New: It is Impossible for God to be Real

[seeds]

Personal experiences of god could be due to many reasons, i.e. altered states of consciousness & hallucinations due to mental illness, stress, brain damage, hallucinogens, various drugs, etc.

There are many people who claimed the experience God but has the rationality to seek psychiatric help to cure them of their hallucinations of God.
see:
How Our Brain Creates Delusion Of God
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrmxjaJu0bc

I'm afraid that you and the video have got it backwards, V.

Our brains create the delusion that our earthly situation is real when, in fact, it is a "dream-like" illusion.

In which case, I suggest that...

"...altered states of consciousness & hallucinations due to mental illness, stress, brain damage, hallucinogens, various drugs, etc..."

...are no doubt what short-circuits the part of our brain that keeps us from realizing just how profoundly strange (illusory) our earthly situation truly is.

Sure, such experiences may not be reliable, but they can nevertheless be thought of as "peepholes" that give some of us hazy glimpses through the trans-dimensional "veil" that our brains have been wired to maintain in order to prevent us from seeing the higher truths of reality.
_______

[Veritas Aequitas]

Personal experiences of god could be due to many reasons, i.e. altered states of consciousness & hallucinations due to mental illness, stress, brain damage, hallucinogens, various drugs, etc.

There are many people who claimed the experience God but has the rationality to seek psychiatric help to cure them of their hallucinations of God.
see:
How Our Brain Creates Delusion Of God
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrmxjaJu0bc

I'm afraid that you and the video have got it backwards, V.

If you listen to the video, you will note the delusional patient who experienced and thought god is real was cured of his delusions by psychiatric counselling and medicine to control his temporal epilepsy. Note there are 100Ks or perhaps million of such deluded people due to some sort of mental illness.

How can that be backward, it is forward towards reality.

Our brains create the delusion that our earthly situation is real when, in fact, it is a "dream-like" illusion.

Note you are a theist and at the same time a philosophical realist [p-realists] who cling to philosophical realism [mind-independent] as an ideology to soothe the terrible cognitive dissonances exuding from within your psyche.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_realism

p-realists insist that reality and things are mind-independent i.e. independent of humans, body, brain and mind. Theists as p-realists believe a mind-independent God exists as real and create the mind-independent universe.

I argued;
Why Philosophical Realism is Illusory
viewtopic.php?t=40167

The point is when theists & p-realists insist their reality is real based on philosophical realism which is illusory, they are actually believing in an illusion.

As such, the video is correct, our brain driven by the evolutionary default of philosophical realism and theism creates the delusion of God as a balm to soothe the terrible cognitive dissonances.

From the ANTI-philosophical_realism [Kantian], what is reality is what that had emerged and realized within a FSR[realization] and perceived, known and described via a FSK.

In which case, I suggest that...

"...altered states of consciousness & hallucinations due to mental illness, stress, brain damage, hallucinogens, various drugs, etc..."

...are no doubt what short-circuits the part of our brain that keeps us from realizing just how profoundly strange (illusory) our earthly situation truly is.

Sure, such experiences may not be reliable, but they can nevertheless be thought of as "peepholes" that give some of us hazy glimpses through the trans-dimensional "veil" that our brains have been wired to maintain in order to prevent us from seeing the higher truths of reality.
_______

Whatever is not realizable cannot and it is impossible to be real!

God is merely an intelligible object, i.e. a thought object which cannot be realizable because humans do not and by default cannot have any functions to realize an intelligible thought, e.g. God as really real.

What is really real is, for example, that apple on the apple tree, you can touch, smell, see, then pluck to be eaten for its nutrition.
The apple is so real to the extent the apple you pluck can be empirically verified and justified via the human-based scientific-FSK [the most real] as really real.
The FSK justification of reality is same for all FSR-FSK possible things.
DO YOU DENY THE ABOVE REALITY?

God as merely an intelligible [thought-only] object cannot be verified within the most real human-based scientific FSR-FSK.

There is no trans-dimensional "veil", prove it exists as real?

What is most real is possible to be verified and justified with real empirical evidences upon the b]human-based[/b] scientific-FSK.
I can speculate there exist as real human like aliens 1,000,000 times more intelligence and capable than any humans, living in a planet 1,000,000 light years away, creating our known universe.
Note the bolded are empirically possible, it is a matter of producing the empirical evidence to verify and justify it exist as real.

