[On the question "Do souls or spirits exist?"]
I believe that souls exist. Sensory information may consist of nothing but chemical processes, but if there were no souls around to experience them, there would be no way to describe how they feel. In other words, without a soul, there would be no particular reason that the color red would be seen as red and not blue. Or for pain to be unpleasant instead of pleasant. Or even, for that matter, to be able to feel or think anything at all. I would say that soul is the only thing that distinguishes us from inanimate objects, but personally, I feel that even inanimate objects have soul and that in some way it might be possible after death to experience what it is like to be reincarnated as, for example, a rock, although it may not be all that terribly interesting to do so.
32 comments
Listen man, if I feel a 1600 tones Yunk ACME INC on my head, I can tell you that there are certain sensitive fibers that will inform me that it will be damage for a while. And animals HAPPEN TO FEEL THE SAME. Leave soul the Plato and St Agustine left ita and don´t try to defend the indefendible. Or should we nominate this idiot to Proudly Marching into the 17th century?. Sorry guys, I don´t want to stain the name of the genius Descartes.
But rocks do have souls! Haven't you read "Thud" yet? :-P
(Hey, the book is more internally consistent than the bible, less ambiguous, and has just as much evidence to support its accuracy!)
Wow, being reincarnated as a rock would suck, but does anyone want to explain to him wavelengths of light?
I can't tell you why exactly we see it as red, but I can tell you red is different from blue on a most basic level.
Boy, this is ridiculous. If he were just limiting this to animal life forms, I would just point out that consciousness =/= soul at all, and tell him to just use the right vocabulary. But to claim that ROCKS and other inanimate objects have souls? There is no reasoning with such a bizarre opinion; that's a sliver of JohnR7-scale nuttiness right there.
~David D.G.
I believe that souls exist.
That's real nice. I'll bet you cannot even come up with a meaningful definition of soul. But you believe that souls exist.
Sensory information may consist of nothing but chemical processes, but if there were no souls around to experience them, there would be no way to describe how they feel. In other words, without a soul, there would be no particular reason that the color red would be seen as red and not blue.
Souls create language. That's a new one.
Or for pain to be unpleasant instead of pleasant.
Pain is unpleasant can be explained completely without recourse to imaginary souls.
Or even, for that matter, to be able to feel or think anything at all.
Emotion and cognition can also be explained with out recourse to souls.
I would say that soul is the only thing that distinguishes us from inanimate objects, but personally, I feel that even inanimate objects have soul and that in some way it might be possible after death to experience what it is like to be reincarnated as, for example, a rock, although it may not be all that terribly interesting to do so.
Rocks have souls. They have language to describe colour, they have pain sensation, they think and they feel. Brilliant!
So if you die and are reincarnated as a rock, does the rock cease to be inanimate? Would that be a new rock or would you animate an existing rock? How long would your soul be a rock? Rocks don't die.
How is that fundie ? It's just some kind of animism, and he does not try to impose you his point of view. Just explaining what you believe doesn't make you a fundie, even if your belief seems completely dumb.
Ockham's razor, we can explain sensory information and reaction through neurology. We don't need the concept of the soul to understand anything, that is to say it doesn't have a place. Ergo, it doesn't exist.
<<if there were no souls around to experience them, there would be no way to describe how they feel. In other words, without a soul, there would be no particular reason that the color red would be seen as red and not blue. Or for pain to be unpleasant instead of pleasant. Or even, for that matter, to be able to feel or think anything at all>>
Nerves, you simpleton! Nerves!
Does that mean paralyzed people don't have souls?
You can't even prove that LIVING things have souls, don't start making unproven assertions about inanimate objects having souls. However, I do find the idea of your being reincarnated as a rock appealling.
You idjit! Oh well, just imagine your sensory organs like electronic sensors (cameras, microphones, thermostats, smoke detectors, whatever) collecting the type of environmental data they are built to deal with and sending it to a brain/computer that has the hardware (neurons) as well as the software (experience, knowledge, language,...) to process said data, give a diagnostic/result and follow the appropriate course of action. Does it help? Or are you also completely computer-illiterate?
I would say that soul is the only thing that distinguishes us from inanimate objects, but personally, I feel that even inanimate objects have soul [...]
Thanks, that really helps us to understand what this soul thing you are talking about is like.
Anyhow, what you are describing sounds like a mind to me. Rocks don't have one, by the way.
Kuvdumass was reincarnated as a rock in order to experience an improved intellect as compared to that in his previous life as a grain of sand. He just hasn't realized it yet.
P.S. Obviously, color-blind people and animals don't have souls. But birds, butterflies, and countless other life forms that can process a wide color spectrum are spiritual souls, indeed.
How exactly do you plan to reincarnate as a rock? You die, your soul goes somewhere, and then? rocks aren't born, so there won't be any new rocks for you to enter, and they don't die, so you can't enter the "corpse" a previous soul leaves.
"soul is the only thing that distinguishes us from inanimate objects, but personally, I feel that even inanimate objects have soul"
My head was spinning by this part.
If that little blue man didn't live inside my left kidney, how would I possibly know that farts smell bad and that cherry is a colour as well as a flavour?
I believe I see holes in your logic.
Um... this seems to be from a forum adjunct to an RPG - Virtual Verduria . Their intro sounds like it might be a fun game too -
Almea is the third planet of the Class G star Ënomai. It is not known whether it lies in our own, or another universe; the fact that certain of the gods of Almea can be identified with '70s terrestrial rock stars does not really decide the question either way.
Not fundie, as far as I can see. In fact, not even really based on this planet (I mean physically, as opposed to the overall format of the planet). Should this really be here?
It's not really a playable RPG but you're welcome to join if you're interested in writing or reading realistic alternate history, sci-fi, or fantasy stories.
My belief is called pantheism and is not really all that unusual nor exotic. It seems to me that the people posting here are mostly unfamiliar with Eastern religions and assume that anyone talking about souls is a Christian and moreover a fundamentalist. Although I don't follow any religion devoutly, my beliefs are much closer to Buddhism than any other religion and I have to admit I was surprised to find myself quoted on this site. I know that it isn't possible for me to prove my beliefs to an atheist and that is what I assume most people here are. But if you do want more information, I have a blog at which I was planning to post more descriptions of my belief system although I abandoned it for lack of interest (on my part and my readers).
http://killallwhales.blogspot.com/
In other words, without a soul, there would be no particular reason that the color red would be seen as red and not blue
What about people who are colourblind? Does this mean they have deformed souls?
Well, THAT has gone the long way around the mulberry bush without adding any sensible information. You've explained the nervous system and the brain, not the "soul". You could just have answered "yes", because you've certainly not shown us any souls.
“… but if there were no souls around to experience … no particular reason … for pain to be unpleasant instead of pleasant.”
Okay, but animals and plants both react to damage/pain. Does that absolutely require a soul?
“Or even, for that matter, to be able to feel or think anything at all."
I can’t buy that. I’ve been on liberty with sailors.
I have seen large numbers of young men pour pollutants into their blood stream and then try to dance salsa to bagpipe music. Or call their wife at 0200 hours. Or call an ex girlfriend from Scotland with a 7 hour time difference.
I have to think that if there was a soul, a celestial portion of our personality, it would not be subject to toxins like mai tais or rum punch. And it would MAYBE try to keep the sailor from doing the stupid.
But they get stupid. Time after time after time.
“I would say that soul is the only thing that distinguishes us from inanimate objects, but personally, I feel that even inanimate objects have soul”
So, the soul makes us different from a tire iron, but the tire iron also has a soul like we do…
Do you KNOW what ‘distinguishes’ means?
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.