RE: Is the soul eternal
September 12, 2010 at 6:22 pm
(This post was last modified: September 12, 2010 at 6:26 pm by theVOID.)
(September 10, 2010 at 10:55 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote:(September 10, 2010 at 7:30 pm)theVOID Wrote: Freud is a chump but at least he admitted his theory wasn't science.
I think Freud gets some slack for being a pioneer in the field. Even though he got a lot wrong, he at least blazed the trail for those who would follow.
Cutting a path through the bush in the wrong direction does not help those who want to go in the right direction.
(September 11, 2010 at 1:18 pm)tackattack Wrote: Void, It was not meant to be unfair. You either can accept the assumption that it might exist and (since it is by definition intangible and unprovale materialistically) share your opinion on whether it's eternal or not or you can withold assuming anything. If you're unwilling to assume anything then the third option is for you. This poll is fairly simply a poll for people who feel there is a soul, or can temporarily accept that mental construct for the purposes of qualifying an abstraction.
Why should i accept the assumption? What arguments do you have in favor of substance dualism?
If the soul exists and is non-physical then it should be immune to physical death no? Then it would be "eternal" or at least immortal, since my soul wasn't existent prior to my birth was it?
The third option is not representative of my beliefs as it is phrased to suggest that i am denying something that actually exists...
.
