Define "Soul"

[Addrionn]

I define soul as an energy, with uknown origin, that allow us to think, have racional thoughts, and discuss this very matter. Our body is simply the result of billions of years of evolution which allow the maximum expression of that kind of energy, and still, going further.

I think our biological existence serves that purpose, so that i can "carry" this kind of energy, which a rock, a river or a particle can´t express.

So, to be simple, the soul is the possible logic to be alive.

 

[fagin]

I define soul as an energy, with uknown origin, that allow us to think, have racional thoughts, and discuss this very matter. Our body is simply the result of billions of years of evolution which allow the maximum expression of that kind of energy, and still, going further.

I think our biological existence serves that purpose, so that i can "carry" this kind of energy, which a rock, a river or a particle can´t express.

So, to be simple, the soul is the possible logic to be alive.

So bacteria have soul. James Brown would be devastated.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

I define soul as an energy, with uknown origin, that allow us to think, have racional thoughts, and discuss this very matter. Our body is simply the result of billions of years of evolution which allow the maximum expression of that kind of energy, and still, going further.

I think our biological existence serves that purpose, so that i can "carry" this kind of energy, which a rock, a river or a particle can´t express.

So, to be simple, the soul is the possible logic to be alive.

Let's assume that your theory is true. What would that imply? What phenomena does your theory predict, and how would we be able to falsify it?

 

[Addrionn]

My theory is based in my interpretation of life itself. It implies the existence of a source of that "energy".

My theory probably could explain the "mens agitat molem" (the mind over the matter).

To falsify it, i think is rather simple: we are just like our own creation, the machine. Our information is passed through generations by DNA, as in software information is passed by zeros and ones. And so, our imaginative processes, our free will, etc. are just biochemical processes.

The phenomena it predicts? Well, maybe, some day, the possibility of transcending my own biological organism and the reality i am stuck into, and, in a final aproach, to have the knowledge of the truth.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

My theory is based in my interpretation of life itself. It implies the existence of a source of that "energy".

How can we detect and measure it?

My theory probably could explain the "mens agitat molem" (the mind over the matter).

What phenomenon is that, and why is your theory more parsimonious than all the others?

To falsify it, i think is rather simple: we are just like our own creation, the machine. Our information is passed through generations by DNA, as in software information is passed by zeros and ones. And so, our imaginative processes, our free will, etc. are just biochemical processes.

That's not what falisy means. How could we disprove your theory? You see, we could disprove the Theory of Gravity by finding masses that do not attract other masses. How could we falsify your theory?

 

[Addrionn]

First, i´m sorry, i don´t use english as my current language, i´m portuguese...

Unfortunately, I can´t mathematicaly prove it, it goes behond the maths logic, its something like, for example, behaviour, you don´t measure it. When i refer myself to the term "energy" it´s because i don´t have any other word which means what i precisely what to say... I woul say this "energy" can´t be seen in numbers, in my pont of view, it´s impossible.

My theory is more parsimonious because i think complicated issues have simple answers.

Einstein told me that: e=mc2.

To falsify my theory, i´m sorry, but i´m in a rush, i´m going to work, but i´ll return to answer that. Sorry :S

 

[Fnord]

So bacteria have soul. James Brown would be devastated.

Sure, bacteria gots soul, but they's gots lousy rhythm. Can't carry a tune worth diddly, neither.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

First, i´m sorry, i don´t use english as my current language, i´m portuguese...

I'm surprised. You're doing well, writing in English. Hang in there. English isn't my first language either.

Unfortunately, I can´t mathematicaly prove it, it goes behond the maths logic, its something like, for example, behaviour, you don´t measure it. When i refer myself to the term "energy" it´s because i don´t have any other word which means what i precisely what to say... I woul say this "energy" can´t be seen in numbers, in my pont of view, it´s impossible.

My theory is more parsimonious because i think complicated issues have simple answers.

A parsimonious explanation would account for everything while making the fewest assumptions. This "energy" of yours doesn't seem t explain anything, and assuming that there's some undetected. . .thing out there is an awfully big assumption.

Einstein told me that: e=mc2.

Yes, but when we convert matter into energy, in a nuclear reactor, for example, we're able to measure what type of energy that matter has become. I'm not a physicist, but I'm pretty sure that there's no energy going unaccounted for. When you talk about energy, what sort do you mean? Heat? I can measure that. Visible light? I can see that. Radio waves? I that's easy to detect.

