|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,915 Year: 4,172/9,624 Month: 1,043/974 Week: 2/368 Day: 2/11 Hour: 1/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: What is the soul? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Is a scientific Research on SOUL would be Fair? Hablas Inglés? I think the question is 'Would scientific research on {the} SOUL be fair?' and the answer is no.
My perception suggest that as we are part of universe we can't avoid this study. It is easy to avoid, with the lack of objective evidence, by simply assuming it doesn't exist.
Perhaps without a pure science on this subject all our other sciences are incomplete. 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Would Isac Newton have an objective mean, when he found the rule of gravity? Yeah, the apple that fell on his head.
I dont think a labeled-scientist can do much in his field who has a kindo serious objectives. I don't understand what your He is just a knowlege worker & not a scientist who freedomly,curriously & passionatly tries to discover the beauty of the nature. 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?
If we feel the existance of something but we can't observe That’s where science loses interest. When it can’t be observed it is just someone’s assertion and not something worth scientific study.
that rule must be discarded as soon as we can. There is never too late. 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.
Infact existance of any thing has either of the two effects. 1) Observation 2) Experience. Both have evidence. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
robinrohan writes: I don't see the necessity for the concept of "soul." I always thought "mind" would do. Faith writes: Mind doesn't include emotions, does it? robinrohan writes: To me it does. Ok, let's just say "consciousness." Uhh, lets just say "soul". thats what the thread is about...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
nobody can agree what a soul is or even if it exists 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.
With there being no verifiable data about angels (or souls), no meaningful answers can be found. 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
We have mind and matter. That's all there is. 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
the part I found bold was "That's all there is."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
robinrohan writes: Logically, that is all there is. OMG, not this crap again.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Insert the word "angel", "god(s)", "ipu", "ghosts", etc in there and we are again left with no facts other than that we appear not to have any real data that any of these exist except as constructs in our minds. agreed.
Fine then, what is a soul? http://www.dictionary.com
Don't use any vague mumbo jumbo, touchy feely words, just give me the facts! What, there are no facts in reference to souls? Well how about that. 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Look at my earlier post. I gave a philosophical dissertation on what the soul is. What else do you need? 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Any entity we could think up would fall into one of those two categories of mind and matter, or being and thing. 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
What's your problem? 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 quote: 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.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024