Do people have souls???

[Rafael Dera]

Sure, we have a soul. Sort of.
There's 25 leprechauns living inside our heads, telling us what to do and moving the various bits and pieces of our bodies around, and telling us how to think and feel. There are many arguments for the leprechaun postulate:
1: It's nicer to believe in leprechauns. Compared to a soul that might spend eternity in (not nice place) for doing something a (or some) vague supernatural being(s) might find offensive in some way.
2: You can't prove we don't all have leprechauns in our head, since they're really small and science can't detect things on their scale of teeny tinyness. You thinking you don't have leprechauns in your head is exactly what the trickster-leprechaun (part of the great mystery of 25) wants you to think.
3: The mad trappings of man cannot possibly be the result of a deity, or chemicals. The first would suggest some higher reason, the other a reasonable explanation; the both of which are clearly preposterous. 25 leprechauns, whirling about, fidgeting and frolicking. The world would be a better place if everyone accepted their inner leprechauns.
4: When we die, some of the leprechauns go out and find new people (kicking out the feeblest of the previous leprechauns) which explains why some people remember previous lives.

I could go on; but i guess i'm trying to say that any point can be argumented.
Anything stated without proof can be dismissed without proof.

Good luck with the essay.

 

[Ampersand]

I think some have souls. But to me a soul is more of a purpose then a spiritual presence. There are people who have a purpose but no soul because their heart has been filled with greed or power. Thats just my thought though.

This is one of the problems that i have with the word soul, everyone seems to have a different meaning for it.
I would refer to what you just described as ones Bushido(or in my case Aikido), but that's just me.

Is that basically your Chi or whatever lol.

Ha. No, not even close.
It refers to the principles by which you live your life.

 

[LogicNProportion]

I don't think so.

I think we are just incredibly self-aware.

Ask yourself this: have you, or have you ever heard anyone say, "my body"?

Would that suggest you are more than your physical self?

It would seem to. But I think this is more just self-awareness taken to a new level.

That question was deeply profound and made me warm and fuzzy on the inside. I applaud you. It's great to see someone of obvious deep intelligence/wisdom.

As for the question, I think we have souls, or at least, a collective consciousness that we are able to project to look upon ourselves. Sorry if that's worded oddly, but I think we are much more than our purely physical forms.

Just for the books, I'm Catholic, but I believe spirituality and religion can easily go hand in hand with science and logic if people just stopped being asses on each side.

 

[Byere]

Yes, you have a soul...

...and then Yuri will come along, kill you and take it and use it to power up his fusion monsters!

 

[Unesh52]

My argument for that is well the play in on grief and the sorrow we feel for the loss of a fellow human along with love and how it does genuinely extend past mere infatuation and obsession. It brings true happiness, something that no material possession can bring about within us. Emotions such as these in my opinion honestly convince me that there is something more to us than a Physical body and mind. That we are indeed something more on the inside whether it be tangible or not. I might go with a light that lies deep within as a semblance for what a Soul might be, but that's just my interpretation.

I'm having a little trouble reading due to some grammatical fudges; watch that, would you? What I'm hearing is that Love is such a profound and powerful emotion that it cannot possibly be explained by science. I find this to be an unsupported and quixotic idea. It's been my impression that we've studied Love a lot and found out a lot about it. It may not be caused by satisfaction of petty, materialistic desires, but that doesn't mean it's magic. Why shouldn't love be explained by chemical processes and be predicted by sociological theory like other emotions? What makes it special? Besides not being caused by getting "things."

In a christian sense i believe the "Spirit" is the part of you that moves on once you die.
Its what lets people tap into and feel the supernatural, and what lets people move through God and the Holy Spirit.
I do believe that it and the "Soul/mind" are linked like the "Body" and "Soul" are linked.
As is Physical trauma can effect the mind, and Mental distress can effect the Spirit.
Though that's just what i was taught, though i do believe it to be true.

And while im skeptical of things lacking Evidence, i can believe in things that lack evidence.

