Body precedes Soul

Many believe that the spiritual is more basic than the physic. More simply, the non-physical is more basic than the physical. Why is this? From what we scientifically know, non-physical things such as emotions are caused by the physical brain. The definition of spirit is "the nonphysical part of a person that is the seat of emotions and character; the soul." Nothing says that means the physical is not more basic. Maybe the soul is simply created by the brain, after all the soul is simply the Self, and "you" are a product of physical interactions.

The Doors of Perception said:

Many believe that the spiritual is more basic than the physic. More simply, the non-physical is more basic than the physical. Why is this? From what we scientifically know, non-physical things such as emotions are caused by the physical brain. The definition of spirit is "the nonphysical part of a person that is the seat of emotions and character; the soul." Nothing says that means the physical is not more basic. Maybe the soul is simply created by the brain, after all the soul is simply the Self, and "you" are a product of physical interactions.

Click to expand...

I think the soul is more than just the seat of emotions and character: those are things that overlap between the spiritual and the physical, being influenced by both. The soul is the connection that we have to the divine energy running through the world, and the spark of the divine energy at the soul's heart is what essentially "powers" us, elevating the chemical and electrical processes of the brain and body from more than just reflex responses and behavioral programming into something greater and more complex and nuanced. And it is through the soul that our minds are able to access the collective unconscious, remember past lives, and to touch the minds and emotions of others.

Science is not the be-all and end-all of truth (scientism). If, however, one chooses to believe that it is, then sure, I suppose there is no grounds for claiming "spiritual" (whatever THAT means) is more "basic" than the physical. But it's a moot point if you believe science is the be-all and end-all of truth, because there is no "spiritual" to begin with. The question of which is more "basic" becomes irrelevant. One of the categories ("spiritual") is invalid.

If, on the other hand, you don't adhere to scientism, the question I ask is also one of relevance. Suppose one of these is more "basic" than the other. And? So what? What does it mean? Is this question important?

I believe that the body is in the soul -- not the other way 'round.

Science isn't the be all end all, but if we can factually explain something why add anything more to it? Even full acceptance of science doesn't mean there is no spiritual truth for me. For example, maybe there is no spiritual / physical duality, so the soul being a product of the brain changes nothing, as all is one.

In my beliefs - the manifest of "spirit" is complex.
The physical is the engine and conduit to the manifest of "self" we create energy maintain awareness and radiate positive or negative poles in our own manufactured world.
In the spiritual is more cause and effect of our world and the world we live in.
It is in the connections of God's world and our own manifestation that I refer to the spiritual world. It implies something more than ourselves and reaches in a subject matter - in the best example - a spiritual "nervous system" of communication and cause and effect.
When and how we reach the awareness of the spiritual is defined by individual perception!

Why not "add" something more to it? I put "add" in quotes because, at least for some, the scientific explanation is not sufficient. It's not enough to explain their personal experiences of reality, so it wouldn't quite be right to say the other explanations are "adding" something that is superfluous.

Quintessence said:

Why not "add" something more to it? I put "add" in quotes because, at least for some, the scientific explanation is not sufficient. It's not enough to explain their personal experiences of reality, so it wouldn't quite be right to say the other explanations are "adding" something that is superfluous.

Click to expand...

What if science can explain it but we just ignore the evidence? Not saying that is the case, don't get me wrong. I have had some intense, non-induced mystical experience but was shown that I can't rule them out as simple brain activity. As far as I know, people have created machines that can induce mystical experiences, as can drugs. That implies something physical.

The Doors of Perception said:

What if science can explain it but we just ignore the evidence? Not saying that is the case, don't get me wrong. I have had some intense, non-induced mystical experience but was shown that I can't rule them out as simple brain activity. As far as I know, people have created machines that can induce mystical experiences, as can drugs. That implies something physical.

Click to expand...

There are many kinds of evidence, but I assume you're talking the empirical sort accepted by scientific standards here. Some folks do ignore the evidence, and that's their prerogative; we all get to construct our own worldview. There are many ways of explaining (mapping) the same aspects of reality (territories). Some maps are better for certain purposes than others. Science can explain facets of mystical experiences, but by and large, I don't find scientific explanations of them very useful outside of detached, academic fascination. Lots of people are totally disinterested in those kinds of explanations; they need something more emotionally resonant and meaningful. Science can be rather esoteric at times. But I digress...

I don't doubt there are some physical going-ons with any kind of human experience. We are, after all, physical creatures. There is a philosophical stream of thought in our culture that teaches us physical things are bad or inferior to spiritual things. Perhaps it is the legacy of these teachings that makes many reluctant to say "yes, there's a physical component to this." It threatens a cornerstone of their worldview.

I think that empirical evidence and reason is above emotion. Emotion doesn't always go with truth, while proof and reason do. Monism would solve this problem, eliminating mind / body duality. But we can't jump to that, where's the fun?!

