About boyfriend visiting a quaker house?

Okay, I've only got a quarter of the way through this thread, but this seems like a monumental storm in an espresso cup, frankly. It was a quip and nothing else.

I'm agnostic. My DD is atheist. We both have enormous respect for Quakers. My mum's local Quaker meeting supported her for years while she was in a care home due to the physical effects of a stroke (her mind was inspected). She was the most difficult of people (and an alcoholic) but they were entirely non-judgemental, and an enormous support, not just to her, but to my sibling and me. I have not yet met a Quaker who I didn't admire.

So big shout out to any Quakers on this thread!

My point is I don't think time will tell. Science is doing an amazing job of helping us to understand things we didn't used to, we are rapidly advancing our knowledge on a daily basis. Of all the scientists and all the millions of experiments that have been done, many of them in the hope of proving god, not a single on of them has ever found any evidence of a god. There is a possibility that this god lives outside of our perception but it seems far more likely to me that it just doesn't exist and that's why we've found no trace. But we are all entitled to our beliefs and as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others, you do you.

The point is the "if" then.

I'm going back to my original point of, you can't prove a negative. So you can't say, categorically, that there is no soul, or no god, or no afterlife. You can say you don't believe in them, or you can provide evidence for an alternative.

All of that is why I'd say I'm agnostic. I think it would be arrogant to assume that we are the highest beings, or alone in the universe or that this is all there is. There may not be anything more, but we can't prove it.

.
Edit: seems I got lost in the quotes, and this branch was about "even if there were an afterlife, we might not be able to percieve it".

Retracing my reply

I think the point is that time will tell. The fact we don't understand everything, or can't take in everything doesn't make it right or wrong. We can all have our own beliefs and theories in life, the annoyance is when we try to tell others they are categorically wrong because their beliefs don't align with my beliefs.

I'm not spiritual in the slightest, so I don't believe in any such notion as a human "soul".

Nobody seems to be able to provide any sort of cogent explanation as to what this supposedly is. The nearest thing to anything that makes sense sounds more to me like a description of personality, which is a product of billions on neurons in our human brains.

Some AI can do a reasonable impersonation of a human being, so much so that when questions and answers are put in text format, a lot of people really struggle to determine whether or not they are conversing with a real human being or a computer, because the AI's can also be taught to display a form of rudimentary "character" and "personality". If silicon-based computer chips can hold enough information to emulate this, then it seems perfectly logical to conclude that a far more advanced and capable carbon version, i.e., the human brain, can pull off a vastly superior version of the same thing, hence why I see nothing whatsoever that is explained by the existence of a "soul" that isn't already adequately explained by the human brain.

This is before we even get to the fact that despite humans being dissected and documented for centuries, as of yet, nobody has witnessed anything whatsoever that physiologically hints at the existence of such a thing, or where it might reside, which again suggests that all a "soul" actually is, is a case of mistaking how brain function presents itself to outsiders, i.e. personality and individuality, for something more than it actually is, and falling into the same trap religion is often guilty of, i.e. adding completely unnecessary added layers of complexity in an attempt to explain something, that just prompt further irreconcilable contradictions and require further explanations, when the universe functions perfectly well if the premise is that the matter under discussion simply does not exist in the first place.

Humans function perfectly well even if the premise is that they are just a pointless, talking bunch of semi-sentient apes, and a big squishy bag of atoms and molecules. All introducing notions like a "soul" does is needlessly complicate us and pose a whole load of irreconcilable quandaries.

Ok, so the first definition says that immortal soul is something many religions believe in. So in the "No God" scenario -> no afterlife -> no soul to take notice -> no-one is the wiser.

The second definition, emotional nature of the person can happily die with the body and mind, no reason to stay behind and observe anything.

I think that many atheists are just as dogmatic (if not more so) than some devoutly religious people. He sounds more open minded than you are and I don’t think he will be happy in this relationship.

You sound a little bit controlling.

He's allowed to have thoughts, an open mind, and to pursue happiness or spiritual growth.

