Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
I don't have any spiritual senses that I'm aware of, my moral system has absolutely nothing to do with souls, and I'm certain that I manage to sleep and to dream without any need of a soul.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
(February 1, 2020 at 6:57 am)Rahn127 Wrote: If we had some kind of soul that could sense anything at all, then we would never have a state we refer to as unconsciousness.
This is getting a little confusing since I stepped away for my wife's B day. But I'll attempt to answer any questions asked of my stance. @Rahn127 - that would be a true statement if the "soul" existed in the conscious state and we had direct conscious access to "soul"'s memory.
(February 4, 2020 at 11:21 pm)EgoDeath Wrote:
(February 3, 2020 at 1:35 pm)tackattack Wrote: I'll just answer your questions as best I can then, and leave the other shit out there:
What is a soul made of, physically? I don't know what an incorporeal thing would be "made of", perhaps something non-baryonic.
So how do you know that a soul is incorporeal? How do you know it's "non-baryonic?" Furthermore, are you a physicist? Or are you just using these words to make it sound like you're saying more than you're actually saying?
I mean, if something is immaterial, how do we even know it is there? Faith?
(February 3, 2020 at 1:35 pm)tackattack Wrote: How do we observe the soul, objectively? I would assume through phenomenology, but that rests on your definition of objective.
So, this is just a fancy way of saying you talk about the soul through philosophy. You're admitting that there is no objective, empirical way to observe the soul. Which is just as good as saying that we don't actually know it's there, not that we know what "it" even is.
(February 3, 2020 at 1:35 pm)tackattack Wrote: How did you discover this method of observation? See above
So, basically, you didn't discover any method.
(February 3, 2020 at 1:35 pm)tackattack Wrote: Did you follow the scientific method in discovering and defining what the soul is? No. Most people are just experiential in their day-to-day, as am I.
So once again, you're admitting that you simply claim to personally experience the soul, and that there is no empirical evidence for it.
(February 3, 2020 at 1:35 pm)tackattack Wrote: Furthermore, how, exactly, does the soul work, specifically? see above and previous posts.
So once again, the answer is you don't know.
So far, we've learned absolutely nothing about the "soul...." Other than, of course, that you've admitted that we cannot observe it objectively, that there is no empirical evidence for it and that you don't eve know what it is made of, how it works, or what it is. We've learned that it is, according to you, possibly immaterial, which is just as good as saying that it isn't there.
Not a very compelling "definition," is it?
I am not a physicist. I do study and love space and physics topics. A lot of people have a problem with immaterial, invisible, supernatural, etc. but all that really means to me is it's not made up of protons, electrons and neutron so I thought a more scientific response would ease tension to facilitate better communication, but I guess you can't please everyone right? You're caught up measuring water with a ruler my friend. Something not so "woo, woo" like the laws of physics, math and morality are immaterial, yet you have no problems with their usefulness day-to-day. There is nothing that necessitates perceptions must enter consciousness to affect our behavior. Many studies prove otherwise. This is just a casual conversation on the Phenomenological existence of a theorized immortal soul. I'm not really trying to convince anyone of anything, just trying to express my belief and prove that a conversation could be had, even if it's dismissed or laughed at.
(February 5, 2020 at 10:03 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: My physical senses don't seem to work the same way that yours do Tack. I don't feel any soul. In fact, my physical senses don't provide me with any non natural information whatsoever.
You either have senses I don't, or you have a soul that I don't. I still have a moral sense, and a mind. What's the best explanation for my not having a soul, while still retaining those things you've claimed soul is the best explanation for?
I believe you do have a soul Gae. We can quibble about the definition and the source. Just as some fish sense electromagnetic fields, and bees detect the charge of ions, and mantis shrimp see circular polarization, why couldn't there be a sense that I have that you don't or that's more practiced than yours? Now I understand all those things other animals see are natural and measurable and a soul might eventually be labeled as a perfectly understandable and natural part of being human. I'm certain, though that other fish perceive the mantis shrimp as having something they don't, and from their perspective super-natural.