I think nothing is "above" any other thing. Unless, of course, we are saying that my head is physically situated above my torso.

Quintessence said:

Science is not the be-all and end-all of truth (scientism). If, however, one chooses to believe that it is, then sure, I suppose there is no grounds for claiming "spiritual" (whatever THAT means) is more "basic" than the physical. But it's a moot point if you believe science is the be-all and end-all of truth, because there is no "spiritual" to begin with. The question of which is more "basic" becomes irrelevant. One of the categories ("spiritual") is invalid.

If, on the other hand, you don't adhere to scientism, the question I ask is also one of relevance. Suppose one of these is more "basic" than the other. And? So what? What does it mean? Is this question important?

Click to expand...

How does one go about showing something that is unobservable and unmeasureable is actually there?

For example, the invisible dragon in my garage....

The Doors of Perception said:

Many believe that the spiritual is more basic than the physic. More simply, the non-physical is more basic than the physical. Why is this? From what we scientifically know, non-physical things such as emotions are caused by the physical brain. The definition of spirit is "the nonphysical part of a person that is the seat of emotions and character; the soul." Nothing says that means the physical is not more basic. Maybe the soul is simply created by the brain, after all the soul is simply the Self, and "you" are a product of physical interactions.

Click to expand...

Could you be moving to a discussion of life after death?

This post of yours would be correct, having a continuance after the chemistry fails.

Without continuance there's not much point in having a body....
that your soul fails when your chemistry fails.

Thief said:

Could you be moving to a discussion of life after death?

This post of your would be correct, having a continuance after the chemistry fails.

Without continuance there's not much point in having a body....
that your soul fails when your chemistry fails.

Click to expand...

I see what your trying to get at. Why do you see it as individual spirits when it is just one spirit within all? Afterlife isn't an individual soul, there is no I, it is oneness and a return from where you came.

The Doors of Perception said:

Many believe that the spiritual is more basic than the physic. More simply, the non-physical is more basic than the physical. Why is this? From what we scientifically know, non-physical things such as emotions are caused by the physical brain. The definition of spirit is "the nonphysical part of a person that is the seat of emotions and character; the soul." Nothing says that means the physical is not more basic. Maybe the soul is simply created by the brain, after all the soul is simply the Self, and "you" are a product of physical interactions.

Click to expand...

Much like a star that emits heat.

And a dirt that produces us, I'm sure we produce many nonphysical things.

Mestemia said:

How does one go about showing something that is unobservable and unmeasureable is actually there?

For example, the invisible dragon in my garage....

Click to expand...

There's no need to show something "unobservable and unmeasurable" is "actually there" in certain senses of what existence can mean. In the context of the otherworlds, the dragon is very much observable, measurable, and can be interacted with or directly experienced by you. Most mundanes will dismiss these experiences as "mere imagination" but it still stands you're having an experience with it, thus it has a realness to you in some sense. The dragon obviously doesn't physically exist in your physical garage in a way that could be physically measured by the empirical sciences. And, if you're trying to measure it in that way, you would be completely missing the point. It exists in an otherworldly sense and that is more than enough; idea and imagination has tremendous power. Rather underestimated in today's society by and large.

idav said:

I see what your trying to get at. Why do you see it as individual spirits when it is just one spirit within all? Afterlife isn't an individual soul, there is no I, it is oneness and a return from where you came.

Click to expand...

When an event reoccurs billions of times....
you'd think the observer would catch on.

We humans have five senses.....delivered in separate casings.
We ARE here to learn all we that we can.
Our separate and linear existence insures an individual on each occasion.

Exacting copies would be nothing more than reflections and echoes.
Kinda like talking to yourself at every turn.

On the spiritual level.....you only get echoes of your own voice.
Unless that 'other person' had a unique perspective.

You were made to be unique.
THAT is what God will find interesting.

Thief said:

When an event reoccurs billions of times....
you'd think the observer would catch on.

We humans have five senses.....delivered in separate casings.
We ARE here to learn all we that we can.
Our separate and linear existence insures an individual on each occasion.

Exacting copies would be nothing more than reflections and echoes.
Kinda like talking to yourself at every turn.

On the spiritual level.....you only get echoes of your own voice.
Unless that 'other person' had a unique perspective.

You were made to be unique.
THAT is what God will find interesting.

Click to expand...

The Self is hidden in all beings, but is manifest only to those who have the intuitive abilities to recognize it. –The Upanishads

When one sees the separate existence of beings inherent in the One, be becomes God. –The Bagavad Gita

Thief said:

When an event reoccurs billions of times....
you'd think the observer would catch on.

Click to expand...

We usually do catch on. I do hope you aren't suggesting a soul moving to the afterlife has reoccured billions of times. In fact, nobody has every seen it one time. What we have seen is the brain shutting down, consciousness / awareness disappearing and the body rotting.