This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe (page 42)

John_Mann

Still off on irrelevant philosophical tangents. The OP is about 9 simple observations. Nothing you have said since begins to address them.

Interesting, I thought your denial was only restricted to the fact that you are a follower of Scientism.

Perry

Eden, the area in purple according to wikipedia is associated with :

planning complex cognitive behavior, personality expression, decision making, and moderating social behaviour.[3] The basic activity of this brain region is considered to be orchestration of thoughts and actions in accordance with internal goals.[4]

The most typical psychological term for functions carried out by the prefrontal cortex area is executive function. Executive function relates to abilities to differentiate among conflicting thoughts, determine good and bad, better and best, same and different, future consequences of current activities, working toward a defined goal, prediction of outcomes, expectation based on actions, and social "control" (the ability to suppress urges that, if not suppressed, could lead to socially unacceptable outcomes). Frontal cortex supports concrete rule learning.

It is this area that when suppressed caused greater incidences of atheism. The clear suggestion is: Less regional brain function = More atheism.

What do you think of my examples of atheism being linked to and an absent father and emotional pain?

cofty

Interesting, I thought your denial was only restricted to the fact that you are a follower of Scientism - J_M

Throwing silly labels around is just another way of avoiding the challenges of the OP. Page 21 now.

Perry - Another pathetic attempt to distract from the challenges of the OP.

John_Mann

Throwing silly labels around is just another way of avoiding the challenges of the OP. Page 21 now.

It's not a silly label, is a verifiable fact. Just compare your position with the definition of Scientism.

Actually you're now projecting your own denial to me. I already answered, line by line, your OP. You can say you don't agree with my answers but you can't say I'd avoided your OP.

Denial is the most basic mechanism of defense in a deluded mind. Denial is followed by projection.

You're a follower of Scientism, cofty.

Perry

Perry - Another pathetic attempt to distract from the challenges of the OP.

Cofty,

Your views have been demonstrated over and over to not be consistent, and thus illogical. You lost the debate. Get over it.

What do you think of the brain suppression study leading to greater incidence of atheism that I posted?

That area of the brain also moderates social behavior which may account for your repeated historical use of the term "WILLFULLY IGNORANT" to describe those not like you; and more recently on this thread the repeated and non sequitur use of the word "pathetic".

cofty

Your views have been demonstrated over and over to not be consistent, and thus illogical. -Perry

Not on one single occasion has that happened.

Don't allow yourself to sink to the level of becoming a liar for Jesus.

You're a follower of Scientism, cofty. - J_M

Not a single word of my OP depends on "scientism".

John_Mann

Not a single word of my OP depends on "scientism".

This is simply not true because you are always demanding scientific evidence.

Asking for scientific evidences in a metaphysical topic like the concept of God is exactly what followers of Scientism do.

You're a follower of Scientism in denial.

You're a follower of two flawed metaphysical positions: Atheism and Scientism.

Atheism while being a metaphysical position (where the only axiom is the very conclusion) denies the existence of metaphysical beings. This is pure non sense.

EdenOne

Perry, parroting pseudo-science from a website such as AmericanVision.org, with a "Dr. Joel McDurmon" quoting from an article from the notorious UK's Daily Mail that misrepresents by miles a serious study paper “Neuromodulation of group prejudice and religious belief” within Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, won't help you in any way.

From his facebook page: Joel McDurmon, is the author of multiple books and hundreds of articles, and regularly serves as a lecturer and preacher.

You, like many theists, prefer "alternative facts" - kinda reminds me Trump administration. Dishonest, to say the least, more than pathethic or willfully ignorant.

cofty

This is simply not true because you are always demanding scientific evidence. - J_M

My OP does not ask for any scientific evidence at all.

It is a series of nine simple, reasonable, testable observations. Each one of them should give somebody pause before they buy into the audacious claims of christianity.

By the way I am trying to mostly ignore Perry when he spouts pseudoscience. IMO it's demeaning to do otherwise.

John_Mann

My OP does not ask for any scientific evidence at all.

In your OP:

Sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

If not scientific evidence so what kind of evidence do you mean?

It is a series of nine simple, reasonable, testable observations.

There are some subjective observations in your OP.

How can we test your subjective claims?

By the way I am trying to mostly ignore Perry when he spouts pseudoscience. IMO it's demeaning to do otherwise.

I can say that I don't agree with the premises used by Perry.

But I agree with his conclusion about the existence and identity of God.

For me he's right with wrong reasons.

In the most significant topic of humankind Perry is right and you're plainly wrong, cofty.

This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

Share this