Thread: Dangerous?

I'm pretty sure the majority of educated people wouldn't believe you can die in a dream because you soul leaves your body.

Probably so, but that doesn't mean that they fully reject the existence of a soul or of God.

http://www.livescience.com/strangene...tists_god.html

The general population is even more convinced.

http://www.gallup-international.com/...llennium15.asp

In America, fully 94 percent of people believe in God. Whether belief in God translates to belief in a soul, I don't know. I would guess though that it does. I would agree that they probably don't believe that you can die in a dream by becoming separated from your body.

In my opinion, under empirical observations, and a skeptical point of view, one can say that the concept of soul as most people define it is invalid,

That's a statement from you I can respect. I just took offense to everyone saying that they knew there was no such thing, as though it had in fact been disproved.

So OP, under the stone-faced atheism of science, there is no evidence for or against a soul. (Though most scientists personally believe that there is something more to reality than just what is physically observable. If that says anything). If you fit into this category, then there is your answer. If you have any faith in spiritual things, then you need to decide for yourself if such a thing is dangerous, because no one can tell you.

Originally Posted by unseen wombat

Though most scientists personally believe that there is something more to reality than just what is physically observable.

Evidence? That might be true for a small group of scientists on your area, but that doesn't mean apply to the whole scientifical community (nor most of it), like it or not.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Evidence? That might be true for a small group of scientists on your area, but that doesn't mean apply to the whole scientifical community (nor most of it), like it or not.

look at the link I provided. You'll see it's true.

Lol that doesn't supply any kind of informaiton as to who was interviewed, and where. It could be In United States, in Cambodia, in Alabama, or at the author's beach house.

Originally Posted by unseen wombat

So OP, under the stone-faced atheism of science, there is no evidence for or against a soul. (Though most scientists personally believe that there is something more to reality than just what is physically observable. If that says anything). If you fit into this category, then there is your answer. If you have any faith in spiritual things, then you need to decide for yourself if such a thing is dangerous, because no one can tell you.

There is no stone-faced atheism in Science. Only in individuals.
Most of the scientifically minded people I know are actually Agnostic, as am I.
Science is just the study of nature and the quest to understand how it works. Most scientific facts are actually just theories. When evidence crops up that contradicts those theories, they are adjusted to encompass the new evidence.

I like to think of myself as a scientific person (although I have no actual training in any branch of science), and I think that any scientific person needs the ability to alter their views if evidence presents itself, otherwise everything would go to shit. So personally, I can't state as a fact that a soul doesn't exist like a lot of people here are doing, and if any evidence arose to suggest it did, then I would accept that. However, I've used my understanding of science to form my own opinion that a soul doesn't exist. Because science has explained a lot that used to be attributed to a soul, so I think anything left unexplained that a soul would explain will eventually be explained by science. Science explain everything because it is everything, its nature. The concept of a soul to me is just a word to describe those aspects we don't yet understand.

As for God. I can't do the same thing because unlike the soul, nothing in science makes God any less probable. If there were a God, it would have a scientific explanation behind it also. Rather, I think the concept of a God is something that cannot be proven either way, so I don't debate it or even think about it. I don't see a point in it. I do however accept that other people do see a point, and need to believe in God for their own sense of purpose and well being, so I'd never try to take that away from them either.