do we actually have souls??

[maverick]

was reading descartes one night when VERY stoned a long time ago, and in what felt like a galaxy far far away.

 

he used rationale to disprove the existence of god. bit of a shame really, cos he set out to do just the opposite :rolleyes:

 

anyhoo...

 

he tried this, and please remember this was 10years or so ago and i was mashed.

 

so you try too.

 

close your eyes

imagine (bad word but will have to do) you have no body, and as result no senses.

you cannot see, hear, taste, touch or smell.

 

let all of this slide away from you. it may help to imagine yourself in a room which isolates you from your senses.

 

once your senses have been removed what are you experiencing?, is there something left? how would you describe it?

 

now imagine that whatever it is has had no input of information from the senses. and if you think there is something else and it can exist without sensory input what is it, and can it cease to exist?

 

i describe it as "potential". when there has been sensory/experiential input i call it an awareness.

 

can this be likened this to the idea of a soul.

 

 

laters ;)

 

 

[maverick]

EDIT: By the way we have instincts, we just rely more on experience.

If we didn't have instincts we guys wouldn't be talking to womens chests instead of their faces.

 

speak for yourself man, im an ass and legs man. damn shame im so tall :D

[Oma]

EDIT: By the way we have instincts, we just rely more on experience.

If we didn't have instincts we guys wouldn't be talking to womens chests instead of their faces.

 

speak for yourself man, im an ass and legs man. damn shame im so tall :D

Well, if that's what you're staring at when talking to women then it's gotta be some akward conversations !! :p

 

 

Is your definition of a soul like Websters 1st definition in the way that the soul/awareness exists independently of the body?

 

 

[juhan]

If I don't believe in an afterlife, do i believe in souls? :cyclops:

 

I think we should throw away all definition of the word soul and just name a star after it! :p

 

=Han=

[NiteShdw]

As someone mentioned earlier, the existence of a soul is by definition impossible to prove.

 

Those who believe in a soul, believe in some 'spiritual', not something physical. So, it should be quite apparent that one cannot prove the existence of something that isn't physical by only using physical means (science).

 

Those who know if a soul exists or not aren't around anymore to tell us!

 

Even so, I still believe there is a lot of circumstantial evidence that that we have a soul. As a species, we are quite unique in our world. It's strange that nearly every other species has a very close relative: different species of birds of the same family, etc. If the human being wasn't somehow 'special', wouldn't there be more human-like animals with similar characteristics, like being able to fasion tools, build communities, build shelters, or otherwise learn and use rational processes? Even monkees, apes, chimps, etc. that are genetically similar to humans don't exhibit nearly the abilities that a human has.

 

Anyway, as I said. It's an impossible argument to win, people have been doing it for thousands of years. As someone else said, we'll all find out one day!

[Oma]

(...)

As a species, we are quite unique in our world. It's strange that nearly every other species has a very close relative: different species of birds of the same family, etc.

(...)

Usually it starts out with one species like a bird that is better suited for an environment - then this species splits up into other species better suited for specific niches. Much the same as what was happening to humans before we became "civilized" (asians, whites, blacks, indians...so on). And like humans a lot of the close birdspecies can mate and have fertile hybrid offspring. We simply didn't go far enough to become different species.

 

All in all, we're not special in when it comes to being "one species only".

So why are there no other species with the same qualities as us?

Well, we've spread worldwide so that particular niche is already taken up by us - so there is no advantage in trying to compete with us.

 

 

[the6ofpopes]

Or it's simply other species know there place in the world & live in harmony with it.

 

Mankind has lost it's ability to live in harmony with anything & is out of control, mankind has lost the understanding that to live in harmony with the rest of the world is all that's needed, we've become a plaque that's spread across the planet.

 

Any sci-fi nut can tell you where this story will end, we read enough sci-fi & fantasy that takes place in out future to know the answer.

 

 

 

 

[Oma]

Our it's simply other species know there place in the world & live in harmony with it.

Ha hahhahahahahahahaha!!

Ahhh ... sorry, it's just such a common misconception.

No, the idea of harmony in nature is not in touch with nature - there can be talk of an equillibrium between competitors.

We just normally don't see the borders since the equllibrium has been reached or is being reached very slowly.