Where do we look for your energy?

 

[ksbluesfan]

Like many things in religion, the soul is something that has been redefined as needed.

What I find interesting is people who believe in evolution and the concept of a soul. If we share a common ancestor with chimpanzees, did we get a soul after the split, or do chimps have a soul too? It's easier to resolve if you don't believe in evolution or that we have a soul.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I define soul as the eternal essential essense of the ego, the self that never dies, the seer of the seen, thinker of thoughts, etc.

Of course, it is illusionary and doesn't really exist.

(Yay for alliteration !)

 

[DrewD]

Whatever inspired it, the expiration of the concept is something to which we should all aspire.

Exactly why I asked the question.

Most of the theists that I talk to believe the "soul" is responsible for our knowledge of right and wrong.

That we are born with this knowledge and it drives us to do good.

In my viewpoint, the expiration of the concept of "soul" will eventually lead to the downfall of the larger religious beliefs. Remove "soul" from Christianity or Islam or any number of beliefs and the whole theory falls apart

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Exactly why I asked the question.

Most of the theists that I talk to believe the "soul" is responsible for our knowledge of right and wrong.

That we are born with this knowledge and it drives us to do good.

In my viewpoint, the expiration of the concept of "soul" will eventually lead to the downfall of the larger religious beliefs. Remove "soul" from Christianity or Islam or any number of beliefs and the whole theory falls apart

Christianity has endured while huge portions of it have been changed or abandoned. Even without a "soul" as Christans currently use that term changed to mean something else, they'd probably take it in stride as well as they handle the "mystery" of the Trinity, or the dissolution of Limbo.

 

[DrewD]

Christianity has endured while huge portions of it have been changed or abandoned. Even without a "soul" as Christans currently use that term changed to mean something else, they'd probably take it in stride as well as they handle the "mystery" of the Trinity, or the dissolution of Limbo.

Then we deal with the next bit of woo that they come up with.

I just recently had a conversataion with a believer on the phone. It was my dad. When I defined the soul as the origin of emotions and the origin of right and wrong, he agreed that was a fair description of the soul.

I'm curious if most Christans or Muslums or what have you would accept this definition of soul.

 

[Addrionn]

A parsimonious explanation would account for everything while making the fewest assumptions. This "energy" of yours doesn't seem t explain anything, and assuming that there's some undetected. . .thing out there is an awfully big assumption.



Yes, but when we convert matter into energy, in a nuclear reactor, for example, we're able to measure what type of energy that matter has become. I'm not a physicist, but I'm pretty sure that there's no energy going unaccounted for. When you talk about energy, what sort do you mean? Heat? I can measure that. Visible light? I can see that. Radio waves? I that's easy to detect.

Where do we look for your energy?

Yes, I admit i´m making a really big assumption. Probably this won´t be anything we could really measure and also compare to any kind of convencional energy. As i see it, its something transcendetal to physics and maths itself. I give you an exelent exmaple of this kind of "energy". Imagination is a phenomena that apears in "inteligent" beings (i´m being a little ironic, of curse) like us. How can i measure it, explain it in a mathematical way? Is it reliable to say that imaginations just comes from a probability of certain neurons to make sinapsis in a certain moment in time that an ideia comming from imagination appears?

In this line of thinking, how can we measure the changes on patterns of behaviour? I recognize that today science is in it´s exponential growth, every year science is developing in a very fast rate (and thanks to the supreme being is not because of war), in which we are making fantastic new discoveries. However there is this, let´s call it place, where science can´t reach with it´s traditional methoths, and probably, will never totally understand and answer the why of life nor the why of "soul".

If i am wrong, which is a possibility i rather admit, then to me it becomes clear that whe, somehow, are just biological machines whith the most fabulous A.I. software in the universe.

When is asked "Where to find this energy?", well, in that case, maybe i have a (strange) possible explanation. Like is known to maths, we live in a three dimensional reality, and we express it in the R3: the axis x, y and z. However is demosntrated that there can be R4, R5, etc... and so on. Imagine this reality is not composed only by R3, we are in fact in, for example, R4. However our biological body can only be aware of the R3 which is contained in the R4 as also the instruments made from the matter of this R3 reality can only register measurments from the implicated reality theiy are. What i want to say is that there is also a possibility that our biological body, as also other superior living beings, have this capability to merge this dimesnion with a possible other one, where all that "energy" could possibly come.

