Nevaeh420
Well-Known Member
Hey Zaehet Strife, I'm going to have to agree with you on this one.
What exactly is a soul?
~PEACE~
When during the course of our evolution did we gain souls?
- Thread starter Beefbisquit
- Start date
What exactly is a soul?
~PEACE~
Beefbisquit
Well-Known Member
What is the criteria for manifesting a spirit? What makes one creature manifest more spirit than another? How have you measured the spirit of humans and other creatures to compare them? Do bacteria or amoebas have spirits? What about sponges?
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
thepenofareadywriter
Well-Known Member
I personally think that the soul or conscious is to the mind, just as a monitor and keyboard is to the computer ... and that all living creatures have a soul or a conscious, I also think the soul or conscious as been from the beginning
thepenofareadywriter
Well-Known Member
I personally think that the soul or conscious is to the mind, just as a monitor and keyboard is to the computer ... and that all living creatures have a soul or a conscious, I also think the soul or conscious as been from the beginning
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
"In your patience possess ye your souls - Be calm and serene, masters of yourselves, and superior to all irrational and disquieting passions. By keeping the government of your spirits, you will both avoid much misery, and guard the better against all dangers."
...nowhere does it say that we have one. Attainment of one is another 'evolution'.
So, you hear a radio playing and you think that the music originates in the radio. When you hear two playing exactly the same tune you come up with an absurd reason why because you are unwilling to admit the music is coming from some place else, not the radio. After all, it makes no sense to you why the music comes from some place beyond the radio. You can't see radio waves.
Consciousness is manifest in all things, you just don't see it because of your cultural bias.
Consciousness is manifest in all things, you just don't see it because of your cultural bias.
Beefbisquit
Well-Known Member
The music itself, or the sound IS originating from the radio. The radio waves that carry the info that can be turned into sound waves, do not originate in the radio. We can't hear radio waves, they require further processing to make them useful to us.
Where your explanation falls apart is that regardless of whether we can 'see' or 'hear' the radio waves, we have demonstrable evidence to support their existence. There is a direct causation between the music and the radio waves. Where is the demonstrable, direct causation between the soul and our consciousness?
Stimuli affects humans pretty evenly across the board; there's bound to be some variance across humanity, what with all our differences, cultural, genetic, etc., BUT we are still more similar to one another than different.
It seems like you're trying to say that humans have consciousness because we all have a connection to something 'other worldly' instead of attributing our consciousness to the fact that our brains are all pretty much the same. Just like radios are all pretty much the same. Some may be louder, or have more features; but they all pick up radio waves and produce audio (In this thought experiment, radio waves could be considered 'what we experience in our lives').
Before I go any further, I must say the radio example is a poor one IMO; but I will indulge your comparison. If we could test for, or had any reason to believe that 'soul waves' or even a 'soul' was manipulating our brains, the comparison might stand, but until we see demonstrable evidence that a soul exists, there's no reason to hold that belief. We already have a 100% natural explanation for why we have consciousness that does not invoke magical thinking. Do we know why every aspect of our consciousness exists the way it does? No, and that's fine. Not knowing is O.K.! People who claim they know all the answers, are generally the people with the the fewest correct answers because they also make the most assumptions and leaps of faith.
Our brains all operate pretty similarly, and all produce comparable results. No two humans have ever had the exact same thoughts, ideas, or experiences; so comparing one radio signal (song, if you prefer) going to multiple radios is also erroneous, unless you claim we all share one soul.
If one of the radios in your scenario stopped transmitting music, but the others continued to work; would you blame the invisible radio waves or the machinery in the radio?
NietzscheKeen
Well-Known Member
May I interject for a second. I was driving down the road this morning and saw a highland gopher tortoise walking across the road. If I'm not mistaken, they are endangered.
I normally stop and help every turtle cross the road safely, but some people don't even seem to care if they hit animals in the road; much less if they are endangered. We were lucky enough to have dozens of endangered plants spring up in our bog a couple of years back. I was horrified and literally teared up in anger when I came back to discover that someone had bush hogged them all down. Why don't people care?