Well then, "spirit" seems to be the thing that the OP was referring to as a "soul." I'll use that from now on. Where is it then? Is it observable? You seem to define the soul by things that are themselves up for debate. If I accept God, Heaven, the "supernatural," and all that, then I guess the soul is a necessary vessel to transport your consciousness from the physical realm to the abstract one. In which case, by extension of the typical conclusion of the God debate, you just believe in souls or you don't. In that case, I don't.

I'm not sure what you're on about with the second part there, about the connection between the soul, mind, body, and spirit. It doesn't seem to be a response to anything I said. And I don't have an opinion on any of that since I deny the existence of souls in the first place.

 

[Gigaguy64]

In a christian sense i believe the "Spirit" is the part of you that moves on once you die.
Its what lets people tap into and feel the supernatural, and what lets people move through God and the Holy Spirit.
I do believe that it and the "Soul/mind" are linked like the "Body" and "Soul" are linked.
As is Physical trauma can effect the mind, and Mental distress can effect the Spirit.
Though that's just what i was taught, though i do believe it to be true.

And while im skeptical of things lacking Evidence, i can believe in things that lack evidence.

Well then, "spirit" seems to be the thing that the OP was referring to as a "soul." I'll use that from now on. Where is it then? Is it observable? You seem to define the soul by things that are themselves up for debate. If I accept God, Heaven, the "supernatural," and all that, then I guess the soul is a necessary vessel to transport your consciousness from the physical realm to the abstract one. In which case, by extension of the typical conclusion of the God debate, you just believe in souls or you don't. In that case, I don't.

I'm not sure what you're on about with the second part there, about the connection between the soul, mind, body, and spirit. It doesn't seem to be a response to anything I said. And I don't have an opinion on any of that since I deny the existence of souls in the first place.

Yea, you can really say "Where" it is because its a Spiritual thing.
Its inside you but, its not like an organ.
I believe its your, if you will, "Life Force", its something born of the supernatural that sets us apart form all other forms of life.
Really, i cant describe the Spirit it outside of my religious context because i believe its completely tied to God.
And like you said, its really gonna come down to either you Believe they exist, or not.

And sorry, i just started to ramble for a sec there...
Though just to be clear, i believe that the Mind IS the Soul.
Its you, your personality and so on, but Soul is used to describe the Supernatural aspect most of the time.

 

[Unesh52]

Yea, you can really say "Where" it is because its a Spiritual thing.
Its inside you but, its not like an organ.
I believe its your, if you will, "Life Force", its something born of the supernatural that sets us apart form all other forms of life.
Really, i cant describe the Spirit it outside of my religious context because i believe its completely tied to God.
And like you said, its really gonna come down to either you Believe they exist, or not.

And sorry, i just started to ramble for a sec there...
Though just to be clear, i believe that the Mind IS the Soul.
Its you, your personality and so on, but Soul is used to describe the Supernatural aspect most of the time.

Well, if it's got no physical existence, then it's not proper to say it's inside you, regardless. A non-entity cannot occupy any space -- I think the concept that "spiritual things" are with us everywhere is at best a misunderstanding of a metaphor about our connection to the spiritual realm, and at worst (the version I adhere to) it's just a lie. It simply doesn't make sense to say a non-physical object is occupying a physical space. I feel like I'm just splitting hairs here though, so let's just forget about the whole thing, yeah?

 

[imagremlin]

I don't think so.

The concept of a "soul" is wishful thinking in my opinion. A way to deal with mortality.

 

[Gigaguy64]

Yea, you can really say "Where" it is because its a Spiritual thing.
Its inside you but, its not like an organ.
I believe its your, if you will, "Life Force", its something born of the supernatural that sets us apart form all other forms of life.
Really, i cant describe the Spirit it outside of my religious context because i believe its completely tied to God.
And like you said, its really gonna come down to either you Believe they exist, or not.

And sorry, i just started to ramble for a sec there...
Though just to be clear, i believe that the Mind IS the Soul.
Its you, your personality and so on, but Soul is used to describe the Supernatural aspect most of the time.

