These are really good questions, Relativist. Let me think about them and I’ll get back to you later.

Fair?

No matter how strong the will to power; will alone cannot grasp truths anecdotes self awareness can be mere self absorption.

Perhaps I should clarify my question:

How would a hypothetical overman know which moral truths are superior and to all of the old master/slave Apollonian moralities Nietzsche criticized and thought foolishness?

My question for you is:

If materialistic science is correct and no ghost in the machine exists; how can there be any psychic abilities like what you’re proposing as a solution to how the mind can exist separate from the brain?

I would argue that the ego/mind isn’t a purely socially conditioned thing. Every human being IS an individual that interacts with others; while retaining autonomy.

I’ve heard of this guy. Interesting fellow. I disagree that there’s no ghost in the machine and the mind is only a virtual machine program.

Each mind is an individual with it’s own idiosyncrasies, tendencies and personality. Not a tabula rasa with an OS.

I saw that in my sons as they were babies.

I respectfully disagree with you. I love my fiancé and I want to sleep with her because I love her and I find her desirable. If we get pregnant, that’s the fruit of our love. Politics have nothing to do with it.

I’m thinking, if politics have anything to do with bringing a child into the world; it’s only because the parents consciously make it into a political decision.

How to become an overman?

If I’m understanding Nietzsche right, his overman would essentially throw out all previous moral systems and restart from scratch; creating his own values.

Assuming no new developments in human nature, wouldn’t he be recreating the old systems but in new expressions?

The problems I see with the overman concept are two:

• His throwing out of old moral systems and values, while creating his own; and acting irregardless of these old systems and their adherents create conflict between this hypothetical overman and the rest of humanity that cling to the old systems.

• Conflict between multiple overmen and their own idiosyncratic systems. These overmen would be hashing out between themselves, as well as other humans. Assuming they’re not biologically superior to baseline humans; these overmen would be overpowered by the larger mass of humanity.

My question would be for a potential overman would be: Assuming you could throw out all of the old moral value systems and start with a clean slate; what epistemology would you use in order to discern these new and superior moral value systems?

As Saint Thomas said: Follow where the truth leads.

What makes a materialistic answer better than a non materialistic answer?

That being said, may I ask you: Why do you believe you’re only matter?

I see your point.

But:

You haven’t answered the question, IMO; of: If the mind stems from the brain, how can anyone experience anything in a brain dead state?

Also: Consider the verifiable details these experiences provide. The detail and knowledge is impossible to otherwise know.

How do you figure?

These experiences happen with no brain waves at all. It should be impossible for anyone to perceive and know anything.

Considering these guys, among others; have been studying them since the mid 60s with strong rigor; I don’t knock it. Plus, psychiatrists are some of the hardest scientists out there. Academic psychologists and psychiatrists are loathe to even consider non materialistic explanations for the soul.

Respectfully speaking, what’s your objections?

And the case of Pam Reynolds as investigated by Dr Michael Sabom

Dr Bruce Greyson of University of Virginia. His YouTube talk: “ Consciousness Independent of the Brain. “

I agree with you, it was a pivotal moment. As for the “ toe the party line “: in the medieval Church, there was a tradition of disputation in which debates were conducted to hash out questions.

Luther’s posting of his Theses was in line with this tradition. He lost the debates he engaged in 1519 with Johann Eck.

I’m not saying the Church was perfect in discipline and practice in Luther’s time. I agree that someone had to speak up about these problems. The problem was in discipline and practice; not doctrine.

I disagree that society itself is an ideology.

I’m currently reading Aristotle’s Politics and he clearly states that the state is a community.

A community is composed of families that formed a larger social group. Typically for mutual support and survival.

I believe our ancestors hardly had the time to debate ideologies when they formed the earliest societies along lines following instincts.

As for Luther, his epistemic approach was badly flawed; IMHO. He didn’t do Scripture and reason. In fact, he stated that Aristotle was the third greatest enemy of true religion. His was a fideist approach that subordinated reason to faith. One of my favorite saints, Saint Thomas Aquinas; famously believed that faith and reason are in tandem; not one over the other nor in conflict with the other.

As a believing and practicing Catholic, I’ll address the OP’s question: What does religion do for us today?

For myself, my Faith provides for me a way of life, a purposeful teleological, rational and benevolent universe designed and managed by a rational and benevolent God of pure Good.

To me, without this, the universe is a purely chance driven existential cosmos in which nothing means anything.

In my mind, it’s far more unlikely that this universe of ours developed purely by random chance after the Big Bang ( A theory developed by Father Georges Lemaitre, a Belgian Catholic priest ) that somehow developed a stable set of physics laws that allowed for us to evolve than to believe in a God Who set off the Big Bang and guided the developing universe along His benevolent design.

As for one poster’s assertion that the Church is a sick joke: I respectfully disagree.

The Church did much good in all her 2,020 years. Sure, we’ve had our bad popes and churchmen; but, we’ve had 2,020 years of many wonderful saints who did great and marvelous things for their fellow human beings.

In fact: I’d contend that the Church built Western civilization after the Western Empire’s fall.