Crosswords1 min ago
Are We More Than Just Ourselves ?
54 Answers
I was asked that question . What they were getting at was the deep emotional feelings we experience , which we can not measure with our senses or properly describe but know they exist outside our physical selves .e.g Awe, fear, pleasure, when looking, feeling, hearing something almost supernatural . e.g Music, poetry, art , scenic views , flowers , anything that stirs our imagination .....................
The arguement was that if we accept that we are more than ourselves , call it the soul if you like , then why not also accept that there could be an afterlife and by extension a god.
My quick answer was these 'soul like ' experiences die when we die.
What do you think ?
The arguement was that if we accept that we are more than ourselves , call it the soul if you like , then why not also accept that there could be an afterlife and by extension a god.
My quick answer was these 'soul like ' experiences die when we die.
What do you think ?
Answers
I think it makes a great deal of sense, actually: -- we don't know what the soul is; -- or what it looks like; -- or have any idea how we could even describe it. A blind person in the same way (at least, one born blind) cannot understand colour, let alone the colour of something that has none. We are as blind about the nature of the soul as he would be about that of the...
22:56 Sun 06th Oct 2013
A god is evidently infinitely easier to imagine than to create.
Speaking of 'essence' . . . have you ever smelt a corpse?
Conscious, defined as an awareness of some aspect of reality, implies a complex organism possessing the means of gathering and processing information, an integration of sensory organs with a functioning brain to gather and assimilate this information into perceptions. Consciousness evolved with the living things that derive the benefits of consciousness and have ultimately come to rely on it for their survival as complex organisms. Consciousness is an aspect of those living things apart from which neither would be possible . . . nor necessary. Life is essential to the means and process that makes conscious living beings capable of deriving the concept of a 'soul' possible.
Speaking of 'essence' . . . have you ever smelt a corpse?
Conscious, defined as an awareness of some aspect of reality, implies a complex organism possessing the means of gathering and processing information, an integration of sensory organs with a functioning brain to gather and assimilate this information into perceptions. Consciousness evolved with the living things that derive the benefits of consciousness and have ultimately come to rely on it for their survival as complex organisms. Consciousness is an aspect of those living things apart from which neither would be possible . . . nor necessary. Life is essential to the means and process that makes conscious living beings capable of deriving the concept of a 'soul' possible.
I'll take that on.
No religious explanation - that is to explain the unexplainable - standard position of mine.
I believe that inspiration of others to the next generation or future generations may be pure transactive stimulation of the conscious or the unconscious, though I also am of the opinion may be that there may be energy forms/intellectual forms of energy transmission that we may have not yet tapped into.
For example, our ancestors could see St Elmo's Fire and feel static tricity - but could they explain it. So, I do believe that there are other mental channels to the transmission of ideas and experience that lie there in the 'grey' world, yet to be explored and understood.
Does this sound daft? Probably - but long continue rational (and irrational) research.
No religious explanation - that is to explain the unexplainable - standard position of mine.
I believe that inspiration of others to the next generation or future generations may be pure transactive stimulation of the conscious or the unconscious, though I also am of the opinion may be that there may be energy forms/intellectual forms of energy transmission that we may have not yet tapped into.
For example, our ancestors could see St Elmo's Fire and feel static tricity - but could they explain it. So, I do believe that there are other mental channels to the transmission of ideas and experience that lie there in the 'grey' world, yet to be explored and understood.
Does this sound daft? Probably - but long continue rational (and irrational) research.
DTC, you can believe what you like, It has kept christianity going for 2000 years. I know it is silly to ask people why they believe things since belief is predicated on absence of evidence, so do you just believe for no reason or do you have some hitherto unknown evidence for these 'channels' and the existence of a 'grey world' ?
Christianity and other forms of religion has served its purpose in explaining the unexplainable.
As to those sections of society that have looked to dominate others by their religious credence, benevolence, warfare and all the rest, I shall leave you to what I think about that psychological manipulation.
As to those sections of society that have looked to dominate others by their religious credence, benevolence, warfare and all the rest, I shall leave you to what I think about that psychological manipulation.
mibn//Might I suggest that the 'soul' is an emergent quality of the whole being ..............//
//Life is essential to the means and process that makes conscious living beings capable of deriving the concept of a 'soul' possible. //
If it is an emergent quality would you say it evolves during our lifetime.
So the soul we are born with is totally different from the basic unit
( of unknown quality ) we aquire at birth.
As OG says //Implying an afterlife and maybe a before life too ? //
//Life is essential to the means and process that makes conscious living beings capable of deriving the concept of a 'soul' possible. //
If it is an emergent quality would you say it evolves during our lifetime.
So the soul we are born with is totally different from the basic unit
( of unknown quality ) we aquire at birth.
As OG says //Implying an afterlife and maybe a before life too ? //
When Aristotle states, "The whole is greater than the sum of its parts." I believe he's referring to that which arises as a consequence of those parts along with how they are arranged and interconnected. The whole cannot exist in the absence of those parts but relies on them and is made manifest by virtue of their existence.
If the soul survives death in any fashion it must be in the memory of that soul that exists in those who live on and in the causal chain of events we set in motion while we were still alive.
If the soul survives death in any fashion it must be in the memory of that soul that exists in those who live on and in the causal chain of events we set in motion while we were still alive.
Mibs, I think you have a good point re. the soul existing in other peoples minds. When a colleague of mine died unexpectedly, for a long time afterwards work related matters were considered in the context of how the deceased colleague would have dealt with them. So, many colleagues had a model of their deceased person in their brains which continued to exist and operate after his death. Not quite a soul but definitely a remnant of the person which faded slowly over time. He appeared to live on as an entity despite his mortal coil being cast off, I assume that this is not uncommon.
