RE: Arguments against Soul
January 31, 2020 at 12:59 pm
(This post was last modified: January 31, 2020 at 1:33 pm by adey67.)
I'm late to the party but I'll try and answer the original question.
There is absolutely zero emperical evidence that there is a mysterious invisible indestructible immortal life force or soul that houses our thoughts memories and personality, zero evidence, nil zip none nada.
Remember that if it interacts with senses like sight hearing and smell(which it must do otherwise its pretty useless) it or its effects absolutely should be detectable.
There isn't a single argument for a soul religious or otherwise that doesn't invoke to a greater or lesser degree some forms of magical thinking, assertions without evidence, leaps of faith, belief in woo etc.
There isn't one single argument for a soul that has any form of reasonable proof that doesn't involve unfalsifiable anecdotal claims or involve confirmation bias cognative dissonance etc.
Not to put to fine a point on it positive confirmation of the existance of a soul would be the biggest news story in world history forget 9/11 WW 1 or WW2 this would be the big one and take science in exciting new directions, the discoverer would have already claimed their Nobel prize and joined the lecture circuit yet all I hear is crickets chirping.
Maybe in the future the existance of a soul might be definitively proven in which case I'll change my mind but the overwhelming probability so far is that this is incredibly unlikely to happen.
There is absolutely zero emperical evidence that there is a mysterious invisible indestructible immortal life force or soul that houses our thoughts memories and personality, zero evidence, nil zip none nada.
Remember that if it interacts with senses like sight hearing and smell(which it must do otherwise its pretty useless) it or its effects absolutely should be detectable.
There isn't a single argument for a soul religious or otherwise that doesn't invoke to a greater or lesser degree some forms of magical thinking, assertions without evidence, leaps of faith, belief in woo etc.
There isn't one single argument for a soul that has any form of reasonable proof that doesn't involve unfalsifiable anecdotal claims or involve confirmation bias cognative dissonance etc.
Not to put to fine a point on it positive confirmation of the existance of a soul would be the biggest news story in world history forget 9/11 WW 1 or WW2 this would be the big one and take science in exciting new directions, the discoverer would have already claimed their Nobel prize and joined the lecture circuit yet all I hear is crickets chirping.
Maybe in the future the existance of a soul might be definitively proven in which case I'll change my mind but the overwhelming probability so far is that this is incredibly unlikely to happen.
