I have strong feelings contrary to moral principles...

[jwhitlock]

Not only has life been replicated in the lab, it has been created from scratch.

Utter nonsense. If this is one of the foundational concepts you're working from, the discussion is going to be non-productive. And I'm aware of the "victory" claimed by some as they create amino acids, or other building blocks. However, to claim that life has then been created is simply disingenuous. Come back when a simple self-replicating virus, complete with DNA control has been created from scratch, and then you may have a leg to stand on. Otherwise, this kind of claim is a serious credibility issue.

The cause of biological activity is so non-specific, I have to wonder if that is a troll question. The origin of biological impulses as a result of stimulus from the outside world is called signal transduction, of which there are several kinds. This, essentially, is the conversion of various natural happenings to electrochemical impulses that are then interpreted by our own brains.

I can quote from Wikipedia as well as you can.

There is nothing outside of biology that can be linked to biological activity. The smallest particle involved in the operation of perception and thought is the electron. Specifically, it is the valence electrons of the atoms of the molecules in our cells. Nuclear chemistry doesn't even fit into the picture. If you two are going to claim that there is another force at work, then you are going to have to explain how the chemistry of the body is affected by "spirit" or whatever you want to call it.

I understand that you think there is another force at work, I really do. I have been on these forums for years, and I was raised Mormon. My contention is that nobody can even create a conceptually coherent explanation of how spirit circumvents already well understood laws of chemistry to change thoughts and perception.

Biology cannot explain - despite your misplaced foundational claim - what really drives life. They cannot replicate the "living" in living things. They can throw the chemicals together, but they can't even take dead things and reanimate them. Until you can come up with a cogent explanation about this - and it's not just "electrical synapse activity" or some other jargon - then you really don't have any basis for being superior in explaining things. We don't know how the Spirit animates matter, and you don't know how life animates biological organisms.

In reality, it's exactly the same question. We, as LDS, simply understand that there are two things involved. You haven't gotten to the point where you're open minded enough to admit that.

Until you can provide that explanation, the most reasonable point of view is not what you possess. I can appreciate you have your faith and you have your experiences, but so does everyone else. There are plenty theories of mind that do not require extra forces of nature. They operate perfectly fine with what we have already established.

Evidently, here's what it really boils down to. You're trying to tell us that your point of view is more reasonable.

False. Wrong answer.

To a neuroscientist, religious experiences can be explained with what we currently understand about the human mind. This is not an overstatement, and I don't claim we know every nuance of a religious experience. I do know that we can induce them, and watch them in action with real time scans. When someone feels like time stops and they are out of body, that their temporal lobe in in inhibitory mode, that when people speak in tongues their dorsolateral prefrontal cortex is inhibited while there is hyperactivity in the Broca's area of their brain. The examples go on and on about where we can tie certain aspects of religious experiences to specific patterns of activity in the brain. A more and more complete picture is being added to everyday. This picture has no need of a spiritual explanation

.

Wrong again. You confuse inducing symptoms with the actual experience. You declare that because you can see the interaction of matter and spirit, and can trigger some of the same responses in matter, you must know what we mean by spirit, and that there really isn't any. I'll go back to my original point; the more clear-minded biologist will understand that there's still something missing that they can't replicate. They can't create life, there's a part of the process they don't have access to.

This is an example of misapplying science to draw conclusions that are outside of the studies / evidence that actually exists. It is, in fact, a disturbing overstatement.

I maintain that my own point of view is perfectly reasonable. There is nothing wrong with people who are not Mormon. They have no deficiencies. There is nothing wrong with people who leave the church, morally, mentally, or otherwise, be it a change to another faith or total disaffection.

You're not making a very good case for this claim. In fact, the rather bizarre generalization that people who leave the Church have no deficiencies is simply out of touch with reality. There are some who have severe deficiencies.

And please note, before you misrepresent my statement, that I said "some". Your generalization as an absolute is not defensible.

There are billions of people on this earth who claim to know that their faith is the correct one. The most reasonable explanation is not the one that excludes everyone else's faith while holding one superior, but the one that provides an explanation for the existence of all faiths, and places them all on an equal playing field/

Actually, the most reasonable explanation is one that doesn't set up a straw man explanation like this as its basis. This is nothing more than an appeal to moral equivalence in order to dismiss all religion as some kind of "biological experience" - something you have not done a very credible job of proving.

Well, I think this discussion has about run its course. The "we've created life from scratch in the lab" claim raised too many flags about this biologically induced rationalization train of thought.

I think the original OP has been the most interesting and informative part of this thread.