What is the material of our soul?

[wesmorris]

HA!

Because I am a pain in the ass and love to argue devil's advocate, and because I enjoy the romantic notion of the soul, I define it in a manner that it cannot be shown not to exist... though I must admit I'm slightly uncomfortable with the term as it would seem its common use is not how I might use it.

I refer to the "abstract aspect of mind", that which is immaterial... the relationships. Not the subject of the relationships, but the notion of them. I think this is what the term "soul" may be intended to reflect, though it's usually put forth in religious terms intended to strengthen the tribe, etc.

So I say hypothetically, the "soul" as it were, has no "material" in the common sense of the word. It is directly related to the material of the brain. Were I to indulge my hypothesis further - I would suspect it as a group of relationships perpendicular to space-time (in at least 4D+1 space) and directly related to (in fact, ultimately the enabling factor of) a POV.

Let the games commence.

Occam can kiss my ass.

This is part of my argument related to meaning I suppose and can be seen in more depth here: Abstracts Again, where raith and I have had a fairly interesting exchange.

 

[november]

Assuming humans have a "soul", it has always been a wonder of mine as to how much of the human body can be removed before the "soul" is affected?

As long as the soul is in the body, how would it NOT be affected?

Question 1: A person loses a limb in an accident. Is the "soul" damaged?

Of course. The soul is damaged/affected by everything we do in bodily form.

Question 2: A person is paralysed from the neck down. Again - is the "soul" in any way damaged?

You're asking the same question, to which I'll give the same answer: yes.

Question 3: A person loses everything from the neck down - but is kept alive artificially - and is now basically a "head in a jar". Is the "soul" affected?

...yes

Question 4: A living, compus mentis "brain in a jar" - sentient and mentally interactive, with technology now replacing every other part of the body. DOES THIS BRAIN IN A JAR STILL HAVE A SOUL?

If the answer to Q4 is "YES" then do you agree that the "soul" is entirely contained within the brain?

"Entirely contained"? How do you make the jump from affect to conclusion? That's pre-school logic.

The brain could be nothing more than a trigger which allows our souls to move about in the physical world, and that's just one possible theory.

If I were to work under the assumption the soul was "entirely contained" within the brain, then I would need a convincing explanation from the scientific community to debunk claims of the paranormal. IE, NDEers who have seen and heard things around them while BRAIN DEAD.

http://near-death.com/experiences/evidence01.html

"during standstill, Pam's brain was found "dead" by all three clinical tests - her electroencephalogram was silent, her brain-stem response was absent, and no blood flowed through her brain. Interestingly, while in this state, she encountered the "deepest" NDE of all Atlanta Study participants."

Hallucinations, and all this other phony balogna doesn't explain the phenomena. Infact, it doesn't even come close.

 

[Provita]

Hmm, never even considered the paranormal occurances as a way to look at a soul. Good insight november.

 

[draqon]

Our soul composition is precisely: methahexoalanine decahestamine anti-iso-hexane decafluorine nitroglycerino-hydrate

Basically saying something none of us know what that is, so its made of something, but we aint got knowledge of what its made.

 

[Mythbuster]

I can say that the soul is made of Bubaballa-chiwawawa-bingbing and we dont know WTF it is.

 

[c7ityi_]

We are the consciousness of things, not things themselves.

 

[Provita]

no no Mythbuster... its not Bubaballa-chiwawawa-bingbing ... its Bubaballa-chewbacca-bingbing-version2.0 Optimised!

 

[Sarkus]

As long as the soul is in the body, how would it NOT be affected?

Can the "soul" not move itself into the remaining parts of the living body? Is it damaged by having a limb removed?

Of course. The soul is damaged/affected by everything we do in bodily form.

I agree our psyche/personality is affected by everything we do - but how do we know the "soul" is?

"Entirely contained"? How do you make the jump from affect to conclusion? That's pre-school logic.

Read again: Q4 asks if a "brain in a jar" has a soul.
The next question asks that if it does, is the "soul" entirely contained with the brain.
No logical jump - merely an additional question.

The brain could be nothing more than a trigger which allows our souls to move about in the physical world, and that's just one possible theory.

Strictly speaking it is not a theory - as it is not testable in any way.

If I were to work under the assumption the soul was "entirely contained" within the brain, then I would need a convincing explanation from the scientific community to debunk claims of the paranormal. IE, NDEers who have seen and heard things around them while BRAIN DEAD.

Where to start....

I assume you have heard of James Randi? Offering $1m prize to anyone who can scientifically prove the existence of the paranormal?

