Posts: 863
Threads: 49
Joined: January 2, 2021
Reputation:
11
The problem of the soul
July 31, 2021 at 7:51 am
The idea of a soul is kind of horrible, isn't it? The implications are dreadful to consider.
Like, what is going on with the soul if I get a head injury and my personality changes as a result? What if I was Christian before but after the injury, I become an atheist? Which version of me is my soul? Does the soul get "damaged" and impacted by the injury also? So, is it physical or not? Or does my real personality and true self stay inside me somewhere, locked away while my new brain injury personality heals and continues living? Where does the new personality come from?
Posts: 32979
Threads: 1412
Joined: March 15, 2013
Reputation:
152
RE: The problem of the soul
July 31, 2021 at 7:56 am
I perceive the soul as one of those primitive concepts that have no place in our advanced understanding of the human psyche.
"Never trust a fox. Looks like a dog, behaves like a cat."
~ Erin Hunter
Posts: 6112
Threads: 53
Joined: September 25, 2018
Reputation:
20
RE: The problem of the soul
July 31, 2021 at 7:56 am
Just another fundamentally unsound misconception of a primitive mind.
Posts: 6112
Threads: 53
Joined: September 25, 2018
Reputation:
20
RE: The problem of the soul
July 31, 2021 at 9:36 am
Ancient humans knew nothing of the natural sciences around them. They created scenarios to ease their frightened minds and caress their fragile egos.
Posts: 1465
Threads: 31
Joined: November 29, 2020
Reputation:
8
RE: The problem of the soul
July 31, 2021 at 9:43 am
(This post was last modified: July 31, 2021 at 9:44 am by Spongebob.)
(July 31, 2021 at 7:56 am)Foxaire Wrote: I perceive the soul as one of those primitive concepts that have no place in our advanced understanding of the human psyche.
This OP is dipping into one of the most fascinating subjects known. Personally, I don't subscribe to the idea of a soul. But I stop short of truly criticizing the idea because some of the greatest human minds took it very seriously. I don't believe you can dismiss the idea as a "primitive concept" when people like Socrates, Plato and Aristotle gave it serious consideration.
(July 31, 2021 at 9:36 am)no one Wrote: Ancient humans knew nothing of the natural sciences around them. They created scenarios to ease their frightened minds and caress their fragile egos.
To whom are you referring to when you say "ancient"?
Why is it so?
~Julius Sumner Miller
Posts: 6112
Threads: 53
Joined: September 25, 2018
Reputation:
20
RE: The problem of the soul
July 31, 2021 at 9:59 am
Humans that lived a very, very (by human standards) long time ago.
The beginningish of modern humans.
Posts: 28299
Threads: 522
Joined: June 16, 2015
Reputation:
90
RE: The problem of the soul
July 31, 2021 at 10:04 am
I find it problematic that only humans have (created) souls. But then, only humans create gods.
Got a problem with your soul, sell it.
Being told you're delusional does not necessarily mean you're mental.
Posts: 16928
Threads: 461
Joined: March 29, 2015
Reputation:
30
RE: The problem of the soul
July 31, 2021 at 10:10 am
Or how do you torture a soul? Or why would you need to punish a soul because of what it did in a completely different world than the one where souls live? Why punish someone for theft or murder or rape since in the world of souls you can't do any of that?
teachings of the Bible are so muddled and self-contradictory that it was possible for Christians to happily burn heretics alive for five long centuries. It was even possible for the most venerated patriarchs of the Church, like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, to conclude that heretics should be tortured (Augustine) or killed outright (Aquinas). Martin Luther and John Calvin advocated the wholesale murder of heretics, apostates, Jews, and witches. - Sam Harris, "Letter To A Christian Nation"
Posts: 29628
Threads: 116
Joined: February 22, 2011
Reputation:
159
RE: The problem of the soul
July 31, 2021 at 10:13 am
(This post was last modified: July 31, 2021 at 10:33 am by Angrboda.)
The soul is a lot like free will in that it has intuitive appeal and seems necessary as a building block upon which other necessary things are built.
The problems are twofold, defining it, and then figuring out how such a thing can be squared with a naturalistic account of the universe.
Does that mean it doesn't exist? I don't think it does mean that, but as always, the burden of proof remains on anyone who wants to claim it does exist. That burden hasn't yet been met.
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)
