Disproving The Soul

[Whateverist]

My major point here is if something like anesthesia can affect the brain in such a way that there is an absolute absence of consciousness, why can't death?

Absolutely does. Unfortunate parallel though. With anesthesia you can ask 'where does your consciousness go' since it obviously returns. With death, there is no return and no place to go.

They say this "soul" is immaterial and it explains consciousness.

My argument is that because of anesthesia and the effects that it has, consciousness cannot be explained from an immaterial perspective. It absolutely must be explained through a materialistic point of view. Therefore, when your material body ceases to function, so does your consciousness.

My side argument is that we were not conscious before birth, so we will not be conscious after death.

I largely agree but I'm not sure there is much agreement on the definition of terms, especially soul. I agree with you that there is no you (and what-ever-you-want-to-call-it) before or after death. But I wouldn't think you can exhaustively explain what it is like to be conscious in a solely materialistic fashion. Science should/may eventually lay bare the necessary physiological conditions for the existence of consciousness. But I have to doubt how that approach could ever yield the sufficient conditions to create a novel, poem or a painting. I doubt that the necessary and sufficient conditions for the writing of Vonnegut's Cats Cradle will ever be known. Likewise I don't see how we will ever be able to do more than catalog the first person phenomena of consciousness through our own reportage.

My only difference with Michael is that I don't see what imagining a being or a place where every stray thought, soul and snowflake can be warehoused for all time makes any difference. For me, soul/identity is a mystery to be experienced and enjoyed here, the only place it will ever exist, and now, its only fleeting time.