And I assume you have scientific evidence of the existence of the paranormal?

http://near-death.com/experiences/evidence01.html

"during standstill, Pam's brain was found "dead" by all three clinical tests - her electroencephalogram was silent, her brain-stem response was absent, and no blood flowed through her brain. Interestingly, while in this state, she encountered the "deepest" NDE of all Atlanta Study participants."

Hallucinations, and all this other phony balogna doesn't explain the phenomena. Infact, it doesn't even come close.

How does this relate to the "paranormal"?
Just 'cos the scientific community does not yet have an answer does not mean that something is "paranormal". It just means that science can not yet explain something.

And also please indicate how an NDE equates to the existence of a soul.

 

[geeser]

http://near-death.com/experiences/evidence01.html

"during standstill, Pam's brain was found "dead" by all three clinical tests - her electroencephalogram was silent, her brain-stem response was absent, and no blood flowed through her brain. Interestingly, while in this state, she encountered the "deepest" NDE of all Atlanta Study participants."

Hallucinations, and all this other phony balogna doesn't explain the phenomena. Infact, it doesn't even come close.

if you can prove this to be true randi will give you a million dollors and hell I will too.
http://www.randi.org/
challenge@randi.org

 

[candy]

I believe that the body wears out but the soul endures.

As to the material of the soul while science has measured 3 forces (electric, magnetic, and gravitational) plus the effects of their interaction I suspect there is a fourth force that has yet to be explored. I believe that this fourth force will clear up the problems between relativity theory and quantum mechanics so I think of it as the unifying force. I think that this unidentified force is the predominate material of the soul and the force that gives us most of what is defined as paranormal.

To the people who experience unexplained phenomenon it is their normal world and they may not want to be lab rats for Randi and his ilk. Personally I do not do card tricks.

 

[november]

Can the "soul" not move itself into the remaining parts of the living body? Is it damaged by having a limb removed?

I don't see a significant point to your questions, especially in the context of this debate. Assuming the brain is the trigger, what relevance would any other part of your body hold in relation to the existence of your soul? I suspect the soul utilizes the brain to react on the physical plain.

You wouldn't know I was in the back seat of a car if the car wasn't moving, unless you saw me in it. I think the soul, in this case, occupies every seat there is to occupy so long as those seats are in sync with the main control. Then again, maybe the soul occupies everything there is to occupy, and we just don't know it because we can't see or feel it's effects.

I agree our psyche/personality is affected by everything we do - but how do we know the "soul" is?

Because the "soul" is defined as being our psyche, our personality, everything we are.

Anyone can change the definition of a soul for their own moot point, but it doesn't matter because the soul (whatever it may be) is "ultimately" affected one way or another..

Read again: Q4 asks if a "brain in a jar" has a soul.
The next question asks that if it does, is the "soul" entirely contained with the brain.
No logical jump - merely an additional question.

I understand the purpose behind your question, but you're implying the obvious. We already know the brain controls the body, we're just not sure what controls the brain.

Well, some of us are.

Strictly speaking it is not a theory - as it is not testable in any way.

Yet.

Where to start....

I assume you have heard of James Randi? Offering $1m prize to anyone who can scientifically prove the existence of the paranormal?

Okay, first of all, let me start off by saying the world would be a boring place WITHOUT people like "James Randi". It's my understanding that, he seeks truth, but in a different manner. I understand he's going through some health problems at the moment, so I wish him the best in that regard.

Now, to get back on topic: I was thinking of this guy last night, a guy I used to go to school with 18 years ago. How would I go about proving that to James Randi? The "normality" of the situation doesn't make it honest, or dishonest. James Randi's philosophy boils down to a simple "can you prove it" yes or no answer...but that doesn't disprove anything of significant value, at least not for me.

And I assume you have scientific evidence of the existence of the paranormal?

I'm capable of giving credence to some things without scientific evidence, are you?

While we're on the subject, what constitutes "scientific evidence" anyway? Here you have a situation where the woman's electroencephalogram was silent, her brain-stem was absent, and no blood flowed through her brain so what happened? Well, she only felt a sense of "heightened awareness" but it can't be real because we don't know how to explain it scientifically.

How does this relate to the "paranormal"?
Just 'cos the scientific community does not yet have an answer does not mean that something is "paranormal". It just means that science can not yet explain something.

Which makes it paranormal!

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=paranormal

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=define:+paranormal&meta=

And also please indicate how an NDE equates to the existence of a soul.