 

Here's a field study - go to a place where heavy machinery has really plowed up some land. If left untouched soon one type of plant will settle - notice this plant (take a picture). This plant is a stress-strategist.

Come back 20 years later - you probably can't find the plant.

It has been out-competed by other plants that couldn't have settled themselves on a bare strip of land.

 

 

[bbbb]

I'm sure Picard hates cloning now. Those nefarious and infernal Romulans, such swine they are. It's all because of those wretched Romulans that poor Picard will be doing anti-cloning demonstrations.

[the6ofpopes]

Well I wasn't really referring to plants, although they are considered a type of species. I said "harmony with the world" not nature, there's a big deference between the two.

 

Ha hahhahahahahahahaha!!

 

Well at least you did get my intend at first, you just took it to seriously after that. :p :p :p

 

stress-strategist = WEED

& the reason it's not there 20yrs later is because we smoked all of it, seeds & all........gotta love it when seeds are mixed in SNAP CRACKLE POP.

 

 

[mcant]

It's strange that nearly every other species has a very close relative: different species of birds of the same family, etc. If the human being wasn't somehow 'special', wouldn't there be more human-like animals with similar characteristics, like being able to fasion tools, build communities, build shelters, or otherwise learn and use rational processes? Even monkees, apes, chimps, etc. that are genetically similar to humans don't exhibit nearly the abilities that a human has.

 

 

We probably killed them all a long time ago, as a species we're not big on sharing, there were a lot of proto hominids around at one time, I find it doubtful they all quietly died out save us

[Soulreaper]

Whether or not we have a soul is a tough one indeed - however I'd like to point out that the mind AND the body are deeply intertwined (which should be an obvious observation).

 

Some claim a soul would be the mind and the beyond - maybe so.

 

But what we can be certain of is that as living creatures, as humans;

spiritual matters are not all that's important, all sides or aspects matter. So it's important to feed both as both sides feed of each other for an instance, feelings, thoughts, behaviour etc. may be born in THOUGHT but how we are physically (bloodstream, oxygen, "general-fitness" etc.) also add-to and vice versa - to put it simple.

 

Just a simple add-to for the posts about being all body or all spiritual.

 

 

[Oma]

Well I wasn't really referring to plants, although they are considered a type of species. I said "harmony with the world" not nature, there's a big deference between the two.

 

Ha hahhahahahahahahaha!!

 

Well at least you did get my intend at first, you just took it to seriously after that. :p :p :p

he he - well, you got me going..!;)

[elderbear]

we have to answer the question of whether the mind is the brain' date=' or whether it uses the brain as an interface to the body. My sense of self, my values, my character, my quirks - are they just a collection of wrinkled neurons? Are they an epiphemon? Or do they exist beyond my physical body?[/quote']

 

What's an epiphemon?

 

It's a typo. I meant epiphenomenon - "A secondary phenomenon that results from and accompanies another: “Exploitation of one social class or ethnic group by another [is] an epiphenomenon of real differences in power between social groups†(Harper's)."

 

Is consciousness a primary phenomenon or is it secondary to the physical processes of the brain?

[elderbear]

Then I have no soul because my personality is totally dependent of my body. Without my body I wouldn't have my consciousness.

 

It all depends on which of the definitions you choose to use. #3 allows you to have a soul.

 

It's just absurd to believe my consciousness would continue to exist outside of my body.

 

I won't argue that it does - but why is it absurd?

 

And this crap about that we have a "choice" when we make decisions... What we choose to do is just a reflection of our instincts, emotions and experiences, just like it is with any other animal.

 

I think you're unduly pessimistic. I'd argue that while we may be pre-conditioned (by genetics, instinct, prior choices) to choose in one way or another, some times, for some things, we have the ability to choose. We have the ability to be self reflective - which means we can impact whatever programming exists.

[elderbear]

We all make Choices but we use reason to finalize those choices, if we didn't we'd still be like other animals or mindless robots, some could argue we already are, eat sleep work, eat sleep work.

 

Some time, just for kicks, google:

 

Antonio Damasio Eliot

 

Damasio has argued from some incredibly interesting evidence that reason alone is insufficient to actually choose.