But to insist God exists is an impossibility because God is NOT an empirical possibility but merely an intelligible object invented to soothe the terrible pains of cognitive dissonances from within.
The claim the God exists as real is like insisting a square-circle [an intelligible object] exists as real which is a non-starter to claim it is real.

Thus those who insist God exists as real is more of a psychological issue than an epistemological one.
You can cure you psychological problem if you make an effort, if not, just live with it BUT don't be so insistence your god is real when God is an reified illusion.

[Veritas Aequitas]

@ Bahman

Aren't you trying to prove that God is not real using logic?

I am using critical thinking, logic and rationality.
I had argued what is most real is confined to the scientific FSK.

• 1. What exist as most real is verifiable by the scientific FSR-FSK.
  2. God and soul are not dealt within the ambit of the credible FSK-FSK.
  3. Therefore, it is impossible for God and soul to exists as real.

Btw, do you have a problem with the validity and understanding [not necessary agree with] the above arguments based on what we have discussed so far.

Yes, I have problems with 1 and 2.

I understand you do not agree with 1 and 2, thus from your perspective is not sound.

But do you agree the syllogism is valid deductively whilst not sound nor true to you.
'Valid' deductively means following the rules of logic but not necessary true, thus can be GIGO.

I checked with ChatGPT on the validity of the syllogism which ChatGPT agreed it is valid.

In addition, ChatGPT commented on the soundness of the premises which I did not ask for. I do not agree with ChatGPT's charge of scientism.

The syllogism you provided is deductively valid in its logical structure, but its soundness depends on the truth of the premises.

In this syllogism, the conclusion follows logically from the premises if we accept them as true. The premises state that what exists as most real is verifiable and justifiable by the scientific framework and system (F&S), and that God and soul cannot be verified and justified within this framework. From these premises, the conclusion is drawn that it is impossible for God and soul to exist as real.

However, the soundness of the argument rests on the truth of the premises. The first premise assumes that the only things that can be considered real are those that can be verified and justified by the scientific F&S. This premise reflects a philosophical perspective known as scientism, which asserts that scientific methods are the only reliable way to gain knowledge about the world. Not all philosophical perspectives agree with this assumption, so it may be subject to criticism.

The second premise states that God and soul cannot be verified and justified within the scientific F&S. While this may be true in a strictly scientific sense, it assumes that there are no other valid means of verification or justification for the existence of God and soul. Again, this assumption may be contested from various philosophical or religious perspectives.

Therefore, the logical structure of the syllogism is valid, but the soundness of the argument depends on the acceptance of the premises, which may be subject to debate and differing viewpoints.

[bahman]

bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jun 25, 2023 10:33 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Jun 25, 2023 4:47 am


I had argued what is most real is confined to the scientific FSK.
1. What exist as most real is verifiable by the scientific FSR-FSK.
2. God and soul are not dealt within the ambit of the credible FSK-FSK.
3. Therefore, it is impossible for God and soul to exists as real.
Btw, do you have a problem with the validity and understanding [not necessary agree with] the above arguments based on what we have discussed so far.

Yes, I have problems with 1 and 2.

I understand you do not agree with 1 and 2, thus from your perspective is not sound.

But do agree the syllogism is valid deductively whilst not sound nor true to you.
'Valid' deductively means following the rules of logic but not necessary true, thus can be GIGO.

No, the argument is not valid either. It should be like this:

1. What exists as most real is verifiable by the scientific FSK.
2. God and soul are not real within the ambit of the credible FSK.
3. Therefore, it is impossible for God and the soul to be real.

bahman wrote: No, the journey toward God, soul, and the like starts from within. You cannot find them under the microscope or watch them by a telescope! It is a matter of personal experience. I have experienced God, soul of my father, and the like since more than ten years by now.

As I had argued the most credible, reliable, and objective basis of reality is the human-based FSR-FSK at present.
You have not answer what other FSK is more objective than the scientific FSK [not mathematics nor logic].

In the above you are relying on a very subjective first person experience which cannot be credible, reliable and objective.
Show me evidence where a first person experience is credible, reliable and objective.

Personal experiences of god could be due to many reasons, i.e. altered states of consciousness & hallucinations due to mental illness, stress, brain damage, hallucinogens, various drugs, etc.

There are many people who claimed the experience God but has the rationality to seek psychiatric help to cure them of their hallucinations of God.
see:
How Our Brain Creates Delusion Of God
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrmxjaJu0bc

If your experience is a one-time episode, it could be due to stress or some drug. But if you have regular experiences of god without any causes you know, it would be advisable to seek psychiatric help like the person in the above video.

