Could you still be an Atheist and believe in a "Soul"?

[CristW]

This poll is stupid. Yes, one can be an atheist and believe in a soul.

Next.

Yes, if you are a confused social conservative atheist ...anything is possible. The poll would not exist if the oxymoron did not exist in the first place: social conservative atheists. Well, they exist but so has the Dinosaurs. It's like thinking: Hey, some people have seen ghosts therefore a soul exist! without even knowing the source of the phenomenon to even conclude the previous.

Sorry, it takes a "leap of faith" to believe in a soul. The burden of proof is on the one who believes in a "soul".

I ask: where is the proof?

Plato does not even know where the "soul" goes even though he claimed to believe in one. Actually, the real question should have been (during his era) if there is a soul in the first place. Gorgas went into another extreme angle(philosophical Nihilism / rather believing in nothing) rather than moderating his stance. So, the previous provides us that even the ancient Greeks did not start at the reasonable starting point: Is there proof of a "soul"?

[Mudhammam]

This poll is stupid. Yes, one can be an atheist and believe in a soul.

Next.

Yes, if you are a confused social conservative atheist ...anything is possible. The poll would not exist if the oxymoron did not exist in the first place: social conservative atheists. Well, they exist but so has the Dinosaurs.

I really don't follow what "social conservatism" has to do with the question - or definition - of a "soul," or Plato's soul.

I guess you must be one of those "intellectual" atheists since your reasoning soars so far beyond me.

[ignoramus]

[robvalue]

"Soul", as generally used, is an incredibly poorly defined concept. If some sort of essence does exist independent of our physical bodies, then I don't see what this has to do with "God" (another even more vaguely defined concept). Sure, a god could make beings with souls, if we entertain these fantastical ideas. But there could also just be beings with souls, maybe even including an afterlife, with no god involved.

So yes. An atheist can belief whatever nonsense drivel they want that doesn't involve gods.

Considering this is all hypothetical made-up stuff with no current grounding in reality, the rules are arbitrary as far as I'm concerned.

If instead you're defining soul in a specific way which requires a god, then yes, it requires a god.

[ignoramus]

I think he's talking about an "objective" description of the soul?!

[CristW]

"Soul", as generally used, is an incredibly poorly defined concept. If some sort of essence does exist independent of our physical bodies, then I don't see what this has to do with "God" (another even more vaguely defined concept). Sure, a god could make beings with souls, if we entertain these fantastical ideas. But there could also just be beings with souls, maybe even including an afterlife, with no god involved.

So yes. An atheist can belief whatever nonsense drivel they want that doesn't involve gods.

Considering this is all hypothetical made-up stuff with no current grounding in reality, the rules are arbitrary as far as I'm concerned.

If instead you're defining soul in a specific way which requires a god, then yes, it requires a god.

You just proved my point: More questioning would create further absurdities. The last point you made is the Plato/Socratic beginning of ancient Greece.

It is all "fantastical ideas" because the burden of proof is on the Theists (and even on the OUTLIER called the social conservative atheist who believe in a "soul" and Plato's creator).

[Aroura]

This poll does not have any option for souls having nothing to do with god, so as far as I'm concerned, it's shitty poll.

I don't personally believe in souls, but even if it turns out they exist, that is not proof of god, just of souls.

[CristW]

I think he's talking about an "objective" description of the soul?!

Yes, of course, it is "objective" but still Plato believed in the possible transmigration of the "soul" and he mentioned "objective" in the sense that the belief in a soul would create social virtues.

This was refuted by the actual events of the Athenian siege.

Also, Plato in the MENO dialogue mentions the soul as immortal and it possibly could transmigrate. If you read the dialogue passage you could see that modern psychology answers his questioning concerning his concept of the "soul".

[Alex K]

Yes, but.
If you're atheist for the right reasons, you don't believe in an immortal soul.

[robvalue]

Almost all sceptics are likely to be atheists, but not all atheists are sceptics.