(February 5, 2020 at 1:51 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote: So, @tackattack, what do you think about the argument that, if souls really existed, we wouldn't expect people who have been unconscious for a long time not to remember anything during that time, that we would expect them to remember either facing silent darkness or leaving their bodies?
Why wouldn't we? If our primary known inputs for memory into the mind are interrupted (blackouts, or unconsciousness , etc.) then there would be a blank in our conscious mind over that period. I experienced this and it makes perfect sense that it's blank. However my sense of time wasn't impaired and I can also deduce the timeframe my inputs were interrupted. I was still me during those times, I just wasn't recording anything. As for leaving bodies, idk, I haven't experienced that. I would theorize that separating the soul from the body/mind then allows the soul to act/record independently from the mind.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
(February 10, 2020 at 11:54 am)tackattack Wrote: +
Why wouldn't we? If our primary known inputs for memory into the mind are interrupted (blackouts, or unconsciousness , etc.) then there would be a blank in our conscious mind over that period. I experienced this and it makes perfect sense that it's blank. However my sense of time wasn't impaired and I can also deduce the timeframe my inputs were interrupted. I was still me during those times, I just wasn't recording anything. As for leaving bodies, idk, I haven't experienced that. I would theorize that separating the soul from the body/mind then allows the soul to act/record independently from the mind.
Then shut up about it, because I have had such and you are talking utter bollox.
When you have had such an experience, get back to me. Unless and until that happens, you are full of it, because I have had a "personal experience" of it. You know, that thing that you jesus freaks think is SOOOOO important. Well, you can foxtrot right oscar with your meaningless speculation because I have been there and done that. You have not. That is the end of it.
February 10, 2020 at 12:57 pm (This post was last modified: February 10, 2020 at 12:57 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
(February 10, 2020 at 11:54 am)tackattack Wrote:
(February 5, 2020 at 10:03 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: My physical senses don't seem to work the same way that yours do Tack. I don't feel any soul. In fact, my physical senses don't provide me with any non natural information whatsoever.
You either have senses I don't, or you have a soul that I don't. I still have a moral sense, and a mind. What's the best explanation for my not having a soul, while still retaining those things you've claimed soul is the best explanation for?
I believe you do have a soul Gae. We can quibble about the definition and the source. Just as some fish sense electromagnetic fields, and bees detect the charge of ions, and mantis shrimp see circular polarization, why couldn't there be a sense that I have that you don't or that's more practiced than yours? Now I understand all those things other animals see are natural and measurable and a soul might eventually be labeled as a perfectly understandable and natural part of being human. I'm certain, though that other fish perceive the mantis shrimp as having something they don't, and from their perspective super-natural.
Are you basing that belief on some physical sense you have, of me having soul? I don't feel it.
You may have a sense that I don't, this is already conceded as a possibility. That would be a very impressive claim, if you want to make it. I just want to be sure that you're wedded to it.
I'm still wondering what the best explanation would be, in your opinion, for my having a mind and a moral sense..if it turned out that I didn't have a soul. Maybe you do have a super sense..but that won't mean that -I- have a soul.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
@Abaddon_ire - calm down bro, it's just a conversation and just a theory, I'll share my snack pack with you if you'll stop jumping to assumptions, and hate blasting anyone with an opinion different than yours, if you can. Not that I think NDE's are super important, but since you've had one please share with the class.
@Gae Bolga - I don't know you have a soul Gae. I surmise you probably have a soul because, as a believer in souls, and speaking with other soul believers, it seems universal enough that all people (at least) have souls. Serial killers have souls... so souls can't be morality. We're classifying soul as different from the mind, so soul can't be mind. I guess the definition of soul lies somewhere outside those two things (at least).
To answer your very specific question: If you don't have a soul, but have a mind and moral sense, the common explanations are that soul is either non-existent, or not based on mind or moral sense, or definitions are incompatible.