Well, if it's got no physical existence, then it's not proper to say it's inside you, regardless. A non-entity cannot occupy any space -- I think the concept that "spiritual things" are with us everywhere is at best a misunderstanding of a metaphor about our connection to the spiritual realm, and at worst (the version I adhere to) it's just a lie. It simply doesn't make sense to say a non-physical object is occupying a physical space. I feel like I'm just splitting hairs here though, so let's just forget about the whole thing, yeah?

I understand what your saying.
Though it will probably never make sense because its something that exists outside of Human Logic.

But anyway, it was nice talking to you, im always happy to find people who like to actually debate and not get in my face and yell how wrong i am, with some colorful language i might add.

 

[roguetrooper96]

If human cloning becomes a reality, then no. If it never does, then maybe.

 

[Unesh52]

Yea, you can really say "Where" it is because its a Spiritual thing.
Its inside you but, its not like an organ.
I believe its your, if you will, "Life Force", its something born of the supernatural that sets us apart form all other forms of life.
Really, i cant describe the Spirit it outside of my religious context because i believe its completely tied to God.
And like you said, its really gonna come down to either you Believe they exist, or not.

And sorry, i just started to ramble for a sec there...
Though just to be clear, i believe that the Mind IS the Soul.
Its you, your personality and so on, but Soul is used to describe the Supernatural aspect most of the time.

Well, if it's got no physical existence, then it's not proper to say it's inside you, regardless. A non-entity cannot occupy any space -- I think the concept that "spiritual things" are with us everywhere is at best a misunderstanding of a metaphor about our connection to the spiritual realm, and at worst (the version I adhere to) it's just a lie. It simply doesn't make sense to say a non-physical object is occupying a physical space. I feel like I'm just splitting hairs here though, so let's just forget about the whole thing, yeah?

I understand what your saying.
Though it will probably never make sense because its something that exists outside of Human Logic.

But anyway, it was nice talking to you, im always happy to find people who like to actually debate and not get in my face and yell how wrong i am, with some colorful language i might add.

Yeah. Maybe John Stewart really did get something out of that rally of his and civilized debate is now spreading through the internet.

...nah, the trolls must all just be saving it up for the holiday season.

 

[Cypher10110]

In short, soul is just a word.

Precisely!

Your post takes my comment a little out of context...

Actually, it did not, as evidenced by my other post in this thread:

"A semantic argument could be posited for the soul being an expression of our ability to interpret our observations into an abstract understanding of our relationship between ourselves and the universe. When we map the brain to the point of being able to duplicate its very essence, what do we create? If my active mind can be uploaded and made to exist in an everlasting non-corporeal state, what am I? What is that active mind?"

Sorry to give you the wrong impression though.

Oh sorry, my bad. That was much more articulate and concise than what I said, and I totally agree. If the soul is everything we are, then everything we are must indeed be the soul.

 

[Gigaguy64]

Yea, you can really say "Where" it is because its a Spiritual thing.
Its inside you but, its not like an organ.
I believe its your, if you will, "Life Force", its something born of the supernatural that sets us apart form all other forms of life.
Really, i cant describe the Spirit it outside of my religious context because i believe its completely tied to God.
And like you said, its really gonna come down to either you Believe they exist, or not.

And sorry, i just started to ramble for a sec there...
Though just to be clear, i believe that the Mind IS the Soul.
Its you, your personality and so on, but Soul is used to describe the Supernatural aspect most of the time.

Well, if it's got no physical existence, then it's not proper to say it's inside you, regardless. A non-entity cannot occupy any space -- I think the concept that "spiritual things" are with us everywhere is at best a misunderstanding of a metaphor about our connection to the spiritual realm, and at worst (the version I adhere to) it's just a lie. It simply doesn't make sense to say a non-physical object is occupying a physical space. I feel like I'm just splitting hairs here though, so let's just forget about the whole thing, yeah?

I understand what your saying.
Though it will probably never make sense because its something that exists outside of Human Logic.

But anyway, it was nice talking to you, im always happy to find people who like to actually debate and not get in my face and yell how wrong i am, with some colorful language i might add.