Then I started to think of the people that don't care. My mind generalized an ignorant hick that gets his kicks running over animals. It's usually this type that doesn't care about endangered species or climate change. They are also usually the ones that believe in creation and totally dismiss the idea of evolution. Doesn't it seem backwards for someone that believes all the animals that exist today were created BY GOD and have always existed as they do today can not care about animal protection? The people that believe we were given dominion over the entire earth; shepherds so to speak. What kind of shepherds are we that we don't even care. That we knowingly do things that harm out planet. Wouldn't you want to preserve it in as pristine a condition as when your heavenly father created it?
That was just my thoughts. I've been in an angry mood today.
I normally stop and help every turtle cross the road safely, but some people don't even seem to care if they hit animals in the road; much less if they are endangered. We were lucky enough to have dozens of endangered plants spring up in our bog a couple of years back. I was horrified and literally teared up in anger when I came back to discover that someone had bush hogged them all down. Why don't people care?
Then I started to think of the people that don't care. My mind generalized an ignorant hick that gets his kicks running over animals. It's usually this type that doesn't care about endangered species or climate change. They are also usually the ones that believe in creation and totally dismiss the idea of evolution. Doesn't it seem backwards for someone that believes all the animals that exist today were created BY GOD and have always existed as they do today can not care about animal protection? The people that believe we were given dominion over the entire earth; shepherds so to speak. What kind of shepherds are we that we don't even care. That we knowingly do things that harm out planet. Wouldn't you want to preserve it in as pristine a condition as when your heavenly father created it?
That was just my thoughts. I've been in an angry mood today.
Consciousness is the least understood thing in science. You can't claim 100% certainty in one sentence and then claim we don't know everything about how it works in another. How can you be 100% certain when you don't know how something works.
" People who claim they know all the answers, are generally the people with the the fewest correct answers because they also make the most assumptions and leaps of faith."
You seem to be describing yourself there.
It has been discovered that animals use quantum processes in their organs. Birds eyes for example. It is likely that our own brains have evolved to take advantage of various quantum states. Given how little we understand about quantum mechanics there very well could be a field which imparts what might be described as consciousness into a brain. I wouldn't be so quick to rule it out. Might explain why our observation of quantum event changes that event and this even extends into the past.
Physics has hypothesized disembodied brains, AKA Boltsmann Brains. Such a brain interacting at a quantum level with an organism might give the appearance of that organizm being conscious. I'm not saying this is how it happens, I'm just pointing out one of countless ways it might happen. The fact of the matter is we don't know how consciousness arises or where it comes from.
If the Aware project shows people have information about things they shouldn't, then we can surmise we know even less than we thought we did.
You claim everyone isn't recieving the same radio signal and hence it can't be true. Well, if you strip away ego, you will find that each of our experiences are identical. Bascially pure awareness with nothing else.
That the radio stops working because you stomped it just goes to prove my point. You break the radio, it no longer recieves the signal hence you call it dead. Now if that radio were repaired and then brought back to life with memories of floating above your work bench watching while you repaired it then you might consider something else was going on.
" People who claim they know all the answers, are generally the people with the the fewest correct answers because they also make the most assumptions and leaps of faith."
You seem to be describing yourself there.
It has been discovered that animals use quantum processes in their organs. Birds eyes for example. It is likely that our own brains have evolved to take advantage of various quantum states. Given how little we understand about quantum mechanics there very well could be a field which imparts what might be described as consciousness into a brain. I wouldn't be so quick to rule it out. Might explain why our observation of quantum event changes that event and this even extends into the past.
Physics has hypothesized disembodied brains, AKA Boltsmann Brains. Such a brain interacting at a quantum level with an organism might give the appearance of that organizm being conscious. I'm not saying this is how it happens, I'm just pointing out one of countless ways it might happen. The fact of the matter is we don't know how consciousness arises or where it comes from.
