So I went looking for evidence of a soul...

[lilphil1989]

LOL So the air escaping a body means diddly squat because ar pressure already factors in the zero reading unless we're in a vacuum and the air escaping the body also escapes the vacuum

I don't quite know what you mean about a vacuum, but yeah. If you weigh yourself having breathed out, then weigh yourselves with inflated lungs, the weight is the same, because the air in your lungs is at equilibrium with the air surrounding you.
If you were to breathe helium, it would have an effect on your weight (because a constant volume of helium at constant pressure weighs less than that volume of air at that pressure). And make your voice sound funny too

[fr0d0]

Well wouldn't a vacuum be a possible container for zero weight ie no air?

[Violet]

Actually... all air has weight. That it doesn't weigh much does not mean it is weightless Different air has different weight. An interesting thing about our body: we breath oxygen (and other gasses) in... and breath CO2 (and those other gasses) out. I do not know how much weight was supposedly lost by the bodies when they died... but I think that losing the weight of the contained air is accumulative with whatever else is responsible for the loss in weight. Supposedly not much weight was lost in the study... and air does not weigh much. So it could easily be partly (or fully?) responsible for the weight lost.

A vacuum would have nothing within it... so there would be no weight.

[lilphil1989]

Well wouldn't a vacuum be a possible container for zero weight ie no air?

A vacuum can't be a container, since it is just the absence of matter.

[Violet]

But a vacuum might be within a container. I don't see how it would work... because just like with absolute zero: the inside of the container interferes with its existence.

Edit: and why does a soul need weight again?

[lilphil1989]

but I think that losing the weight of the contained air is accumulative with whatever else is responsible for the loss in weight. Supposedly not much weight was lost in the study... and air does not weigh much.

Breathing out does not affect your weight . I'm not saying air is weightless, but our scales are calibrated in such a way that they read zero when the only force on them is due to the pressure of the atmosphere above them i.e when there's "nothing" on them (apart from the air)

[Rhizomorph13]

Air has mass

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_does_..._in_pounds

a large ballon will weigh more than a small balloon when they both have the same amount of rubber due to the greater volume of air.

Sae,

Read the Snopes article for your answers except your question about a soul having weight. Why wouldn't a soul have weight? We don't really have a solid definition of a soul but by the occult definition it is a vehicle for the spirit, which is sometimes described as a trancendental part of us.

I DO NOT believe in a spirit anymore.

Rhizo

[Edwardo Piet]

Not really sure[...]

I guess we may have to just agree to disagree on it then eh?

Like I said, my own personal experiences are the evidence for me.

Evidence 'to you', it's evidence 'to you'? What like something being 'true to you'? Isn't evidence an objective thing? I mean, if someone said that the fact Clouds exist 'to them' is evidence that God exists, then is that evidence? Just because it is 'to them'?

I understand that it's evidence 'to you', but does that really make it evidence unless you have reason to believe that it is actually evidence, that applies to everyone, and is objective, in reality? I mean...is personal experience really evidence, if it's impartial to whether it's 'you' or not...if it was someone else who had had the experience - would you believe them? If 70,000 people see the sun crashing to Earth, and yet it obviously didn't happen, is your experience to be accounted above them simply because it's you? My view is that, no matter how intense the experience, alternative possibilities are much more likely.

I understand that you see there to be a reason to believe. But I don't quite get the phrase of it being 'evidence to you', I mean, is it evidence or not? There are standards of evidence - something isn't merely evidence if it is 'to you', or whoever else.

Assuming there is an abrupt weight loss at the point of death, it would be interesting to know what accounts for it. What if the soul is real and material?

Rhizo

Indeed, 'What if'? I'll believe it when I know of any evidence. I'm not asking for you to provide any. I'm just giving my view.

The fact that you don't believe it does not mean it didn't happen. ... The fact that you think I am saying YOU should believe is just your erroneous reading of my post.

What is the word? My vocabulary fails me. It is something between ironic and serendipitous that you are raising this point over here with Evie while, at essentially the same time, I'm raising the exact same point in another thread elsewhere with Eilonnwy. Awesome, hilarious, ironic, serendipitous, neato, something.

It may be an amusing coincidence to you. But the point he made was a strawman, since I never said such a thing. So ironically, it was an erroneous reading of my post, not the other way around.

EvF

[Rhizomorph13]

EvF,

Ok, its like this, if someone tells me they saw the sun crash to the ground I would reject the reality behind it without further evidence but I would understand why they held a belief in what they saw. I would also consider it a waste of time trying to argue them out of their position because I know the effect of personal experience.

As far as dualism is concerned I think we can just agree that there is no thing besides the material world. After thinking about posts regarding this thread and other musings I have had, I would either have to go back to being a theist and believe in my triune model of reality OR give up on personal experience as evidence.

I concede that personal experience is not evidence and there is probably NOT a soul. This is why we have these discussions though right?

Rhizo

[Violet]

What is a soul if it is not a spirit of some sort? Honest question... I don't see what it is being recast as here...

Personal experience can contain evidence... sometimes one cannot reveal it because of the evidence's personal nature however. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_silence Your personal experience might or might not be true... but we do not have anything to go off of, so it would be hard to convince others of what very well might be true...

If person experience is not evidence... then what is a witness, and why are they used in court?