What is the soul?

My perception suggest that as we are part of universe we can't avoid this study. Perhaps without a pure science on this subject all our other sciences are incomplete.

Would Isac Newton have an objective mean, when he found the rule of gravity? Instead people that time might think he was mad. Did Right Brothers know before invention of Plane that their new invention will change the travelling & transportation at this advance stage we are living in today.All discoveries & inventions are basically for the satisfaction of the man himself. Satisfaction & enjoyment of some achievement of knowledge. I dont think a labeled-scientist can do much in his field who has a kindo serious objectives. He is just a knowlege worker & not a scientist who freedomly,curriously & passionatly tries to discover the beauty of the nature.In short, if there is a rule by granted in history of science that "If we feel the existance of something but we can't observe, kik off it out of science" then that rule must be discarded as soon as we can. There is never too late.Infact existance of any thing has either of the two effects. 1) Observation 2) Experience. Both have evidence. The only difference is that the second one reuires more efforts.This message has been edited by Bashier Ahmed, 04-21-2006 02:02 PM

I would like to talk about the very evidences of the Soul.1) A child remembers about his previous birth experiences. He knows his name, his father's & mother's name & the names of relatives & in some cases the names of his killer. Not only he tells a far distant place but also identifies when the child has been brought to that location. Then he recognises many things there. A child who never went the place, how can he remebers all the things. This is not one case but I myself read some of the cases in newspaper.There is two possiblities: 1) He simply tells his imaginatin which affected by stories, movies, tv, reading etc. 2) He is a lier.
In any of the case either imagination or lie, he could not get that much accuracy unless he experience that in his previous birth.I briefly tell you the another evidence. That is, a person saved from death & then he remembers his experience during his death process.Above two cases are not direct but atleast indirect evidences of soul. These must be studied with the sincere efforts.

If a person given annesthesia he does not have either of the things: mind, emotion & will. But still he does exist! Then this existance is Soul. If I think.

--> Well, neither of those are evidence of a soul. At best they might be unexplained events.... I agree. We can make systematic efforts to explain that, doesn't it? Furhter, the scientists could either prove existance or non-existance of the soul. If it exists then same study like we have on time, energy etc. could be performed.--> But that also misses the second question I asked. If we can test and measure 'soul' then is it not just another material object and not spiritual?... Everything that exists have some properties. At the time if we don't have sufficient knowledge to directly observe it (ie. materialise it), we can atleast study its attributes & reach to the required entity (the soul in our case). It doesn't mean whether the entity is material or spiritual or even just a logical existance (like time-as per my perception).This message has been edited by Bashier Ahmed, 04-22-2006 03:40 AM