Why do we cater to the idea of a soul?

ChapelHillSooner said:
The problem is that consciousness is not a testable phenomenon. We can’t be sure that it exists outside of our own personal experience so it is impossible to clear any type of higher bar either way.
Click to expand...
It sounds like what you're really struggling with is hard solipsism not philosophy of consciousness, maybe?

We don't need certainty to make progress in understanding reality.
 
ChapelHillSooner said:
I don’t know about soul but you will never convince me that consciousness can arise from a complex organization of matter. I will firmly hold to the belief that consciousness is a separate entity of nature at the minimum. It might require some complex logic to organize into something that allow experience but it simply can’t emerge from that organization.

And by consciousness I mean the instantaneous awareness of my existence and thoughts. I can’t guarantee anyone else has it. I can’t even guarantee that I had it when I started writing this post as that could be an illusion created by my memory but my awareness of that memory can’t simply be from an organization of matter and energy.

I have seen no reasonable explanation for a resolution of the transporter paradox.

But, anyway, that is tangentially related to a concept of a soul.
Click to expand...
This is how I feel. And trying to think about it and figure it all out could drive you mad.
 
Of course you all know just as well as I do about this matter - which is to say: nothing. But I subscribe to Sagan's "cosmic dust."

I grew up in a very religious household. But after reaching a certain age, and reading lots of things, I could no longer in good faith believe there is anything like a soul or an afterlife, for that matter.

In my opinion, the notions of the soul and of the afterlife are a combination of fear of oblivion and upper-class desire to maintain control.

That being said, yes, it's remarkable how this as all happened. The fact I'm even typing this to you through digital interface, let alone mere fact we have consciousness.

To rift off our dear leader, this is a big, beautiful universe! We would be fools to think that, in all this wide, open space with all this wide, open matter, there could not possibly come together something like us. And I will always claim that there are others similar to us somewhere far away. If not now, then in the past or in the future. How could there not be?

When we ask about the soul, we're basically asking about the cosmos. How did it come into being? How did nothing become something? There's no explanation. If I could provide one - "well, because of X,Y, or Z" - I would do so. And do something no one else has ever done. But I can't, obviously.

Something happened though, and we're not alone. I'm grateful for my short time here. My short time of consciousness.

When it ends, I suspect I'll go back into the great contribution that somehow, someway will keep the fire going, so to speak.
 
It's worth noting that the idea of a soul is not native to the Hebrew Bible or the New Testament. Yahweh does not imbue the man with a soul in Gen. 2. He instead gives the divine breath to the soil and, just as easy, that breath departs upon the death of the man. Ancient Israelite thought does not have a firm spiritual/material divide.

The soul is a Hellenistic idea--think Platonism--and so it does not start to shape Jewish thought until the 4th c. BCE. The antithesis between the material and spiritual is Greek. Jesus does not mention souls in the gospels--there is no talk (excepting, possibly, a verse in Revelation) about the ascendance of souls to heaven. Instead, Jesus talks about resurrection and the coming of the kingdom of God.
 
Last edited:
One other thing I should say, if you notice what seems to work - it's a circle. Another one goes out; another one goes in. The shapes of the planets. When I made my own deep dish pizza in cast iron during the last eclipse, I thought about this a lot. The shape is truly great.

I suspect that the universe must be a circle. Because it's the perfect shape. Constantly expanding, yeah, maybe. But must be a circle.

I don't know what to make of that. If I did, I would be God. And I'm no god. None of us are.

If there's something like a soul, it will work on a circle, I suspect. Infinity seems our case. If so, then, at some point, in a galaxy far, far away, it will come back again. At some point. Consciousness, I mean. If given long enough. Matter and all that bullshit.

Anyhow, my two cents.
 
MendotoManteo said:
Of course you all know just as well as I do about this matter - which is to say: nothing. But I subscribe to Sagan's "cosmic dust."

I grew up in a very religious household. But after reaching a certain age, and reading lots of things, I could no longer in good faith believe there is anything like a soul or an afterlife, for that matter.