The only way to confirm what is real is to verify and justified whatever the claim via the most credible, reliable and objective FSR-FSK, i.e. the scientific-FSK.

bahman wrote: Oh yeah, psychiatric. Let me breathe.

Seriously, if you have experienced God and see your father regularly and very often, then it is advisable you check with psychiatrist or rationalize your way to be more realistic.

You mentioned it happened once and that was 10 years ago.
If you are rational and apply critical thinking, it would be very unintelligent of you to confirm any truth merely on a one-time subjective first-person experience.

Did you see this video?
How Our Brain Creates Delusion Of God
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrmxjaJu0bc
research on this, then read and listen to this such info exhaustively.
"God has sent me to you": Right temporal epilepsy, left prefrontal psychosis;
Religious experiences have long been documented in patients with epilepsy, though their exact underlying neural mechanisms are still unclear.

Here, we had the rare opportunity to record a delusional religious conversion in real time in a patient with right temporal lobe epilepsy undergoing continuous video-EEG. In this patient, a messianic revelation experience occurred several hours after a complex partial seizure of temporal origin, compatible with postictal psychosis (PIP). We analyzed the recorded resting-state EEG epochs separately for each of the conventional frequency bands. Topographical analysis of the bandpass filtered EEG epochs revealed increased activity in the low-gamma range (30-40Hz) during religious conversion compared with activity during the patient's habitual state. The brain generator underlying this activity was localized to the left prefrontal cortex. This suggests that religious conversion in PIP is related to control mechanisms in the prefrontal lobe-related processes rather than medial temporal lobe-related processes.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27176877/

ETA: Note original retained

I visited several doctors but they could not help me.

[Veritas Aequitas]

bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jun 25, 2023 10:33 am

Yes, I have problems with 1 and 2.

I understand you do not agree with 1 and 2, thus from your perspective is not sound.

But do agree the syllogism is valid deductively whilst not sound nor true to you.
'Valid' deductively means following the rules of logic but not necessary true, thus can be GIGO.

No, the argument is not valid either. It should be like this:

1. What exists as most real is verifiable by the scientific FSK.
2. God and soul are not real within the ambit of the credible FSK.
3. Therefore, it is impossible for God and the soul to be real.

My P2 is based on your assertions, e.g.

• Human scientific knowledge is not complete. Period.
  viewtopic.php?p=650526#p650526

which you imply, the idea of God and soul are not dealt within the scientific FSK-FSK.

As such my syllogism taking into account your point is valid;

1. What exist as most real is verifiable by the scientific FSR-FSK.
2. God and soul are not dealt within the ambit of the credible scientific FSK-FSK.
3. Therefore, it is impossible for God and soul to exists as real.

There is no real to add the term 'real' in P2.

Elsewhere I have argued, the theistic FSR-FSK based on faith in contrast to the solid empirical basis of the scientific FSK, has negligible credibility, reliability and objective in terms of reality.
The idea of God is merely a thought, i.e. an intelligible object which is ontologically empty thus impossible to be real.

I visited several doctors but they could not help me.

If you have regular experiences of experiencing God and souls I am quite sure there are doctors specializing is temporal epilepsy and other hallucinations who could advise or help you.
Temporal lobe seizure
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-con ... c-20378220

BUT you mentioned it happened only once 10 years ago; if that is the case, it unlikely to be temporal epilepsy or any serious medical issues.
Thus there is nothing much any doctor can do except to give you certain information if they are informed.

[bahman]

I understand you do not agree with 1 and 2, thus from your perspective is not sound.

But do agree the syllogism is valid deductively whilst not sound nor true to you.
'Valid' deductively means following the rules of logic but not necessary true, thus can be GIGO.

No, the argument is not valid either. It should be like this:

1. What exists as most real is verifiable by the scientific FSK.
2. God and soul are not real within the ambit of the credible FSK.
3. Therefore, it is impossible for God and the soul to be real.

My P2 is based on your assertions, e.g.

• Human scientific knowledge is not complete. Period.
  viewtopic.php?p=650526#p650526

which you imply, the idea of God and soul are not dealt within the scientific FSK-FSK.

As such my syllogism taking into account your point is valid;

1. What exist as most real is verifiable by the scientific FSR-FSK.
2. God and soul are not dealt within the ambit of the credible scientific FSK-FSK.
3. Therefore, it is impossible for God and soul to exists as real.

