Philosophy Now Forum

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 7:40 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 7:29 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 7:03 pm
This is, in essence, what Age calls the soul of a person, and I wouldn't have a problem with that, were it not for the word having a much more commonly thought of meaning. But no, I can't think of a snappy description.

I copied this from Dictionary.com

The literal meaning of the word soul is the spirit that’s believed to inhabit a person separate from their body—the spiritual self, as opposed to the physical self (this sense is reflected in the phrase body and soul).

In this sense, some believe the soul survives after the death of the body—in a form we might call a spirit or ghost.

Some people associate the soul with a person’s inner self or essence, or perhaps their personality, ego, or psyche.

Soul is often also used in figurative and metaphorical ways.

The phrase soul-searching means contemplating what a person feels in their heart (in the figurative sense) or conscience.

Soul is sometimes used as a way to refer to a person, as in Not a soul was left on board.

Expressions like old soul and creative soul emphasize a person’s sensibilities.

To say that someone has soul often means that they have spirit, courage, and passion. Someone who’s described as soulful is passionate or expressive.

Sometimes, soul is used to refer to the core or driving force behind something. This sometimes refers to a person, as in Kate is the soul of this operation. Heart is sometimes used in the same way, as is the phrase heart and soul.

Much more specifically, soul is often used to describe things involving Black American culture, such as soul food. The word soul is commonly used as a short way of referring to soul music.

What is the difference between soul and spirit?

The first definition on the list is the one I question: "some believe the soul survives after the death of the body—in a form we might call a spirit or ghost."

All the others are just figurative terms.

The ghost/spirit meaning is certainly the one that applies to the question of reincarnation. The main problem is that with the advance of biology we know that 'mind' and body are not separate substances such that 'mind' can separate out from the dead body.

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 7:50 pm
The ghost/spirit meaning is certainly the one that applies to the question of reincarnation. The main problem is that with the advance of biology we know that 'mind' and body are not separate substances such that 'mind' can separate out from the dead body.

Even if biology, or any other science, raised no objection to the idea, I still don't see a reason to consider it as a possibility. What is there to even suggest it might be? I can only guess that the original notion came out of a reluctance to acknowledge death as the end.

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 8:10 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 7:50 pm
The ghost/spirit meaning is certainly the one that applies to the question of reincarnation. The main problem is that with the advance of biology we know that 'mind' and body are not separate substances such that 'mind' can separate out from the dead body.

Even if biology, or any other science, raised no objection to the idea, I still don't see a reason to consider it as a possibility. What is there to even suggest it might be? I can only guess that the original notion came out of a reluctance to acknowledge death as the end.

Belinda here is equating 'mind' with soul which is not necessarily the case. I disagree with the definition that body and soul suggests they are separate, separate concepts yes, just as mind and body are separate concepts. It should have always been obvious that mind and body are not physically separate, as how could one walk and talk!

In the case of talking about reincarnation we need to head beyond biology and even chemistry to the fundamental level of physics.

As I have made the point before, that soul could simply be a point-of-view location reference within the matter of spacetime. In a similar way that a pointer in a computer program references the location within RAM of a block of memory. Once the matter of the body has died, the POV address within spacetime can be updated (by God) into something of a physical body, perhaps another foetus in time.

Again, there is not much point in talking about reincarnation without considering God or "God" - An intelligence operating at the most finite sub-atomic scale of matter, upon which our perception of the nature of reality sits.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 12:17 am

In the case of talking about reincarnation we need to head beyond biology and even chemistry to the fundamental level of physics.

As I have made the point before, that soul could simply be a point-of-view location reference within the matter of spacetime. In a similar way that a pointer in a computer program references the location within RAM of a block of memory. Once the matter of the body has died, the POV address within spacetime can be updated (by God) into something of a physical body, perhaps another foetus in time.

I know some very strange things have been found in physics, and I expect there are even stranger things yet to be discovered, so I don't challenge the possibility of any of the above. A lot of new discoveries come about because the thing being looked for is implied in the behaviour of something else. By the behaviour of a particle, scientists might be able to infer the existence of some other particle, or force, for example, so although they might not know exactly what they are looking for, they do know it must exist. They observe a phenomenon, and then look for its cause, so my question would be: what phenomenon do we observe that implies there is such a thing as a soul causing it? What phenomenon requires there to be such a thing as the soul in order to explain its existence? What reason do we have to even think there could be such a thing as the soul?

Again, there is not much point in talking about reincarnation without considering God or "God" - An intelligence operating at the most finite sub-atomic scale of matter, upon which our perception of the nature of reality sits.

I am not dismissing the possibility of there being God, but I am not aware of his existence, and I am not aware of anything that suggests his existence, so, at least for now, I'm not in a position to consider God. I do seem to think that there are people who believe in reincarnation, but not in God.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 12:17 am
As I have made the point before, that soul could simply be a point-of-view location reference within the matter of spacetime.