In my opinion, the notions of the soul and of the afterlife are a combination of fear of oblivion and upper-class desire to maintain control.

That being said, yes, it's remarkable how this as all happened. The fact I'm even typing this to you through digital interface, let alone mere fact we have consciousness.

To rift off our dear leader, this is a big, beautiful universe! We would be fools to think that, in all this wide, open space with all this wide, open matter, there could not possibly come together something like us. And I will always claim that there are others similar to us somewhere far away. If not now, then in the past or in the future. How could there not be?

When we ask about the soul, we're basically asking about the cosmos. How did it come into being? How did nothing become something? There's no explanation. If I could provide one - "well, because of X,Y, or Z" - I would do so. And do something no one else has ever done. But I can't, obviously.

Something happened though, and we're not alone. I'm grateful for my short time here. My short time of consciousness.

When it ends, I suspect I'll go back into the great contribution that somehow, someway will keep the fire going, so to speak.
Click to expand...
" I'm grateful for my short time here. My short time of consciousness."

This captures my existential position.

I believe my afterlife will be no different than my before life and so with the little time I have in my present life, I hope I have and can do some good things to bring joy to those who I will leave behind.
 
finesse said:
In light of the "idea" that Biden is a soulless construct, what is a soul? Why should we believe in it, cater to it as part of politics or as a reason to interfere in people's personal life? There's no evidence of one. There is not a single confirmable idea of what a soul could be. We have no idea of how one could be created, if there is a life span and if one can be destroyed or marred. If one can be marred, is it irredeemable damage? Most importantly, who can judge one?
Click to expand...

"There is scarcely a greater cause of confusion and difficulty in the comprehension of Hebrew modes of thought than the tendency – in part, to be sure, a necessity – that impels us to translate nephesh by the word “soul.” The nephesh is the life or the self of the man, the living man himself, just as he is here and now. The older Hebrews had no word for body (σωμα), and what we call body was not to them the opposite of nephesh, but was inseparable from it." ~Frank Chamberlain Porter

Still, though, seems like a pretty petty fight to pick. What do you care if some people believe in a soul?
 
I grew up Catholic-I have had it in me at times (yrs ago) to believe in such
What destroys it all for me is to hear Baptist preachers scream about how All coffins will open one day and we will all fly up to sit with God
 
ChapelHillSooner said:
I don’t know about soul but you will never convince me that consciousness can arise from a complex organization of matter. I will firmly hold to the belief that consciousness is a separate entity of nature at the minimum. It might require some complex logic to organize into something that allow experience but it simply can’t emerge from that organization.

And by consciousness I mean the instantaneous awareness of my existence and thoughts. I can’t guarantee anyone else has it. I can’t even guarantee that I had it when I started writing this post as that could be an illusion created by my memory but my awareness of that memory can’t simply be from an organization of matter and energy.

I have seen no reasonable explanation for a resolution of the transporter paradox.

But, anyway, that is tangentially related to a concept of a soul.
Click to expand...

I agree with this.

I've also been thinking about where we draw the line. Humans have "consciousness," okay. What about apes or dogs? Do they? If so, why, and if not, why not? And if they do, then do dolphins? Cats? Bats? Where does it end, and why does it end just there?

I think the oldest religions end up saying that everyone and everything has consciousness (or a soul), that the material universe in some sense *is* a soul.

I've always sort of understood animism or pantheism, mostly on an intellectual plane. But I had a couple epiphanies lately when reading Robin Wall Kimmerer. She points out that for third person singular pronouns, most indigenous languages do not chose "it." They chose "he" or "she." And so almost everything is conceived of in personal terms ("it" is reserved for things that people make, like tents or knives). And since almost everything - animals, plants, rocks, stars, waters - is referred to with personal pronouns and conceived of as like a person, the neurological circuitry in the human brain that is activated by interpersonal relationships becomes activated in our connection to the natural world (IOW, this is much more than just an opinion or an idea, it involves the actual behavior and activity of the brain itself). And so it is simply offensive to call a river an "it," to reduce it to merely its physical aspect. It would be like looking at someone's grandmother in the kitchen and going "it is cooking."

