Do you think you have a soul? If you do, why?

[Ghost of the dead horse]

All your poll options express - or imply - for soul to be something separate to a person.

Well, this is the interpretation of soul advocated by both catholic and protestant movements, which dominate the idea of the very concept.

At the time of writing, the people in the area of modern Palestine thought of the "soul" (Nephesh in Hebrew) as a living animal or a human as a complete living whole.

I searched two sources about it:
-Hebrew-English Lexicon, Brown, Driver & Briggs, Hendrickson Publishers.
-What the Bible Says About Death, Afterlife, and the Future
"The ancient Hebrews had no idea of an immortal soul living a full and vital life beyond death --"

Didn't read whole of the online source, but it gives the idea of it.

 

[Moiety]

So what? Our bodies may function like machines but that does not mean we are solely machines. Bodies and "the subtle" are interwoven, yes. However, the body is finite, the subtle is not. How do you explain OBE or NDE...specters and spirits...astral projection (please do not try to tell me I am hallucinating, I have experienced these things and there are countless accounts of others who have as well...just because you never have does not mean it does not exist...I think fanatical materialists do not seem to understand this) ? Just because we are built like machines does not rule out the spiritual in us. It is extremely narrow minded to assume it does. Science explains how things work (which is important of course) ...things that are finite, things that are definable. Are you denying the infinite?

The subtle? What is the subtle? I have never seen a spirt or specter or astral projection. But WHY can't they be physical things? This topic is all about the why.

And who said anything about ruling out the spiritual? What IS the spiritual? How are you defining it?

Do you believe in vampires? Why not?


And please don't make this an "us against them" thing. Don't group people together into spiritualistic people and non-spiritualistic. Even spiritualistic people have different definitions. I know many that don't believe in astral projection or ghosts or anything of the sort. And I don't share the views of all other non-spiritualists either. Heck I don't even know if I'm not a spiritualistic person. I need to know what it is first.


EDIT: And one very important thing to understand is ...you ask me how I explain astral projection. I don't. In the same way someone who didn't believe lightning was a sign of the gods being angry at us, didn't know how to explain how to his friends who happened to believe it WAS something done by the gods. The difference is that his friends led their lives believing something which isn't true, while he didn't.


But more importantly, when you have spiritual beliefs, what makes you choose one view VS the other? What is the criteria you use to choose between christian beliefs and buddhist beliefs? Or to say both of them are wrong? What makes you pic one of the thousands of different views on spiritualism, is what I'm asking?

 

[NewEra]

Yes, I do. I believe when you die, your soul leaves your body. After that, who knows what happens.

 

[Edasich]

Don't believe in souls, although I used to when I was younger. It's a nice idea though.

 

[527468]

Only smart beings have souls. It's the main battery supply for the brain. The deer creatures run off of solar power or whatever. Yeww.

 

[Oberon]

There are many ways of viewing the problem, and a logically correct answer for each view.

That's great!

 

[AOA]

Yup, indeed do.

 

[Nyx]

The subtle? What is the subtle? I have never seen a spirt or specter or astral projection. But WHY can't they be physical things? This topic is all about the why.

And who said anything about ruling out the spiritual? What IS the spiritual? How are you defining it?

Do you believe in vampires? Why not?


And please don't make this an "us against them" thing. Don't group people together into spiritualistic people and non-spiritualistic. Even spiritualistic people have different definitions. I know many that don't believe in astral projection or ghosts or anything of the sort. And I don't share the views of all other non-spiritualists either. Heck I don't even know if I'm not a spiritualistic person. I need to know what it is first.


EDIT: And one very important thing to understand is ...you ask me how I explain astral projection. I don't. In the same way someone who didn't believe lightning was a sign of the gods being angry at us, didn't know how to explain how to his friends who happened to believe it WAS something done by the gods. The difference is that his friends led their lives believing something which isn't true, while he didn't.


But more importantly, when you have spiritual beliefs, what makes you choose one view VS the other? What is the criteria you use to choose between christian beliefs and buddhist beliefs? Or to say both of them are wrong? What makes you pic one of the thousands of different views on spiritualism, is what I'm asking?

Ok, when I was typing this out I was not literally talking about you...I often do this when explaining things without clarifying first. Sorry...I did not mean to be an ass about it if I sounded that way.

But to answer your questions...

These things are not physical because they are mental. They are all about the mind, perception, and consciousness, which we all know are intangible. Everything cannot be physical. If that were so we would not know what physical is… a rudimentary comparison to this is like saying we would not have light without darkness. Remember though, nothing is black and white…of course there are infinite shades of grey that helps us refine our understanding of the world.

You are right, not everyone believes the same things or experiences the same things. Everyone's experience is unique and different people need different things to develop spiritually.

