Pure Brutality

[Sheldon]

@Sheldon

Earlier when you said "if you can't demonstrate anything approaching objective evidence a soul or spirit exists, then I have no sound or objective reason to accept claims they do" it gave me the impression that you wanted to talk about soul and spirit, and whether there's any reason to think that they exist.

If I was mistaken in this impression I apologize. I won't bother you any more.

Try reading the whole post for context, and the post I was responding to, instead of leaping on one sentence, and spinning into another chance to cite an ancient greek philosopher, without proper context. 

It should have given you the impression I was responding to a specific claim about spirituality by another poster, and that I was asserting my own criteria for belief, while asking that poster for clarity on what he meant. I even quoted the dictionary definition of that word for clarity, (which contained the words spirit and soul), and questioned how his vague definition differed from it, and off you went to how ancient Greeks defined the word soul, as if I didn't already know that word definitions have evolved over time.

adjective
1.
relating to or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.

You see the last emboldenced part right? So a long piece of word salad name dropping Aristotle, just to present a different definition, had no relevance. I also challenged your sweeping and unevidenced claims about what most christians believe a soul to be, I challenged you to evidence that, and you offered nada. 

The Catholic catechism seems to think it is immortal, created by (a) god, and that it does not die when the body dies:

CITATION