Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (24280)	7/3/2006 12:54:43 AM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

<I was referring to your denial of the truth of the statement that "they didn't actually learn something that they didn't already know."> That's because it's poppycock to claim to know that's true in these cases. So... yea, I deny that that is necessarily the truth, I don't know, and neither do you. < The literature proves that people are unable to learn something they don't already know by any obe process such as "moving their mind" around in a room.> First of all literature doesn't 'prove' anything. How can 'literature' prove? There is anecdotatal evidence that there were things they could'nt have known being wheeled in and out of the operating room on a table. <The point of most obe claims is that the mind is somehow associated with a soul or spirit and that this spirit can leave the body.> Exactly he above point... as far as leaving the body... I don't know about soul or spirit as I don't know that those are defined in what I've read. < This general idea is often presented in a variety of forms as instances of psychic phenomena.> That's what some people call that... some of what I've read were simply interviews of patients by surgeons and doctors who became interested in the anecdotes they kept hearing. <These claims have never enjoyed scientific credibility, however, for the good reason that they are claims which are incapable of evidentiary support.> Anecdotes ARE evidence...so the comment on "evidentiary support" is wrong, and in fact is exactly why the issue doesn't "go away"... Of course there are no 'repeated experiments' however abd so they have never enjoyed "scientific credibility" as you say, but one wouldn't expect them to. DAK