Some of the links I posted are one place to start when talking about "the subtle"... This is the realm of thought energy primarily, I think. There is a Hermetic axiom : "The ALL is MIND, the UNIVERSE is MENTAL." For me, spirituality deals with this. How we perceive things. How this plays into consciousness, unconsciousness, and super-consciousness (this would be achieved through meditating and other practices). Understanding the Mind. This is why Jung was so into the occult as a psychologist. Hermeticism is part of Western Esotericism. Many of these things link up with the East too. These axioms are the root of most spiritual beliefs.

I guess I am talking about mysticism then :

Mysticism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All major religions have a mystical branch (and these all have many axioms in common).

I also suggest the Tao Te Ching for insight into this.

It is hard for me to define clearly because the subject itself is so vast. I am sure there are people out there more capable than I am of explaining this better if my responses are not clear enough for you. There are probably a few on this forum too.

Theosophy is a good example of all religions trying to get to the same thing which is primarily what I am exploring right now…I was raised Catholic and still enjoy learning intellectual Christianity as well as other religions, mystic religions, and the occult/esoteric.

Theosophy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think religious doctrine is actually important for some (I am NOT talking about religion in regards to anything else…we don't need to go there right now). Some people need structure to reach God, or Oneness, or whatever you want to call it. People choose religion for many reasons ...cultural, preference of doctrine or beliefs, or just blindly choosing without thinking about it (all too common)

The realm of these things is vast. That is why people can spend their whole lives studying it like theologians and mystics.

This is wonderful and fun : (I recommend you check out Alan Watts...atheists and theists alike can appreciate him)

[YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BE5M8743a1s"]Alan Watts - Atheist Spirituality[/YOUTUBE]

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

Hey. I'm back. I'm going to your responses one at a time until I get through them.

The Scientific Theory of the Soul | Hare Krishna Community

I found this article but I don't know, I tried.

There exists, within this material universe, three types of energy: gross material, subtle material and spiritual. The gross material energy consists of earth, water, fire, air and ether [defined as the "space" within the universe]. The subtle material energy consists of mind, intelligence and false-ego [defined as the identification of the body as the self]. The spiritual energy consists of the soul [the individual living entities] and the supersoul

I only recognize one type of energy. And it pervades everything living. We cannot measure it because we still can't really understand what it is.

The presence of the soul in any living entity is indicated by consciousness. Although we cannot actually see the soul, we can see its symptoms. We cannot “see” electricity but when we see an illuminated light-globe we can see the symptom of the presence of electricity. Similarly when we see consciousness we see the symptom of the soul.

Any material body inhabited by a soul will undergo changes. It will be created, it will grow, it will produce by-products [offspring], it will dwindle and ultimately it will die.

I don't believe Soul does anything but infuse Life. The material form does the rest.

The “Soul Theory” makes many predictions that can be experimentally tested and also one can propose experiments which, if successfully carried out, could disprove it. So it is a theory suitable fro study using the currently accepted “scientific method”.

* Predicts out of body experiences are possible
* Predicts past life recollection is possible
* Predicts “unembodied” souls are possible
* Predicts life cannot be produced from a combination of chemicals

Soul is Universal. Therefore when soul comes in and infuses life here on Earth (or elsewhere in the Universe), there would be no possibility of separate soul memory or 'unembodied' soul. I don't personally buy the concept of past lives as separate entities myself because I think there is this big Soul Soup (I gave you that to let you have some fun with it ) where Soul is one vast collective force.

“Unless there is a soul present within matter it will not go through the cycle of birth, growth, production of by-products, dwindling and death. This cycle is a symptom of the presence of the soul. The soul is placed within matter by other living entities and then develops.”

Proof: Analytically study all living entities and confirm that all living entities are caused, or born from “parents”, other living entities.

Falsify: Show life can be created from matter only [a chemical mixture of earth, water, fire, air and ether.] Then show the resulting combination of matter can exhibit the symptoms of life [growth, changing, production of by-products dwindling and vanishing.]

“The soul is placed within matter by another living entity then a material body is developed around the soul from matter.”

Proof: Analytically study living entities to confirm their source is another living entity.

Falsify: Show living entities can be produced by a combination of chemicals. The resulting living entities must be able to exhibit the symptoms of the presence of the soul, ie: consciousness, and undergo the transformations of growth, change, production of by-products [offspring], dwindling and death.

When life is created, we can see on a microscopic level what happens. But since we cannot see or measure energy (Life force, Soul) we really have no idea how it infuses into living beings. That is one of our current mysteries. We also have no idea how it leaves either (death).

I like this bit.


Leibniz's King of China TE: here Leibniz asks if we would be willing to have our souls switched into the body of Bill Gates (to update the example) if it meant that all of the "pins" were switched (so Bill Gates' pins are put into your pincushion and your pins are put into his pincushion). By Soul Theory, you would become very rich, even though you would have all of the memories and desires of Bill Gates. But Leibniz thinks that no one would agree to this, proving that no one finds it intuitive that "same soul" is a sufficient condition for personal identity.

