RE: Question about "faith"
September 27, 2020 at 7:26 pm
(This post was last modified: September 27, 2020 at 7:27 pm by possibletarian.)
(September 27, 2020 at 12:29 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: If we know souls are immaterial, that alone begins to give information about what they are not (material) and what they are (immaterial).
If they are said to be a component of human beings, then we know they are inconsistent with chairs and rocks, and consistent with people. We can ask what happens to people in the absence or presence of a soul (death/resurrection) and whether or not it plays out.
I'm sure religions vary with their definitions. Some are better than others. But even if they're abstract, scientists can define concepts operationally for the sake of experimentation. Operational definitions transform abstract concept into testable form. Depression, for example, can be operationally defined as a specific score on a mood test.
Descartes proposed the pineal gland as the seat of the soul, and souls were a mechanism that moved nerves in hydraulic fashion. And yet the Otto experiment I mentioned falsified that by the discovery of neurotransmitters. And pineal glands can be removed without causing death.
We don't actually know anything about souls, they have not yet proven to be anything more than like your god, an idea.
'Those who ask a lot of questions may seem stupid, but those who don't ask questions stay stupid'