Conquer Club

In all religions, there is a soul or spirit outside of your body. It doesn't exist. It is all physical. If someone damages their brain, their personality changes. What you would call "who they are" changes. Basically, their "soul" changes. That is proof that the soul doesn't exist and disproves all religions and other such theistic beliefs.

Simon Viavant wrote:In all religions, there is a soul or spirit outside of your body. It doesn't exist. It is all physical. If someone damages their brain, their personality changes. What you would call "who they are" changes. Basically, their "soul" changes. That is proof that the soul doesn't exist and disproves all religions and other such theistic beliefs.

We'd best batten down the hatches, a shit storms about to blow through.

Also, I agree.

Also, cocks.

what was the purpose of the picture?

Also Neotony, your wanted in the Biblical Mafia Game.

fireedud wrote:what was the purpose of the picture?

Also Neotony, your wanted in the Biblical Mafia Game.

Seoul's in Korea. I recognize how lame the joke is.

And I figured.

fireedud wrote:what was the purpose of the picture?

Also Neotony, your wanted in the Biblical Mafia Game.

What character is he playing? Judas?

jay_a2j wrote:

fireedud wrote:what was the purpose of the picture?

Also Neotony, your wanted in the Biblical Mafia Game.

What character is he playing? Judas?

Chuckle chuckle. I'd rather be Longinus, or whatever his name was.

Neoteny wrote:

fireedud wrote:what was the purpose of the picture?

Also Neotony, your wanted in the Biblical Mafia Game.

Seoul's in Korea. I recognize how lame the joke is.

And I figured.

i think I can see tonka waving at us

What your referring to is called central state materialism. Basically pure physicalism, the idea that humans don't have souls, just brains, neurons firing etc.
Put simply, it is the opposite of Cartesian Dualism -the idea that the body and the soul are two distinct entities.

Its one of those weird things -although you might think that in todays age of science that materialism would have been proved, it still suffers from philosophical problems.
Plus, most people, even non religious people tend to believe that they are more than just a body -most seem to think they have a soul/spirit or "mind" (as opposed to just a brain).
I tend towards physicalism myself, and yet the BIG problem remains -there is a definite sensation of being "me". Or as Descartes put it, someone seems to be doing the thinking.
The same problem reversed is "if its all just physical, then whats the difference between humans and robots/AI -there doesn't seem to be any.
And intuitively, most of us would say we are different from robots -we have a sensation of being CONSCIOUS, of being our selves.
Which is why dualism still lives on, 250 years after Hume et. al thought they had buried the soul for other.
See Wilson Pickett for more on this.


ps google "The Chinese Room" by Searle -it gives a good example of my point.

It all depends on what your definition of soul is. Even an atheist can believe in a soul or having soul given the definition in the dictionary:

1. the principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans, regarded as a distinct entity separate from the body, and commonly held to be separable in existence from the body; the spiritual part of humans as distinct from the physical part.
2. the spiritual part of humans regarded in its moral aspect, or as believed to survive death and be subject to happiness or misery in a life to come: arguing the immortality of the soul.
3. the disembodied spirit of a deceased person: He feared the soul of the deceased would haunt him.
4. the emotional part of human nature; the seat of the feelings or sentiments.
5. a human being; person.
6. high-mindedness; noble warmth of feeling, spirit or courage, etc.
7. the animating principle; the essential element or part of something.
8. the inspirer or moving spirit of some action, movement, etc.
9. the embodiment of some quality: He was the very soul of tact.
10. (initial capital letter) Christian Science. God; the divine source of all identity and individuality.
11. shared ethnic awareness and pride among black people, esp. black Americans.
12. deeply felt emotion, as conveyed or expressed by a performer or artist.
13. soul music.
–adjective
14. of, characteristic of, or for black Americans or their culture: soul newspapers.

For me a soul is not the spirit. The soul is the total sum of living existence, so yes, the soul can change and be made to change by outside environmental forces; in addition, the soul describes all living things, not just humans. I believe that animals and plants have souls as well. I also believe that the soul continues on after death for a time, but it too can perish eventually. As all things in the world are surrounded by Earth's magnetic field, I feel that our living existence is being imprinted in time and space, and when something dies, that imprint can still exist and someday, someone will figure out how to delve into this library of sorts, using technology.

So in the future, we might be able to use our computers to communicate or observe past living entities...

you never know until you die...

Joodoo wrote:you never know until you die...

exactly, that's what Buddha would say. Are you Buddha?

no, but I'm partially Buddhist,
if you really wanna know I'm part Christian, Taoist, and Buddhist
yeah, I know it's confusing

Whats that line about " I have difficulty about following advice on moderation and self restraint form a guy (Buddha) who weighs in at 300 pounds"

Da Gip, you're not being serious are you about that "Magnetic imprint" nonsense?
what possible evidence is there to support such a claim?

Joodoo wrote:no, but I'm partially Buddhist,
if you really wanna know I'm part Christian, Taoist, and Buddhist
yeah, I know it's confusing

your life's a total nonsense?

no, it's just that I favor some beliefs from the three religions

suggs wrote:

Joodoo wrote:no, but I'm partially Buddhist,
if you really wanna know I'm part Christian, Taoist, and Buddhist
yeah, I know it's confusing

your life's a total nonsense?

idk, sounds a little like the best of all worlds to me. Pick the parts you like and leave out the rest, it might not always be very consistent, but if it works.

Yeah i doubt it works.
Sounds like a recipe for cognitive dissonance to me.

MeDeFe wrote:

suggs wrote:

Joodoo wrote:no, but I'm partially Buddhist,
if you really wanna know I'm part Christian, Taoist, and Buddhist
yeah, I know it's confusing

your life's a total nonsense?

idk, sounds a little like the best of all worlds to me. Pick the parts you like and leave out the rest, it might not always be very consistent, but if it works.

I didn't know that I could do that. I wanna be part Chinese. From now on you all can call me Juan_Cho.

How about Wan- Ker?

suggs wrote:How about Wan- Ker?

That's a good name, or Wang Dong.

Simon Viavant wrote:In all religions, there is a soul or spirit outside of your body. It doesn't exist. It is all physical. If someone damages their brain, their personality changes. What you would call "who they are" changes. Basically, their "soul" changes. That is proof that the soul doesn't exist and disproves all religions and other such theistic beliefs.

Of course there is a "soul" just as there is a "rythm & blues" and ... oh wait wrong argument.

It is easy to identify the elements of the strawman you have assembled in order to set them on fire, but it is not really all that productive. It is, in some respects, an apple and orange comparison and people on either side who attempt to make them equivalent are doing themselves a great disservice.

It is always possible to narrow down a subject to such fine detail that the subject gets lost. A good example, which I learned decades go was a course on organic chemistry from the physics level, the interaction of the various orbitals and how they cause the various atomic bondings. Work at that level of detail and you thend to miss out the underlying organic processes. In short you can't see the forest because you are staring at the bottom of a single leaf.

This process continues when we take these larger concepts and attempt to define them. We can take large collections of liquid objects, for exmple, and call them rivers, lakes, and oceans. The Hudson is a river right? (Wrong it's an estuary, but I digress.) The "Soul" is likewise a vague super concept. Much like the distinctions between a river (or an esturary) and a sea or ocean the boundaries are arbitrary.

We could, for example, define the soul as the integral of all thought of a given organism, where we define the though as the integral of impulses within the brain at any one given instant. Of couse we could define the soul as anything we like. That's the nature of defining things.

So your post didnt say anything.

It's a second order Clintonian argument. It depends on what the definition of "is" is.