The human soul - it's time to get to the bottom of this

[Larynx]

Show me that soul DOESN'T exist and I believe you.

Show me that there isn't a pink flying elephant in Antarctica that feeds off the tears of orphaned asian children, and I'll believe it doesn't exist. Why do people still cling to this argument again?

[ptwonline]

Science proved there is a soul by measuring the weight of it. The soul weighs 3/4 of an ounce. I'm surprised people don't know about this and then claim there isn't such a thing as a soul. The soul was weighed by Dr. Michael MacDougall in 1907.

According to Sylvia Brown, a well-known psychic, the soul enters the body shortly before birth. So no, an embryo doesn't have a soul, and the fetus doesn't have a soul either until it's about a month away from being born.

In short, yes, I believe everyone has a soul. I believe animals have souls. I don't need to prove it because it doesn't matter if you believe in it or not.

For further reading: http://www.snopes.com/religion/soulweight.asp

Sylvia Brown is one of the worst frauds/charlatans around, and who has been caught very publicly in her frauds. Please don't quote anything from her if you wish to be taken seriously at all.

By the way, the doctor who claimed to have weighed the soul used a flawed experiment and his results have never been able to be replicated. His experiment is considered to have no scientific merit.

[semaphore]

Show me that soul DOESN'T exist and I believe you.

Prove the Invisible Pink Unicorn doesn't exist. Prove that there is no Flying Spagetti Monster. Prove that Russel's Teapot doesn't exist. Prove that I don't have a fire breathing dragon in my room. You can't prove a negative, to even make such a suggestion is silly.

Anyway all I was saying is that there is no evidence. If you don't believe me, then go find that evidence.

[schwarzkopf]

If you want to discuss it, an internet board isn't how you should be going about it. Just saying.

And that is the sad truth. Open discussion of topics like this bring out the extremists too much to allow it to proceed.

[Deleted]

Show me that there isn't a pink flying elephant in Antarctica that feeds off the tears of orphaned asian children, and I'll believe it doesn't exist. Why do people still cling to this argument again?

Why not? If you are able to do that, I believe. That's simple. And why are you trying to compare "pink flying elephant" to the soul. Those are two different things, retarded approach to the subject.

[schwarzkopf]

There's nothing to get to the bottom of, sadly.

There is, and that is how people continuously deem the soul as having to be religious in nature. It does not.

We do know the soul exists, in the practical sense (much like we know emotions exist), it isn't supernatural, it isn't religious - it is just not well understood yet.

Something should not be dismissed just because we don't understand it.

[semaphore]

Why not? If you are able to do that, I believe. That's simple. And why are you trying to compare "pink flying elephant" to the soul. Those are two different things, retarded approach to the subject.

So you believe that there exists a "pink flying elephant in Antarctica that feeds off the tears of orphaned asian children". And you do not in any way think that's just a tad ridiculous.

---------- Post added 2012-08-17 at 04:05 PM ----------

We do know the soul exists, in the practical sense (much like we know emotions exist)

How do we know that? More importantly, what is this thing you are defining as our soul?

Again, we can scientifically observe people experience emotions. I have yet to hear of anything observing souls in the conventional sense (but if you define it as consciousness or whatever, then sure, we do have it, and we can demonstrate it).

[caninepawprints]

Sylvia Brown is one of the worst frauds/charlatans around, and who has been caught very publicly in her frauds. Please don't quote anything from her if you wish to be taken seriously at all.

Not every psychic is 100% accurate, so you've got to take away from it what you will and leave the rest. This doesn't mean what you choose to take away is accurate as well, but that's where belief comes into play. Do you feel it's true or not? If not, don't worry about it. If you do, then that's fine, too. Also, I'm curious; where were her claims caught to be fraudulent?

Edit: Never mind. I looked it up online. But this comes back to my first statement about not every psychic being 100% accurate.

The problem is how everyone who wants religion to shut up and keep to themselves don't shut up themselves. They keep trying to push their non-belief onto others. People need to decide what they believe and leave it at that. There's no need to shove belief or non-belief down others' throats.

[Yalingo]

Any Life-after-death scenarios are human creations as it is in our nature to fear the end of our lives. If believing that dying wont be the end of your life helps people to cope with death then fine, but don't be surprised when you get there and you just end up as worm food.

[Themius]

We are so ignorant. We can't see most of the universe, really we can't see shit, at one point newtonian was the end all be all, the answer to everything and then we discovered new things and now it's quantum, whose to say this can't happen again?

