Is the Filter Theory committing the ad hoc fallacy and is it unfalsifiable?

[Ninshub]

Another New-ager.  What on earth has this got to do with science and demonstrable reality?

I think Sci answered. But I am curious as to what your precise definition of what a "new ager" is, if you were interested in spelling it out.

does nothing to overthrow all of neuroscience, which finds that the mind is dependent on the brain, and hence is unlikely to survive death.

It says no such thing.  It simply observes certain correlations and, again, only those it CAN observe presently.

This is dogma Merle; plain and simple.

EDIT: I see Brian already made a similar observation.  Still, I'll leave mine here as I find this to be THE singular barrier to this being anything close to a productive conversation.

It says no such thing.  It simply observes certain correlations and, again, only those it CAN observe presently.

This is dogma Merle; plain and simple.

Before my grandmother had a stroke, she would interact with people and remember it. After her stroke, she would interact with people, and not remember it happened. If the mind is dependent on the brain, this is easy to explain. If the mind is not dependent on the brain, can you explain why this happens?

It says no such thing.  It simply observes certain correlations and, again, only those it CAN observe presently.

This is dogma Merle; plain and simple.

EDIT: I see Brian already made a similar observation.  Still, I'll leave mine here as I find this to be THE singular barrier to this being anything close to a productive conversation.

Yes, certainly, correlation is not causation. However, the actual mechanism of the memory impairment can be interpreted via the filter/transceiver theories as indeed due to the brain damage, but where this is because the spirit is very intricately intertwined with the neuronal microstructure of the brain which it utilizes to manifest in the physical. Consciousness and memory are therefore functionally impaired by the physical neuronal brain damage, but in a model where the mind is not equal to the brain. When the spirit finally disentangles itself from the brain structure, mind, consciousness and memory are no longer impaired. Regarding memory, this explanation of course also requires that human memory data not be exclusively stored in the brain, but either solely in the spirit/spiritual realm, or in both places.

[Ninshub]

This is not meant to insult Merle at all but that's a very clear explanation nbtruthman and I'm puzzled if Merle doesn't see that as answering his post just previous.

Before my grandmother had a stroke, she would interact with people and remember it. After her stroke, she would interact with people, and not remember it happened. If the mind is dependent on the brain, this is easy to explain. If the mind is not dependent on the brain, can you explain why this happens?

See my previous post, #574.

I liked this post of yours because I find there is too much credulity on this forum and we need skeptics like you to bring these things up, but your last statement is still unqualified. As well as that,  Christianity speaks of a physical resurrection, so survival does not depend upon a seperate "soul."

I'm curious. If there is no separate soul, then how are the mind and personality and memories preserved during the tens or hundreds or thousands of years between physical death of a person and the Resurrection?

So I find this study interesting, but the small observed affect does nothing to overthrow all of neuroscience, which finds that the mind is dependent on the brain, and hence is unlikely to survive death.

Very well, Merle. Your points about the mediumship studies are a significant improvement from your previous posts. 

I concede to your criticisms as they are well founded. I'll try to contact the authors in order to seek some further clarification.

Before my grandmother had a stroke, she would interact with people and remember it. After her stroke, she would interact with people, and not remember it happened. If the mind is dependent on the brain, this is easy to explain. If the mind is not dependent on the brain, can you explain why this happens?

The mind being affected by the brain (and viceversa) is an undeniable fact.

BUT, if the dependence model was true, why do anomalous instances of mental function persisting despite great damage to cerebral structure occur?

The Importance of the Exceptional in Tackling Riddles of Consciousness and Unusual Episodes of Lucidity

Yes, certainly, correlation is not causation. However, the actual mechanism of the memory impairment can be interpreted via the filter/transceiver theories as indeed due to the brain damage, but where this is because the spirit is very intricately intertwined with the neuronal microstructure of the brain which it utilizes to manifest in the physical. Consciousness and memory are therefore functionally impaired by the physical neuronal brain damage, but in a model where the mind is not equal to the brain. When the spirit finally disentangles itself from the brain structure, mind, consciousness and memory are no longer impaired. Regarding memory, this explanation of course also requires that human memory data not be exclusively stored in the brain, but either solely in the spirit/spiritual realm, or in both places.

I might add that I think this conceptual approach neatly accounts for a number of the mysteries associated with the mind-brain problem. Such as terminal lucidity and paradoxical lucidity, where there is an unexpected return of mental clarity and memory, or suddenly regained consciousness, that occurs in the time shortly before death in patients with severe psychiatric or neurological disorders (terminal lucidity), and where this occurs long before death in cases of paradoxical lucidity. There are especially mysterious instances where this sudden return of mental clarity and function is despite severe brain damage.

This hypothesis is based on the filter/transceiver theory and would partially agree with the materialists: the mind does in fact depend on the physical brain as much human experience seems to indicate - but in this hypothesis that dependence is temporary, only during physical life when the spirit is inhabiting the body and manifesting in the physical mainly via complexly interpenetrating the brain's neuronal structures. During episodes of terminal (and probably paradoxical) lucidity the spirit has become partly decoupled from the damaged physical brain and is able to temporarily experience a more normal consciousness including access to memories, but still has enough connections to other brain functions to communicate vocally.

Cases of near normal mental functioning despite loss of most of the cerebral cortex due to severe hydrocephalus could also be explained by this hypothesis - it is functionally similar to terminal lucidity in that the mind appears to be fully functioning despite loss of or damage to much of the brain.

This hypothesis accepts that there is a dependence of the mind on the physical brain, but postulates that this dependence is strictly only during physical life.