(February 26, 2016 at 4:29 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:

(February 26, 2016 at 3:04 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: That's actually taken from the definition.


Computers have the ability to problem solve, yet they can't reason... you know, the whole "Cogito ergo sum" thing

Fair point, but computers aren't other species.

Yes, but the example shows why problem solving doesn't equal reasoning.

(February 26, 2016 at 4:29 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: Do chimps, rats, or crows have souls?

No, think about it, animals don't know how to discern right and wrong, which is crucial to ones ability to reason.

(February 26, 2016 at 4:29 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: Is the ability of an organism to engage in self-reflection the hallmark of having a soul?

I would say that is one of the criteria.

(February 26, 2016 at 4:29 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: If so, do people in vegetative states that result from disease or accident retain a soul somehow, or is their soul lost?

There have been plenty of people who were pronounced clinically dead (no functioning brain), yet were able to recall everything that happened in the operating room. which shows that their consciousness existed somewhere, or else they wouldn't remember.

(February 26, 2016 at 4:29 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: If lost, what's the difference between "having a soul" and having certain higher brain functions?

The soul has nothing to do with the brain. Take love for example: "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends".

Animals are all about self preservation. An animal will abandon its offspring to predators to save it's own life, While a real human mother would give her life for her child without a second thought.

(February 26, 2016 at 1:18 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(February 26, 2016 at 12:49 pm)Chas Wrote: Since it is demonstrably false that it always existed on Earth, where did it exist before that?

I believe I've answered that already...

I must have missed it.  Can you point it out?

Quote:

(February 26, 2016 at 12:52 pm)Chas Wrote: At what point in evolutionary history did 'souls' show up?

About the same time the ability to reason did.

That's a pretty fuzzy answer.  How much ability?  More than dolphins?

(February 26, 2016 at 7:23 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: There have been plenty of people who were pronounced clinically dead (no functioning brain), yet were able to recall everything that happened in the operating room. which shows that their consciousness existed somewhere, or else they wouldn't remember.

Quote:

(February 26, 2016 at 4:29 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: If lost, what's the difference between "having a soul" and having certain higher brain functions?

The soul has nothing to do with the brain. Take love for example: "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends".

Animals are all about self preservation. An animal will abandon its offspring to predators to save it's own life, While a real human mother would give her life for her child without a second thought.

And there are many cases of animals risking their lives to save others.

(February 26, 2016 at 5:11 pm)Simon Moon Wrote:

(February 26, 2016 at 4:29 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: Fair point, but computers aren't other species. Do chimps, rats, or crows have souls? Is the ability of an organism to engage in self-reflection the hallmark of having a soul? If so, do people in vegetative states that result from disease or accident retain a soul somehow, or is their soul lost? If lost, what's the difference between "having a soul" and having certain higher brain functions?

This brings up many questions.

Here are 3 that come to mind. I have asked theists about these examples many times. Not once have I received a coherent answer.

Human Chimeras - in somewhat rare instances, while twins are developing in utero, one twin will absorb the fetus of the other twin. It is unknown how rare this is, because it does not always show up in lab tests.  

What happened to the second soul? Does the surviving twin have 2 souls? Does "god" recall the extra soul?

Sounds like the other twin died. In which case we believe his/her soul is with God.

Quote:"Personality reset" - sometimes due to brain injury, a person can literally have their personality reset, to the point that they are almost unrecognizable. 

I have an aunt that had a brain injury that went from being a sweet, caring person, to a raging, paranoid bitch. My uncle had to divorce her because she was literally not the person he married. 

If the soul is responsible for what makes "you", "you", what happened to my aunt's soul?

While we are in this world, it is our physical bodies (including all the chemistry in our brain) and our souls that make up who we are. They are one. Not separated until after death.

Quote:Epilepsy surgery (corpus callosostomy) - to prevent seizures, surgeons will cut the connection between the 2 hemispheres of the brain. After the surgery, patients will have 2 different personalities.

There are even cases where one personality is a theist, the other is an atheist.  

Does the soul get to go to heaven based on the theist side of the brain? Or is it doomed to hell based on the atheist side?

It is simplistic to believe people go to Heaven/Hell depending on whether or not they believe in God. When a person dies, they leave behind their physical bodies, along with any mental illnesses/disorders it may have. At that point, the person is able to think completely clearly and make a conscious decision on whether they want to be with God or not.

Interesting questions, btw. You might find this article enjoyable: http://waitbutwhy.com/2014/12/what-makes-you-you.html (written by an atheist, so it's safe)

(February 26, 2016 at 7:23 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: No, think about it, animals don't know how to discern right and wrong, which is crucial to ones ability to reason.

You're a perfect Ignoramus (no offense to our fellow member). You know nothing about research on that matter and run your virtual mouth. Go, educate yourself on what I quoted. And then come back. Maybe I could take you seriously for once, if you do.

(February 26, 2016 at 5:33 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(February 26, 2016 at 1:54 pm)Nihilist Virus Wrote: All of Genesis was symbolic?

Personally I believe all of the OT are just parables, not historic facts.

So why are the gospels not in the same category?

(February 26, 2016 at 8:56 pm)abaris Wrote:

(February 26, 2016 at 7:23 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: No, think about it, animals don't know how to discern right and wrong, which is crucial to ones ability to reason.

You're a perfect Ignoramus (no offense to our fellow member). You know nothing about research on that matter and run your virtual mouth. Go, educate yourself on what I quoted. And then come back. Maybe I could take you seriously for once, if you do.

To the rest of the members about to read this post I apologize but I must shame this fool.

Are you saying animals live by a moral code?

(February 26, 2016 at 9:51 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: To the rest of the members about to read this post I apologize but I must shame this fool.

Are you saying animals live by a moral code?

You're an idiot. Instead of looking up what I said, you simply come back with what you consider a snide remark. Look in the mirror for some shaming.

And maybe look up Frans De Vaal or Brian Hare. Just for starters. Researchers, you know, who know their stuff, as opposed to you.

See Ya, if you done that.

(February 26, 2016 at 9:55 pm)abaris Wrote:

(February 26, 2016 at 9:51 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: To the rest of the members about to read this post I apologize but I must shame this fool.

Are you saying animals live by a moral code?

You're an idiot. Instead of looking up what I said, you simply come back with what you consider a snide remark. Look in the mirror for some shaming.

And maybe look up Frans De Vaal or Brian Hare. Just for starters. Researchers, you know, who know their stuff, as opposed to you.

See Ya, if you done that.

I see you avoided answering the question, but no matter.

Frans De Waal you say?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frans_de_Waal

Quote:His 2013 book The Bonobo and the Atheist examines human behavior through the eyes of a primatologist, and explores how much God and religion are needed for human morality. The main conclusion is that morality comes from within, and is part of human nature. The role of religion is secondary. De Waal also writes a column for Psychologie, a popular Dutch monthly magazine.

So I take it you agree with that position then?

(February 26, 2016 at 10:15 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: So I take it you agree with that position then?

Do take a look at his actual work instead of wiki, will you?

Or keep talking out of your ass for all I care. And don't forget Brian Hare on you way. And all the others. I won't do your homework. If you want to be the fool, be my guest, for all I care.

For starters.

https://www.ted.com/talks/frans_de_waal_...ave_morals

The rest is up to you.