Six Questions about the Soul

[gnostic]

1. What is a soul?

2. Who (and/or what) has a soul?

3. Why would a soul want a body?

4. What does a soul actually do?

5. If the soul is "immaterial", how does it communicate with the material brain?

6. If you had no soul, how would you be different?

In one interesting conversation I had with one of Jewish members here, have a completely different view that of Christian and Islamic teachings as to what soul is.

I don’t know if all Jews agree with this view or not.

This was years ago, in another thread. So I may not remember all the details he had provided.

According to him (I don’t remember who), he said the soul wasn’t a spirit, like the way Christian and Muslim like to think, where after death, the soul or spirit would be judged on their deeds in this life, and then sent accordingly to heaven/paradise or to hell for punishment. So to these two religions, the soul can be redeemed or corrupted by their deeds in this life.

According to him, soul is not a spirit, but “spark of life”, like “breath” that give life to the physical body, and when a person die, the soul returned to god, uncorrupted and untarnished by any deed or sin.

To him, the soul don’t have any memory of the person of this life, have no personality whatsoever, cannot do good or bad, because the soul isn’t a person’s spirit.

I think people, especially non-Jewish people should remember that Judaism don’t teach the same things as Christianity and Islam or their other offshoots about the afterlife. There are no heaven or hell for the departed, just possibly the netherworld if any.

So at least one Jew I know (though I don’t remember his name) view the soul very differently to Christians and Muslims, but I don’t know if they all (Jews) agree with his view on the soul.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The body seems to provide the physical resistance/limitation; the measuring stick. It isn't clear that the soul could have this experience any other way.



It seems to be the energy that turns on physical devices, but I think it also might be a carrier of knowledge. As to how it might do that without always having a physical place to store acquired knowledge, I am really not sure. Maybe we aren't supposed to know. Then again, maybe we are supposed to learn about what the soul is, while we are here. In any case, I think it is useful to try to understand the soul, because it seems to teach us that there are forces that are transcendent, and sometimes we have stubborn ideas about what we are

How can you study a "soul" when it can't even be shown to be real on the grounds of it being completely undetectable, unmeasurable, unquantifiable,... in other words: when it has no detectable manifestation whatsoever?

Worse even: how do you even establish that a "soul" exists when it, due to the undetectability, is indistinguishable from things that don't exist?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

2. Who (and/or what) has a soul?
All humans have a soul.

3. Why would a soul want a body?
A soul does not want a body, a soul associates with the body around the time of conception and animates the body, giving it life.

What gives chimps, gorillas, bonobos, cats, dogs, cows, spiders, sunflowers,.... "life" if only humans have a soul?

4. What does a soul actually do?
The soul directs the body and brain and mind. The soul works through the brain and while we are alive on earth in a physical body, but when we die and no longer have a physical body the soul continues to live. It lives forever, and that is why it is called an immortal soul.

How do you know this? How can we verify that?

And what were souls doing before the human associated with it was born?

The soul is the sum total of the personality so it is the person himself; the physical body is pure matter with no real identity.

Then why do people's personality sometimes change when under the influence of certain chemicals or as a result of brain trauma?

5. If the soul is "immaterial", how does it communicate with the material brain?
By some process unbeknownst to us.

Then how do you know it actually is the case?

6. If you had no soul, how would you be different?
If you had no soul your body would be dead, since the soul is necessary for the body to live.

Why are chimps, bonobos, gorillas, oerang oetangs, spiders, lions, tigers, elephants,.... not dead then?

 

[amorphous_constellation]

How can you study a "soul" when it can't even be shown to be real on the grounds of it being completely undetectable, unmeasurable, unquantifiable,... in other words: when it has no detectable manifestation whatsoever?

Worse even: how do you even establish that a "soul" exists when it, due to the undetectability, is indistinguishable from things that don't exist?