Does a soul exist? Idk, I am interested in the theory that our consciousness is located in another dimension and we tune into our bodies like radios or televisions. Perhaps using our dna, most of which we have no idea what it does or what it's for and therefore we infer it's junk.

[schwarzkopf]

How do we know that? More importantly, what is this thing you are defining as our soul?

Just what the dictionary defines it as, no more no less.

Where it states that part of us which is not material. It notes also that whilst it is established that it exists, it is only a belief that it goes on after our death.

That is - the existence of a soul is an independent question to what happens to it after we die (much as the existence of our body is an independent question to what happens to it after we die).

---------- Post added 2012-08-17 at 04:10 PM ----------

Any Life-after-death scenarios are human creations as it is in our nature to fear the end of our lives.

Discussion of a soul is not discussion of afterlife.

Completely separate discussions.

Some people believe our body comes back after we die in an afterlife - that discussion is COMPLETELY independent of the discussion about the existence of the body while you are alive.

---------- Post added 2012-08-17 at 04:11 PM ----------

Perhaps using our dna, most of which we have no idea what it does or what it's for and therefore we infer it's junk.

There is thought that DNA is the true life form, that we are merely a tool of its propagation. Maybe our soul is indeed the reflection of that true life form without us?

[semaphore]

Just what the dictionary defines it as, no more no less.

You say that as though dictionaries all have the same exact and precise authoritative definition for souls. Google define for instance notes that it is immortal.

Where it states that part of us which is not material.

Emotions are, in fact, material. Once again, I can show your emotions to you in a lab, via a computer. Just because it is not readily obvious to human senses, doesn't mean it is immaterial.

(Although I suppose this also depends on how you are definiting "not material").

[Nos]

Prove the Invisible Pink Unicorn doesn't exist. Prove that there is no Flying Spagetti Monster. Prove that Russel's Teapot doesn't exist. Prove that I don't have a fire breathing dragon in my room. You can't prove a negative, to even make such a suggestion is silly.

Anyway all I was saying is that there is no evidence. If you don't believe me, then go find that evidence.

Well... if it's invisible, that means it's not reflecting any visible spectrum of light. Pink is a color we can perceive within the visible spectrum, so that means it's impossible for there to be a unicorn both invisible and pink, right?

Does this mean souls are real?

[Orestis]

According to Sylvia Brown, a well-known psychic, the soul enters the body shortly before birth. So no, an embryo doesn't have a soul, and the fetus doesn't have a soul either until it's about a month away from being born.

Thank you for this. It has convinced me to look beyond my beliefs and now I support abortions right up "until it's about a month away from being born".


On topic: There is no such thing as a soul.

I'm always curious to see reasons why people think we need them though.

[schwarzkopf]

You say that as though dictionaries all have the same exact and precise authoritative definition for souls. Google define for instance notes that it is immortal.

Most dictionary definitions I've checked state the immortality is a belief, the soul is not.

Emotions are, in fact, material. Once again, I can show your emotions to you in a lab, via a computer.

This couldn't be done 50 years ago, does that mean emotions didn't exist 50 years ago ?

Just because it is not readily obvious to human senses, doesn't mean it is immaterial.

Exactly.

[semaphore]

Well... if it's invisible, that means it's not reflecting any visible spectrum of light. Pink is a color we can perceive within the visible spectrum, so that means it's impossible for there to be a unicorn both invisible and pink, right?

It's a name, don't dwell on what was meant to be a joke.

Does this mean souls are real?

No. That would be a logically fallacy outright.

[Deleted]

Discussion of a soul is not discussion of afterlife.

Completely separate discussions.

Some people believe our body comes back after we die in an afterlife - that discussion is COMPLETELY independent of the discussion about the existence of the body while you are alive.

Completely different? Philosophically close enough.

[nertharul]

Well as far as i know and wut i believe we are all some sort of energy so when everything dies it doesnt end in the death it just get transformed in anything else, wut?? we dont know yet, but thats how i liek to define as SOUL.

Sorry for my bad english

[schwarzkopf]

My opinion is this:

The soul is that part of us at the quantum level allows us free will. That part of us which if removed would make us automatons, bereft of choice or novel thought.

In essence it the RNG at the bottom of our code that makes us non-deterministic.

[Bigface]

At our current level of science we cannot prove that such a thing as a "soul" exists, but neither can we prove that it doesn't, much like the afterlife and God. To discuss wether it's a possibility or not can be interesting, but to try to bring in "facts" in such a discussion is pointless.

This guys says it best. It's a great discussion for those interested. But let's not bring in "facts" to an impossible question.