Do we posess a soul, or is it all chemical?

[GLo Jones]

I'l just leave this here...


It's not just about animals having souls, but the subject on souls altogether. It's my opinion on this subject.

That man is an absolute genius!

 

[GLo Jones]

For me, I think certain thoughts or actions are based on the chemical compounds in our brain.

This. As far as I'm concerned, no-one has a soul. We are motivated only through instinct/conditioned behaviour/emotional response.

That's not, with all respect, in the context what I've written down. The point you quoted me on (I should have explaind it more proper, come to think of it) is about things like adrenaline that comes from excitement or the (dopamine?) that comes free when tickled and makes you laugh. But not the over-all things that make us do what we do or don't under normal circumstances.

Don't worry, I was purpopsefully taking your quote out of context to express my own opinion.

However, I don't think there is a single action or decision we make, that isn't derived from a combination of our instincts, intellect, and conditioned behaviour.

Try me.

 

[Estarc]

I believe that we have a soul. I believe that chemical reactions and whatnot strongly influence everything that goes on in our bodies. I don't know what a soul is or what it does. But I certainly believe it exists.

 

[hawkeye52]

well considering most of our personality is made up of a collection of memories of puinishments and rewards i wouldnt say its all chemical as our personalities (afaik) aren't physical beings. we have chemicals that contribute to our personalities (such as testosterone makes us more aggressive) but they dont define us generally.

so yes we do have souls as you like to put it but i think they are personalities

 

[Jack_Uzi]

For me, I think certain thoughts or actions are based on the chemical compounds in our brain.

This. As far as I'm concerned, no-one has a soul. We are motivated only through instinct/conditioned behaviour/emotional response.

That's not, with all respect, in the context what I've written down. The point you quoted me on (I should have explaind it more proper, come to think of it) is about things like adrenaline that comes from excitement or the (dopamine?) that comes free when tickled and makes you laugh. But not the over-all things that make us do what we do or don't under normal circumstances.

Don't worry, I was purpopsefully taking your quote out of context to express my own opinion.

However, I don't think there is a single action or decision we make, that isn't derived from a combination of our instincts, intellect, and conditioned behaviour.

Try me.

Agreed.
*Edit: I'm sorry, messing up bigtime and just saying what you were telling already. Must be getting a bit tired here....

 

[GLo Jones]

For me, I think certain thoughts or actions are based on the chemical compounds in our brain.

This. As far as I'm concerned, no-one has a soul. We are motivated only through instinct/conditioned behaviour/emotional response.

That's not, with all respect, in the context what I've written down. The point you quoted me on (I should have explaind it more proper, come to think of it) is about things like adrenaline that comes from excitement or the (dopamine?) that comes free when tickled and makes you laugh. But not the over-all things that make us do what we do or don't under normal circumstances.

Don't worry, I was purpopsefully taking your quote out of context to express my own opinion.

However, I don't think there is a single action or decision we make, that isn't derived from a combination of our instincts, intellect, and conditioned behaviour.

Try me.

Agreed. But that might well be that the interlinking part in this could be the soul? Let's say the decisive and combined factor of the instinct, intellect and conditioned behaviour that is the output for action and thought?

No, the interlinking part is the trail of thought we make.

An example: We clean our teeth, why?

We do it because our intellect can predict that if we do not, then our teeth will decay, and this is very unpleasant. Our instincts are based on the foundation of avoiding pain, and seeking pleasure. So naturally, we choose to clean our teeth. I see no room for a soul to influence our behaviour.

If this is not good enough, then I suggest you give me an example, and I'll explain how we're motivated to do/not do it.

 

[Vanguard_Ex]

It's all chemicals.
Consciousness is an illusion perpetrated by our brains.

How can consciousness be an illusion?

As for me I believe that, to some degree, everything has a soul. A spark of the divine.
EDIT: Everything living or natural, before you start asking if tables and cakes have them ¬_¬

 

[IsraelRocks]

You cant believe in the concept of a soul and not believe in god.