Ok first of all, a person can put what they think a soul is into words, like I probably did earlier in this thread, and like I have elsewhere. So somewhere in that, there is a map forms that begins to describe the soul; that begins to put together the words and ideas that make up what a soul could be. So now, you form the soul as a 'concept.' And it can be a powerful concept that form of it, that can be worth contemplation, and perhaps eventually it can be something that one believes is approximately true, if it's described well enough, and thought about enough

You might think this is stupid, but I really think that the Tarot describes the soul. I chose to study the Marseilles Tarot, and it's one of the oldest ones, apparently. I think it describes the journey of the soul, and can start to tell you what the soul is. The four minor suits describe the qualities of the soul, and the major suits describe the characters that a soul passes through. The more I look at it, the more I think I might be on the trail of some more complete picture

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Ok first of all, a person can put what they think a soul is into words, like I probably did earlier in this thread, and like I have elsewhere

I can also put into words what I think a gooblydockbloebloe is. Doesn't mean it's actually real.
The author of star wars also put into words what he thinks Jedi are and what The Force is. Neither are real either.

So that doesn't seem to amount to anything useful.

So somewhere in that, there is a map forms that begins to describe the soul; that begins to put together the words and ideas that make up what a soul could be.

It seems to me that the only thing that is somewhere in that, is a collection of people's imagination, with no bearing on reality at all.

So now, you form the soul as a 'concept.' And it can be a powerful concept that form of it, that can be worth contemplation, and perhaps eventually it can be something that one believes is approximately true, if it's described well enough, and thought about enough

But the source of those descriptions is just people's imagination...
The point exactly.

You might think this is stupid, but I really think that the Tarot describes the soul. I chose to study the Marseilles Tarot, and it's one of the oldest ones, apparently. I think it describes the journey of the soul, and can start to tell you what the soul is. The four minor suits describe the qualities of the soul, and the major suits describe the characters that a soul passes through. The more I look at it, the more I think I might be on the trail of some more complete picture

Why?

When you are presented with a story, the only way to check its accuracy is to see how it holds up against observable reality.

With no means whatsoever to "gauge" the "soul", whatever it is...
With no detectable, measurable, quantifiable,... manifestation of this thing whatsoever...
How could you possibly ever verify such stories in reality? And thereby distinguish it from non-existent things that you can dream up just as well?


PS: for the record... I'm not trolling, nor am I trying to be argumentative just for the sake of it. I'm genuinely trying to understand here and am asking honest questions. From where I sit, all I see is people offering up their own imagination. From where I sit, I only see people confusing their own imagination with outside reality.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

It seems to me that the only thing that is somewhere in that, is a collection of people's imagination, with no bearing on reality at all.

Well what is imagination. You might think it is pretty worthless, but really, I think there is something important in there. Like if you were to take someone from 50, 40,000 years ago for a 5 minute tour of new york, he'd probably be astounded. Now instead of that, you travel back in time and simply describe it to the man. In the latter case, he would show his incredulity. He would point to your imagination. But there is something in the imagination, that could build all that in reality

 

[Trailblazer]

What gives chimps, gorillas, bonobos, cats, dogs, cows, spiders, sunflowers,.... "life" if only humans have a soul?

All animals lave an animal spirit which animates their bodies but only humans have a rational soul that is capable of abstract thought, and as far as human ability permits discovers the realities of things, becomes cognizant of their peculiarities and effects, and can understand the qualities and properties of beings.

How do you know this? How can we verify that?

I know this from the Baha'i Writings. No, it cannot be verified, not until we die and experience it.

And what were souls doing before the human associated with it was born?

The soul comes into existence at the time of conception so it did not exist before we were born.

Then why do people's personality sometimes change when under the influence of certain chemicals or as a result of brain trauma?

That does not change their personality, it only alters the expression of their personality temporarily, while they are living in a physical body and thus have a brain. After they die, their personality will no longer be altered in such a way because they won't have a physical body and brain anymore.

Then how do you know it actually is the case?

I do not need to know the process in order to know it is actually the case. The soul is connected to the mind but exactly how the mind works is still unknown to science.

Why are chimps, bonobos, gorillas, oerang oetangs, spiders, lions, tigers, elephants,.... not dead then?

