Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Soul
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 7 of 46 (466359)
05-14-2008 6:57 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by PurplyBear
05-14-2008 6:52 PM


Philosophically, I'd say there are two options:
1) Souls don't exist
2) Souls don't matter
If a soul is immaterial (not physical) you have to come up with a mechanism whereby the soul can affect a material object (ie. your body). Even were you to be able to do that, it should be possible to point to a process that is going along following material laws, and then changes course by no possible means. As far as I know, that has never been shown to happen.
If a soul, then, cannot affect the material body (or interract in any way at all), then it becomes irrelevant. It's entirely possible that we all walk around with invisible, massless goblins on our shoulder, but since they have no affect on us, does it make any sense to worry about them?

"Of course...we all create god in our own image" - Willard Decker, Star Trek: The Motion Picture
http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by PurplyBear, posted 05-14-2008 6:52 PM PurplyBear has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by PurplyBear, posted 05-14-2008 6:59 PM Perdition has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 9 of 46 (466361)
05-14-2008 7:08 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by PurplyBear
05-14-2008 6:59 PM


In your OP you said:
My kid asked me these questions - she is 10. I told her they were great questions! However, I pointed out religion is childish, and she need not waste her time with childish things. I explained the soul is a made up story by irrational adults. Therefore since the soul does not exist her questions are meaningless (like questions about Santa I told her).
Now you say:
See above. The soul does matter. It is the part of us the bible says, so I believe, that spends eternal happiness with jesus in heaven.
So I'm a bit confused. Either way, you're left with the 2 options I mentioned, unless you can come up with a way for a nonmaterial thing to interact with a material thing. And then, once you have a way, you need to show any evidence of that actually happening.
I'm not going to rule out the possibility of an immaterial entity residing within our body that can be called a soul, but if it can't interact with your body, it can't hold memories from your brain, and could therefore be written off as being part of "you" (meaning the person people would describe you as).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by PurplyBear, posted 05-14-2008 6:59 PM PurplyBear has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by PurplyBear, posted 05-14-2008 11:25 PM Perdition has replied
 Message 16 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-15-2008 10:17 AM Perdition has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 12 of 46 (466404)
05-14-2008 11:32 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by PurplyBear
05-14-2008 11:25 PM


Re: I am confused
Christians and Muslims and many other religions past and present believe in a soul. As to why, you'd have to ask them, but I think it comes down to a couple things. On one hand, people look at their rich internal lives (thoughts, emotions, fears, desires, morals, etc) and have a hard time believing those things are chemical/electrical effects in the brain. They hold up those things as proof that there is something immaterial.
I think another strong reasoning is the desire for there to be "something" after death. I admit, the fear of ceasing to exist is a strong one in me. And while its obvious that our physical bodies decay and stop working, if there could be a non-physical aspect that doesn't decay, that would be a huge relief.
I don't think it's that people are stupid, far from it. They just choose to believe what makes them feel better.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by PurplyBear, posted 05-14-2008 11:25 PM PurplyBear has not replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 20 of 46 (466501)
05-15-2008 11:05 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by New Cat's Eye
05-15-2008 10:17 AM


If your soul interacts with your mind, then there should be something going on in the mind that can't be described in physical terms. As scientists are getting better and better at deciphering the electrochemical impulses in the brain, we're finding more and more evidence that every desire, thought, and feeling are merely those electrochemical processes at work.
Anything we believe exists that we can't actually see, we deduce by noticing its effects on something else. Dark matter is gravitationally linked to visible matter, etc.
The fact that you feel you have a soul is not evidence of anything. When you go to the dentists and he shoots novacaine in your mouth, your lips feels twice the size of normal...but it's not. People feel things all the time that are wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-15-2008 10:17 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-15-2008 12:10 PM Perdition has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 26 of 46 (466520)
05-15-2008 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by New Cat's Eye
05-15-2008 12:10 PM


If your soul interacts with your mind, then there should be something going on in the mind that can't be described in physical terms.
Why?
It isn't necessary.
If everything can be described in physical terms, what reason do we have to postulate any non-physical entities. Occam's Razor would be an argument against that. Another would be this:
You throw a ball in an arc to a friend a few feet away. The ball starts off on an upward trajectory and then reaches an apex and curves back down to your friend. We cand escribe the entire flight in physical terms. Does that then rule out the possibility that there are fairies on the ball who pushed it back down so it wouldn't keep flying upwards forever? No. Do we have any reason for thinking they are there when Gravitational Theory explains it just fine? Also no.
Those electochemical processes could be a result of the soul transgressing the mind, just sayin'
If the soul created a change, such that electro chemical signals were the result, there should be a something at which we can point and say, "Those weren't created physically." If everything can be explained physically, we have no reason to postulate a nonphysical component. And if everything would have happened regardless of there being a nonphysical component or not, then even if there is one, it becomes irrelevant. It would seem you're saying that God would have created humans as a sort of Rube Goldberg machine with unnecessary complexity to do a simple task, namely the transmission of electro chemical signals.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-15-2008 12:10 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 27 of 46 (466522)
05-15-2008 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by New Cat's Eye
05-15-2008 12:23 PM


