off-topic hijack: martin bashir is a complete t*sser, haven't seen the guy in ages, looks like he crossed the big blue yonder and ended up over in the states.

lucky you guys!!!!

hijack over

I saw the edited version on Nightline randomly which is weird because I don't watch the show. The full debate should be "interesting"--by that I mean lol @ Deepak. Will watch tomorrow.

Don't bother watching, the fact that these are the best two theists they could find says it all about this topic, this entire thing is a ****ing joke

I'm sure it will be entertaining. And I love me some Sam Harris.

none of them have a frikin' clue. deepak and his witch came across as complete jellyfish, sam and the skeptik guy were obviously very smug at "making more sense" but clearly had no knowledge whatsoever of the spiritual experience. the fact the guy used to be a fundamentalist christian says a lot. get em all loaded on 5-meo-DMT and ask them what their thoughts on the matter are.

waste of time

Harris does not disregard mystical/spiritual experiences; he has in fact studied under Buddhist meditation wizards.
He just argues that people draw unjustified conclusions from these types of experiences.
Having powerful experiences in an altered state of mind, does not tell you that there is a god.
It first and foremost tells you, that the human brain is capable of some funky ****.

lol. Anyone who makes this comment about Sam Harris "clearly has no knowledge whatsoever" on the issue.

It was interesting to me that Deepak appeared very deferential to Sam Harris throughout the entire discussion -- apologizing for misspeaking, openly accepting corrections, and even going so far as to agree with Sam Harris when Sam Harris specifically calls him (Deepak) out for spewing nonsense!

However, that didn't stop him from, as Sam Harris pointed out, continuing to play the game and use scientific and religious sounding words incorrectly, or with a definition unique to him personally and varying quite greatly from what scientists and mainstream religionists (and even theologians) mean when they use the same terms, and making logical leap after logical leap without any meaningful implications pointing the way from starting point to ending point.

I agree, funky s*** indeed.

However, some ppl do have powerful experiences when in altered states, that do specifically tell them there is a god. i am not advocating that as proof, merely pointing it out. i am fascinated by such things.

I'll readily admit i'm wrong if sam harris knows a bit about this sort of stuff, good for him. All outspoken atheists should.

i'll find out a bit about the guy.

Er, no.

They are just interpreting the experience as such, which is what Harris cautions against.

haha yep this

No, thats the way they interpret it. If I believed everything I saw when off my tits on mushrooms was real I'd be one ****ed up person.

Check out Sam Harris' recent TED talk - "Science can answer moral questions"

I mean lol Deepak is obviously just a charlatan and a really good one. Jean Houston is... Splendor?

awesome vid imo

or some sort of clone (what a horrifying thought)

Er, yes.

Whether their experience relates directly to the ultimate truth of being is another matter, but people do indeed have direct revelations of God or a god when in altered states.

I get that's what you believe, but do you hold out the possibility that our brains are capable of producing these "revelations" all by themselves? If not, I'd like to hear why.

*sigh* Arouet i would have to type SO much to even begin to answer your question.

I'm not sure where to start.

Have you ever read this book? FWIW it only touches on the topic, but a knowledge of that essay is still essential to understand the nature of the concept.

In a crude nutshell negating the need to tell you my life story, I have experienced direct correlations between inner spiritual experiences and outer solid reality, and although the former can be explained by brain activity, the latter cannot.

I also don't believe that the brain being found to have created something automatically or in any way at all contradicts the spiritual reality of that thing. We are spiritual beings, our brain is serving a purpose in that respect. It is a very narrow and unenlightened view to draw a thick black line between the two imo.

Also I have never had a direct and unambiguous revelation of God in the manner described above, I have had other experiences which leave me personally with no real doubt that there is a reality behind the word "God", perhaps different to mainstream conceptions, but none of direct revelation of God, in the manner that I am aware others have had. My direct revelations and experiences have all been firmly spiritual in nature, but not directly and unambiguously of God or a god, as such.

It is nigh on impossible to put these things into words though, so I don't imagine that helped much.

The most powerful thing I can say to you is this and this alone: if you ever experience a "revelation", mystical transmission, whatever you want to call it, you will then have a perspective on the matter. Before I experienced these things myself my mind was literally incapable of conceiving of the nature of these experiences, as is the mind of anybody who has never experienced them, such is the extra dimension of consciousness they bring.

The idea that a person could ever gain any sort of insight into the mystical experience by reading a scientific journal or setting up a controlled experiment to monitor brain waves is so ludicrously pointless and laughable it genuinely pains me to think there are ppl out there who put stock in it.

I was born and raised devout thoroughbred secular atheist with no exposure to spirituality or religion whatsoever at any point, I could not have given two hoots or two seconds of my attention to it all, it simply did not show up on my radar, and had I never experienced the things I have, I would still be that way. At the risk of sounding incredibly bold, that is all that seperates me from the next guy who thinks it's all a load of ballz.

As I've said before, I am not for a minute doubting that you had a profound spiritual type experience. While I've never experienced such a thing, I don't doubt that many people have had such experiences. But having not had such an experience, I am at a disadvantage I suppose. You will not be surprised, however, if I question not your experience, but the meaning behind it.

You don't have to provide any personal details you don't want to, but perhaps you could either tell me what happened to you, or just come up with a similar example that can more concretely show what you mean by the bolded.

I'm not drawing a line between the two, I'm suggesting that the spiritual experience simply comes from the brain. Is it possible that it is prodded by some outside source? Sure, but that hasn't been established yet. It is hard to do so by anecdotal evidence, yet I would still be interested to analyse the type of experience you mentioned above.

dude, it's good that you're being a reasonable open-minded human being about this despite obviously holding different views; i respect that, that's the way it should be. all about the love brother.

however, i'm so hungover i don't quite know how i managed to even type that last post, so I'm gonna vacate the forums for a while.

Shall construct as relevant and incisive a post as I can (be bothered to) and get back to you as soon as recession of sledgehammer headache and jelly-body begins to take effect.

peace out

lol, take your time.

I have had experiences on drugs that there is no doubt in my mind would convince many people of a higher spiritual plane or having just had a mystical spiritual experience or even that they experienced God. I am able to be objective about my experience however whereas it seems you are not.

Sam Harris has such an absurdly suave demeanor...in another life he could be Bond. James Bond.