There is no real to add the term 'real' in P2.

Elsewhere I have argued, the theistic FSR-FSK based on faith in contrast to the solid empirical basis of the scientific FSK, has negligible credibility, reliability and objective in terms of reality.
The idea of God is merely a thought, i.e. an intelligible object which is ontologically empty thus impossible to be real.

I know that I said that science does not deal with the supernatural. Here you want to show that God and the soul do not exist. Therefore, you have to change P2 as I mentioned.

I visited several doctors but they could not help me.

If you have regular experiences of experiencing God and souls I am quite sure there are doctors specializing is temporal epilepsy and other hallucinations who could advise or help you.
Temporal lobe seizure
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-con ... c-20378220

BUT you mentioned it happened only once 10 years ago; if that is the case, it unlikely to be temporal epilepsy or any serious medical issues.
Thus there is nothing much any doctor can do except to give you certain information if they are informed.

Yes, I have had regular spiritual experience for more than 10 years. I don't think that I am mentally ill. My experience is quite coherent.

[Veritas Aequitas]

No, the argument is not valid either. It should be like this:

1. What exists as most real is verifiable by the scientific FSK.
2. God and soul are not real within the ambit of the credible FSK.
3. Therefore, it is impossible for God and the soul to be real.

My P2 is based on your assertions, e.g.

• Human scientific knowledge is not complete. Period.
  viewtopic.php?p=650526#p650526

which you imply, the idea of God and soul are not dealt within the scientific FSK-FSK.

As such my syllogism taking into account your point is valid;

1. What exist as most real is verifiable by the scientific FSR-FSK.
2. God and soul are not dealt within the ambit of the credible scientific FSK-FSK.
3. Therefore, it is impossible for God and soul to exists as real.

There is no real to add the term 'real' in P2.

Elsewhere I have argued, the theistic FSR-FSK based on faith in contrast to the solid empirical basis of the scientific FSK, has negligible credibility, reliability and objective in terms of reality.
The idea of God is merely a thought, i.e. an intelligible object which is ontologically empty thus impossible to be real.

I know that I said that science does not deal with the supernatural. Here you want to show that God and the soul do not exist. Therefore, you have to change P2 as I mentioned.

I have checked with ChatGPT which remarked;

ChatGPT wrote:
The syllogism you provided is deductively valid in its logical structure, ..

ChatGPT is not absolutely reliable on everything, but it very reasonable with issues of basic logic. I don't see the need to change my P2.
While my syllogism is valid, you may not agree that it is sound.

I visited several doctors but they could not help me.

If you have regular experiences of experiencing God and souls I am quite sure there are doctors specializing is temporal epilepsy and other hallucinations who could advise or help you.
Temporal lobe seizure
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-con ... c-20378220

BUT you mentioned it happened only once 10 years ago; if that is the case, it unlikely to be temporal epilepsy or any serious medical issues.
Thus there is nothing much any doctor can do except to give you certain information if they are informed.

Yes, I have had regular spiritual experience for more than 10 years. I don't think that I am mentally ill. My experience is quite coherent.

"Mentally ill" encompasses a wide extent of mental deviation from norms; but certain singular deviations has no significant impact on one's life at all; at times it could be very positive for the person.

If you "have had regular spiritual experience for more than 10 years" without drugs, then it is likely to be Temporal Epilepsy which could be mild and unnoticeable seizures.

I suggest you research and exhaust [if possible] on all you can find on the topic of 'Temporal Epilepsy & God"

Here is a quickie find on "Temporal Epilepsy & God" from google;

Israeli doctors watch epileptic’s brain while he ‘sees God’
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-s ... -epilepsy/

I see no harm in one 'experiencing' God but it is not realistic to insist God is really-real.

[bahman]

My P2 is based on your assertions, e.g.

• Human scientific knowledge is not complete. Period.
  viewtopic.php?p=650526#p650526

which you imply, the idea of God and soul are not dealt within the scientific FSK-FSK.

As such my syllogism taking into account your point is valid;

1. What exist as most real is verifiable by the scientific FSR-FSK.
2. God and soul are not dealt within the ambit of the credible scientific FSK-FSK.
3. Therefore, it is impossible for God and soul to exists as real.

There is no real to add the term 'real' in P2.

