How Would A Brain Transplant Work?

[Nihil Obstat]

In any case, I listen to Fr. Ripperger for good discussions of the interior life and the virtues, not for his scientific opinions. His opinions on psychology are interesting, given his educational background, but still not my primary interest.

[Jack4]

On 2/22/2019 at 11:04 AM, Nihil Obstat said:

St. Thomas Aquinas when he wrote that science answers scientific questions, and we ought to be careful not to make unbelievers think we are stupid

@Nihil Obstat Do you have a source?

[Nihil Obstat]

9 hours ago, Jack4 said:

@Nihil Obstat Do you have a source?

I was trying to find it the other night. It came up in a philosophy class I took some time ago, and we had discussed it in some detail, but I had just assumed that I would be able to pull up the source when I needed it again. It will take a little more effort than that, it seems. 

[Ice_nine]

On 2/22/2019 at 12:34 AM, Nihil Obstat said:

I am not sure where he is on young earth creationism. I know he is against evolution in some sense. From what I can tell his view on that is highly specific and nuanced.

My approach is, I like I think, taken from St. Thomas Aquinas when he wrote that science answers scientific questions, and we ought to be careful not to make unbelievers think we are stupid. I believe that is a bit of a paraphrase.

I do not lose sleep over it. God created in whatever way He chose, and left what evidence He did.

I've been attracted to traditionalism, but some aspects of the culture around it are off-putting, the anti-science bent being one of them. I did listen to some of Ripperger's talk on the subject, but didn't have 90 minutes to spare.

 

[Nihil Obstat]

Ah, finally found it. It was Augustine, not Aquinas, but it would be safe to say that Aquinas would substantially agree with the sentiment.

https://www.pibburns.com/augustin.htm

28 minutes ago, Ice_nine said:

I've been attracted to traditionalism, but some aspects of the culture around it are off-putting, the anti-science bent being one of them. I did listen to some of Ripperger's talk on the subject, but didn't have 90 minutes to spare.

 

It is around. I can admit it is very off-putting. There is a vocal minority of anti-vaxxers in our community, and our priest, despite having studied biology, encourages it.

You will find nuts anywhere. Our Trad nuts are anti-science or sedevacantists, or conspiracy theorists.

I am willing to tolerate the weeds for the sake of the wheat. I will not delude myself that I could find anywhere without weeds. It would be an exercise in frustration.

 

Really, Ripperger's talks on the virtues, or his series on spiritual theology are incredible. He has one in his spiritual theology series on sentrad.org where he talks about the nine levels of prayer. It has really powerfully affected my interior life.

Augustine:

 

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he hold to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion. [1 Timothy 1.7]

[Jack4]

On 2/24/2019 at 4:21 AM, Nihil Obstat said:

Ah, finally found it. It was Augustine, not Aquinas, but it would be safe to say that Aquinas would substantially agree with the sentiment.

https://www.pibburns.com/augustin.htm 

Augustine:

 

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he hold to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion. [1 Timothy 1.7]

Thank you @Nihil Obstat

[Nihil Obstat]

Further reading.

 

https://dhspriory.org/thomas/QDdePotentia4.htm#4:1

 

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1032.htm#article1

[Jack4]

How is the second link relevant?

[Nihil Obstat]

Firstly, as regards the dignity of faith itself, which consists in its being concerned with invisible things, that exceed human reason; wherefore the Apostle says that "faith is of things that appear not" (Hebrews 11:1), and the same Apostle says also, "We speak wisdom among the perfect, but not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world; but we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery which is hidden" (1 Corinthians 2:6-7).

Secondly, as regards the utility of drawing others to the faith. For when anyone in the endeavor to prove the faith brings forward reasons which are not cogent, he falls under the ridicule of the unbelievers: since they suppose that we stand upon such reasons, and that we believe on such grounds.

Therefore, we must not attempt to prove what is of faith, except by authority alone, to those who receive the authority; while as regards others it suffices to prove that what faith teaches is not impossible. Hence it is said by Dionysius (Div. Nom. ii): "Whoever wholly resists the word, is far off from our philosophy; whereas if he regards the truth of the word"—i.e. "the sacred word, we too follow this rule."

[Gary david]

I think by that time changing brains won't be a problem  because we will all have a cell phone for a brain.

[penitent60]

Huge fan of Lois Bujold Mcmaster and her wonderful space operatic Vorkosigan series. Yes, I would like a perfectly ordinary body Mediator of Meh. I think the concept of dumping a clone brain in order for you to be transplanted into the cloned body is ikky on so many levels....do clones have souls? Gestating a bay in an artificial womb sounds good but not on a moral perspective.....how wrong would it be if your mother wasnt in attendance on your birthday, and then there is resurrecting the dead with not necessarily perfect outcomes.