Arguments against Soul

[Simon Moon]

Ultimately, consciousness is simply very large amounts of electrons transitioning from one energy state to others, if you wish, a kaleidoscope of light and energy, but, consciousness is just matter and energy, nothing more.

This all looks very scientific, but it relies on the assumption that consciousness equals soul. That hasn't been demonstrated yet.

I don't see how?

It seems to me, just to point out that, consciousness is a function of physical processes in a physical brain. There is no need that I see, to invoke a soul at all. Whether the soul is coequal or equivalent to consciousness or not.

There is evidence for physical brains, there is evidence for physical brains producing activity, and there is evidence for consciousness. Where is the evidence in any of that where a soul fits in?

How would you explain, things like, complete changes in personality, memory, tastes, etc, when someone has a brain injury? Yet you are saying that even after the ultimate brain injury, brain death, there is something left, that can lift off of the brain and continue to survive.

I have an aunt that had a fall about 8 years ago, and had bleeding in her frontal lobe and temporal lobes. After her 'recovery' she went from being the nicest person you'd ever want to meet, to a raving bitch.

So, what are the attributes of her soul? The nice person she once was, or the bitch?