If chimps, bonobos, gorillas, oerang oetangs, spiders, lions, tigers, elephants had no animal spirit to animate their body they would be dead.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Well what is imagination.

Things that only exist in your head.

You might think it is pretty worthless, but really, I think there is something important in there. Like if you were to take someone from 50, 40,000 years ago for a 5 minute tour of new york, he'd probably be astounded. Now instead of that, you travel back in time and simply describe it to the man. In the latter case, he would show his incredulity. He would point to your imagination.

And he would be correct and rational to do so. Because 50.000 years ago, New York only exists in your mind and not in the outside world.

But there is something in the imagination, that could build all that in reality

False analogy.
Now you are talking about something a human dreams up and then builds it to make it real.
While the soul is supposed to be something that objectively exists and thus upon which humans have no influence regarding its existence (or non-existence).

Show me the actual difference in the real world between the soul and gooblydockbloebloe.
You can't. Because the concepts of both only seem to exist between people's ears.

As the saying goes: "The undetectable and the non-existent, look very much alike"

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

All animals lave an animal spirit which animates their bodies but only humans have a rational soul that is capable of abstract thought, and as far as human ability permits discovers the realities of things, becomes cognizant of their peculiarities and effects, and can understand the qualities and properties of beings.

All great apes are capable of abstract thought.
This is a prerequisite for tool making with intent, purpose and planning for later use.
Which is exactly what great apes do. Like chimps who manipulate sticks into termite catching tools in one place, to use them later on in another place.

This is pure planning, intent and purpose. Which is abstract thought.

I know this from the Baha'i Writings. No, it cannot be verified, not until we die and experience it.

You don't know it, if you can't show it.
So instead, you just believe it.

That does not change their personality

Actually, it does.

, it only alters the expression of their personality temporarily,

No. It's permanent.

while they are living in a physical body and thus have a brain. After they die, their personality will no longer be altered in such a way because they won't have a physical body and brain anymore.

I do not need to know the process in order to know it is actually the case. The soul is connected to the mind but exactly how the mind works is still unknown to science.

You can't know things that you can't verify.
Again, you are using "know" while you should be using "believe".

If chimps, bonobos, gorillas, oerang oetangs, spiders, lions, tigers, elephants had no animal spirit to animate their body they would be dead.

I'm getting nothing but bare assertions here.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Things that only exist in your head.

And he would be correct and rational to do so. Because 50.000 years ago, New York only exists in your mind and not in the outside world.

As well, 50,000 years ago, you would have to find a man with a seriously stretched imagination to even have anything remotely like new york, in his head, in his imagination. And yet, in the same reality, on the same planet, as a product of the same species, new york was born.

Think about what the imagination is. Does it have a purpose? Why should man have it. Can it create things, and what created it in man, to set in motion in man. One either thinks it is somewhat useless, or, they generally think that it is a powerful and mysterious engine, which molds new creation. In part of the way I might define the soul, I think imagination may play a role. Perhaps it is the seat of the soul. Or perhaps the primary tool of the soul, besides the body.

While the soul is supposed to be something that objectively exists and thus upon which humans have no influence regarding its existence (or non-existence).

That sentence actually carries a few heavy claims. Perhaps you're off to a good start. Your definition of the soul seems sharper in resolution than the nonsense word example. As for 'having no influence' on it, you are taking a mighty step forward there, that I don't recall claiming to have taken. How did you arrive at that conclusion?

As the saying goes: "The undetectable and the non-existent, look very much alike"

There is plenty of stuff that's kind of hidden behind the scenes. Did nature intend for man to a have view of atoms? Or to get a picture of mars? Off he goes anyway, 'detecting' all sorts of things, that are totally extracurricular to the basic biological program. Unless you claim that nature intended for an organism to have a view of atoms, for some reason.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Why?

When you are presented with a story, the only way to check its accuracy is to see how it holds up against observable reality.