[elderbear]

close your eyes

imagine (bad word but will have to do) you have no body, and as result no senses.

you cannot see, hear, taste, touch or smell.

 

Didn't have to imagine. Experienced it once with a purified dose of a potent, over-the-counter dissociative. Nothing like experiencing nothingness, total disconnect from the body, from space, from time, such voidness that there is no space to have empty space, no events, no sequence, thus no time.

 

Tripping on the thought "All we have is the moment, the here and now - all else is delusion." Then I realized that there was no "here" and no "now." Utterly awesome - could have been a real screamer, though, if I'd let it panic me.

[elderbear]

It's strange that nearly every other species has a very close relative: different species of birds of the same family, etc. If the human being wasn't somehow 'special', wouldn't there be more human-like animals with similar characteristics, like being able to fasion tools, build communities, build shelters, or otherwise learn and use rational processes? Even monkees, apes, chimps, etc. that are genetically similar to humans don't exhibit nearly the abilities that a human has.

 

 

We probably killed them all a long time ago, as a species we're not big on sharing, there were a lot of proto hominids around at one time, I find it doubtful they all quietly died out save us

 

I'm about half-way through Jared Diamond's The Third Chimpanzee. We are very close to our ape cousins - 98.4% shared genetic material. There is greater variation in single species of birds than between humans and chimps! Lots of other animals fulfill NiteShdw's criteria. And don't forget, until about 40,000 years ago, we shared the planet with homo neanderthalis.

 

Diamond seems to believe that what really sets us apart was "The Great Leap Forward," a period of time when h. sapiens began a cultural evolution (or evolved cultures - I haven't finished the book yet to find out) that turned us into the people we are today.

 

If I ever doubted the existence of a soul, however, the day I held my newborn son in my arms and looked into his infinitely deep baby-blue eyes, I had to believe. Evidence? Yes. Subjective evidence. Scientific? No. But for me, seeing such a look of helplessness, dependence, innocence, and possibility cut through a lot of philosophical BS. And in the nearly 18 years since then, it's been clear to me that I wasn't wrong.

 

(And yes, you can argue about the "true" meaning of this experience, and how a "soul" is an artificial construct that fulfilled some need for meaning on the part of a new parent - you will only impress me with your tremendous ignorance. I know that already. But like love or a great poem, it's not the disection that's important, it's the experience.)

[Soulreaper]

True enough!

 

When it comes to choice and behaviour and all that, we do all have something called "core belief system" sort of the operating program (dos/linux/kernel/win etc.) of "us".

 

I'm not going to expand on the subject here because a thread would easily fill 3-4 A4 pages and I'd rather TALK about instead of writing it.

 

However yes one can argue that all is based on impulses and fluids and hormones and instincts and so on and so forth, but that is just a little bit ONE-sided, BLIND-sided and slightly cynical.

Of course a lot of different factos IMPACT other factors which IMPACT what we think, how we feel, what we like, don't like

etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. but to an extent, we actually -do- make choices all the time.

Thought is a process just like many areas (all) of life.

There are processes and those processes have a set of mechanics and there are effects (results, cause/effect).

Understanding some mechanics helps one understand WHY "I" did what I did and can be helpful in making sure ones "Automatic (corebeliefs)" actions / thoughts etc. MAKE the results we "want".

 

This is in short but as I said I don't want to expand too much on it right now - I'd have to write myself to death.

 

But we certainly make a lot of choices and some choices are choices we didn't take (tricky there).

so to speak.."not choosing is also making a choice"...also as stated before, some things are chosen through passive/automatic - most of them we're mostly unaware of - unless we make certain to BE aware of them.

 

And we CAN make many many choices - however impacted things may be by other factors.

Many times we make choices that are impacted before we made a choice meaning that something ahead of the thought process of choosing between something given already "made" us feel inclined towards something - but still maybe some choices aren't 100% pure or free choices, however it's still a choice however "small" one - this is hard to write down in a clean manner (as this post isn't pre-prepared by me).

Well if we'll eventually get our Niteshdw Con I'll make sure to talk further on this subject and in more detail.

 

 

[Oma]

(...)

We are very close to our ape cousins - 98.4% shared genetic material. There is greater variation in single species of birds than between humans and chimps! (..)

 

By the way, I've just pinched your sig :P