You want an example of an NDE after I just gave you a perfect one? Of course, I'm talking about the out of body experiences people have gone through when they were supposedly "dead". This "hallucination" b.s. doesn't do it for me. How can a person "hallucinate" with no vital signs? And furthermore, I would think "hallucinations" would be more common if that were infact, a scientific explanation. Something's going on here, and we aren't doing anyone any justice by sweeping these stories under the rug just because we don't understand them.

 

[usp8riot]

I think the brain is just like every other organ in the body, with no mystical purpose. People thought a lot of the heart too in the early days, but really it's just there to pump blood. Obviously important but nothing mystical like the word heart is used on Valentine's Day and like it's the true organ of love, that's fantasy and so is the brain not a shelter or output for the soul. It is simply an organ to convert/transfer energy as every other organ in the body does. A soul in the terms I speak, is a part of us that will live eternily beyond our bodies.

 

[wesmorris]

I think the brain is just like every other organ in the body, with no mystical purpose.

Yes but what's interesting about the brain is that amongst its other functions, like regulating this and that... it's there to pump concepts. That aint so simple as blood.

Blood is material. You can put your hands in it.

Concepts... not so much.

While you may damage the brain and have concepts go away, you certainly won't find them oozing out of it.

 

[TheVisitor]

Read again: Q4 asks if a "brain in a jar" has a soul.
The next question asks that if it does, is the "soul" entirely contained with the brain.

------------------

Humans are tri-une beings....body, spirit, and soul.
The brain is the carnal mind not the soul, it is in another dimension already.
"The kingdom of heaven is in you" Christ said.

 

[Sarkus]

Because the "soul" is defined as being our psyche, our personality, everything we are.

Then WHY USE THE WORD "SOUL"?
Why not just use the words "Personality" or "Psyche"?
Also, if you define the "soul" as something intangible (such as you have done) then it IS intangible - it is an abstract concept - with NO material parts - by your very own definition.

The personality of a person is the total make-up of the neurological connections and pathways within a person's brain.

Anyone can change the definition of a soul for their own moot point, but it doesn't matter because the soul (whatever it may be) is "ultimately" affected one way or another..

The debate is regarding the material of our "soul" - so the definition of "soul" is very important.

I'm capable of giving credence to some things without scientific evidence, are you?

I am capable of accepting the possibility of ideas - but I will not "believe" them without evidence, they will merely remain possibilities.
And where I see flaws in some ideas I will try and point them out.

While we're on the subject, what constitutes "scientific evidence" anyway? Here you have a situation where the woman's electroencephalogram was silent, her brain-stem was absent, and no blood flowed through her brain so what happened? Well, she only felt a sense of "heightened awareness" but it can't be real because we don't know how to explain it scientifically.

Ok, just answer me this question:

Where is the evidence that the NDE, or other experience she had, was WHILE "the woman's electroencephalogram was silent, her brain-stem was absent, and no blood flowed through her brain..."? Please cite the evidence that it occurred at this stage, and not while the brain was shutting down etc?
Unless you can give evidence for this, it is far more likely that the NDE occurred while she was "Near Death" - not actually dead.

The occurrence of "experiences" (NDE etc) while the brain goes through a significant change is widely accepted - but the subjective interpretation of those experiences as being religious, soul-related etc, is irrelevant.

Which makes it paranormal!

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=paranormal

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=define:+paranormal&meta=

Please note that these definitions state:
- not understandable in terms of known scientific laws and phenomena;
- seemingly outside normal sensory channels;
- not in accordance with scientific laws;

i.e. scientific laws do not allow for such things as the paranormal.
There is a difference between "not understandable" and "not understandable YET".

There is a VAST difference between that which can not YET be explained by science and that which CAN NOT be explained science.

It took scientists years to understand how a bumble-bee stayed in the air...
and according to you this would make the bumble-bee's flight part of the "paranormal".

If it can be observed - it is no longer part of the paranormal - it becomes part of normal science.

You want an example of an NDE after I just gave you a perfect one? Of course, I'm talking about the out of body experiences people have gone through when they were supposedly "dead". This "hallucination" b.s. doesn't do it for me. How can a person "hallucinate" with no vital signs? And furthermore, I would think "hallucinations" would be more common if that were infact, a scientific explanation. Something's going on here, and we aren't doing anyone any justice by sweeping these stories under the rug just because we don't understand them.

NDEs are scientific fact - but the cause and explanation for them have not yet been fully explored / investigated / resolved.
This does NOT make them part of the paranormal or make them evidence of anything other than an as yet not understood event in the brain while the brain goes through trauma / close-down.

