(September 6, 2016 at 10:22 am)LadyForCamus Wrote:(September 6, 2016 at 10:17 am)robvalue Wrote: Does it even give a falsifiable definition of a soul?
I'll be astounded if it does.
Yeah, good point. Let's work on a definition before we can even talk about evidence in favor of such a thing.
Did you not read the article?
That was the primary take way from it, was a defination the article gives coinsides/works with the 2007 Theory of Biocentrism. The old term 'soul' is being described in the theory as it's primary biological life force. It is conscientiousness.
That is your definition. This theory explains makes an attempt to account for Conscientiousness as a product of biology. which Robert Lanza, M.D., the currently Chief Scientific Officer at the Astellas Institute for Regenerative Medicine and Adjunct Professor at Wake Forest University School of Medicine.
For the purpose of this article drew parallels with His/our understanding of the word soul.
Both you and bobbie-value want to poo poo on this topic without doing any of the leg work.. Intellectual dishonesty anyone? How about a side of closed minded laziness?
