Split Souls

[ydoaPs]

When there's a split brain patient with one half Christian and the other half atheist, does only half of the soul go to heaven?

 

Split brain bodies develop two entirely different personalities. In fact, it's hard to be around one and force yourself to think of it as containing only one person. Here's a very prominent neuroscientist describing a case which led to the initial question.

 

 

It really makes me wonder how people can hold onto things like the belief in a unified immortal soul in the face of modern neuroscience.

[md65536]

When there's a split brain patient with one half Christian and the other half atheist, does only half of the soul go to heaven?

In my uneducated opinion, "profound theological questions" based on theological assumptions (existence of souls and heaven and a set criteria for entrance, etc) are fairly meaningless and can be easily answered with the same type of thinking that leads to the questions.

 

The spirit becomes whole again in death. One side was possessed by demons and the faith of the believing side saves the whole. Something in the bible says that a spouse saves their non-believing partner, so the same thing applies here.

 

Arbitrary rules to answer this sort of question might only bother someone who is skeptical of the arbitrary rules that lead to the question in the first place!

 

 

 

Edit: I don't think "meaningless" was the right word to use, however I think the question is profound only due to it being a "complex question" (an informal fallacy).

Edited June 15, 2013 by md65536

[MU!!]

 

 

"It really makes me wonder how people can hold onto things like the belief in a unified immortal soul in the face of modern neuroscience."

 

Why not drop Eben Alexander an email.

 

In my uneducated opinion, "profound theological questions" based on theological assumptions (existence of souls and heaven and a set criteria for entrance, etc) are fairly meaningless and can be easily answered with the same type of thinking that leads to the questions.

 

The spirit becomes whole again in death. One side was possessed by demons and the faith of the believing side saves the whole. Something in the bible says that a spouse saves their non-believing partner, so the same thing applies here.

 

 

Theology -and most of the bible - is about as useful in understanding the spirit world as a tit on a boy pig.

[EdEarl]

Thinking is harder than feeling, it requires more of our energy reserves. Moreover, feelings can be addictive, not so for thinking. Convincing a feeling addict to adopt thinking instead is harder than convincing a heroin addict to get clean.

[Villain]

Thinking is harder than feeling, it requires more of our energy reserves. Moreover, feelings can be addictive, not so for thinking. Convincing a feeling addict to adopt thinking instead is harder than convincing a heroin addict to get clean.

 

How is this relevant?

[EdEarl]

How is this relevant?

IMO It explains the saying, "Do not confuse me with the facts." For example, why the phenomenon of split brains is not significant to religious people.

[Villain]

IMO It explains the saying, "Do not confuse me with the facts." For example, why the phenomenon of split brains is not significant to religious people.

 

I'd be surprised if many people have heard of it, regardless of their religious status.

 

Are you saying that they're more likely to feel than think?

[iNow]

I'd be surprised if many people have heard of it, regardless of their religious status.

 

Are you saying that they're more likely to feel than think?

Studies have shown that religious people tend to rely more on intuitive feeling than analytical thinking relative to irreligious people.

 

http://www2.psych.ubc.ca/~ara/Manuscripts/Science-2012-Gervais-493-6.pdf

[EdEarl]

I'd be surprised if many people have heard of it, regardless of their religious status.

 

Are you saying that they're more likely to feel than think?

I'm saying feeling and reacting without rational thought is typical of everyone. Villain asked how it was relevant, and I related it to the OP, which was about religious people.

[MonDie]

rely more on intuitive feeling than analytical thinking

 

The word 'feeling' is misleading. In those studies, being intuitive meant choosing the intuitive answer, the first answer that comes to mind. They weren't necessarily sensitive poets, they were just the people who didn't bother to check their answers.

 

I think analytics could be a left hemisphere specialty, but I'm no neurologist. Unfortunately, the speaker mixes up which is the atheistic hemisphere, the left or the right. If the right is atheistic and the left theistic, that would pretty much falsify the hypothesis that the left hemisphere is less religious.

Edited June 23, 2013 by Mondays Assignment: Die

[iNow]

Yes. It's a gut feeling thing, not a "the morning dew makes me feel like I'm dancing on rainbows in a Sound of Music segment with Julie Andrews" feeling. It's contrary to nuanced thought and higher executive function in this context.

 

Also, the whole left/right brain split is a bit of an old myth. The tendencies people ascribe to right and left hemispheres are actually the result of great activity in both. Artists use the left and right, mathematicians use the left and the right.

Edited June 23, 2013 by iNow

[tar]

There is also bad and good feelings, and Julie Andrews movies don't span the gamut of possible feelings. Panic and despair for instance are feelings a human usually would rather not be having.

 

If one side of the brain works with the other, usually, there is probably not a "better" side, and one side helps to moderate and assist whatever is going on, in the other.

 

In a split brain case, I would imagine that we have a connection problem of some sort, and the usual cooperation between the halves is either not present or subdued for some psychological or physiological reason.

 

The star of "Big Bang Theory" on TV evidently has his thinking part working, but does not pick up well on social cues.

 

Evidently, one "side" of the brain, whether fact or myth, is not enough to be fully functional. One needs the cooperation of the two, working in unison to be a "good" person. Or a "normal" person. Or at least a fully functioning person.

 

While there is fact and fiction, true and false, there is also good and evil, and most "Christians" believe in the Devil, if they believe in God.

 

If a brain, devoid of reason is useless, I would argue one devoid of feeling suffers from a equal malady.

 

Regards, TAR2