Elsewhere I have argued, the theistic FSR-FSK based on faith in contrast to the solid empirical basis of the scientific FSK, has negligible credibility, reliability and objective in terms of reality.
The idea of God is merely a thought, i.e. an intelligible object which is ontologically empty thus impossible to be real.

I know that I said that science does not deal with the supernatural. Here you want to show that God and the soul do not exist. Therefore, you have to change P2 as I mentioned.

I have checked with ChatGPT which remarked;

ChatGPT wrote:
The syllogism you provided is deductively valid in its logical structure, ..

ChatGPT is not absolutely reliable on everything, but it very reasonable with issues of basic logic. I don't see the need to change my P2.
While my syllogism is valid, you may not agree that it is sound.

No, your argument is not valid. The fact that science does not deal with the supernatural does not mean that the supernatural is not real. It just simply means that you cannot validate or invalidate supernatural using science.

If you have regular experiences of experiencing God and souls I am quite sure there are doctors specializing is temporal epilepsy and other hallucinations who could advise or help you.
Temporal lobe seizure
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-con ... c-20378220

BUT you mentioned it happened only once 10 years ago; if that is the case, it unlikely to be temporal epilepsy or any serious medical issues.
Thus there is nothing much any doctor can do except to give you certain information if they are informed.

Yes, I have had regular spiritual experience for more than 10 years. I don't think that I am mentally ill. My experience is quite coherent.

"Mentally ill" encompasses a wide extent of mental deviation from norms; but certain singular deviations has no significant impact on one's life at all; at times it could be very positive for the person.

If you "have had regular spiritual experience for more than 10 years" without drugs, then it is likely to be Temporal Epilepsy which could be mild and unnoticeable seizures.

I suggest you research and exhaust [if possible] on all you can find on the topic of 'Temporal Epilepsy & God"

Here is a quickie find on "Temporal Epilepsy & God" from google;

Israeli doctors watch epileptic’s brain while he ‘sees God’
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-s ... -epilepsy/

I see no harm in one 'experiencing' God but it is not realistic to insist God is really-real.

I knew that any sort of spiritual experience is due to brain activity since I experience something other people don't see. But that does not mean that such a brain activity does not have a cause. I cannot fool myself given the fact that I am my brain!

[Flannel Jesus]

The problem with titling something "new" is that eventually it's not new anymore. New Super Mario Bros, for example: that came out in 2006, it's 17 years old. It's not new by any means.

[Age]

Personal experiences of god could be due to many reasons, i.e. altered states of consciousness & hallucinations due to mental illness, stress, brain damage, hallucinogens, various drugs, etc.

There are many people who claimed the experience God but has the rationality to seek psychiatric help to cure them of their hallucinations of God.
see:
How Our Brain Creates Delusion Of God
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrmxjaJu0bc

I'm afraid that you and the video have got it backwards, V.

Our brains create the delusion that our earthly situation is real when, in fact, it is a "dream-like" illusion.

In which case, I suggest that...

"...altered states of consciousness & hallucinations due to mental illness, stress, brain damage, hallucinogens, various drugs, etc..."

...are no doubt what short-circuits the part of our brain that keeps us from realizing just how profoundly strange (illusory) our earthly situation truly is.

Sure, such experiences may not be reliable, but they can nevertheless be thought of as "peepholes" that give some of us hazy glimpses through the trans-dimensional "veil" that our brains have been wired to maintain in order to prevent us from seeing the higher truths of reality.
_______

LOL So God, Reality, or the 'Natural world', created the human brain to PREVENT the human species FROM SEEING the so-called 'higher truths of Reality, God, and the 'Natural world'.

Here we can CLEARLY SEE ANOTHER PRIME example of one being FOOLED by A(NOTHER) one of 'its' OWN DELUSIONS.

[Age]

My P2 is based on your assertions, e.g.

• Human scientific knowledge is not complete. Period.
  viewtopic.php?p=650526#p650526

which you imply, the idea of God and soul are not dealt within the scientific FSK-FSK.

As such my syllogism taking into account your point is valid;

1. What exist as most real is verifiable by the scientific FSR-FSK.
2. God and soul are not dealt within the ambit of the credible scientific FSK-FSK.
3. Therefore, it is impossible for God and soul to exists as real.

There is no real to add the term 'real' in P2.

Elsewhere I have argued, the theistic FSR-FSK based on faith in contrast to the solid empirical basis of the scientific FSK, has negligible credibility, reliability and objective in terms of reality.
The idea of God is merely a thought, i.e. an intelligible object which is ontologically empty thus impossible to be real.

