• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

The growing the soul theory

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
Has anyone heard of this? I dont know if its a theory derived from the so called "new physics" or world religions and philosophy but it is the idea that not everyone actual has an everlasting soul, not because they have "lost" it as was theorised in some Greek or Roman myths and legends (I know the one about the mirror and breaking it meaning that seven years would be required for the soul to "grow back" but there are others) or "sold" it like in some Christendom morality play or devil myths but because it had not developed in the first place.

In this theory the soul is the end product of the individual's life, in the way that the a baby or infant child has not the intellect or emotional competence of a full developed adult, I can think of a lot of ethical implications if it were the case or if human soul was rationalised in this way.

I also think that this idea has its corollary in atheist or humanistic thinking about the task of life or existence is for man to "give birth to himself", ie develop himself or herself.
 
W

WALMART

Guest
I'd always likened myself to the ball in Beautiful Katamari - a large, gravitatious orb careening through the universe, absorbing the souls of everything I come across.
 

Nicodemus

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
9,756
4c5e4ec3a0c00_blog.jpg
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
I'd always likened myself to the ball in Beautiful Katamari - a large, gravitatious orb careening through the universe, absorbing the souls of everything I come across.

Is that the video game in which the big ball creature rolls around collecting things from its environment and growing bigger and bigger? I think I saw some clips of it once, its a playstation game isnt it?
 
W

WALMART

Guest
Is that the video game in which the big ball creature rolls around collecting things from its environment and growing bigger and bigger? I think I saw some clips of it once, its a playstation game isnt it?


Yar, to both questions. The more you've collected, the more you can collect.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,192
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Has anyone heard of this? I dont know if its a theory derived from the so called "new physics" or world religions and philosophy but it is the idea that not everyone actual has an everlasting soul, not because they have "lost" it as was theorised in some Greek or Roman myths and legends (I know the one about the mirror and breaking it meaning that seven years would be required for the soul to "grow back" but there are others) or "sold" it like in some Christendom morality play or devil myths but because it had not developed in the first place.

In this theory the soul is the end product of the individual's life, in the way that the a baby or infant child has not the intellect or emotional competence of a full developed adult, I can think of a lot of ethical implications if it were the case or if human soul was rationalised in this way.

I also think that this idea has its corollary in atheist or humanistic thinking about the task of life or existence is for man to "give birth to himself", ie develop himself or herself.

I first really ran across this in a discussion about abortion, interestingly... discussing whether souls are made and remain static at conception or whether souls are born and developed over time. Obviously it has ramifications in terms of value... for example, is abortion okay when the life of the mother is threatened.

Considering we can't measure or detech "souls" (they're a philosophical construct), it's a competing idea with the static soul theory, and has a bit of precedence in that everything in this world that is alive seems to go through a growing process. I guess it's up to whether people have a more utilitarian approach, where value resides in what competence and material has been collected over time, or whether there is something intrinsic and equivalent in terms of value regardless of any other factor.

I'd always likened myself to the ball in Beautiful Katamari - a large, gravitatious orb careening through the universe, absorbing the souls of everything I come across.

Wait, don't you mean Heavy Metal?
 

Tiltyred

New member
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
4,322
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
468
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Some theories say that the soul does not incarnate until a certain period in gestation. That feels correct to me, just intuitively. Which is why I don't have a problem with first trimester abortions. I've never verbalized this before, but I also feel that if there is a God, and he wants a soul to incarnate, it will, so if there's an abortion, there will be a pregnancy elsewhere, or a pregnancy later, for that soul to incarnate in. In other words, that there are no mistakes. It's not a mistake to carry full term, and it's not a mistake to terminate a pregnancy. What's supposed to happen will happen, either way.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,192
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Some theories say that the soul does not incarnate until a certain period in gestation. That feels correct to me, just intuitively. Which is why I don't have a problem with first trimester abortions. I've never verbalized this before, but I also feel that if there is a God, and he wants a soul to incarnate, it will, so if there's an abortion, there will be a pregnancy elsewhere, or a pregnancy later, for that soul to incarnate in. In other words, that there are no mistakes. It's not a mistake to carry full term, and it's not a mistake to terminate a pregnancy. What's supposed to happen will happen, either way.


It does seem kind of crazy-inconsistent to think that a soul that lasts forever after human death is somehow thwarted or ruined if death occurs before birth.

Especially considering the rate of natural miscarriage.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
I first really ran across this in a discussion about abortion, interestingly... discussing whether souls are made and remain static at conception or whether souls are born and developed over time. Obviously it has ramifications in terms of value... for example, is abortion okay when the life of the mother is threatened.

Considering we can't measure or detech "souls" (they're a philosophical construct), it's a competing idea with the static soul theory, and has a bit of precedence in that everything in this world that is alive seems to go through a growing process. I guess it's up to whether people have a more utilitarian approach, where value resides in what competence and material has been collected over time, or whether there is something intrinsic and equivalent in terms of value regardless of any other factor.

That was one of the big ethical questions I'd thought of funny enough, I also have read that it featured in justifying infanticide in the ancient world, although I dont know if that was just Sparta.

The thing is though that it was held that people could be fully grown die and simply face oblivion because they had failed to grow a soul for themselves while they were alive, it links with the "if you dont find paradise in this life you will not in any other" idea, which is all very interesting and intriguing to me but I know that the ancient world was an exploitative and vicious place so this is likely linked to treating some people as subhuman and subordination or slavery as norms too.

Its sort of an inversion of buddhism too though, dont you think? You do not automatically experience a cycle of birth-death-rebirth unless you've developed a soul in this life to begin with, oblivion, if nirvana is considered the same thing as oblivion that is, is your fate.
 

sprinkles

Mojibake
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
2,959
MBTI Type
INFJ
Some theories say that the soul does not incarnate until a certain period in gestation. That feels correct to me, just intuitively. Which is why I don't have a problem with first trimester abortions. I've never verbalized this before, but I also feel that if there is a God, and he wants a soul to incarnate, it will, so if there's an abortion, there will be a pregnancy elsewhere, or a pregnancy later, for that soul to incarnate in. In other words, that there are no mistakes. It's not a mistake to carry full term, and it's not a mistake to terminate a pregnancy. What's supposed to happen will happen, either way.
At what point?

Is it dictated by a specific cell division? Because that's what growth is during gestation. If it's a specific point, then the difference between a soul and not a soul is one cell division, is it not?

I mean it's like "Ok, the fetus almost has a soul but not quite. It needs this final cell division to obtain it." Well why would that specific stage be so drastically significant if the entire rest of the process is gradual?

How much sand is a pile? If I take one grain of sand away, does it stop being a pile?
 
Top