If the Aware project shows people have information about things they shouldn't, then we can surmise we know even less than we thought we did.
You claim everyone isn't recieving the same radio signal and hence it can't be true. Well, if you strip away ego, you will find that each of our experiences are identical. Bascially pure awareness with nothing else.
That the radio stops working because you stomped it just goes to prove my point. You break the radio, it no longer recieves the signal hence you call it dead. Now if that radio were repaired and then brought back to life with memories of floating above your work bench watching while you repaired it then you might consider something else was going on.
Beefbisquit
Well-Known Member
Not at all. I base my beliefs on what is demonstrable, and from everything humans have seen and studied about the brain, scientists have yet to say 'There must be something supernatural at play here.' When people get brain damage it affects their personalities, so unless brain damage also affects their souls, what explanation can you provide that has some demonstrable evidence, and doesn't rely on giant leaps of faith? None. Zero. Zilch.
Rational people say "I don't know" when they don't have evidence to support one position or another, not make up something to make themselves feel better. Or to explain the unexplainable. Just for a second, think about that. Experts don't know exactly how consciousness works. At the moment it's unexplainable. Why are you attempting to explain the currently unexplainable, and getting bent out of shape when people call you on it? If experts had an explanation, it wouldn't be unexplainable.
I'm not ruling out the possibility, I'm just not believing it until I see some evidence that it is more likely true than not true. Want to know why? Because I actually care about the likelihood that my beliefs are true. If you want to believe things just because they might be posible, go ahead - that's called taking a leap of faith. I refuse to hold beliefs without justification.
An excerpt from New Scientist to shed some light on bird eyes;
"BIRD brain" is usually an insult, but that may have to change. A light-activated compass at the back of some birds' eyes may preserve electrons in delicate quantum states for longer than the best artificial systems.
Migrating birds navigate by sensing Earth's magnetic field, but the exact mechanisms at work are unclear. Pigeons are thought to rely on bits of magnetite in their beaks. Others, like the European robin (pictured), may rely on light-triggered chemical changes that depend on the bird's orientation relative to Earth's magnetic field.
A process called the radical pair (RP) mechanism is believed to be behind the latter method. In this mechanism, light excites two electrons on one molecule and shunts one of them onto a second molecule. Although the two electrons are separated, their spins are linked through quantum entanglement.
The electrons eventually relax, destroying this quantum state. Before this happens, however, Earth's magnetic field can alter the relative alignment of the electrons' spins, which in turn alters the chemical properties of the molecules involved. A bird could then use the concentrations of chemicals at different points on its eye to deduce its orientation.
We don't know exactly, but the overwhelming majority of experts in neuroscience don't jump from 'we don't know exactly how the brain works' to 'must be an untestable phenomenon that we should have faith in'. They're scientists, it's their job to experiment BEFORE providing a conclusion.
Experiences are subjective by default. To say we have the same subjective experiences is like saying you're a married bachelor.
Let's stop using a faulty comparison between radios and people. What in reality represents a testable, tangible wave that enters our brains and determines our actions? If your answer is the soul, I am going to ask you for testable evidence of the soul. If you cannot provide it, you have no argument with a basis in reality as we know it yet.
EDIT: And you're right, the brain is a bit of a "black box". We know stimuli goes in, and then we behave or act in a certain way. Exactly how that happens, we don't know - but the best explanation is a series of natural phenomenon that when combined, give us a sense of self; or a consciousness. Our species has a unique intelligence that allows us to do thing other species can't, if you look at our brains physical makeup, you get an answer.... a natural answer.
NietzscheKeen
Well-Known Member
There is debate over whether we can ever really be certain of anything. What constitutes proof and so on.
You have still provided absolutely no proof that consciousness originates in the brain. That is because there is no scientific proof either way.
You also make the mistake of confusing consciousness with ego. Two totally different things. Consciousness can exist without ego, ego cannot exist without consciousness.
I submit that your belief, given there is no proof, that consciousness arises from the brain is a leap of faith. You are in fact holding your beliefs without any justfication.
