The problem of the soul

[Angrboda]

I'm not sure any of this is productive.

[Spongebob]

@WinterHold said:

Essentially that's what I meant by "transitional" state: Plasma is a temporary state that superheated matter goes through: that's not "matter" -even if science said so today- but rather a "transitional state into something we didn't yet discover".

The question I would ask myself is this: what happens to matter after turning to plasma? what's the next state?

But you are simply wrong about this.  We have established that it is consensus science that plasma is matter.  That case is closed.  Any arguments to the contrary are outside of science.

Clearly you didn't read what I posted earlier about neon lights.  Neon lights are an example of plasma.  Plasma is just heated gas, which forms ions.  Ions are not something other than matter or outside our understanding; they are just atoms with a number of electrons stripped away or added on; nothing more.  You can have ions in liquid state as well.  High school chemistry students understand this stuff.

In a neon light, you flip a switch, energy is added in the form of electricity and plasma is formed from the gas inside the tubes.  You can leave it on for years if you like; nothing transitional about it.  Turn off the switch, the energy goes away and the gas returns to its more stable state.  There is no "after turning to plasma".  There's nothing fantastic about it; it's pretty boring physics, actually.  There's way more astonishing physics out there to ponder; stuff we can barely understand.

I believe what you may be thinking about it what happens to matter (atoms) if they are torn apart, if the atom itself is broken into its constituent parts.  Well, there's a simple answer to that one as well:

[The Grand Nudger]

I think there's more actual valid debate to be had in grand nudger's assertion.  Why can't god be made of matter?  

Historically, the immateriality of god is related to convictions regarding it's incorruptibility.  However, we're told that they're immensely powerful and interact with and within the world and that this is an objective phenomena.  

Stuff that objectively interacts with other stuff is the same sort of stuff in that respect, at least, or so it seems to me.

@WinterHold
What do you think?  Can god be made of stuff?  If so, what sort of stuff..if not, why not?

[Angrboda]

I think there's more actual valid debate to be had in grand nudger's assertion.  Why can't god be made of matter?  

Historically, the immateriality of god is related to convictions regarding it's incorruptibility.  However, we're told that they're immensely powerful and interact with and within the world and that this is an objective phenomena.  

Stuff that objectively interacts with other stuff is the same sort of stuff in that respect, at least, or so it seems to me.

@WinterHold
What do you think?  Can god be made of stuff?  If so, what sort of stuff..if not, why not?

That's very reminiscent of Popper's Third World, which many see as a problem. If there's a world where one kind of stuff interacts, and a second world where a different kind of stuff interacts, then there must be a third world where world one stuff and world two stuff are able to interact. I tend to see the problems inherent in such a view arguing strongly for monism. However, in a monist world, a lot of God stuff wouldn't happen.

[WinterHold]

[Spongebob]

[The Grand Nudger]

He is totally unique, our eyes cant even see him in this life, when I picture God I just picture a blank void; 

There's alot of stuff our eyes cant see, a whole universe of unique stuff just like that, isn't there?  

actually we were taught that from a very young age by our parents as Muslims; Anthropomorphism is despised by Islam.

Is a burger being made out of stuff anthropomorphizing a burger?  Is that what you think the term refers to?  

What your parents were probably trying to tell you is that it's not kosher to imagine god as a human man with a face, etc.  Most stuff isn't a human man, and doesn't have a face, more of the same from above.

I'm trying to figure out why god can't be stuff.  Not wondering whether it has a visible penis.

By the by, the impulses in the brain aren't actually electricity, we're not a piece of consumer electronics (as the contention goes, we're not a program or even the machine, we're the product of the immensely powerful drugs the whole thing is sitting in)- but it makes for a good analogy to how being could be mechanically arrived at. If that thing, our being, which you call a soul...can be stuff.... and you seem to believe very strongly that it is stuff....that only makes it even more mystifying that you reject the notion of god as stuff. Doesn't it?

[Neo-Scholastic]

Historically, the immateriality of god is related to convictions regarding it's incorruptibility.  However, we're told that they're immensely powerful and interact with and within the world and that this is an objective phenomena.  

Stuff that objectively interacts with other stuff is the same sort of stuff in that respect, at least, or so it seems to me.

@WinterHold
What do you think?  Can god be made of stuff?  If so, what sort of stuff..if not, why not?

That's very reminiscent of Popper's Third World, which many see as a problem. If there's a world where one kind of stuff interacts, and a second world where a different kind of stuff interacts, then there must be a third world where world one stuff and world two stuff are able to interact. I tend to see the problems inherent in such a view arguing strongly for monism. However, in a monist world, a lot of God stuff wouldn't happen.

Not every problem is a defeater though. As a common objection to dualism it is really and argument from ignorance and or incredulity. If the only positions we can reasonably hold are those without unresolved problems then we could not reasonably hold any positions.

[Angrboda]

That's very reminiscent of Popper's Third World, which many see as a problem.  If there's a world where one kind of stuff interacts, and a second world where a different kind of stuff interacts, then there must be a third world where world one stuff and world two stuff are able to interact.  I tend to see the problems inherent in such a view arguing strongly for monism.  However, in a monist world, a lot of God stuff wouldn't happen.

Not every problem is a defeater though. As a common objection to dualism it is really and argument from ignorance and or incredulity. If the only positions we can reasonably hold are those without unresolved problems then we could not reasonably hold any positions.

It might also be a question of infinite regress or a mereological issue. I don't know. I hadn't considered your objection previously. I'm not sure it's necessarily so. I'll have to give it some thought.

[Ahriman]

The human soul can be shaped throughout a person's entire lifetime, unlike the mind, which develops very early in a person's life.