If it is immaterial it seems to me it is indistinguishable from something that doesn't exist so unless you have any evidence it exists, I think it's best to assume it doesn't.

We know where are thoughts and memories are kept, in our brains, our personalities too, without a brain you have none of these things. Because if our personalities are kept in our souls, why do they change when we damage our brain? edit to add: this also goes for our morals and emotional nature, these can also both change if our brains are damaged.

My understanding of Quakerism is that they're a bit like the Unitarians - isn't it all about freedom to find your own path and own spirituality and not about believing one set creed? I pretty sure you can be atheist/ humanist and Quaker or Unitarian.

Do you know what agnostic means? He’s told you right from the start what his beliefs are, and his behaviour is entirely consistent.

I tend to view my agnosticism as a belief in infinite unknowable possibilities. Spirituality has at times comforted me, but I cannot say I believe in an omnipotent presence or intelligent design. There’s energy out there, there are beautiful religious buildings that I would pay good money to spend some time in, there are people and faiths and good and bad. The universe is so much bigger than me or my comprehension, who am I to say what does or does not exist?! I am a speck. I do however believe in the goodness of people.

From google:

• The immaterial essence of a person: In many religions and philosophies, the soul is the non-material aspect of a person that includes their identity, personality, and memories. Some believe the soul is immortal and can survive physical death.
• The moral and emotional nature of a person: The soul can also refer to the moral or emotional nature of a person.

What is a a soul? what is the essence of a person? I know if you boil up plants you can make essence, so all I'm thinking of now is like a concentrated human stock, will that be able to perceive an afterlife or just make a good long pig gravy?

Yes, there's also the Chemistry and Physics.

Souls? The essence of a person?

I don't have any particular beliefs but I think there's more to people than the biology.

"awww shite I'm dead" made me chuckle.
I think the whole evolution thing screws it all up for me. But that's another conversation.

Ok. I've never heard the soul has a body or a mind, in fact I've never really heard a reasonable explanation of what it is.

Tell me what the soul is and what it's properties are and how to find it and I'll tell you whether I think it might be capable of thought.

Which part don't you understand?

The one that it seems you are trying to belittle people and label them as angry? You know you are.

Or you don't understand the part, which reacts to your previous post, the one Balmy reacted to before you so kindly labelled her as angry? You suggested there that people should want for their children to have faith, because there might be some regrets in future if H&H were to exist.

And to that I say - it must be sad to not have a courage to live a good life based on your own decisions and rather submit to a blackmail (of a potential god who says "worship me or I'll make your afterlife a hell").

Isn't there something about a soul?

Theoretically, yes.

Seems to me there are three possibilities -

1. There is an afterlife, and it's open to all regardless of what they believe, or whether they even believe at all, in which case, hooray! joy all around!, however this renders belief/faith/religion completely unnecessary for the purpose of ensuring entry.
2. There is an afterlife, but entry criterion is conditional, in which case the majority of us are screwed in any case, including those who believe but chose the wrong faith/beliefs/deities to worship and not just those who don't believe.
3. There is no afterlife, in which case none of us are ever going to find out about that, because we'll be in a state of non-existence. Once we die, there is not going to be some sort of limbo state that gives us a moment to come to grips with the fact that is is, game over. You are dead, and have simply ceased to be. This is why there is absolutely nothing to fear about the prospect of no afterlife, i.e. you aren't going to be sitting around somewhere thinking to yourself "aww shite, I'm dead, and I wish I was alive again because this sucks", because, again, you don't exist, and non-existent things can't postulate their own existence.

All in all, seems there's nothing to lose in being religious, but on the other hand, it's highly likely it's totally immaterial in any case.

Possibly not. Even if there is some sort of afterlife it may be impossible to perceive it without your body. How can you ever know anything without a brain? You could well be correct yet never know it!

Yes, exactly. That's totally true - i had missed that point of those already gone - thank you.

Well said.

But if there is, it's likely all your loved ones who predeceased you will be there, and you'll all know about it?

The only people who don't know are the living. Everyone else either knows or there isn't one so they've just ceased.