To answer a question you didn't ask. If you do have a soul and a mind and moral sense, but denied your soul exists, the common explanation is it's not meaningful enough to impact your current processing as a materialist, which would fit because it's immaterial.
I perceive in my mind that I have a soul. It is informed by the present, past and actions of my body and thoughts. It inspires, it focuses, it records when the brain is off, it holds the essence of the I that observes my world. I don't "know" that the soul exists beyond death. It would make sense of NDE's and apparitions, objective morality, qualia, etc. and explain things like blindsense (basically seeing without visual cortex at a higher statistical rate than probability) among other things. I suppose fairies sprinkling sight dust on blind people, or mass group hallucinations could explain at least some of those things. Whatever you attribute it to doesn't really matter though, as those things do happen. My white privilege, Christian, North American theological predisposition very well could be just as wrong as fairies. Just as a predisposition of epistemological materialism would by definition assume nothing immaterial could exist.
Apparently discussing it calmly is upsetting to some people but I'm willing to continue for the sake of proving that a discussion can be had without the world ending.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
(February 10, 2020 at 3:26 pm)tackattack Wrote: @Abaddon_ire - calm down bro, it's just a conversation and just a theory, I'll share my snack pack with you if you'll stop jumping to assumptions, and hate blasting anyone with an opinion different than yours, if you can. Not that I think NDE's are super important, but since you've had one please share with the class.
Calm down from where? Or what? What makes you think I care about your opinions. I deal in facts. And you don't have any. Does that discombobulate me? Nope. I read your posts and laugh out loud at my screen because they are so spectacularly nuts. Actual christians think your ideas are nuts.
Actual theologians of my direct acquaintance think your ideas are nuts. I directly asked the question. If you don't want your belief or faith dragged into disrepute by this kind if wingnuttery, why don't you do something about it? His answer was illuminating. And rather depressing.
Either soul is the best explanation for mind and morality..as you indicated, or it isn't.
I have no problem imagining a world in which you have a sixth sense that I don't, and a soul. I see no reason why, in that world where you have a sixth sense and a soul, that soul would be an explanation for mind or morality. I think that you're tacitly assuming too much. As though, if a soul existed, it explained either thing by default.
We can imagine any combination of these ideas you're playing with. That I don't have a soul but do have the sixth sense. That I have the sixth sense but not the soul. That I have both. In no combination does soul ever present itself as an explanation for morality or mind. Frankly, whether my morality depends on soul isn't even a credible issue of disagreement.
I know that you believe in soul. The existence of soul isn't even a productive discussion between us. Lay that aside. You believe in soul. I know that. What I don't know is why you believe that soul is an or even the best explanation for mind or morality. This is no small thing, and there's no necessary reason for us to disagree here. You indicated that your belief in soul was predicate on this claim..but is that true? Even if it isn't, that wouldn't mean that there was no soul - it would only mean that you had to find a way to more accurately communicate why you believe in their existence. You either believe in soul for this invalid reason, or you have some other not-blatantly-invalid reason for believing in soul. If it's the latter..I'm trying to help you articulate that - not trying to prove that there is no soul or meandering around in a useless conversation about it's existence.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
tackattack Wrote:Why wouldn't we? If our primary known inputs for memory into the mind are interrupted (blackouts, or unconsciousness , etc.) then there would be a blank in our conscious mind over that period.
If our conscious minds were indeed souls (rather than generated by the brain), which can, among other things, perceive time, than we certainly would expect people who have been unconscious for weeks or months to be able to tell how much time has passed. The fact that they can't, that they usually report it felt like a very short period of time, severely undermines the plausibility of the souls existing.
By the way, what do you think of this article against NDEs? I used to believe in souls for quite some time after I stopped believing in God, souls seemed to me far less absurd than God, but that article really opened my eyes. How much have I been misled to by the apologetic literature (that's readily available in Croatian, but the atheist literature isn't so much)...