Oh, and "life is a ***** and then you die"

 

[Sougo]

Well I for one do believe in a soul. My reasoning is this:

Scientists/Science cannot 'construct' a human, or really anything living by themselves. Even if they clone an animal, they have to implant it into a surrogate mother in order for it to be 'born.' In other words they could construct a being capable of living (something like Frankenstein) and plant in it a beating heart, a functioning brain and everything ... but this 'creation' will not live, as its missing a soul.

Heck, scientists cannot even 'create' bacteria ... they have to rely on other bacteria to do the reproducing in the 'natural' way.

 

[Regular Guy]

No such thing as a soul. Our consciousness is nothing but a series of chemical reactions and electrical impulses.

 

[tomtom94]

It's all chemicals.
Consciousness is an illusion perpetrated by our brains.

How can consciousness be an illusion?

Makes us THINK we're in control. In reality we're essentially doing the bidding of our genes: namely go forth, increase, and multiply.

In fairness I'm aware it's quite a cynical view, and perhaps I went a little OTT there.

 

[Regular Guy]

It's all chemicals.
Consciousness is an illusion perpetrated by our brains.

How can consciousness be an illusion?

Makes us THINK we're in control. In reality we're essentially doing the bidding of our genes: namely go forth, increase, and multiply.

In fairness I'm aware it's quite a cynical view, and perhaps I went a little OTT there.

It's not cynical, it's just stupid. Chemicals and electrical signals make up our consciousness, and that consciousness is more powerful than even the most basic biological imperatives.

How else could people starve themselves to death in hunger strikes? Or die without having sex or passing on their genes?

So no, consciousness is not an illusion. We ARE in control of ourselves. Ultimately, the only thing holding us back from doing anything (within the realm of being physically possible) is ourselves. We could all be incredibly successful, or ripped, but our own lack of willpower holds us back.

 

[Vanguard_Ex]

It's all chemicals.
Consciousness is an illusion perpetrated by our brains.

How can consciousness be an illusion?

Makes us THINK we're in control. In reality we're essentially doing the bidding of our genes: namely go forth, increase, and multiply.

In fairness I'm aware it's quite a cynical view, and perhaps I went a little OTT there.

Ohh no I see what you mean, the old free will vs. determinism debate.
Not at all, I didn't mean to look like I was being unnecessarily challenging.

 

[Jack_Uzi]

For me, I think certain thoughts or actions are based on the chemical compounds in our brain.

This. As far as I'm concerned, no-one has a soul. We are motivated only through instinct/conditioned behaviour/emotional response.

That's not, with all respect, in the context what I've written down. The point you quoted me on (I should have explaind it more proper, come to think of it) is about things like adrenaline that comes from excitement or the (dopamine?) that comes free when tickled and makes you laugh. But not the over-all things that make us do what we do or don't under normal circumstances.

Don't worry, I was purpopsefully taking your quote out of context to express my own opinion.

However, I don't think there is a single action or decision we make, that isn't derived from a combination of our instincts, intellect, and conditioned behaviour.

Try me.

Agreed. But that might well be that the interlinking part in this could be the soul? Let's say the decisive and combined factor of the instinct, intellect and conditioned behaviour that is the output for action and thought?

No, the interlinking part is the trail of thought we make.

An example: We clean our teeth, why?

We do it because our intellect can predict that if we do not, then our teeth will decay, and this is very unpleasant. Our instincts are based on the foundation of avoiding pain, and seeking pleasure. So naturally, we choose to clean our teeth. I see no room for a soul to influence our behaviour.

If this is not good enough, then I suggest you give me an example, and I'll explain how we're motivated to do/not do it.

Okay. Let's say that this evening I'm going to write a story or poem for myself. And after that make a prank call to a friend of mine who will never know it was me and then go to a pub with my Russian hat on. I understand you can analyze and rationalize everything based on logic, but not everything in life is.

 

[Laughing Man]

No, simple answer really.

Soul is nothing more than a concept created by humans to give some deeper meaning to our lives. The reality is we are not special in any way shape or form, we were just lucky enough to get to where we are now through nothing more than chance. The ability to share our ideas and thoughts is what allowed us to become smart and a side effect of that is we have attached excessive importance to our existence. A by product of this is that we have real trouble with the concept that when we die that is it, there is nothing more. We believe that something more must happen to us and as a result we created this thing called soul, this thing that is contained within us and makes us us and that once we die has the ability to move on to some greater purpose or being.

