteries of Babylon and the "Enlightened Ones".

Oh, really Soma. Come now, you do realize that that was merely Descartes's solution to the problem, which may (it is highly likely, I'll give you that) have its roots in ancient paganism. But it would be fallacious to conclude that dualism itself is occultic just because Descartes used the pineal gland as the point of interaction due to the occult belief in the pineal gland as the "third eye".

Drink some "aya" for a do it yourself perspective on the occultic notions of dualism including OBE's and astral projection.

So, let me ask you then: do you believe in OBE's and astral projection, or is it all in one's head? If it isn't all in one's head, then what exactly is it that is out-of-body?

Am I correct in assuming that you simply dismiss these problems because you believe the Bible teaches substance dualism to the exclusion of all other possibilities (including property dualism)?

Not exactly. The only problem I am aware of with interactionism is the mind-body problem itself: how can an immaterial mind interact with and affect the material brain?

I dismiss this problem based on my two points previously given. If I believe that God is Spirit and yet has a mind and that he can interact with and affect my brain, then it would be inconsistent to dismiss dualism simply because I don't know how the interaction occurs. If God can do it to me, why couldn't an immaterial substance he has created within me do it also? I am content to label interactionism a mystery because it is beyond our understanding.

Why? Because there are reasons to reject interactionism (I think) which I have touched on earlier - namely that it seems conceptually awkward to give an account for how an immaterial thing can "push physical buttons". If the "soul" really is immaterial it starts to look suspiciously like a material thing if it start getting into the business of introducing changes in neural states of the brain (for example).

No more awkward, and I believe much less awkward, than physical processes giving rise to immaterial things. And I would add that the brain starts to look suspicisously like an immaterial thing if its changes in neural states cause immaterial stuff to happen. I find the problems for non-dualists to be larger and more severe than those faced by dualists. I'll develop this more when I have time.

Besides, I do not believe there are any defenders of substance dualism in the academic world. Does this not seem suspicious to you? What motive would all these philosophy experts have to reject substance dualism?

On the contrary, I know of at least one: Alvin Plantinga. My prof considers him to be the best Christian philosopher there is right now. I have a 50 page paper of Plantinga's on substance dualism. I haven't read through all of it as it gets somewhat technical, but it is very interesting.

One might argue that a conscious or unconscious desire to "push God out of the picture, thereby avoiding their need to repent" is responsible. This is possible, but I am inclined to give them more credit than that.

I agree with you here. I think the main reason is that philosophers have the tendency to rationalize too much, to demand an answer for everything. This is why the "mystery" argument is typically rejected - because there must be a reason and relegating it to mystery is unacceptable.

Even in a Christian college, I would expect that the profs would expect some kind of a "secular/philosophical" rather than strictly a Biblical defence for certain challenges such as the interactionism that comes along with substance dualism.

Heh. I tried to negate that by stating outright that I wasn't going to attempt a solution to interactionism, just that it shouldn't be a "stumbling block" for the Christian's belief in dualism. The rest of my paper was in defense of dualism itself. Some of my arguments and rebuttals of materialist arguments weren't fully developed because of the 5 page limit imposed by the prof.

 

[Soma-Sight]

Oh, really Soma. Come now, you do realize that that was merely Descartes's solution to the problem, which may (it is highly likely, I'll give you that) have its roots in ancient paganism. But it would be fallacious to conclude that dualism itself is occultic just because Descartes used the pineal gland as the point of interaction due to the occult belief in the pineal gland as the "third eye".

Free,

You are awesome man. Let me just point that out.

To be quite honest with you Free, from my own personal experience there is MORE empirical evidence for dualism and the pineal as the faculty of control than that of the holistic approach quibox and I have been debating. I must also point however that I believe BIBLICALLY there is more evidence for the holistc point of view.

Trust me when I say that certain tryptamines and indol phenalanines can dramatically change your brains basic perception abilities in order to......

1. Be aware of extradimensional realities, entities, and worlds.
2. (The less likely in my estimation) Open a part of the brain that "creates" its own fantasies. (I really dont believe this at all but it should be noted that in some cases it may very well be some of your imagination unfolding scenarios.)

The use of entheogens points us to a dualistic mind - body idea that is supported in most religons today. The trance of meditation induced in the Budhist camp, the dancing patterns inducing altered states in Sihk religons, fasting and long treks carried out by Muslims in order to sense Allah, the use of entheogens in tribal Native American comunities such as peyote, tribal Shamanism which uses aya to facilitate OBE's, Christian prayer and fasting inducing altered states of consciousnes....etc, etc.

ALL OF THE ABOVE MECHANISMS OF SPIRITUAL AWAKENINGS HAVE ONE ROOT.....THE ATTEMPT TO SEPARATE THE FLESH FROM THE SPIRIT OR THE "IMMORTAL SOUL".

Now whether or not the Bible agrees that their is an "immortal" part of man is what I question. I think the Bible is unique in that it dispels the notion of these experiences as viable and points to them as a possible "deception" by the "Angel of Light" that is causing man to believe that death is not the end.

My experiences of OBE's and NDE's that i have experinced PERSONALLY point me to DUALISM and an immortal soul.

My study of the Bible has led my to support the notion of a HOLISTIC solution to the mind - body / soul - body problem in that without a body your soul is dead in that it has no faculties of sensory perception.

Free,

Read this book for a unique perspective on the mind body problem.