I understand it´s very difficult to accept this and also very difficult to prove this. I make these assumptions without being a PhD on Physics, Psicology or wathever, but for now, is my only belief on what "Soul" is to me.

About Mens Agitat Molem, its an expression which tell us that we have power over any material on our universe beacuse we have the ability to think, because whe have a Mind...

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Yes, I admit i´m making a really big assumption. Probably this won´t be anything we could really measure and also compare to any kind of convencional energy. As i see it, its something transcendetal to physics and maths itself.

Then, what good is it? If you can't test it, why bother?

In this line of thinking, how can we measure the changes on patterns of behaviour? I recognize that today science is in it´s exponential growth, every year science is developing in a very fast rate (and thanks to the supreme being is not because of war), in which we are making fantastic new discoveries. However there is this, let´s call it place, where science can´t reach with it´s traditional methoths, and probably, will never totally understand and answer the why of life nor the why of "soul".

I think we understand those two issues very well. Firstly, life has no inherent meaning, only what meaning you choose to give it. Secondly, the soul is nothing but an illusion created by our brains. There is no evidence that contradicts these conclusions, and all other theories are either contradicted by evidence, or are completely untestable, so why bother?

If i am wrong, which is a possibility i rather admit, then to me it becomes clear that whe, somehow, are just biological machines whith the most fabulous A.I. software in the universe.

When is asked "Where to find this energy?", well, in that case, maybe i have a (strange) possible explanation. Like is known to maths, we live in a three dimensional reality, and we express it in the R3: the axis x, y and z. However is demosntrated that there can be R4, R5, etc... and so on. Imagine this reality is not composed only by R3, we are in fact in, for example, R4. However our biological body can only be aware of the R3 which is contained in the R4 as also the instruments made from the matter of this R3 reality can only register measurments from the implicated reality theiy are. What i want to say is that there is also a possibility that our biological body, as also other superior living beings, have this capability to merge this dimesnion with a possible other one, where all that "energy" could possibly come.

I understand it´s very difficult to accept this and also very difficult to prove this. I make these assumptions without being a PhD on Physics, Psicology or wathever, but for now, is my only belief on what "Soul" is to me.

Let's assume I could imagine that. That's nice. I can also imagine that I am brain in a vat, or a butterfly's dream. Those theories are equally untestable. What makes your theory better than those?

About Mens Agitat Molem, its an expression which tell us that we have power over any material on our universe beacuse we have the ability to think, because whe have a Mind...

We have a mind? That's news to me. I thought that we have brains, and that the "mind," with a sense of self-awareness, is a sort of illusion.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Yes, I admit i´m making a really big assumption. Probably this won´t be anything we could really measure and also compare to any kind of convencional energy. As i see it, its something transcendetal to physics and maths itself.

Then what good is it? If you can't test it, why bother?

In this line of thinking, how can we measure the changes on patterns of behaviour? I recognize that today science is in it´s exponential growth, every year science is developing in a very fast rate (and thanks to the supreme being is not because of war), in which we are making fantastic new discoveries. However there is this, let´s call it place, where science can´t reach with it´s traditional methoths, and probably, will never totally understand and answer the why of life nor the why of "soul".

I think we understand those two issues very well. Firstly, life has no inherent meaning, only what meaning you choose to give it. Secondly, the soul is nothing but an illusion created by our brains. There is no evidence that contradicts these conclusions, and all other theories are either contradicted by evidence, or are completely untestable, so why bother?

If i am wrong, which is a possibility i rather admit, then to me it becomes clear that whe, somehow, are just biological machines whith the most fabulous A.I. software in the universe.

When is asked "Where to find this energy?", well, in that case, maybe i have a (strange) possible explanation. Like is known to maths, we live in a three dimensional reality, and we express it in the R3: the axis x, y and z. However is demosntrated that there can be R4, R5, etc... and so on. Imagine this reality is not composed only by R3, we are in fact in, for example, R4. However our biological body can only be aware of the R3 which is contained in the R4 as also the instruments made from the matter of this R3 reality can only register measurments from the implicated reality theiy are. What i want to say is that there is also a possibility that our biological body, as also other superior living beings, have this capability to merge this dimesnion with a possible other one, where all that "energy" could possibly come.