I know that I said that science does not deal with the supernatural. Here you want to show that God and the soul do not exist. Therefore, you have to change P2 as I mentioned.

I have checked with ChatGPT which remarked;

ChatGPT wrote:
The syllogism you provided is deductively valid in its logical structure, ..

ChatGPT is not absolutely reliable on everything, but it very reasonable with issues of basic logic. I don't see the need to change my P2.
While my syllogism is valid, you may not agree that it is sound.

LOL So this one now uses 'ARTIFICIAL intelligence' TO CHECK to see if 'its' OWN 'logic' is right or not.

Way to go "veritas aequitas". If the human being had NOT YET 'evolved' to ABSOLUTE STUPIDITY, then 'it' HAS 'now'.

If you have regular experiences of experiencing God and souls I am quite sure there are doctors specializing is temporal epilepsy and other hallucinations who could advise or help you.
Temporal lobe seizure
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-con ... c-20378220

BUT you mentioned it happened only once 10 years ago; if that is the case, it unlikely to be temporal epilepsy or any serious medical issues.
Thus there is nothing much any doctor can do except to give you certain information if they are informed.

Yes, I have had regular spiritual experience for more than 10 years. I don't think that I am mentally ill. My experience is quite coherent.

"Mentally ill" encompasses a wide extent of mental deviation from norms; but certain singular deviations has no significant impact on one's life at all; at times it could be very positive for the person.

If you "have had regular spiritual experience for more than 10 years" without drugs, then it is likely to be Temporal Epilepsy which could be mild and unnoticeable seizures.

I suggest you research and exhaust [if possible] on all you can find on the topic of 'Temporal Epilepsy & God"

Here is a quickie find on "Temporal Epilepsy & God" from google;

Israeli doctors watch epileptic’s brain while he ‘sees God’
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-s ... -epilepsy/

I see no harm in one 'experiencing' God but it is not realistic to insist God is really-real.

[socrat44]

"If He (God) understands Math and Physics then He exists."
/Frank Tipler/.
God is real, if the "One" used the laws of math and physics to create the Universe.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Edited:
1. What exist as most real is verifiable [ONLY] by the scientific FSR-FSK.
2. God and soul are not dealt within the ambit of the credible scientific FSK-FSK.
3. Therefore, it is impossible for God and soul to exists as most real.

No, your argument is not valid. The fact that science does not deal with the supernatural does not mean that the supernatural is not real. It just simply means that you cannot validate or invalidate supernatural using science.

The argument is valid, i.e. deductively logically.
What you are refuting is the argument is not sound. Note the difference between valid and sound.

You are actually arguing my P1 is not true.
P1. What exist as most real is verifiable "ONLY" by the scientific FSR-FSK.

What you are insisting is there are other models [FSR-FSK] that can verify what exist as real or most real.

I have asked you, what other models [FSR-FSK] other than science can verify what is most real?
You have not provided any credible answers to my question.
You mentioned 'mathematics' and 'logic' which is not relevant.

You are not relying on your first-person-experience [highly subjective] as the most reliable model to verify what is really real. This is not possible because what is highly subjective cannot be objectively real.

Si,
P1. What exist as most real is verifiable [ONLY] by the scientific FSR-FSK.

Prove my P1 is wrong, then I will agree my argument whilst valid is not sound.

Yes, I have had regular spiritual experience for more than 10 years. I don't think that I am mentally ill. My experience is quite coherent.

"Mentally ill" encompasses a wide extent of mental deviation from norms; but certain singular deviations has no significant impact on one's life at all; at times it could be very positive for the person.

If you "have had regular spiritual experience for more than 10 years" without drugs, then it is likely to be Temporal Epilepsy which could be mild and unnoticeable seizures.

I suggest you research and exhaust [if possible] on all you can find on the topic of 'Temporal Epilepsy & God"

Here is a quickie find on "Temporal Epilepsy & God" from google;

Israeli doctors watch epileptic’s brain while he ‘sees God’
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-s ... -epilepsy/

I see no harm in one 'experiencing' God but it is not realistic to insist God is really-real.

I knew that any sort of spiritual experience is due to brain activity since I experience something other people don't see. But that does not mean that such a brain activity does not have a cause. I cannot fool myself given the fact that I am my brain!