All spiritual, mystical experiences, ideas of a soul, a god, a someone who reincarnates are born out of thought. They are thought-induced states, nothing more.

No body/mind mechanism, no thought. It's that simple.

Whatever answers are given regarding death, you are not satisfied with them, and so you must invent theories about reincarnation. What is it that will reincarnate? Even while you are alive, what is there? Is there anything beyond the totality of the knowledge which existed inside you now? So, is there death at all, and if there is, can it be experienced?

It is the continuity of thought that dies. The body has no death, it only changes form. The ending of thought is the beginning of physical death. What you experience is the emptiness of the void. But there is no death for the body at all.


And please don't tell me to fuck off because it really hurts my feelings.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 8:40 am And please don't tell me to fuck off because it really hurts my feelings.

With more dictation from you that I find mostly irrational. By dictation I mean, you asserting things rather than questioning things (just so you understand). We here in this thread are questioning things - you are dictating things.

So.

Shall I tell you to go away or ignore you from now on where it comes to any deep philosophical contemplations? (*we can still chat with light hearted banter about other shit)

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 8:11 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 12:17 am

In the case of talking about reincarnation we need to head beyond biology and even chemistry to the fundamental level of physics.

As I have made the point before, that soul could simply be a point-of-view location reference within the matter of spacetime. In a similar way that a pointer in a computer program references the location within RAM of a block of memory. Once the matter of the body has died, the POV address within spacetime can be updated (by God) into something of a physical body, perhaps another foetus in time.

I know some very strange things have been found in physics, and I expect there are even stranger things yet to be discovered, so I don't challenge the possibility of any of the above. A lot of new discoveries come about because the thing being looked for is implied in the behaviour of something else. By the behaviour of a particle, scientists might be able to infer the existence of some other particle, or force, for example, so although they might not know exactly what they are looking for, they do know it must exist. They observe a phenomenon, and then look for its cause, so my question would be: what phenomenon do we observe that implies there is such a thing as a soul causing it?

I don't think of the soul as a cause of anything, more a place holder, your POV within the matter of spacetime. However, I guess upon reincarnation, that POV spacetime position is where the new biological matter manifests (by growing around it) - and you are reborn.

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 8:11 amWhat phenomenon requires there to be such a thing as the soul in order to explain its existence? What reason do we have to even think there could be such a thing as the soul?

Experience of God (in my case and clearly many others through time).

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 8:11 am

atto wrote:Again, there is not much point in talking about reincarnation without considering God or "God" - An intelligence operating at the most finite sub-atomic scale of matter, upon which our perception of the nature of reality sits.

I am not dismissing the possibility of there being God, but I am not aware of his existence, and I am not aware of anything that suggests his existence, so, at least for now, I'm not in a position to consider God. I do seem to think that there are people who believe in reincarnation, but not in God.

Not sure why you are using the male pronoun 'him' to refer to God here, I don't think I have seen you do this, but I certainly don't - the backbone to the nature of perceivable reality is clearly not a human no matter what sex. In saying that, I don't see it inconceivable that this entity formed into a male form and indeed perhaps Christ.

You are still not ready to consider God but are still interested in reincarnation.

So.

How can we intelligent men conceive of reincarnation where there is no intelligence beyond our own minds within the nature of Earth where dead material bodies shall decompose?

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 9:23 am
With more dictation from you that I find mostly irrational. By dictation I mean, you asserting things rather than questioning things (just so you understand). We here in this thread are questioning things - you are dictating things.

Hang on a minute, is it me, or am I missing something very very useful and important here, I just don't get this.

It's ok for you to state authoritatively the words....'' Don't dictate to me (someone with 26 years of experience of God) with your clueless waffle'' to me, but when I state authoritatively some words to you I'm just being irrational? hmm,ok if you say so, after all, you do claim to have much more experience of God than me very authoritatively by the by.
OK, The floor is all yours, but don't be surprised if someone just happens to step on your toes. It doesn't mean you are in their way.

Also, the one who questions reality and God doesn't exist, except in this conception, a figment fictional character of the imagination, like the figment there is a you and then a God who speaks to you from with inside your skull, which to me, also sounds irrational, by the by.


And also, if it's true that there does exist a someone who can question things, then that must imply answers are to be found, else what's the point of questioning things at all?

So whatever answers crop up or are given, it does seem as though you personally are not going to be satisfied with them, so all you've got are meaningless questions on going on and on and on and on..until they have all melted away like a salamander in the mid day sun.

Get off your own soapbox why don't you.


.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 9:48 am
How can we intelligent men conceive of reincarnation where there is no intelligence beyond our own minds within the nature of Earth where dead material bodies shall decompose?

Don't forget to include the women here.

Oh wait!

It's quite easy to imagine immortal souls in the absence of any deity. There are lots of ghost stories that imaginative authors have written and readers have enjoyed. Hollywood too has produced movies that feature ghosts that are supposed to be deceased persons without their bodies.