I understand it´s very difficult to accept this and also very difficult to prove this. I make these assumptions without being a PhD on Physics, Psicology or wathever, but for now, is my only belief on what "Soul" is to me.

Let's assume I could imagine that. That's nice. I can also imagine that I am brain in a vat, or a butterfly's dream. Those theories are equally untestable. What makes your theory better than those?

About Mens Agitat Molem, its an expression which tell us that we have power over any material on our universe beacuse we have the ability to think, because whe have a Mind...

We have a mind? That's news to me. I thought that we have brains, and that the "mind," with a sense of self-awareness, is a sort of illusion.

 

[Addrionn]

Then what good is it? If you can't test it, why bother?

I bother beacuse if i can´t really measure it, i´ll need another way to prove it.

We have a mind? That's news to me. I thought that we have brains, and that the "mind," with a sense of self-awareness, is a sort of illusion.

In that case i don´t agree you, i can´t concieve the fact that we are just a sum of biochemical machanisms. For me, thinking that way, and i´m not saying it´s wrong, there is no logic for us to bother with anyting at all. Why do we need to build houses, why do we need to work, why do whe need to be part of a culture, and so on? In animals, Nature tell us our main objective is to prepetuate the existence of the spiecies... So, why don´t we just do like animals, whe shut our mouths, eat and reproduce? (Well, sometimes everything would be easier that way )

The only proof i have is this one: we all are making this very discussion, with our different points of view. Tomorrow we will meet a friend and say: "Man, i´ve been discussing this thing with some people", and he will say "Relax, Chill, Carpe Diem! Your brain will blow if you think too much" and we will start laughing. Emotion. Are they also just processes of our biochemestry or are a part of that "energy" i think exists? Emotions lead us to the most irracionaland ilogical behaviours we can imagine.

If really i have this illusion i have a consciouness, then, how can i take away this illusion and be what i am suposed to be?

 

[boloboffin]

When I thought I had a soul, I associated it with a specific feeling in my body. Having had proprioception^WP explained to me, I now realize that I was confusing that with a soul.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

I bother beacuse if i can´t really measure it, i´ll need another way to prove it.

Measuring is proving. You cannot just say something is real, and prove it that way. It must be measurable.

In that case i don´t agree you, i can´t concieve the fact that we are just a sum of biochemical machanisms. For me, thinking that way, and i´m not saying it´s wrong, there is no logic for us to bother with anyting at all. Why do we need to build houses, why do we need to work, why do whe need to be part of a culture, and so on?

Because you want to get out of the rain, sun, and cold. Because you want food, mates, and resources. Because you desire human contact. If those easons aren't compelling enough, make your own. While you might consider those answers lacking and uncomfortable, the universe does owe you comfort.

In animals, Nature tell us our main objective is to prepetuate the existence of the spiecies...

Species have no objective. The development of perpetuation of species happens simply because of the individual drives in individual animals. "Nature" has no objectives.

So, why don´t we just do like animals, whe shut our mouths, eat and reproduce? (Well, sometimes everything would be easier that way )

Because we have evolved fairly decent brains and complex social interactions which together have allowed us to solve many problems through the application of intelligence, and by sharing those applications with others. Without either of those, a good brain, or good social interaction, we wouldn't be where we are today. The brain we have evolved is well adapted to try to make sense of the world, and to communicate with others. It's a fundamental a human drive as sex, shelter, and food.

The only proof i have is this one: we all are making this very discussion, with our different points of view. Tomorrow we will meet a friend and say: "Man, i´ve been discussing this thing with some people", and he will say "Relax, Chill, Carpe Diem! Your brain will blow if you think too much" and we will start laughing. Emotion. Are they also just processes of our biochemestry or are a part of that "energy" i think exists? Emotions lead us to the most irracionaland ilogical behaviours we can imagine.

Yes, emotions are also reducible to simple chemical interactions, influenced by external stimuli.

If really i have this illusion i have a consciouness, then, how can i take away this illusion and be what i am suposed to be?

I never said that we should dispel the illusion of the mind. It might be wrong on some fundamental levels, but it's a useful illusion. Being fully cognizant of everything that goes inside your brain, all day, every day, would be incredibly tiresome, and very demanding. I'm pretty sure we interact more efficiently and process information more rapidly when the work our brains do remains in the background.

 

[Omega Man]

Opinion:

Language is a logical construction that we use to denconstruct illiogical things.
Soul is the love of doing it.

om