Well, but we become soooo attached to our physical form. Which is understandable because it anchors us in this world. I don't want to be anyone else because since I was a fertilized ovum, I was me. My Soul only makes me alive, as it makes you alive.

Locke's Nestor TE: here we get the reverse problem. In this case, Locke asks what we would think if our pins were removed from our souls and placed into another person's soul and body. If so, then your memories and desires would be present in another person. According to Locke, our intuitions here are that we have moved our position to another body, and so it seems that our intuitions suggest that souls are not even necessary conditions for personal identity.

No, Soul doesn't have anything to do with identity, memories, desires, or intuitions. That's where MBTI comes in and takes over....... All that stuff is of the physical world and in our DNA and worldly experiences. Soul only infuses Life, I think.

Does a person need a soul to have a heart to love?

Interesting question, that. One area I'm very curious about is cloning. Cloning is creating Life in a laboratory. And life does occur. So, according to my strong belief about it, I know somehow in that process Soul is captured to some degree. But. We also know (unless there is new evidence or reports I don't know about) that these beings are never as healthy as the original 'natural' being it came from. Most likely that reason is due to genetic problems, namely genetic imprinting, and the statistics on success are horrifying: Only 1-2% survive, and only 20% of those are anywhere near normal. Perhaps some of the reason for the difficulty of success does lie in something to do with capturing Soul, or, more precisely, inability thereof.

 

[Thalassa]

Yes, and I think it's obvious.

I liken people who don't believe in anything beyond the tangible physical to the mathematicians in Poe's The Purloined Letter who are incapable of imagining anything existing that doesn't fit into their equations.

 

[Synarch]

What is a soul?

 

[Ginkgo]

I like to think that I have a "spirit" - as Webster's defines it as..

4. A supernatural being, as:
a. An angel or a demon.
b. A being inhabiting or embodying a particular place, object, or natural phenomenon.
c. A fairy or sprite.

That would be an interesting idea to entertain. But other than that, no.

I do have soul though!

[YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1ehMrK3itM"]SOUL[/YOUTUBE]

 

[/DG/]

I'd like to think that we have a soul. I simply can't grasp the idea that something so complex as a human being can't have something more, something that isn't tangible, that makes us who we are. I picked the second option.

 

[Mole]

The soul is a wonderful metaphor.

A metaphor is a comparison of relationships and takes the form of -

A is to B, as C is to D.

And so naturally metaphors don't exist anymore than comparisons exist.

But things exist for the purpose of comparison. In other words, existence gives birth to metaphor.

So your soul has been born from your very existence.

And of course, in the West, the doctrine of the soul has given rise to the corrollary that we are all the children of God and so we are all equal, in fact that we are all free and equal as well as sisters and brothers.

So the metaphor of the soul underpins the very culture of the West.

The soul is our treasure and delight and our most intimate possession.

 

[laintpe]

i think mine is coding.

 

[Oberon]

The soul is a wonderful metaphor.

What's a metaphor you?

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

What's a metaphor you?

haha! You are a funny mouse, too!

 

[Lasting_Pain]

Even though there is no rational explanation on explaining a soul. I have to go with my feelings, so yes I feel that I have a soul.

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

All your poll options express - or imply - for soul to be something separate to a person.

Well, this is the interpretation of soul advocated by both catholic and protestant movements, which dominate the idea of the very concept.

At the time of writing, the people in the area of modern Palestine thought of the "soul" (Nephesh in Hebrew) as a living animal or a human as a complete living whole.

I searched two sources about it:
-Hebrew-English Lexicon, Brown, Driver & Briggs, Hendrickson Publishers.
-What the Bible Says About Death, Afterlife, and the Future
"The ancient Hebrews had no idea of an immortal soul living a full and vital life beyond death --"

Didn't read whole of the online source, but it gives the idea of it.

I am a Christian, but I would say that you are exactly right.

 

[Mole]

The Suspension of Disbelief and MBTI

What's a metaphor you?

I tol' you - a metaphor is a comparison of relationships. You use them all the time simply to speak. We take them for granted. They are right under our nose every minute. That is why they are invisible.

You are surrounded by an invisible cloud of metaphor like the Milky Way is surrounded by an invisible cloud of dark matter.

The Milky Way would fly apart without its invisible cloud just as we could never move beyond the literal without metaphor.

You might say that the literal is for reality and metaphor is for the imagination. And of course it is very important to be able to distinguish between the two. And that is why children play - to learn the difference between imagination and reality.

And as we become more sophisticated we describe imagination as the suspension of disbelief.

And the suspension of disbelief underlies all art and religion and even mathematics. For once we move beyond counting, mathematics is entirely mathematical metaphor.

Why, the only thing necessary to enjoy MBTI is the suspension of disbelief.