That's exactly what I do with the tarot, though you probably don't care. A spread of cards tells a story, the symbols of the images interlock and create a narrative synergy

 

[Hawkins]

1. What is a soul?

2. Who (and/or what) has a soul?

3. Why would a soul want a body?

4. What does a soul actually do?

5. If the soul is "immaterial", how does it communicate with the material brain?

6. If you had no soul, how would you be different?

An entity considered a human will have a soul. Soul serves the purpose of continued witnessing because humans are designed to live a multiple-staged life. When a human died a physical death and without a soul, who is he can no longer be identified except God. However, "God alone knows" is not a good testimony in court. When an individual stands trial in court, if "only God knows" remains the evidence then it can valid but not persuasive to other entities including angels and humans. It's lawfully valid however no one feels good that "you are sentenced to death simply because God knows so". That's why a soul is needed as a human's permanent ID such that who he is is trackable at least by other entities such as the angels and chosen saints.

A body on the other hand is to live a designed physical world and serves as an image for humans to recognize each other. We can't recognize each other without a body, only God and angels and some chosen saints with granted ability can tell who we are in the soul form without a body. That's why every single human needs to be resurrected with a body in order to stand trial in the heavenly court, such that eyewitnesses can be called by both the accusing and defending sides.

The soul is thus supposed to be made of materials residing in an adjacent plane or space. That's why natural after we die our physical death, we descend to Hades/Sheol. It in a form takes over once departed from the body. It's more or less like a failover backup machine. No one knows whether it has other functionalities to have an influence on our brain and so on.

A human spirit is something else. It serves the purpose of storing something stage-dependent, as I said above, humans are designed to live a multiple-stage life. For example, in this life you have different kinds of affections, to your parents and children and so on. However in Heaven, as Jesus put it, we have only brothers and sisters as defined by the new spirit granted to our new body.

If you have no soul then you may not be effectively judged, as you may argue that "this body is just a clone, not the same body previously lived on earth and sinned."

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

As well, 50,000 years ago, you would have to find a man with a seriously stretched imagination to even have anything remotely like new york, in his head, in his imagination. And yet, in the same reality, on the same planet, as a product of the same species, new york was born.

What's your point?
When you imagine it without it existing, then it is just your imagination.

What are you objecting to?

Think about what the imagination is. Does it have a purpose? Why should man have it. Can it create things, and what created it in man, to set in motion in man. One either thinks it is somewhat useless, or, they generally think that it is a powerful and mysterious engine, which molds new creation. In part of the way I might define the soul, I think imagination may play a role. Perhaps it is the seat of the soul. Or perhaps the primary tool of the soul, besides the body.

Unless your point is that you will one day create souls while they don't exist today, I have no idea what your point is with this New York analogy.

That sentence actually carries a few heavy claims.

These claims come from soul believers, not from me.
I tend not to make claims about unfalsifiable things because I consider that to be a waste of energy and brainpower.

Perhaps you're off to a good start. Your definition of the soul seems sharper in resolution than the nonsense word example.

Not my definition.

As for 'having no influence' on it, you are taking a mighty step forward there, that I don't recall claiming to have taken. How did you arrive at that conclusion?

Influence over its existence.
Humans have influence over the existence of a hammer or town, because it's humans that create those things.

A human can choose to create a hammer or choose not to create a hammer.
If souls are real, humans have no say or role in bringing those into existence.

I can't believe I have to explain this, while I am the one that doesn't even believe souls are real.

There is plenty of stuff that's kind of hidden behind the scenes. Did nature intend for man to a have view of atoms? Or to get a picture of mars? Off he goes anyway, 'detecting' all sorts of things, that are totally extracurricular to the basic biological program. Unless you claim that nature intended for an organism to have a view of atoms, for some reason.

Atoms and planets are detectable.
You don't seem to understand what is meant by that word.

Atoms have detectable manifestation.
They also had detectable manifestation before we had the tools to detect them.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

That's exactly what I do with the tarot, though you probably don't care.

Why would you think I don't care?

What methodology is employed and what is the control mechanism?

 

[Trailblazer]

Things that only exist in your head.

These things might only exist in your head or they might exist in your head and in reality.
Iows, people can imagine things that are actually true.

 

[Trailblazer]

When you imagine it without it existing, then it is just your imagination.