 

[tjcross]

i believe the soul is energy in the body a unique energy that slowly is drained back into the world as we live eventually there is not enough to sustain life in our body and we die i do not believe it's chemical as science is yet to create life were there was none before or bring a human back from the being dead for more than a few seconds and can't seem to extend it.
ps. even with the energy organ falure can kill the body even if a car has a full tank of gas if the engine is broken the car isn't moving

 

[Moromillas]

Not in such mundane terms. Without getting all existential, yes one exists.

 

[GLo Jones]

For me, I think certain thoughts or actions are based on the chemical compounds in our brain.

This. As far as I'm concerned, no-one has a soul. We are motivated only through instinct/conditioned behaviour/emotional response.

That's not, with all respect, in the context what I've written down. The point you quoted me on (I should have explaind it more proper, come to think of it) is about things like adrenaline that comes from excitement or the (dopamine?) that comes free when tickled and makes you laugh. But not the over-all things that make us do what we do or don't under normal circumstances.

Don't worry, I was purpopsefully taking your quote out of context to express my own opinion.

However, I don't think there is a single action or decision we make, that isn't derived from a combination of our instincts, intellect, and conditioned behaviour.

Try me.

Agreed. But that might well be that the interlinking part in this could be the soul? Let's say the decisive and combined factor of the instinct, intellect and conditioned behaviour that is the output for action and thought?

No, the interlinking part is the trail of thought we make.

An example: We clean our teeth, why?

We do it because our intellect can predict that if we do not, then our teeth will decay, and this is very unpleasant. Our instincts are based on the foundation of avoiding pain, and seeking pleasure. So naturally, we choose to clean our teeth. I see no room for a soul to influence our behaviour.

If this is not good enough, then I suggest you give me an example, and I'll explain how we're motivated to do/not do it.

Okay. Let's say that this evening I'm going to write a story or poem for myself. And after that make a prank call to a friend of mine who will never know it was me and then go to a pub with my Russian hat on. I understand you can analyze and rationalize everything based on logic, but not everything in life is.

I think you'll find, unfortunately, that it is. Though the examples you've given are hypothetical, and therefore cannot be given logical explanations.

If you did write yourself a poem, there would be a reason for you to do so, whether that reason is purely to try and prove me wrong (anything seen as a form of victory is a subconscious method of boosting self-esteem and keeping the morale up), or for your own entertainment, there will be a clinical, maybe even chemical explanation.

As for the prank call. If you actually did it, it would most likely be for entertainment or humour. Entertainment is generally a method of recreating the reward feelings and mental engagement that would otherwise be created in the natural environment of our ancestors. Either that, or is merely a useless byproduct of our mental development as a species. Much like our sense of humour. It gives us rewarding endorphins when activated in certain circumstances, and can serve to keep morale up, but other than that, serves no purpose, and is a mental equivalent of the appendix.

As for the Russian hat thing... I have no fucking idea, but if you actually did it, rather than suggesting it, there would be some kind of biological/psychological reason.

 

[GLo Jones]

Well I for one do believe in a soul. My reasoning is this:

Scientists/Science cannot 'construct' a human, or really anything living by themselves. Even if they clone an animal, they have to implant it into a surrogate mother in order for it to be 'born.' In other words they could construct a being capable of living (something like Frankenstein) and plant in it a beating heart, a functioning brain and everything ... but this 'creation' will not live, as its missing a soul.

Heck, scientists cannot even 'create' bacteria ... they have to rely on other bacteria to do the reproducing in the 'natural' way.

I think you'll find the reason we can't yet literally 'create life' is because we still haven't worked out the minuscule and seemingly endless details of DNA. All life on our planet is derived from it, and yet it is so complex, that we cannot create our own yet. We must use pre-existing DNA for the time being.

DNA is the only thing stopping us, and even that's just a load of chemicals bound together in particular forms.