There is so much we do not know about the brain - but to jump to a belief in things like "soul" or "paranormal" is absurd and irrational. Why not come to the conclusion "We do not know yet"?

 

[Sarkus]

Humans are tri-une beings....body, spirit, and soul.
The brain is the carnal mind not the soul, it is in another dimension already.
"The kingdom of heaven is in you" Christ said.

Evidence please?

 

[Kibbles]

I'm not saying these are the most credible sources of information on the soul, but I'd have to personally investigate the matter before declaring them either truthful or bogus.

Here's an interesting experiment that might be helpful
http://www.ghostweb.com/soul.html

A group studying the matter complete with a library of cases to make their case
http://www.childpastlives.org/
http://www.childpastlives.org/library.htm
They seem somewhat credible at first glance

Here's some old news on the topic
http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2000/10/22/nsoul22.xml

I just find it really strange though that people are absolutely certain that a soul does not exist and immediately link the idea to religion and the existence of God. I feel that the existence of a soul does not necessarily require the existence of a supreme being. For all we know, the soul could be a naturally occuring thing that just so happens to cycle in whatever process that it does.

On the other end of the spectrum, a lot of people seem to feel they know without a doubt the the soul exists, exactly what it is, and how it works.

 

[Sarkus]

I'm not saying these are the most credible sources of information on the soul, but I'd have to personally investigate the matter before declaring them either truthful or bogus.

Here's an interesting experiment that might be helpful
http://www.ghostweb.com/soul.html

A group studying the matter complete with a library of cases to make their case
http://www.childpastlives.org/
http://www.childpastlives.org/library.htm
They seem somewhat credible at first glance

Here's some old news on the topic
http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2000/10/22/nsoul22.xml

I just find it really strange though that people are absolutely certain that a soul does not exist and immediately link the idea to religion and the existence of God. I feel that the existence of a soul does not necessarily require the existence of a supreme being. For all we know, the soul could be a naturally occuring thing that just so happens to cycle in whatever process that it does.

On the other end of the spectrum, a lot of people seem to feel they know without a doubt the the soul exists, exactly what it is, and how it works.

I find the experiment in 1907 to be quite funny and unfortunately in no way connectable to the main ideas of "soul".
The experiment merely concludes that there is a loss of weight at the moment of death, a loss of weight that, in the scientist's opinion, could not be accounted for by "normal channels of loss".

Fair enough - but what has this to do with a soul?
There is no evidence at all to suggest that this weight loss IS the soul, or that the weight loss IS anything other than natural - only that it could not be accounted for by a "normal channel of loss".

So where does that leave us? - well, with non-"normal" channels of loss - channels of loss that are only evident at the moment of death - entirely natural channels of loss - merely unexplained as yet. This does not make them in any way unnatural / paranormal / spiritual.

NDEs when supposedly "brain dead" - there needs to be some evidence that the NDE was experienced while in this state and not either prior to actual death or during resuscitation. Unfortunately this is extremely difficult to do - as you will only ever have the subjects own testimony as evidence of the NDE in the first place.

 

[TheVisitor]

Evidence please?

If you really have a deep calling to the deep, God will give you enough "evidence" to convince you.
But it will be on a personal basis, ...that you won't be able to prove to anyone.
It will be proof to you.
That's the way He really does it...not just join some church.

As far as physical proof of a soul.....
The most I can give a skeptic would probably be to check out "kurlian photgraphy"
Russian equipment that can photograph the "aura".
You can tear a leaf, or photograph a persons hand with a finger missing and the spiritual force or energy it photographs is the image of the whole hand or leaf.
That may reveal a spirtual body beneath the physical.
Like I said we are tri-une beings.
Body, spirit, and soul.

 

[Sarkus]

If you really have a deep calling to the deep, God will give you enough "evidence" to convince you.
But it will be on a personal basis, ...that you won't be able to prove to anyone.
It will be proof to you.
That's the way He really does it...not just join some church.

Please define this God.
Please then provide evidence of its existence.
Then please provide proof/evidence that this is the way God works.

As far as physical proof of a soul.....
The most I can give a skeptic would probably be to check out "kurlian photgraphy"
Russian equipment that can photograph the "aura".
You can tear a leaf, or photograph a persons hand with a finger missing and the spiritual force or energy it photographs is the image of the whole hand or leaf.
That may reveal a spirtual body beneath the physical.
Like I said we are tri-une beings.
Body, spirit, and soul.

Aye - and this has been scientifically proven... where exactly? Links, please?