What is the soul?

Hablas Inglés?I think the question is 'Would scientific research on {the} SOUL be fair?'and the answer is no. It is easy to avoid, with the lack of objective evidence, by simply assuming it doesn't exist. All the sciences are incomplete, i mean, they know that they don't know everything and the more they know the more they realize they don't know, or something like that.It doesn't matter if science is incomplete as long as the things it has completed continue to hold true. Science is doing great while ignoring the soul and without an objective means of detection, the soul should continue to be avoided by science.

Yeah, the apple that fell on his head. I don't understand what your saying typing here. What's your point? I don't think discovering the beauty of the nature is a doctrine of science. Whats wrong with just being a knowledge worker? That’s where science loses interest. When it can’t be observed it is just someone’s assertion and not something worth scientific study. I think it is a good rule and should not be discarded. It opens too broad of a door, science would have to look into everything that people are claiming exist without evidence. It would hinder scientific progress and it wouldn’t provide any results that are worth anything (to science). And if its never to late then lets just worry about it later. Science is doing fine with the rule so until we see a problem.... If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Experiences are subjective and observations are objective. Subjective experiences cannot be trusted to be something that actually exists. Science requires objective observation, that’s just the way it is.

---

Science fails to recognize the single most potent element of human existence.
Letting the reigns go to the unfolding is faith, faith, faith, faith.
Science has failed our world.
Science has failed our Mother Earth.
-System of a Down

Uhh, lets just say "soul".thats what the thread is about...

Come on now...nobody?A lot of us agree that it exists and we can also agree on what it is, with a simple definition. We have our own ideas on what it encompasses when we start getting more specific with the definitions but to say that nobody can agree what is a soul is not true. WRT science I agree that no meaningful answers can be found but from a spiritual point of view I think that a lot of meaning can come from a discussion. You, personally, might consider those answers to lack meaning but that's just your prerogative, as it is mine that they do.

What a bold assertion to claim knowledge of the non-existance of something. You can't know that something doesn't exist.I agree that we have mind and matter but I think we have a soul too. IMHO, when we die the mind and matter die but the soul moves on, its an immaterial component of our existance that is connected to the matter via the mind.

the part I found bold was "That's all there is."

OMG, not this crap again.

agreed. http://www.dictionary.com Yup, there are no facts. People still agree on what the soul is though. And a lot of us think they exist. I guess we are all just crazy though.

Huh?Not everyone is replying to you. Did you mean to reply to me?I read your earlier post, I don't need anything else, thank you.

Logically, that's just not true But I don't wanna argue with you when all your gonna do is use your own definitions for words and argue them with your own form of logic.Leave your logical arguments out of it and define entity, mind and being and maybe I'll discuss it with you but otherwise, don't even bother replying.

Well, that's off topic.But,In this message Message 191 you set out an incorrect argument with false premises and refused to do anything but reiterate your premises or play the logic card (with your own weird form of logic). In this thread, you made another outlandish claim and then threw the logic card out there again. So, I'm not gonna "go through the motions" again if you're gonna pull the same crap. When I saw you say "Logically" I rolled my eyes and stopped.Like I said typed:

quote:

---

I don't wanna argue with you when all your gonna do is use your own definitions for words and argue them with your own form of logic.

---

But anyways, lets not derail this thread into off-topic land, so don't reply. Open a new thread if you care to discuss any of this, I just didn't want to open a new thread to explain my problem, which it isn't.