It definitely has a cause, i.e. Neuro-psychologically. When certain sets of neuron are triggered, they generate a sense of spirituality leading to a sensing of God, e.g.

Israeli doctors watch epileptic’s brain while he ‘sees God’
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-s ... -epilepsy/

As I believe, in your case, it could be due to mild Temporal Epilepsy which is evident and supported by tons of research.

Otherwise, you believe God tweaked your [the chosen ones] brain to make you see or experience God?

See this thread;
Listing of Causes in Experiencing God
viewtopic.php?t=40346
It is more likely that your experience of God is from one of the listed causes [all verifiable by the scienfific FSK], than insisting God exists as really real without proofs.

[Iwannaplato]

P1. What exist as most real is verifiable "ONLY" by the scientific FSR-FSK.

So, there are degrees of reality or of being real.
Like X is real, but Y is more real, and Z is most real, F is less real.
What are the qualities of quasi-realness?
Like a brick that is somewhat real and then a brick that is more real and a brick that is most real. What's the difference between the bricks or the experience of the bricks?

[bahman]

Edited:
1. What exist as most real is verifiable [ONLY] by the scientific FSR-FSK.
2. God and soul are not dealt within the ambit of the credible scientific FSK-FSK.
3. Therefore, it is impossible for God and soul to exists as most real.

No, your argument is not valid. The fact that science does not deal with the supernatural does not mean that the supernatural is not real. It just simply means that you cannot validate or invalidate supernatural using science.

The argument is valid, i.e. deductively logically.

No, it is not valid. You have to change P2 yet you have to show that P2 is correct.

What you are refuting is the argument is not sound. Note the difference between valid and sound.

No. Your argument is neither valid nor sound.

You are actually arguing my P1 is not true.
P1. What exist as most real is verifiable "ONLY" by the scientific FSR-FSK.

What you are insisting is there are other models [FSR-FSK] that can verify what exist as real or most real.

I have asked you, what other models [FSR-FSK] other than science can verify what is most real?
You have not provided any credible answers to my question.
You mentioned 'mathematics' and 'logic' which is not relevant.

You are not relying on your first-person-experience [highly subjective] as the most reliable model to verify what is really real. This is not possible because what is highly subjective cannot be objectively real.

Si,
P1. What exist as most real is verifiable [ONLY] by the scientific FSR-FSK.

Prove my P1 is wrong, then I will agree my argument whilst valid is not sound.

We have been through this. Logic, spirituality, and theology are other sources of knowing the truth. Moreover, that is you who should prove that P1 is correct.

"Mentally ill" encompasses a wide extent of mental deviation from norms; but certain singular deviations has no significant impact on one's life at all; at times it could be very positive for the person.

If you "have had regular spiritual experience for more than 10 years" without drugs, then it is likely to be Temporal Epilepsy which could be mild and unnoticeable seizures.

I suggest you research and exhaust [if possible] on all you can find on the topic of 'Temporal Epilepsy & God"

Here is a quickie find on "Temporal Epilepsy & God" from google;

Israeli doctors watch epileptic’s brain while he ‘sees God’
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-s ... -epilepsy/

I see no harm in one 'experiencing' God but it is not realistic to insist God is really-real.

I knew that any sort of spiritual experience is due to brain activity since I experience something other people don't see. But that does not mean that such a brain activity does not have a cause. I cannot fool myself given the fact that I am my brain!

It definitely has a cause, i.e. Neuro-psychologically. When certain sets of neuron are triggered, they generate a sense of spirituality leading to a sensing of God, e.g.

Israeli doctors watch epileptic’s brain while he ‘sees God’
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-s ... -epilepsy/

As I believe, in your case, it could be due to mild Temporal Epilepsy which is evident and supported by tons of research.

Otherwise, you believe God tweaked your [the chosen ones] brain to make you see or experience God?

See this thread;
Listing of Causes in Experiencing God
viewtopic.php?t=40346
It is more likely that your experience of God is from one of the listed causes [all verifiable by the scienfific FSK], than insisting God exists as really real without proofs.

As I mentioned, my experiences are coherent. I talk with them like other human beings. Given the fact that I am my brain, I cannot fool myself being not aware of what I am doing. This sort of experience has a cause that could not be me or my brain. They just see neural activity when there is such an experience. What you are suggesting is that a set of neurons play evil trying to fool me. That means that there is another conscious agent who resides inside my brain. A set of neurons could not do that.