The Brain is Not Dependent on Soul Activity

[Nakosis]

I believe consciousness (the brain) is not dependent on soul activity

I believe your brain is the real you. Your body is the vehicle that enables your brain to do its work in this world. Just as a driver controls a car through its control mechanisms while sitting in the driver's seat, the brain uses the central nervous system to control the body.

the brain controls the nervous system and, through it, various organs in the body.

The brain is the physical or material part of a human being or animal, regarded as mortal. Therefore consciousness is only temporary.

 

[dybmh]

I agree that the brain is not dependant on the soul. A person like that is the definition of a socio/psychopath.

Your beliefs about the 'real-me' are rejected. Lack of evidence at best conjecture.

 

[Alien826]

I agree that the brain is not dependant on the soul. A person like that is the definition of a socio/psychopath.

Your beliefs about the 'real-me' are rejected. Lack of evidence at best conjecture.

I'm wondering if you believe that there is something called a soul? If you do, why do you think it exists, if you don't aren't you kinda stuck with the brain hypothesis?

Personally the jury is out on the soul idea and unless something new comes along it's likely to remain out. The brain idea actually makes sense. "A blow to my head confuses me, a blow to my foot does not".

 

[dybmh]

I'm wondering if you believe that there is something called a soul? If you do, why do you think it exists, if you don't aren't you kinda stuck with the brain hypothesis?

Yes, I believe it exists. Why? Because body/soul as a unit is a model for understanding how the world works. And I have been using this model for 20+ years, and it works well for predicting outcomes and avoiding trouble.

It's really just a black-box. I can't tell you what's in the black box or how it works. But I see the inputs, I see the outputs, and from that patterns are produced.

Personally the jury is out on the soul idea and unless something new comes along it's likely to remain out. The brain idea actually makes sense. "A blow to my head confuses me, a blow to my foot does not".

It's all about defintion of terms. Generally speaking, the non-religious materialist, cannot deny what I describe as a soul, they just don't like the way it feels to have a religious moniker attached to them, and everything around them.

 

[George-ananda]

I believe consciousness (the brain) is not dependent on soul activity

I'm unclear. Are you saying there is no soul or just that the brain is not dependent on it?

I don't agree with your physicalist theory for at least a couple reasons. One, how does matter produce consciousness (The Hard Problem of Consciousness). Two, I believe many paranormal events do occur that would not be possible in a physicalist model.

My theory is that in addition to a physical body we have interpenetrating astral/mental/soul bodies at vibratory rates and in dimensions not directly detectable by the physical senses and instruments. Consciousness is a fundamental constituent of reality (not created by the brain) and incarnates these physical/astral/mental bodies to give them life.

 

[Quintessence]

What about the rest of the world? The not-you?

How does the "you" have any meaning at all without the existence and presence of the "not-you?"

 

[Nakosis]

I agree that the brain is not dependant on the soul. A person like that is the definition of a socio/psychopath.

I see, so you believe socio/psychopath have no soul?
How would you go about getting them a soul to fix their condition?

Your beliefs about the 'real-me' are rejected. Lack of evidence at best conjecture.

Your beliefs, my beliefs, anyone's belief, why would you expect evidence?
I'm just declaring my beliefs like other believers here.

 

[Nakosis]

What about the rest of the world? The not-you?

How does the "you" have any meaning at all without the existence and presence of the "not-you?"

I find the "not-me" believe any number of random beliefs.
Seems they all find meaning in their beliefs, same as me.

 

[Nakosis]

What about the rest of the world? The not-you?

How does the "you" have any meaning at all without the existence and presence of the "not-you?"

I find the "not-me" believe any number of random things.
Seems they all find meaning in their beliefs, same as me.

 

[Nakosis]

I'm unclear. Are you saying there is no soul or just that the brain is not dependent on it?

I'm not saying whether souls exist of not.
Just saying what my belief is like many others do.

I don't agree with your physicalist theory for at least a couple reasons. One, how does matter produce consciousness (The Hard Problem of Consciousness). Two, I believe many paranormal events do occur that would not be possible in a physicalist model.

My theory is that in addition to a physical body we have interpenetrating astral/mental/soul bodies at vibratory rates and in dimensions not directly detectable by the physical senses and instruments. Consciousness is a fundamental constituent of reality (not created by the brain) and incarnates these physical/astral/mental bodies to give them life.

Thank you for sharing your belief too.

 

[Nakosis]

I'm wondering if you believe that there is something called a soul? If you do, why do you think it exists, if you don't aren't you kinda stuck with the brain hypothesis?

Personally the jury is out on the soul idea and unless something new comes along it's likely to remain out. The brain idea actually makes sense. "A blow to my head confuses me, a blow to my foot does not".

Funny thing to me, when I say I believe we don't need a soul I get called out on a lack of evidence.

