• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Information Theory of the Soul

Gambit

Well-Known Member
What is the soul?

"The soul is the form of the body." St. Thomas Aquinas (In DA II.1.234)

"Aquinas (following Aristotle) defined the soul to be "the form of activity of the body." In Aristotelian language, the formal cause of an action is the abstract cause, as opposed to the material and efficient cause. For a computer, the program is the formal cause, while the material cause is the properties of the matter out of which the computer is made, and the efficient cause is the opening and closing of electric circuits. For Aquinas, a human soul needed a body to think and feel, just as a computer program needs a physical computer to run. (source: pg. 127, "The Physics of Immortality: Modern Cosmology, God and the Resurrection of the Dead" by Frank J. Tipler)

"The word "information" comes from the Aristotle-Aquinas' notion of "form": we are "informed" if new forms are added to the receptive intellect. Even semantically, the information theory of the soul is the same as the Aristotle-Aquinas theory." pp. 127-128 "The Physics of Immortality: Modern Cosmology, God and the Resurrection of the Dead" by Frank J. Tipler)

One of the leading theories for the nature of consciousness is the "integrated information theory (IIT)" (which would be compatible with Aristotle's and Aquinas' notion of the soul as the form of activity of the body. There are also a variety of "quantum mind" hypothesis which augments this view.
 
Last edited:

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
What is the soul?

"The soul is the form of the body." St. Thomas Aquinas (In DA II.1.234)





One of the leading theories for the nature of consciousness is the "integrated information theory (IIT)" (which would be compatible with Aristotle's and Aquinas' notion of the soul as the form of activity of the body. There are also a variety of "quantum mind" hypothesis which augments this view.

Information is physical. Are souls physical too? If not, then information theory is unapplicable.

Ciao

- viole
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
It's immaterial. Physicist Frank J. Tipler explains why in his (short) video interview with Lawrence Kuhn (host of PBS's "Closer to Truth").

Well, it is not. And physicist F. Tipler got it all wrong in his book. I wonder whether you read it.

You cannot possibly make space for new information without creating entropy. As Landauer showed. That is why your computer needs fans or cooling elements, and your brain calories. Try to be spiritual without eating for two weeks.

Theoretically, you can use energy/temperature units for the unit of information (a bit).

What coukd be more physical than that?

Ciao

- viole
 

Gambit

Well-Known Member
Well, it is not. And physicist F. Tipler got it all wrong in his book. I wonder whether you read it.

I have read Tipler's book (that's why I am able to cite very specific excerpts from it). But it doesn't appear that you bothered to view the short video I furnished you in my previous post. If you had, then you would have learned that Tipler invokes the laws of thermodynamics (and consequently entropy) in order to explain why information is immaterial.
 

wizanda

One Accepts All Religious Texts
Premium Member
What is the soul?
It is a Spark of Character Energy within the Matrix.

It is a quantum strand, within a tapestry of lower denser strands; that has more Oneness to organize the rest. :)
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
I have read Tipler's book (that's why I am able to make very specific quotes from it). But it doesn't appear that you bothered to view the short video I furnished you in my previous post. If you had, then you would have learned that Tipler invokes the laws of thermodynamics (and consequently entropy) in order to explain why information is immaterial.

So, if you read it then I am sure that you agree that all predictions he made are just flat wrong. No big crunch, ergo no infinite progress to host our simulated souls, and the simulated souls of any possible living being, lol. I rate that as yet another fantasy of a guy that comes to ridicolous conclusions just because he finds dying a suboptimal state of affairs.

And I saw the video. What it missed is that information is strongly related with entropy. They are basically the same thing. As Shannon showed. So, if information is immaterial then entropy is too. Which begs the question: why do we measure entropy in calories per celsius degree if it is immaterial?

What does your knowledge of physics tell you? Or do you delegate your thoughts to someone who showed evidence to be a crackpot?

Ciao

- viole
 
Last edited:

Gambit

Well-Known Member
So, if you read it then I am sure that you agree that all predictions he made are just flat wrong. No big crunch, ergo no infinite progress to host our simulated souls, and the simulated souls of any possible living being, lol. I rate that as yet another fantasy of a guy that comes to absurd conclusions just because he finds dying a suboptimal state of affairs.

None of this is relevant to the definition of the soul I provided in the original post of this thread. I would urge you to stay on topic.

And I saw the video. What it missed is that information is strongly related with entropy. They are basically the same thing.

Wrong! If you had actually watched the video, then you would have learned that Tipler explains the direct relationship between entropy and information. Next time, I would suggest you actually watch the video before you post.
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
None of this is relevant to the definition of the soul I provided in the original post of this thread. I would urge you to stay on topic.



