(August 16, 2014 at 4:10 am)Michael Wrote: Baqal, I think you most have missed my opening paragraph, because you too seem to pursuing, and dismissing, an Aristotelean view of the soul, from which I distanced myself in the opening paragraph of my post ...
Firstly, the OP seems to adopt an Aristotelean model of soul, that a soul is something we have. I would say the biblical meaning is much more that we 'are' souls; that 'soul' describes the essence of our identity.
I do not believe in a soul that interacts with the world AT ALL. As I said, things like souls are always open to subjective definitions. I have two options. I can believe either description of a soul or not believe in any of them because I am able to recognize that the idea of a soul is nothing but pulling the concept to you and modifying it in order to suit your worldview.
Quote:But I am intrigued by your idea that nothing immaterial exists. This would seem to be self-refuting, as that very proposition is immaterial and therefore does not exist. This, of course, was the reason that the logical positivism movement collapsed; it pulled the rug out form under itself in just the same way.
Do you really have to fiddle with abstract ideas? Abstract ideas are measurable in our reality, so they exist. That is the minimum requirement for the existence of anything. They would be completely useless if you do not have a properly working brain that can make them up or recognize them.