I suppose it's only atheists required to have evidence.

 

[dybmh]

I see, so you believe socio/psychopath have no soul?
How would you go about getting them a soul to fix their condition?

That's not what I said.

Your beliefs, my beliefs, anyone's belief, why would you expect evidence?

My expectation is different on a case by case basis. For you, yes, I expect some evidence for holding beliefs about others.

I'm just declaring my beliefs like other believers here.

And I'm just rejecting it like all the other non-believers here.

 

[danieldemol]

I believe consciousness (the brain) is not dependent on soul activity

I believe your brain is the real you. Your body is the vehicle that enables your brain to do its work in this world. Just as a driver controls a car through its control mechanisms while sitting in the driver's seat, the brain uses the central nervous system to control the body.

the brain controls the nervous system and, through it, various organs in the body.

The brain is the physical or material part of a human being or animal, regarded as mortal. Therefore consciousness is only temporary.

I'm not sure, but I see consciousness as more of an emergent property of underlying brain activity rather than being the brain itself.

Although unless there is some kind of redundant source of spirit consciousness i agree that the logical implication of consciousness being an emergent property of the brain is that it (consciousness) would cease at death.

 

[Nakosis]

I'm not sure, but I see consciousness as more of an emergent property of underlying brain activity rather than being the brain itself.

Although unless there is some kind of redundant source of spirit consciousness i agree that the logical implication of consciousness being an emergent property of the brain is that it (consciousness) would cease at death.

Sure, like a tornado. You can't explain the behavior of a tornado by examining the individual components of a tornado. Wind, debris etc... A tornado only "emerges" when these individual components interact in a specific way.

I view the brain as inclusive of these interactions though I suppose you might classify this interaction as a mind.

 

[Nakosis]

That's not what I said.

Ok, you defined this behavior as a brain without any connections to a soul.

My expectation is different on a case by case basis. For you, yes, I expect some evidence for holding beliefs about others.

Yes, expectations. After many years of discussing people's individual beliefs I've learned it is better not to have any.

And I'm just rejecting it like all the other non-believers here.

Sure, with the myriad of beliefs which a person runs into, they are far more likely to find themselves rejecting a majority of them. A common experience we can share.

 

[Nakosis]

Yes, I believe it exists. Why? Because body/soul as a unit is a model for understanding how the world works. And I have been using this model for 20+ years, and it works well for predicting outcomes and avoiding trouble.

It's really just a black-box. I can't tell you what's in the black box or how it works. But I see the inputs, I see the outputs, and from that patterns are produced.



It's all about defintion of terms. Generally speaking, the non-religious materialist, cannot deny what I describe as a soul, they just don't like the way it feels to have a religious moniker attached to them, and everything around them.

That is exactly right. The only thing I did was replace the word soul with brain.
So then you don't like the feel of having a non-religious moniker attached to you and everything around you.

Myself, I don't care really. I'm fine with interchanging the words brain and soul.

 

[dybmh]

Ok, you defined this behavior as a brain without any connections to a soul.

I used the word 'like' indicating it was not an equivalence and not a defintion.

 

[Quintessence]

I find the "not-me" believe any number of random beliefs.
Seems they all find meaning in their beliefs, same as me.

No, no, no... I don't mean other humans. I mean the environment and the external world you exist in just in general. What about all that?

The opening post focuses a great deal on an ego-centered or self-centered perspective on this matter. It focuses on the "I" and the "me" without taking much account of the environment within which the "I" dwells. How can "the brain" be the real you, when there is no "you" without the rest of the world providing a context and a landscape within which to dwell? How is "the body" the vehicle that enables "the brain" when "the body" can't move or do anything without a landscape within which to dwell? Why so much focus on "the brain" and "the body" while ignoring the rest of the world, the not-you?

This is a bit rhetorical, I suppose - Western philosophy is notorious for ignoring environmental considerations to fixate on the ego with its musings. As someone whose religion and philosophy is not anthropocentric, I just find it odd sometimes - all that fixation on "I" and "ego" as if those concepts are somehow meaningful without thou. In some religious traditions, expression of "soul" or "spirit" relates to this notion that there is no "I" without "thou." That we emerge from the essence/soul/nature of our environment and that it is the driver of things.

 

[Alien826]

Funny thing to me, when I say I believe we don't need a soul I get called out on a lack of evidence.

I suppose it's only atheists required to have evidence.

I was responding to @dybmh.

 

[Alien826]

It's all about defintion of terms. Generally speaking, the non-religious materialist, cannot deny what I describe as a soul, they just don't like the way it feels to have a religious moniker attached to them, and everything around them.

Put like that, there's nothing to disagree with, as you are using the word "soul" to be synonymous with "mind", which I use to mean the activity of the brain. That's not how "soul" is generally defined though and if you use it that way you are bound to cause confusion.