Yes, that's true, but one can imagine something that actually exists, as I just said.

 

[Trailblazer]

All great apes are capable of abstract thought.
This is a prerequisite for tool making with intent, purpose and planning for later use.
Which is exactly what great apes do. Like chimps who manipulate sticks into termite catching tools in one place, to use them later on in another place.

This is pure planning, intent and purpose. Which is abstract thought.

I was waiting for this.
I know that some animals have the capacity for abstract thought, just not the same level of capacity as humans.

You don't know it, if you can't show it.
So instead, you just believe it.

True, but so what? That does not mean my belief is not true.

Actually, it does.

No. It's permanent.

Only according to science but there are more avenues to truth than that.
You do not know that the change in personality is permanent, you only know what you can see in this world.

You can't know things that you can't verify.
Again, you are using "know" while you should be using "believe".

Know, believe, it's just semantics.
I do not need to know the process in order to believe it is actually the case. I believe the soul is connected to the mind but exactly how the mind works is still unknown to science.

I'm getting nothing but bare assertions here.

How do you think I could prove that animals have a spirit that animates their bodies?
Nobody can see a spirit, measure it or analyze it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

These things might only exist in your head or they might exist in your head and in reality.

And the way to establish if that's the case, is true objective evidence.

Iows, people can imagine things that are actually true.

Yes. And it takes objective evidence to establish it to be so.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Yes, that's true, but one can imagine something that actually exists, as I just said.

I never said otherwise.

Anything you dream up could be true. Like Gooblydockbloebloe. That could exist.
But this would have to be established with something other then just the mere fact that you dreamed it up.
Until you do so, it is JUST imagination.

Or do you usually just assume that everything you imagine to be true is actually true?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I was waiting for this.
I know that some animals have the capacity for abstract thought, just not the same level of capacity as humans.

So, what is the threshold?
By what objective criteria do you measure this?
From which point on does it supposedly require a "soul"?
And provide a proper explanation that isn't just arbitrary. Because I predict that here, you will attempt at drawing the bullseye around the arrow.

True, but so what?

See the previous post. For beliefs / imagination to be true, it has to be established by other means then just assuming them to be true simply by the fact that you believe it / imagine it.

It also means that your choice of words was dishonest. You said "know", while you actually should have said "believe". This means that you misrepresented it.

That does not mean my belief is not true.

As said in the previous post: anything you can believe or imagine could be true.
The way to establish if it is, requires evidence.

Only according to science

Aka, according to evidence based methodology.

but there are more avenues to truth than that.

Such as?
And perhaps more importantly, are they evidence based or gullibility based? Aka, faith based?

You do not know that the change in personality is permanent, you only know what you can see in this world.

There is no evidence of any other "world".
Again we come to this point where all you currently have are mere beliefs and imagination.
For those to become knowledge / facts, you require more then just the mere beliefs and imagination.

So, as far as the actual evidence, established facts and actual knowledge goes: yes, these things are permanent.

Know, believe, it's just semantics.

It's not. Knowledge is a subset of belief.
To use them as if they are synonyms, is intellectually dishonest.
They do not mean the same thing.

I do not need to know the process in order to believe it is actually the case.

Indeed.
But you do in order to KNOW it is actually the case.

You can believe anything.

I believe the soul is connected to the mind but exactly how the mind works is still unknown to science.

Right. All you have are mere beliefs. And now, you are even seemingly trying to "defend" this belief with an argument from ignorance.

The "soul of the gaps", if you will.

How do you think I could prove that animals have a spirit that animates their bodies?

It's your claim. Figure it out yourself. Don't ask me to do your homework.

As for how to go about it... The same way it works for anything else.

1. come up with a falsifiable model
2. determine the testable predictions / expectations that naturally flow from said model
3. figure out how to test those predictions / expectations against reality in such a way that they can be independently verified.

Nobody can see a spirit, measure it or analyze it.

Sounds like these spirits then fall in the same category then as undetectable extra-dimensional pink unicorns and gooblydockbloebloe.

You know what else can't be seen, measured or analysed?

Things that don't exist.