User Tag List

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12

Thread: The Quantum Soul

  1. #11
    Senior Member Array logan235711's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007


    I think that's pretty accurate. We don't have a good grasp of the human brain at all. We don't even have a definition of consciousness for goodness sakes! here let me quote the entry for one of the formost books about the mind from The International Dictionary of Psychology:

    Consciousness: The having of perceptions, thoughts, and feelings; awareness. The term is impossible to define except in terms that are unintelligible without a grasp of what consciousness means. Many fall into the trap of confusing consciousness with self-consciousness – to be conscious is only necessary to be aware of the external world. Consciousness is a fascinating but elusive phenomenon: it is impossible to specify what it is, what it does, or why it evolved. Nothing worth reading has been written about it. (Sutherland 1989)
    lol ok...but anyways, other problems that have been around for centuries are about the very notion of duality. The idea of mind and soul are so ingrained in peoples' conception on the world that including elements outside of that or that disregard one of those elements seems impossible for many to grasp. Within the heart of philosophy, the very sector which this Cartesian duality arose, has been questions and results from taking up this view that not only seem to contradict it, but have left over numerous interpretations to it's very meaning blah blah blah, basically, we are no closer to an answer and Cartiesian duality is admitted by most to be just one view, nothing in stone, nor ever have been, even the day after it was written about.

    Regardless! Quatum souls, or whatever have been around since the 70s in good form. lol I remember when these pop mags wrote about string theory in the early 2000s and I was like, what?! they just found out about this, it's been around for over 25 years for goodness sakes!!! lol, I know for you older folks, it might not seem like awhile, but for people who pick these magazines up and think, 'wow' we are making incredible breakthroughs! or 'look what we just found out!' they are so out of the loop its funny : ( anyways, interesting idea of course, but not much support for it than most the other stuff that comes from those magazines--I usually might just read then for the two page 'tidbit' sections they have xD the best stuff!

  2. #12


    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    Would it not be fair to say that we don't understand the brain and we have no idea what a soul is either. So we're scratting around trying to explain such things within our own pre-existing conceptions of how the world works and applying anything which looks similar. According to quantum theory I'd leave such things as undefined. There exists no proof one way or another and no real reason to test it. Hence my response.
    I would argue scientists do understand a great deal about the brain, given what's been discovered and what has been achieved with that information. We also know what the soul is too: numerous religions have expanded on the idea. The problem is that the two don't really match, though here is a realistic possibility.

    Just because you cannot conceive of a way to test it means there isn't one. Given enough time, would you have invented the transistor? Yet there it is.

    Basically the theory that our soul exist in more than one place, or indeed our minds, is critically flawed in that there is no reason to think such things except for the fact that we can't explain everything about it from our current standpoint. That does mean that the current one is wrong/ incomplete but that does not make any alternative more valid without it's own validation.
    I think you were heading in the right direction here, but I'm not sure where you ended up. For something to be 'valid with its own validation' is almost like expecting two results from zero causes, even in comparison with another theory. Ideas are good; ideas are worth something until you evelate them beyond testability, but that's not the case here (at least not yet). The quantum 'soul' doesn't need to prove itself before we can ask if there is one. This idea is built on something known to exist. Indeed, that doesn't mean it's correct, or 'true', but as it has a grounding in the real world, that means it's "valid"... that it should be testable and that it 'should' be tested.

    Sooner or later it will, regardless of what anyone thinks.

Similar Threads

  1. quantum theory
    By WALMART in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 07-26-2012, 11:32 AM
  2. The Quantum Microphone
    By Mal12345 in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-14-2011, 11:49 AM
  3. Quantum Entanglement
    By Malice in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 02-19-2011, 08:06 PM
  4. Quantum weirdness
    By entropie in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 09-01-2009, 10:57 PM
  5. Quantum of Solace [007]
    By Geoff in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-01-2008, 10:55 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts