Watsisname wrote:Source of the post I don't think dualism in its general sense can be proved false. Rather, it cannot be falsified, which is why it isn't science or a defensible model of reality.
That depends on which way someone is proposing dualism. If they are going the scientific route as an idea they wish to propose through study, you can safely come to a conclusion that it is 99.99% improbable. If they go the faith based route then I fall back on my materialist views. I look at unfalsifiable claims in the same way I look at flawed and incorrect hypotheses, if it doesn't have the evidence to support it then it most likely is not true.
To me, if something cannot be backed up by evidence and is only supported by how someone feels or what they believe then it has been reliably disproven.
Marko S. wrote:Source of the post What if soul is in fact physical thing? You know how some people had 'out of body' experience. When they would see themselves just laying.
That could just be a hallucination the brain creates after regaining consciousness and filling blanks. Alternatively, and a bit more on the weirder side of things, the brain is still a mystery and it may be possible for it to build these complex models of reality by combining data from other senses if sight is not available.
Spacer wrote:Source of the post souls existence will break physics laws don't them?
Don't know of anything in the laws of physics that would prohibit a cloud of conscious gas, it just seems like an extra step to explain consciousness that isn't required. Can't think of anything that forbids an extra dimension comprised of pure consciousness either, but as far as the evidence goes none of this is required to explain what we observe so it falls into the unneeded category.
Spacer wrote:Source of the post why would humans have souls but animals don't?
That comes from the old anthropocentric idea that humans are somehow special. There are plenty of religions where all things have souls, including plants and some of these religions are far older than the Judeo-Christian religions.
midtskogen wrote:Source of the post For instance, if a test subject is asked to consider something and make a decision, and we measure the brain activity and consistently find that the decisive activity happened well before the subject himself or herself think he or she made the decision, then our thoughts and consciousness can't be quite what we think they are.
Those experiments were not accurate 100% of the time. In fact there were instances where the frontal lobe of the brain did override choices made before the person was aware. One could argue there is some semblance of "free will" or at least a greater ability to human choice. At this point however I still fall under the determinism side of things, tomorrow is just as real as today, so the choices I make today are determined to guarantee tomorrow is tomorrow. Just because a system has a billion billion little moving parts doesn't make it any less determined than a clock with only 5 gears.
midtskogen wrote:Source of the post then our thoughts and consciousness can't be quite what we think they are.
If you haven't watched it I recommend the show Westworld, they had a pretty decent scene on that
spoiler tagged just in case