Re: Evidence and Existence
At the risk of opening a can of worms...
While my subjective experience is not really "evidence" for the soul, in the sense of empirical evidence, I consider my position sensible because it makes sense to me. From what I can tell, my soul does exist. You being unaware of souls doesn't trump my own experiences. It wouldn't be sensible for me to drop my belief in my soul simply because you don't see one.
You say it is sensible for you to believe in a soul because you subjectively feel you have a soul. And it is equally sensible for me not to believe I have a soul because I feel I don't.
It would then follow that it is sensible for someone to believe they have been abducted by aliens because they feel like that has happened. Or that it is sensible for a paranoid delusional person to believe there is a secret cabal out to get him because he feels that there is. Both of these people have no objective evidence to prove their beliefs, they only have their feelings. Especially in the last case, we would want the person to go onto some sort of medication because we don't accept his evidence.
Your feelings may be enough for you to believe, but to say that belief if therefore sensible is a reach, imo.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-15-2008 12:23 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-15-2008 1:12 PM Perdition has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 33 of 46 (466535)
05-15-2008 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by New Cat's Eye
05-15-2008 1:12 PM


Re: Evidence and Existence
I'm perfectly willing to concede the point that there may be a soul that exists non-physically. Science says nothing about non-physical entities. What I am arguing is that for a soul to matter it has to interact with the physical. If two things interact, there is a change created in at least one of the things. If there is no change, there is no interaction, if there is no interaction, then the existence of the one is irrelevant to the other. So, until you can show me where the soul interacts with the body, then at the very least we can say the soul is irrelevant to the body.
As for your subjective experience, it may be illuminating to ask if you felt the existence of your soul before you had heard of the belief or after. If no one had shown you a Bible or introduced to you the concept of a soul, would you still feel you had one? I know these are difficult if not impossible to answer, but they are interesting things to contemplate.

"Of course...we all create god in our own image" - Willard Decker, Star Trek: The Motion Picture
http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-15-2008 1:12 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-15-2008 3:08 PM Perdition has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 38 of 46 (466565)
05-15-2008 3:25 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by New Cat's Eye
05-15-2008 3:08 PM


Re: Evidence and Existence
Well, the mind is another thing we'd have to show the existence of, like the soul. The "mind" as a nonphysical entity, is something I would argue against as well. The "mind" as merely a term meaning the conglomeration of electro-chemical signals in the brain that make up our thoughts, feelings, etc would be more akin to what I think of as the mind. The first definition of mind, is often synonymous with some people's definition of soul.
As for the first concept of the soul, obviously someone thought of it, and no, I don't consider that any more proof than your feelings. I just think it would be an interesting thing to ponder. When I was younger, I believed in God and souls and stuff, but I reached a point where I asked myself why I believed those things, and all I could come up with was that others had told me. Once I started looking for independent verification, I couldn't find any. I find it interesting to question my beliefs from time to time and try to understand why I believe something and if there might be a reason to change my belief. Over the yeras, a number of things have come and gone, and I truly feel that I'm getting closer to the "truth" every time I do this little mental investigation. You may do the same thing and still come to the conclusion that you have a soul, and it will all depend on what we consider to be convincing evidence. I consider personal feelings to be the weakest form and when I find those are the only reasons for my belief, I hold them in the most tentative of ways.

"Of course...we all create god in our own image" - Willard Decker, Star Trek: The Motion Picture
http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-15-2008 3:08 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-15-2008 3:56 PM Perdition has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 43 of 46 (466573)
05-15-2008 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by New Cat's Eye
05-15-2008 3:56 PM


Re: Evidence and Existence
I was an atheist too for a while but when I honestly went looking for 'those things', I found them.
In this case, I would want to know your motives for looking. Were you looking because you were just generally curious, or were you looking because you wanted to find something?
What was it that you found that changed your mind, and what stopped you from seeing/feeling/noticing that when you became an atheist in the first place?
I want there to be an afterlife, and I want there to be an eternal part of me. But my desire doesn't make me think its actually true. A strong desire to find something can often cloud our judgment when we start out to find it. My cousin at one point had a profound experience, I can't describe exactly what it was, since I didn't experience it, but he told me that he could see how some people could attribute the feeling to God, how some people could make it a religious experience. He chalked it up to the amazing power of humanity and nature. Depending on how you filter the experience could cloud judgment on what the experience actually was. Even something as mundane as remembering the color of a car you passed a few minutes ago gets clouded by expectations and desires, to the point where an eye-witness testimony is often shown to be suspect at best.
I have no doubt you feel something but to say that feeling points to one possibility over another is a completely different question.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-15-2008 3:56 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024