She also said that indigenous languages are very verb-heavy. They have many more verbs, and many of them are deployed in ways that seem bizarre to western materialism. For example, "Sunday" is a verb. What you doing today? I'm sundaying....oh, me too. Prof. Kimmerer said that one of her toughest challenges in learning her native Potawatomi was hearing that "bay" was a verb. She was like, "No it's not. It's a person, place or thing. A bay is a noun." Until she realized that it was only a noun in the abstract. Any actual, individual, singular bay...well just go look at it. You'll see it's in motion....water coming in, clouds passing by, sounds of seabirds, insects buzzing around...this place is indeed "baying."

For me, once I got a glimpse into those two things, the whole flower of animism unfolded before me. It is very beatiful. And much closer to the truth, IMO, than western epistemology (minus Spinoza and a few others) and western materialism.

From this point of view, do humans have souls? Of course. As does everything else in the whole of creation.
 
Last edited:
TarSpiel said:
"There is scarcely a greater cause of confusion and difficulty in the comprehension of Hebrew modes of thought than the tendency – in part, to be sure, a necessity – that impels us to translate nephesh by the word “soul.” The nephesh is the life or the self of the man, the living man himself, just as he is here and now. The older Hebrews had no word for body (σωμα), and what we call body was not to them the opposite of nephesh, but was inseparable from it." ~Frank Chamberlain Porter

Still, though, seems like a pretty petty fight to pick. What do you care if some people believe in a soul?
Click to expand...
I'm so happy to see you here...

But I don't think his post is a "petty fight" in the context of my earlier post...
 
heelinhell said:
I don't think his post is a "petty fight"
Click to expand...

Well, I guess it comes across as petty or arrogant by the framing of it...why do *we* have to *cater to* those who believe X, Y, or Z? It's not seeking understanding, it's just poking aggressively at people.

I'm a huge fan of finesse, and have been for a very long time now, and that's not going to change. But I don't think it's a very helpful or interesting way to frame the question.
 
mpaer said:
I grew up Catholic-I have had it in me at times (yrs ago) to believe in such
Click to expand...
Same here. CCD courses, first communion, confession, and confirmation. Mass every Sunday without fail. Now I have no spiritual beliefs whatsoever.
 
heelinhell said:
I've always wondered if I had a soul before I was born...
Click to expand...

This reminds me of the core teaching of my zen tradition.

What was "I" before you were born? What will be "I" after you die? What is "I"? Just your body? Just your mind? Don't know?

Commentary: Everyone goes around saying I, I, I, yet nobody understands this "I." So everybody is insane.
 
heelinhell said:
If it could be proven ( which it can't ) that there is no afterlife, organized religion would wither on the vine which would be a good thing for the world.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure. Judaism has devout practitioners who don't believe in an afterlife. Some Buddhists don't believe in a personal soul that survives death. I think those are a minority in the wide context of world religions - I think most people do believe in some sort of survival of individual consciousness - but organized religion could/would probably still meet various needs, for forming communities, for pacifying the mind through ritual, for ethical and relational wisdom, etc.
 
TarSpiel said:
Well, I guess it comes across as petty or arrogant by the framing of it...why do *we* have to *cater to* those who believe X, Y, or Z? It's not seeking understanding, it's just poking aggressively at people.

I'm a huge fan of finesse, and have been for a very long time now, and that's not going to change. But I don't think it's a very helpful or interesting way to frame the question.
Click to expand...
More about presenting the case that the soul, regardless of what it is or even if it exists, is not something that man should greatly concern themselves with. Our grasp of the very idea is too small and our share of an immortal soul (a popular conception) is too small and too short to matter and certainly too small for the state of our soul to be judged. There's also the issue of a qualified judge. The Bible offered suggestions but modern Christians don't believe that part to be infallible.

End point ,of course , is that the abortion laws, blue laws, or any other laws that are passed by moral suasion in favor of an idea that is not in the benefit of the majority is bad for our system of government. We pay too much homage to an ancient set of myths that began to be outdated when the Known World was within 1500 miles of the Mediterranean coast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top