The only natural answer you get by looking at brains is that dolphins are smarter. You are no doubt in line with the "scientists" who ran around the globe measuring heads in an effort to prove white people were naturally smarter.
You also make the mistake of confusing consciousness with ego. Two totally different things. Consciousness can exist without ego, ego cannot exist without consciousness.
I submit that your belief, given there is no proof, that consciousness arises from the brain is a leap of faith. You are in fact holding your beliefs without any justfication.
The only natural answer you get by looking at brains is that dolphins are smarter. You are no doubt in line with the "scientists" who ran around the globe measuring heads in an effort to prove white people were naturally smarter.
Beefbisquit
Well-Known Member
There is a plethora of evidence that supports consciousness manifests in the brain. When the brain is damaged consciosunes is affected - we have never found a way to damage the soul and watch the effect on the brain. Once thta happens, I will gladly concede, or at least re-evaluate the findings of virtually every neuroscientist in the world.
What are your credentials in neuroscience? Where are the papers you've (OR ANYONE) has published that show that the brain is not responsible for the mind? My understanding of the mind is based off the findings of neuroscientists and other experts in their fields, providing demonstrable proof of their findings.
When the brain is damaged, people can lose their 'sight' but still see. Or people with brain damage lose the ability to 'see faces', but can tell who people are by 'looking at them', or feeling them. The funny thing is, the people who have their brain affected in this way will tell you they can't see, but the parts of their brains that process visual information, will still be active.
We have zero evidence of the mind existing outside the brain, but significant evidence supporting that the mind is part of the brain. Prove me wrong. I dare you.
Both consciousness and the ego are products of the brain. Prove they are separate entities (because that's what you're claiming) and you might have a leg to stand on. (You don't)
The ego, is part of the mind, which is part of the brain.
So, assuming that natural things produce natural things, and don't require 'magic' is a leap of faith? YOU ARE AN IDIOT.
If consciousness is distinct from the brain, then damaging the brain would not affect consciousness. Since we know for a fucking fact, that damaging the brain affects consciousness, I'm not sure why you keep repeating the same stupid shit. Are you fishing for people to agree with you? Because that's what rational people are going to assume. If your beliefs are that weak, and in need of support, maybe you should reconsider them.
So, dolphins are capable of calculus and astrophysics? When did dolphins figure out Pi? What are dolphins views on the multiverse or string theory?
I studied the people who did that study..... in sociology. IMO, the least useful 'science' (It's not a science, BTW) that exists.
Apparently you don't talk to dolphins much. I can see why they don't like you.
To say that the human brain is the source of consciousness is the same as saying your computer is the source of the internet. A damaged brain isn't much of a receptor now is it. Oh we cut this section out and now we don't get any FM radio anymore. Duh.
To say that the human brain is the source of consciousness is the same as saying your computer is the source of the internet. A damaged brain isn't much of a receptor now is it. Oh we cut this section out and now we don't get any FM radio anymore. Duh.
Beefbisquit
Well-Known Member
Ok, Caesar Milan.... calm down now.
So the brain state is dependant on how well the soul can be received VIA invisible, undetectable signals, and our brain is actually a giant satellite dish used to pick up these signals, instead of acting independently of itself? LOL....
[video=youtube_share;1D5Sa2Yq-2g]http://youtu.be/1D5Sa2Yq-2g[/video]
Being that the natural state of belief is 'NON BELIEF' until justified; what evidence was brought forth that proved to you that we are constantly receiving signals from an undetectable source (soul), that provide us our personalities?
1itsme
Well-Known Member
ok I find this fascinating. if god created man in his image, and man evolved from some kind of monkey. does that mean that god is some kind of monkey? cause that would explain a few things.
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
...curious experiment: exchange 'soul' for 'life' and re-read thread.
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
...my 2 cents. After each one of us kicks the bucket, our personalities will fade into memory. Life will continue on and on. The thing itself is life, it was here before our perception of it.