It's also quite easy to imagine all sorts of deities without also imagining immortal souls.

If I understand Attofishpi his thesis is that we could not imagine God unless there was a perfect God of which we are inadequate imitations. Likewise Atto seems to be saying we could not imagine ghosts unless there was a perfect ghost of which our ideas of ghosts are inadequate reflections.

In other words Attofishpi seems to be a Platonist.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 9:48 am
I don't think of the soul as a cause of anything, more a place holder, your POV within the matter of spacetime. However, I guess upon reincarnation, that POV spacetime position is where the new biological matter manifests (by growing around it) - and you are reborn.

If there is an intelligence behind this, which makes it happen, do you ever wonder what the point of it is, or do you know what the point is?

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 9:48 am

Harbal wrote: What phenomenon requires there to be such a thing as the soul in order to explain its existence? What reason do we have to even think there could be such a thing as the soul?

Experience of God (in my case and clearly many others through time).

This is where I am at a disadvantage; I don't have any experience of God.

Not sure why you are using the male pronoun 'him' to refer to God here, I don't think I have seen you do this, but I certainly don't - the backbone to the nature of perceivable reality is clearly not a human no matter what sex. In saying that, I don't see it inconceivable that this entity formed into a male form and indeed perhaps Christ.

I have no idea what pronoun to use, so I went with the most commonly used pronoun.

You are still not ready to consider God but are still interested in reincarnation.

When I have a reason to consider God, I suppose I will consider God. I won't need to get myself into a state of readiness first, all I will need is the reason. It's not so much that I am interested in reincarnation myself, but more that I am interested in why anyone else is interested in it.

How can we intelligent men conceive of reincarnation where there is no intelligence beyond our own minds within the nature of Earth where dead material bodies shall decompose?

It's not that I can't conceive of intelligence beyond our own minds, but the nature of such an intelligence, and what influence it might have "within the nature of Earth" are things upon which I have no basis for speculation. My imagination could, no doubt, come up with endless theories, but none are likely to be correct.

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 10:14 am It's quite easy to imagine immortal souls in the absence of any deity. There are lots of ghost stories that imaginative authors have written and readers have enjoyed. Hollywood too has produced movies that feature ghosts that are supposed to be deceased persons without their bodies.

It's also quite easy to imagine all sorts of deities without also imagining immortal souls.

Why are we bringing fictional stories into this?

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 10:14 amIf I understand Attofishpi his thesis is that we could not imagine God unless there was a perfect God of which we are inadequate imitations.

Please provide an example of why you have come to this perception (for all I know, maybe you are right - but I do_u_bt it).

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 10:14 amLikewise Atto seems to be saying we could not imagine ghosts unless there was a perfect ghost of which our ideas of ghosts are inadequate reflections.

Again, I have no idea where you are coming to such a conclusion. Hence, I think you are being ridiculous in your assertion.

Belinda wrote:In other words Attofishpi seems to be a Platonist.

If by this measure:- Philosophers who affirm the existence of abstract objects are sometimes called Platonists. renders me a 'platonist' then be happy that you have at least one pigeon hole for me.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 9:23 am
Shall I tell you to go away or ignore you from now on where it comes to any deep philosophical contemplations?

If you like, it's your right and exclusive privilege to do and say what you want to an irrational waffler like me, someone, in your opinion who is considered far less experienced in these philosophical matters. I'm fairly certain now, that I have no chance of interacting philosophically on any level with such a self-absorbed, highly ranked, self-opinionated individual like you. And why would I even bother anyway, you are completely out of my league.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 9:23 am (*we can still chat with light hearted banter about other shit)

Thanks, but I would have considered that at one time, but over the days and weeks, you have shown to me repeatedly, that you do not even deserve my time anymore, and to be frank, I'm not really partial to your general demeanor, or personality at all, to be honest.


.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 10:42 am Thanks, but I would have considered that at one time, but over the days and weeks, you have shown to me repeatedly, that you do not even deserve my time anymore, and to be frank, I'm not really partial to your general demeanor, or personality at all, to be honest.

Finally. (praise be to God)

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 10:47 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 10:42 am Thanks, but I would have considered that at one time, but over the days and weeks, you have shown to me repeatedly, that you do not even deserve my time anymore, and to be frank, I'm not really partial to your general demeanor, or personality at all, to be honest.

Finally. (praise be to God)

You are still going to hear my philosophy though.

That is unless you put me on your ignore list because you have made it very clear that you do not want to hear it.

Hmm, I wait and wonder with bated breath, will you or won't you, finally do it, and put me on your ignore list. You do not need to ask for my permission by the way, it's your prerogative to do what you want to do here at the PNF.

Lets hope you finally do what you keep threatening to do, and finally once and for all, do it.

Lets wait and see.