(September 26, 2020 at 9:50 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:(September 26, 2020 at 9:05 pm)possibletarian Wrote: Then how would you tell if there was a soul, what about a soul would we be able to test ?
I don't know enough about souls to give you an answer; they're just not in principle unfalsifiable. If a theory predicts that an egg drop will break an egg, but it also predicts that it won't break an egg, that theory is unfalsifiable because it predicts all possible experimental outcomes. Nothing about the description of souls predicts all possible outcomes.
Scientists spend much of their time figuring out precisely how to test things. That's not an easy question to answer. Many breakthrough in science occurred after someone finally figured out a clever way to test something. An example that comes to mind was the hypothesis that neurons communicate via chemical signals, not electrical signals. For a long time nobody knew how to test this hypothesis until Otto Loewi came up with a clever experiment. He stimulated the parasympathetic nerve of a heart inside a liquid solution, and then bathed a second heart with that same solution and observed as the heart rate decreased. Thus concluding that neural transmission was chemical and those chemicals had diffused into the solution. This story is famous because Otto came up with the idea for the experiment in a dream he had lol.
Short answer: That's for you to figure out.
Well that's just the point, I can't figure it out, I've seen you type lots but am still at a loss as to what you are trying to convey.
If you don't know how to test for a soul, simply say so, if you claim their presence (should they exist) is testable then simply say how. Quoting material objects like eggs and other growing knowledge about physical things does nothing to aid comprehension of what you are saying I'm afraid.
'Those who ask a lot of questions may seem stupid, but those who don't ask questions stay stupid'