Yeah. Maybe John Stewart really did get something out of that rally of his and civilized debate is now spreading through the internet.

...nah, the trolls must all just be saving it up for the holiday season.

Yea....
Sigh, i can hardly wait.
-_-

 

[Tsaba]

There is "Scientific Proof" and then there are "theories," science has theories for darn near everything, but, it doesn't mean it has the answers

That said, science has carefully constructed theories based on meticulous and replicable evidence... Religions have...... ? Oh yeah, nothing.

OHHH Really....... then tell me how the big bang happened, I'll wait.......

The fact that Science cannot and will not explain HOW HOW HOW it happened, it's just a theory and one explanation for how the universe came to be, so science doesn't always have ALL the numbers. The explanation that some big monkey rat hippo thingy created the universe, that's just as good an explanation than that of the universe expanding like snowflakes, each unique and beautiful from a storm that spontaneously formed.

Or who knows, maybe a blue hand with a spiral from the justice league formed the freaken universe

To say one thing is more right than the other is pure ignorance and that makes you worse than the religions you bash for being close minded.

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang
http://dcanimated.wikia.com/wiki/File:Beginningoftime.jpg
http://cosmology.berkeley.edu/Education/IUP/Big_Bang_Primer.html
http://www.big-bang-theory.com/
http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s03e16-are-you-there-god-its-me-jesus

 

[Caliostro]

words

Science doesn't claim to know everything. The difference is, we don't start making up shit randomly as we go along when we hit a dead end. We make theories that seem plausible based on the evidence we have. To say scientific theory is the same as pulling thoughts straight out of your rectum... Well, THAT, is the definition of ignorance.

I can't tell you with 100% certainty that the big bang is how it really happened. No one can. I can tell you that it's the most likely theory so far. One thing I can tell you with 100% certainty: Wasn't a divine entity. I can guarantee you that like I can guarantee that Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth fairy and Peter Pan aren't real.

Actually, scratch "Santa Claus" off that list. He's actually based on a real person.

 

[Tsaba]

more words

Science is just a way to explain things away, ALL I'M SAYING is that religion is just another way of explaining away why we are here, for some people it's good enough, and that's all that should matter, but, you seem hell bent of telling people how wrong they are and how right you are, and for that, your ignorant.

EDIT: Now I'm willing to respect your beliefs, all I'm asking in return is that we stop turning this, "discussion," into a flame war and respect each other here.

 

[Caliostro]

Science is just a way to explain things away, ALL I'M SAYING is that religion is just another way of explaining away why we are here, for some people it's good enough, and that's all that should matter, but, you seem hell bent of telling people how wrong they are and how right you are, and for that, your ignorant.

EDIT: Now I'm willing to respect your beliefs, all I'm asking in return is that we stop turning this, "discussion," into a flame war and respect each other here.

You don't know the difference between a contraction and a possessive and I'm ignorant? Sorry, particularly pressing pet peeve, if you'd pardon the alliteration.

That said, me saying "Rain is the condensation of water vapour into the heavier liquid form (i.e.: water) which then falls from the sky. You can test this by boiling some water inside some transparent covering material and seeing what happens." is a way of explaining it. "It happens because of magic, because I believe it does" is NOT an explanation. It's a cop out. It's avoiding an explanation.

Science is not the same as religion, they don't belong together, nor should they ever be mixed. I would argue religion doesn't really belong anywhere, but you're as entitled to believe in it as I am to believe Elvis is alive, or that dragons exist, or whatever else I, you or anyone feels like believing. But saying that it "is a way of explaining things, like science", or that the scientific method is equivalent to just claiming something is true is objectively wrong.

 

[RocksW]

Pretty much the same answer, our minds are a product of neurological responses to external stimuli. Our experiences determine who we are and what we become.

Agreed, but what I meant was self awareness. My name is Kevin. Why am I Kevin and not Roger from down the street?

It depends on your view on the nature of the universe i suppose, but considering we're both clockwork robots, what made me this particular clockwork robot? How does my point of view even exist in the first place? How does yours?

Like I said, pseudo science lol