Souls

Do we have souls? I say no, I don’t think they’re necessary to a logical/sound worldview. — mattw

“Not if you’re white… only black people got soul man!”
“Ahhh, Souls!”
Facetiousness aside, I suppose it depends entirely on your definition of souls, I think most christians (actually, probably most people) would say we do, but have a very tricky time actually defining what they are, and if they did nail down a definition, it would be different from someone else’s — Jim

(James Brown is obviously the exception to my rule.) By soul, I mean something that exists “outside” of the physical world — metaphysical like. I believe in “consciousness,” just not in some eternal, spiritual “life seed,” I think. — mattw

So, basically, you’re disagreeing with dualism? And perhaps arguing that the ‘soul’, as mentioned in the bible doesn’t refer to some spiritual thing, but rather a physical thing? — nato

So… souls… someone say something disagreeable… otherwise it makes for boring reading— jim

Only fundies have souls! — Stan

By soul, I also include ‘spirit’. I’m against any type of dualism, on the whole. — mattw

So you would disagree with the notion that there could be purely spiritual beings? ie consciousnesses without any physical form —jim

Oooh good question. I don’t think I would disagree with that notion; I just think that humans are material beings. — mattw

so there may be some things that are purely spiritual, and some things which are purely physical (rocks perhaps?) but human beings are either a bit of both, and intrinsically so, such that the two can’t be separated, or are completely physical? —Jim

I like the notion that we’re a bit of both, but inseparably so. Adds a bit of mystery. fraser

Yeah, me too. — Jim

I kinda think we have a bit of spiritual, and a bit of physical, but that the two bits aren’t seperable. I think the words ‘soul’, ‘spirit’, merely descibe different aspects of a person. It’s not like we’re the fusion of a body, a spirit and a soul, but rather, its one whole, with some bits that are less physical than others.

I’m also beginning to think that (a little like the borg), the different pieces are dependant on one another; if the physical body shuts down, so does the more spiritual bits. So, when people die, their soul doesn’t drift of somewhere - instead, they die, they shut down, and wait until someone comes along and ressurects them. - nato {“BRAAAAAAAAINNNS” —Jim}

That’s beginning to make sense to me. My issue has always been—how can a human being possibly have a meaningful existence without a human body? — mattw

I’m all about dualism so sod you all! In my view, the soul is the collection of baser, less desirable human instincts/elements, the ones more concerned with physicality and getting enjoyment out of the tactile. Hence the derogatory term, “soulish”. I believe that the spirit is the combination of our personality, our memory, our decision making/rationality and emotion. It’s more concerned with ideas and non-tactile parts of the world, the thought instead of the action. Neither are physical, both are evident in all humans, and it seems the more spiritual you wish to become, the more useful it is to repress/ignore soulishness, and of course the inverse is also true.

So if the spirit is more concerned with personality, memory, emotion and thought, I’m sure that a human possessing a spirit would have a meaningful existence.

Or whatever. It’s 2:40am and I just don’t care anymore. -Tony

Here’s something interesting to ponder- at med school, my sister has to dissect cadavers- I said to her ‘doesn’t it just feel so wrong, cutting up a human’ and her explanation was that its just a body, there’s no soul… so I’m interested, how does that fit in with your view of things Matt? How would you feel about dissecting a human? – greg

There must be a significant number of atheist doctors, so one imagines you don’t have to have a belief in the soul to be able to dissociate between an alive person, and a dead body. It’s like the fundy claim ‘if you’re not christian theres no reason you shouldn’t be a cheat and murderer’. (Most) Non-christians seem to manage fine without our assumptions, and so, non-dualists can also manage. - nato

A corpse is still lacking the ‘spark of life’, whether you explain it with a soul or by electro-chemical reactions in the brain. The brain has shut down, and is no longer being provided with oxygen, so whatever consciousness was in there is no longer. I still haven’t figured out life-after-death yet; I’m inclined to go with ‘a fascimile of the brain as it was’ — mattw

@Nato, if you were an athiest it’d be rather a lot simpler, because you’d most likely believe that when you’re dead- that’s it, you cease to be. – greg