A Question for Christians

[ QUOTE ]
I find it most interesting that the most insulting posts come from the "rational" scientific posters.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's probably because it's easy for the atheists to insult the intelligence of the believers, but not vice-versa. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] Nah... I'm sure being a good Christian witness has something to do with it.

[ QUOTE ]
What is the core problem with Lestat's "question"? Well, because it can't be answered in a one-answer-is-right fashion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think most questions would fall into this category. I see nothing wrong with this.

[ QUOTE ]
I've never really thought about the question myself until this thread so I never looked into it.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, maybe instead of bashing Lestat because he asked a question you've never thought about, you should think about the question so that you might present a good response. "I don't know" is always valid, and atheists use it all the time. The key is thinking about it, rather than dismissing it and berrating the questioner instead.

[ QUOTE ]
So -- all you non-believers: If we switch brains which man is which? Because one is on death-row and to be executed tomorrow and the other is a free man. So which one dies?

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe the personhood is equal to or completely contingent upon the functioning brain. Move the brain, you move the person. Destroy the brain, you destroy the person. However, we tend to give people ownership of their own bodies. So, unless the person freely gave up his own body, then that body that now has the criminal's brain, belongs to the non-criminal, and should not be destroyed.

[hmkpoker]

I think OP made a mistake in the way he worded the question. Most people would agree that the soul would correlate more with the brain than the rest of the body, so putting A's brain in B's body still leaves the B body with A brain with all the responsibilities of the orignal A and vice versa.

But...

Let's say the procedure were different. Rather than yanking the big cerebral mass altogether, what if it was transplanted nueron bundle by neuron bundle?

NOW we run into a slew of philosophical problems.

At what point does soul A officially transfer into B's body? If it does at some point transfer, then what if a different neuron bundle were switched over before that point? Is it possible for the soul to be an amalgam...that is, part A and part B...and if it is, don't we have to rethink what a "soul" is?

[Lestat]

<font color="blue">So -- all you non-believers: If we switch brains which man is which? Because one is on death-row and to be executed tomorrow and the other is a free man. So which one dies? </font>

To a logical thinking atheist, the answer is simple. The person who's brain is in the executed body dies. See how easy it was for me to answer this question?

Of course, no one knows exactly what a soul is, or what happens to it when a body dies, or a brain gets transplanted, etc. Therefore the question *seems* like a trap. But if you believe in souls, then this question MUST be thought about! Wouldn't you at least agree with that?

The reason I posted this in the first place, was because of a side topic that had come up in another thread. Someone asked, the difference between someone unborn and someone dead. Are they in equal states of non-existence? To me, the answer is yes. But a Christian might -- In fact, he SHOULD -- arrive at a different answer. So my question wasn't meant to be a trap. I simply tried to form the question in such a way that might provide insight into the thinking behind their answer. To expose the rationale. I'm not sure why you have such a problem with that. I easily answered your question above and would be more than happy to provide the rationale for my answer.

[Lestat]

<font color="blue"> So, unless the person freely gave up his own body, then that body that now has the criminal's brain, belongs to the non-criminal, and should not be destroyed. </font>

Hmm, this is interesting and I admit somewhat surprising. So if George is a mass murderer who is on death row and Harry is a do-gooder, and their brains are transplanted, you feel Harry's body should get a reprieve from execution (try to omit any personal opinions on the death penalty itself)? Would you go a step further and say it should be released from the confinements of jail?


Very interesting, because I do see your point about ownership of bodies.

[Lestat]

[ QUOTE ]
I think OP made a mistake in the way he worded the question. Most people would agree that the soul would correlate more with the brain than the rest of the body, so putting A's brain in B's body still leaves the B body with A brain with all the responsibilities of the orignal A and vice versa.

But...

Let's say the procedure were different. Rather than yanking the big cerebral mass altogether, what if it was transplanted nueron bundle by neuron bundle?

NOW we run into a slew of philosophical problems.

At what point does soul A officially transfer into B's body? If it does at some point transfer, then what if a different neuron bundle were switched over before that point? Is it possible for the soul to be an amalgam...that is, part A and part B...and if it is, don't we have to rethink what a "soul" is?

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree these are better questions. I just wanted to keep the concept simple. As it is, some have said it's a ridiculous question. If they can't fathom it might one day be scientifically possible to transplant a brain, they certainly aren't going to grasp the concept of transferring neuron bundles.

[Sifmole]

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="blue">So -- all you non-believers: If we switch brains which man is which? Because one is on death-row and to be executed tomorrow and the other is a free man. So which one dies? </font>

To a logical thinking atheist, the answer is simple. The person who's brain is in the executed body dies. See how easy it was for me to answer this question?

Of course, no one knows exactly what a soul is, or what happens to it when a body dies, or a brain gets transplanted, etc. Therefore the question *seems* like a trap. But if you believe in souls, then this question MUST be thought about! Wouldn't you at least agree with that?


[/ QUOTE ]

You answer was not quite clear to me, but your other answer led me to believe that you were saying that the order of execution should follow the brain, not the body -- do I understand correctly?

So -- to add complication because you gave a one sentence answer that provided zero reasoning:

So Harry is a quadraplegic and George is a specimen of perfect fitness but at one point was in dire need of money; so at some point before Harry committed his crime, he and George made an agreement to trade bodies for 10 years in exchange for Harry giving George a very large sum of cash. Then Harry commited his crime and is now facing execution.

What should happen?

[wtfsvi]

[ QUOTE ]
An individual born w/o the conception between man and woman, who can walk on water, make a couple loaves of bread and fish feed thousands, heal lepers and the blind by touch, be crucified, die and return to life.... Sound like the description of any human you've ever met?

[/ QUOTE ] He was both human and God. Is that not almost the whole point? I'm perplexed.

[Sifmole]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think OP made a mistake in the way he worded the question. Most people would agree that the soul would correlate more with the brain than the rest of the body, so putting A's brain in B's body still leaves the B body with A brain with all the responsibilities of the orignal A and vice versa.

But...

Let's say the procedure were different. Rather than yanking the big cerebral mass altogether, what if it was transplanted nueron bundle by neuron bundle?

NOW we run into a slew of philosophical problems.

At what point does soul A officially transfer into B's body? If it does at some point transfer, then what if a different neuron bundle were switched over before that point? Is it possible for the soul to be an amalgam...that is, part A and part B...and if it is, don't we have to rethink what a "soul" is?

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree these are better questions. I just wanted to keep the concept simple. As it is, some have said it's a ridiculous question. If they can't fathom it might one day be scientifically possible to transplant a brain, they certainly aren't going to grasp the concept of transferring neuron bundles.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you notice that each of your posts betrays your intent to insult?

[imported_luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
He was both human and God. Is that not almost the whole point? I'm perplexed.

[/ QUOTE ]
The problem seems to arise because of the pronoun "HE". Since no other humans are also gods, or from another angle, 'god' and 'human' are considered entities with different qualities, to use "he" has created a new entity - a god/human sharing of a body. So, to use the term 'human' for this fairly rare entity destroys the distinctiveness of both.
"THEY" were a god and a human. Much along the lines of Multiple Personality Disorder, the body is human, but there is more than one entity sharing it.

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
Harry is a quadraplegic and George is a specimen of perfect fitness but at one point was in dire need of money; so at some point before Harry committed his crime, he and George made an agreement to trade bodies for 10 years in exchange for Harry giving George a very large sum of cash. Then Harry commited his crime and is now facing execution.

What should happen?

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming they have legal rights to do so, let them switch bodies, then execute whichever mind was behind the crime (apparently the one that is now in the healthy man's body)