Uncategorized

(Part 2) Keith Augustine’s How Not to Do Survival Research: Reflections on the Bigelow Institute Essay Competition

Augustine raises the issue of the fallacy of how survivalist’s conclude from the difficulties in describing how consciousness arises from the body that therefore it doesn’t: Ruickbie’s use converts Noë’s actual meaning into an argument from ignorance: we don’t know how brain activity gives rise to consciousness, therefore it must not give rise to consciousness. (Part 2) Keith Augustine’s How Not to Do Survival Research: Reflections on the Bigelow Institute Essay Competition

(Part 1) Keith Augustine’s How Not to Do Survival Research: Reflections on the Bigelow Institute Essay Competition

See Augustine’s essay here: https://journalofscientificexploration.org/index.php/jse/issue/view/85 This is a large essay so I’m breaking reporting of it into 2 parts. Augustine points to the difficulties in using eye witness testimony as evidence for the mind surviving death: Nahm later writes that impartial judges “would take eyewitness testimonies just as seriously as they would do in other (Part 1) Keith Augustine’s How Not to Do Survival Research: Reflections on the Bigelow Institute Essay Competition

Review of *Not* So Fast: A Response to Augustine’s Critique of the BICS Contest: Stephen E. Braude, Imants Baruss , Arnaud Delorme, Dean Radin, Helané Wahbeh

see the article here: https://journalofscientificexploration.org/index.php/jse/issue/view/85 At times Braude et al’s response to Augustine reads like a long lottery fallacy, the idea that since it’s mathematically absurd that I should win a major lottery, if I do win a miracle has taken place.  Against this, while it’s preposterous for me to think I should win when Review of *Not* So Fast: A Response to Augustine’s Critique of the BICS Contest: Stephen E. Braude, Imants Baruss , Arnaud Delorme, Dean Radin, Helané Wahbeh

When Will Survival Researchers Move Past Defending the Indefensible? (Part 3)

So, this is my last post on Augustine’s “Defending the Indefensible” Essay I particularly liked Augustine’s distinction between analogies that illustrate and analogies that argue, since we are all familiar with debates that are just opposite sides throwing illustrations at one another as though they are arguments (eg pro life vs pro choice; conservative vs When Will Survival Researchers Move Past Defending the Indefensible? (Part 3)

When Will Survival Researchers Move Past Defending the Indefensible? (Part 2)

Augustine feels the interaction brought out many things that needed to be said, particularly a more accurate representation of the best that the skeptical eye could bring to the table. Reber and Alcock had argued in Skeptical Inquirer in 2019 as to why physics makes psi impossible. Under Braude’s final year as JSE Editor-in-Chief, either the whole When Will Survival Researchers Move Past Defending the Indefensible? (Part 2)

When Will Survival Researchers Move Past Defending the Indefensible? (Part 1)

When Will Survival Researchers Move Past Defending theIndefensible?Keith Augustine The exchange between our Secular Web/Internet Infidels director Keith Augustine and noted “soul survivalist ” proponents was published yesterday. I’ll be blogging about it, but check out the exchange: https://journalofscientificexploration.org/index.php/jse/issue/view/85 HIGHLIGHTSThe survivalists’ response to the author’s skeptical review did notconfront the novel criticisms and arguments made When Will Survival Researchers Move Past Defending the Indefensible? (Part 1)

The Myth of an Afterlife Chapter 10: The Dualists Dilemma by Keith Augustine and Yonatan I. Fishman

The Myth Of An Afterlife Chapter Ten:  The Dualist’s Dilemma: The High Cost of Reconciling Neuroscience with a Soul  by Keith Augustine and Yonatan I. Fishman One of the editors of the anthology, Keith Augustine, has provided a helpful brief analogy illustrating the case against the thesis that the mind somehow exists independent of the brain.  As The Myth of an Afterlife Chapter 10: The Dualists Dilemma by Keith Augustine and Yonatan I. Fishman

The Myth of an Afterlife ch 6

Chapter Six No Mental Life after Brain Death The Argument from the Neural Localization of Mental Functions Gualtiero Piccinini and Sonya Bahar In a thorough, rigorously argued chapter, Piccinini and Bahar outline their position as follows: To make our case, we will sample the large body of neuroscientific evidence that each mental function takes place The Myth of an Afterlife ch 6

The Myth of an Afterlife, Chapter Five: The Argument from Brain Damage by Vindicated Rocco J. Gennaro and Yonatan I. Fishman

This is a pretty meaty essay, so I’d like to cover it over a few posts.  Today, I’d like to talk a bit about this passage here: “There are, to be sure, several much-discussed objections to materialism, but most of them question the notion that materialism can currently fully explain conscious experience. And even if The Myth of an Afterlife, Chapter Five: The Argument from Brain Damage by Vindicated Rocco J. Gennaro and Yonatan I. Fishman

The Myth of An Afterlife 8: Chapter 4 on Wasting Away

The Myth Of An Afterlife Chapter Four Dissolution into Death The Mind’s Last Symptoms Indicate Annihilation David Weisman From previous posts, I’d like to make a distinction between the causal understanding of the unconscious and the frame mode.  For instance, we might say some repressed trauma in my younger life is causing dysfunction at my present The Myth of An Afterlife 8: Chapter 4 on Wasting Away