Are humans predisposed to believe in magic?

muhammad_isa said:
Not really .. it only started in 1800.
The best thing about it is that it doesn't do anything :D
..as opposed to modern pills which often have dreadful side-effects.
Click to expand...

Most of the magical orders still in existence today go back only as far as the 1800s, max.

Also, homeopathic remedies are routinely recalled for containing actual ingredients. Arsenic, in particular, is nasty stuff even if highly diluted. Here's an example involving belladonna:

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/pre...ladonna-certain-homeopathic-teething-products
 
muhammad_isa said:
It's only a double-standard to you because you deny the existence of anything other than the material.
Talking about proof doesn't help .. it is not possible to prove non-material concepts with material senses.
Click to expand...

I don't "deny the existence of anythying other than the material". I happen to be atheist, not materialist-reductionist.

The double standard, however, is evident to me: One human being (Jesus) walking on water is reasonable to you, another human being claiming the same, is not.

We all have a non-material mind. It is only a belief that the brain is responsible for consciousness. That cannot be proved for the reasons already stated.
Click to expand...

To the contrary. The non-material mind is evidently influenced by its material substrate and the conditions it is in.

Try meditating before and after having a cup of coffee.
 
Cino said:
I don't "deny the existence of anythying other than the material". I happen to be atheist, not materialist-reductionist.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but most atheists do..

Cino said:
The double standard, however, is evident to me: One human being (Jesus) walking on water is reasonable to you, another human being claiming the same, is not.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call that a "double-standard".
It is very obvious that people can't walk on water. Anybody who does must either be using magic (i.e illusion or science) or have or been given the ability to defy natural laws.

Cino said:
To the contrary. The non-material mind is evidently influenced by its material substrate and the conditions it is in.

Try meditating before and after having a cup of coffee.
Click to expand...

That doesn't prove that the brain is responsible for consciousness. That only proves that it is influenced by physical/chemical phenomena.
You might conclude that it is .. but you have absolutely no idea whether you will still be aware after your death
 
muhammad_isa said:
Fair enough, but most atheists do..
Click to expand...

Well, in this forum I hold back on my stereotypes of what most religious people do...

I wouldn't call that a "double-standard". It is very obvious that people can't walk on water. Anybody who does must either be using magic (i.e illusion or science) or have or been given the ability to defy natural laws.
Click to expand...

Suit yourself. Like I wrote earlier in this thread, rationalization is part of the fun.

That doesn't prove that the brain is responsible for consciousness. That only proves that it is influenced by physical/chemical phenomena.
You might conclude that it is .. but you have absolutely no idea whether you will still be aware after your death
Click to expand...

Actually, I do have a pretty good hunch based on a lot of empirical data, that the brain is indeed the substrate on which consciousness operates. And like I said, you can do the experiment on yourself, in a fairly harmless way, by mildly changing your brain chemistry and then observing your consciousness. You can study the findings on certain types of brain injuries. For a period of time, radically altering a person's consciousness by doing brain surgery ("lobotomy") in order to change their behavior was very fashionable.

You are right of course that nobody ever came back from the dead, I mean, really dead, body completely destroyed, to tell the tale. But this brings us, as much as I hate to say this, squarely into Russell's Teapot Territory. And I really don't want to go there. It's such a dull place. Let's not make interfaith.org that dull.
 
Last edited:
wil said:
or it is a parable or metaphor, or fable, or euphemism or myth...lots of options
Click to expand...

Err .. no .. I don't think that that is possible :)
The accounts are eyewitness events by the disciples.

..and then we have the transfiguration.
In these accounts, Jesus and three of his apostles, Peter, James and John, go to a mountain to pray. On the mountain, Jesus begins to shine with bright rays of light. Then the prophets Moses and Elijah appear next to him and he speaks with them.
 
Cino said:
..You can study the findings on certain types of brain injuries. For a period of time, radically altering a person's consciousness by doing brain surgery ("lobotomy") in order to change their behavior was very fashionable.
Click to expand...

I think you'll find that lobotomies cause a change of behaviour.
In any case, you are missing the point. Any study of brains whilst alive cannot prove anything at all about what happens after death.
Are you suggesting that the billions of people, including top academics, that firmly believe in life after are death are somehow ignoring relevant evidence?
 
muhammad_isa said:
I think you'll find that lobotomies cause a change of behaviour.
Click to expand...

Yes, and in subjective experience as well, a.k.a "consciousness".

In any case, you are missing the point. Any study of brains whilst alive cannot prove anything at all about what happens after death.
Click to expand...

Not so much missing the point as avoiding the tautology.

Are you suggesting that the billions of people, including top academics, that firmly believe in life after are death are somehow ignoring relevant evidence?
Click to expand...

No, but you seem to want to fit me into your image of what a proper atheist ought to behave like, it seems to me.

Bored now.
 
muhammad_isa said:
I'm not ;)
I can only find out what you think by discussion.
Click to expand...
Sure thing. I'll get used to your rhetorical innuendos, at some point. And since you've been around for a while, you may have seen a few of my posts where I go into detail about my views, so we don't have to start from square one in our future discussions.
 
wil said:
Appears jumping to conclusions not found in evidence is a thing.
Click to expand...

Like I said to @CobblersApprentice when he was around,
our intentions are important when it comes to our beliefs.

Why should we believe that there is life after death, or not? There could be a number of reasons.
 
But is belief in an afterlife / denial of one's own mortality a form of magical thinking? I think it touches deeper things than human pattern matching gone creative.
 
Cino said:
But is belief in an afterlife / denial of one's own mortality a form of magical thinking?
Click to expand...

No, I wouldn't say so.
"Magical thinking" is belief in the irrational, imo. It is not irrational to think that we would find ourselves in existence some time after our death. It is not irrational to believe in G-d / love.
It has happened once, and there is nothing to suggest that it won't happen again.

Flesh, brains and blood is purely material. Our mind/soul is something else.
It could manifest in any form .. it doesn't have to be floating in nothingness :eek:
 
muhammad_isa said:
No, I wouldn't say so.
"Magical thinking" is belief in the irrational, imo. It is not irrational to think that we would find ourselves in existence some time after our death. It is not irrational to believe in G-d / love.
It has happened once, and there is nothing to suggest that it won't happen again.

Flesh, brains and blood is purely material. Our mind/soul is something else.
It could manifest in any form .. it doesn't have to be floating in nothingness :eek:
Click to expand...

Me, too, I differentiate between magical thinking and religious beliefs.

So how did we drift from the topic of magical thinking to the topic of religious beliefs? These internets, how do they work...
 
wil said:
Yup, it could...(or.not). It doesn't have to (but might)
That is why it is belief...that is why we have so many religions, because none is proven as fact...
Ya gotta have faith
Click to expand...

No .. the reason why we have "so many religions" has little to do with their creeds, imo
It is more to do with tribes and how they socially evolve over time.

Yes .. "you gotta have faith" .. but faith in what? Faith in a creed?
No .. creeds are mostly made by mankind .. it's faith in the unseen i.e. faith in G-d and righteousness
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top