Wrong! If you had actually watched the video, then you would have learned that Tipler explains the direct relationship between entropy and information. Next time, I would suggest you actually watch the video before you post.

Looks like I need to improve my English. Lol. I admit I was a bit fast watching it, while having a party. So, he is making my point. Apparently.

Now, do you think that entropy is not physical? If no, how can Tipler conclude that information is not if they are the same thing?

What are yor thoughts?

Ciao

- viole
 

Gambit

Well-Known Member
I admit I was a bit fast watching it, while having a party. So, he is making my point. Apparently.

Yes, Tipler is saying that the measurement of entropy can be translated into bits of information.

Now, do you think that entropy is not physical? If no, how can Tipler conclude that information is not if they are the same thing?

Tipler makes a distinction between "nonphysical" and "immateriality." He defines the "physical" as "that which is subject to the laws of physics." But he argures that the first law of thermodynamics refers to materiality while the second refers to immateriality or information. (Information is the pattern or arrangement of matter. But it is not matter itself.) Therefore, he is arguing for a type of dualism - the dualism of "matter" and "information." This type of dualism is known in philosophy as "hylomorphism" - the dualism of "form" ("morphe" in Greek) and "matter" ("hyle" in Greek). And it is this type of dualism (not Cartesian dualism) that has been embraced in traditional and classical theology.
 

LegionOnomaMoi

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Well, it is not.
What it is ontologically is a matter of no small amount of debate. Gun to head, if I were forced to refer someone to the best source on the nature of information it would be Aguirre, A., Foster, B., & Merali, Z. (Eds.). (2015). It From Bit or Bit From It?: On Physics and Information. Springer.
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
Yes, Tipler is saying that the measurement of entropy can be translated into bits of information.



Tipler makes a distinction between "nonphysical" and "immateriality." He defines the "physical" as "that which is subject to the laws of physics." But he argures that the first law of thermodynamics refers to materiality while the second refers to immateriality or information. (Information is the pattern or arrangement of matter. But it is not matter itself.) Therefore, he is arguing for a type of dualism - the dualism of "matter" and "information." This type of dualism is known in philosophy as "hylomorphism" - the dualism of "form" ("morphe" in Greek) and "matter" ("hyle" in Greek). And it is this type of dualism (not Cartesian dualism) that has been embraced in traditional and classical theology.

So, we came full round to my original question.

If information theory can be applied to describe souls, do you think that souls are physical, albeit immaterial?

Ciao

- viole
 

allfoak

Alchemist
Souls cannot be material in nature, they are eternal, a spark of the divine.
They can however create an image of themselves (that is how we come into being) which experiences the material.
In this way the Soul grows and expands.
It is the medium between spirit and matter.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
I think human beings are body and soul (matter and form).

Adam did Not become a living soul until God breathed the breath of life into lifeless Adam - Genesis 2:7
Adam did Not have a soul, nor did Adam possess a soul. Adam became a sinning soul that died - Ezekiel 18:4,20. And souls can be destroyed - Acts of the Apostles 3:23
So, All of Adam was a soul. When Adam died All of Adam ' returned ' to the dust of the ground - Genesis 3:19
A person can Not ' return ' to a place he never was before.

Adam was mortal. Adam could only have ' everlasting life ' if he kept God's Law.
So, Adam was never created as immortal, and there was No post-mortem penalty for Adam just a returning back to where Adam started in the dust.
All of Adam went from non-life, to life, and simply returned to non-life.
 

Gambit

Well-Known Member
Adam did Not become a living soul until God breathed the breath of life into lifeless Adam - Genesis 2:7
Adam did Not have a soul, nor did Adam possess a soul. Adam became a sinning soul that died - Ezekiel 18:4,20. And souls can be destroyed - Acts of the Apostles 3:23
So, All of Adam was a soul. When Adam died All of Adam ' returned ' to the dust of the ground - Genesis 3:19
A person can Not ' return ' to a place he never was before.

Adam was mortal. Adam could only have ' everlasting life ' if he kept God's Law.
So, Adam was never created as immortal, and there was No post-mortem penalty for Adam just a returning back to where Adam started in the dust.
All of Adam went from non-life, to life, and simply returned to non-life.

You're making a biblical argument, not a philosophical one.
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
I think human beings are body and soul (matter and form).

Well, everything is. The moon has also a form.

But that was not my question. Do you still claim that we can use information theory (physical stuff, as we have seen) to study the soul?

Ciao

- viole
 

EtuMalku

Abn Iblis ابن إبليس
The word "soul" remains ill-defined and is used to cover a wide range of metaphysical beliefs and concepts concerning both life and a possible after-life.
The failure of science to predict, and still less control, certain human activities such as politics, economics, fashion and love should indicate that Human life has a 'subtle' side to it that is more than what physics' alone are capable of understanding.
 
Top