Hi,




I am kind of new to being an atheist but none the less I am satisfied in my dis-belief in religion all together. My question is that in the end when the body gives out in a serious of commands from either tramms, disease, malice, wichever it maybe that there is something left other than a roting body? I have had that question on my mind for the last day or two. I took health science in college and loved the anatomy classes that I attended. I remember that the frontal lobe is effected when the homeostasis is thrown off in the body, as well as the nervous system, vital organs and other chemicals. The memory and thought process is distorted to unreconizable to me whether the person is knowning what they are seeing or what they are not.
Is it a mere faberication of their imagination in seeing things? I do not know of any real proof of any spirits existing either to really give way to humans having a soul, correct? There is no spiritual aspect for if there was wouldn't there be more to us other than roting flesh after our bodies give out? Just like there would be more to the church today other than hypocrites and bias ideas of the attenders if there was a jesus, no?

I respect y'all answers and opinions for even though I am an atheist I still think. :-) about these types of questions that I am willing to learn from others on.

Chicken.

I am an atheist therefore I think---

(August 22, 2010 at 3:07 pm)chicken12 Wrote: I do not know of any real proof of any spirits existing either to really give way to humans having a soul, correct?

Correct I'd say. I don't know of any evidence for a soul or spirit either. Do tell me if you find any.

(August 22, 2010 at 3:09 pm)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote:

(August 22, 2010 at 3:07 pm)chicken12 Wrote: I do not know of any real proof of any spirits existing either to really give way to humans having a soul, correct?

Correct I'd say. I don't know of any evidence for a soul or spirit either. Do tell me if you find any.

Thank you FVSE. I thought I was on the right track but it is always good to get other opinions. If there was then I sure will let you know but as of now I don't know or have any knowledge of any.

Chicken

Iam an atheist therefore I think--

The evidence must match the subject to be relevant. As 'souls' are defined as non physical, it would be incorrect to require physical evidence of their existence. So evidence can only be deduced through logic alone.

What defines the soul in many religious endeavours is very different. In xtianity, as I think you may be referring to chicken, it is the essence of a person unrelated to the mind and body.

The term seems well used in popular culture, I have an idea what someone would mean by calling something or someone soulless or having no soul.

It's a problem for critical thinking skills which are in danger of rusting from disuse in modern society. Personally I uphold their importance.

(August 22, 2010 at 4:15 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: The evidence must match the subject to be relevant. As 'souls' are defined as non physical, it would be incorrect to require physical evidence of their existence. So evidence can only be deduced through logic alone.

What defines the soul in many religious endeavours is very different. In xtianity, as I think you may be referring to chicken, it is the essence of a person unrelated to the mind and body.

The term seems well used in popular culture, I have an idea what someone would mean by calling something or someone soulless or having no soul.

It's a problem for critical thinking skills which are in danger of rusting from disuse in modern society. Personally I uphold their importance.

But if there is no evidence of god or jesus as in religious so to speak then how can their be evidence of a soul?

There is evidence chicken, just not physical evidence, or evidence that doesn't require a choice on your part. If there were, then all religions would implode. (don't cheer )

(August 22, 2010 at 5:05 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: There is evidence chicken, just not physical evidence, or evidence that doesn't require a choice on your part. If there were, then all religions would implode. (don't cheer )

What is the non-physical evidence?

Every human characteristic which one would categorize as being part of the human 'soul' has ostensibly been shown to be the product of the brain. Science will produce further evidence and understanding of brain/mind monism, and eventually give us the tools to work with the brain/mind system in ways most people never imagine.

P.S. That which is not observable does not exist. The very act of existing is to be observable.

Mind does not = soul lrh9 (I covered that above)

@ OO : I also said above: "it would be incorrect to require physical evidence of their existence. So evidence can only be deduced through logic alone. "

(August 22, 2010 at 6:24 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: @ OO : I also said above: "it would be incorrect to require physical evidence of their existence. So evidence can only be deduced through logic alone. "

Deductions can be valid and still not be sound.

Man cannot live by syllogisms alone.