What's a soul?

[Kilroy_x]

Re: What's a soul?

Just as an aside, I like the discussions about the state of the universe like this. Tell me Kilroy, if the universe is finite, you can presumably go and go and go and hit the "end" of it, yes? If so...what is there? A wall? A void? Do you wrap around to the other side?

I don't know, I'm not a physicist. I'm not sure that physicists know. None of that matters. I suppose we could say "We don't know whether the universe is infinite or finite" but the basis of my statement is that all observations have thus far shown the universe to be finite.

[devonin]

Re: What's a soul?

Our ability to observe processes in action imply that those processes are finite, but that's just entropy in action. My question refers primarily to the "size" of the universe.

If you can go and go and go and hit a wall, you may be tempted to say "A ha, the universe is finite" but what is the wall? What is on the other side of it? More wall is still something, void is still -something- even if only describable by its lack of other characteristics.

It seems to me that the (hmm I don't want to say 'universe' but 'multiverse implies other universes full of stuff) Superverse is necessarily infinite because if ever you get to a barrier or stopping point, the question becomes "what is on the other side of it" In that context, the word "nothing" means precisely that.

Granted if on that logic you admit that it is infinite, you don't really -gain- anything from that conclusion, but there's a very agnostical slant to the idea that even if we knew, we either coudln't grasp it, or it just woudln't reveal anything particularly cogent about the world to us.

[Pyroshock]

Re: What's a soul?

In the discussion of what beings have souls, let's look at the denotation of the word soul:

the principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans, regarded as a distinct entity separate from the body, and commonly held to be separable in existence from the body; the spiritual part of humans as distinct from the physical part.

Note the part "in humans". This basically proves what devonin was saying, that the concept of a soul was created to separate humans from animals.

Now, let's say that somewhere in the universe there was a species that is to us as we are to birds. If they weren't advanced enough to disprove the idea of a soul, how would they view us in the matter of souls? We mostly believe that we have souls and everything inferior to us does not. What about everything superior to us? Is soul simply a human concept or any form of intelligent life?

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Re: What's a soul?

Well I understand that I may have not said certain things in my initial argument like "I didn't flat out say that we Can do this, it's simply a belief and a goal for me that humans can find a way to live for ever. Dreams don't always come true (even in the sense that they might be false and unobtainable). Also, if my scenario ever came true, I would indeed try to look for if souls and religions had any truth in them, but only if it didn't cause any harm to others," but I was just trying to add more information to make it clear now.
As for my scenario, I meant to say that perhaps we could find a way to make people live for ever by using technology (such as a robot), biological ways (like how trees live for so long), or any other ways. I just know that it's a possibility. Unless having a soul or religion are proven tie into being in such a state of living for ever (by that I mean not dead as a spirit, but in the world that we live in right now) or any other matters at hand, I don't think religion and spirits should be persued. I mean if you think about it, how is a person going to find a god/ any soul they think might exist faster than making technology that seems more likely to be possible because of our progress in the scientific world?

[Relambrien]

Re: What's a soul?

Well I understand that I may have not said certain things in my initial argument like "I didn't flat out say that we Can do this, it's simply a belief and a goal for me that humans can find a way to live for ever. Dreams don't always come true (even in the sense that they might be false and unobtainable). Also, if my scenario ever came true, I would indeed try to look for if souls and religions had any truth in them, but only if it didn't cause any harm to others," but I was just trying to add more information to make it clear now.
As for my scenario, I meant to say that perhaps we could find a way to make people live for ever by using technology (such as a robot), biological ways (like how trees live for so long), or any other ways. I just know that it's a possibility. Unless having a soul or religion are proven tie into being in such a state of living for ever (by that I mean not dead as a spirit, but in the world that we live in right now) or any other matters at hand, I don't think religion and spirits should be persued. I mean if you think about it, how is a person going to find a god/ any soul they think might exist faster than making technology that seems more likely to be possible because of our progress in the scientific world?

I feel like I might want to get into this discussion, but I need to clarify one thing before I do.

So what you're trying to say is that until we find a way to live for an infinite period of time, trying to determine the existence and workings of any spiritual concept is useless, because it would take an infinite (or ridiculously long) amount of time to do so?

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Re: What's a soul?

Percisely. I mean think about our progress in the world. How in the world would we even start to go about finding souls and religion? There is almost no way to start such a search so it's basically pointless unless we lived for a very long time. We have no leads on these issues at all. I personally don't like the idea of death no matter what anyone says. Even if I go off to a heaven like place, I would rather stay in Earth and not take my chances. However, living for ever is not only dedicated for the purpose of religion and spirits, it's also to not worry about the everyday problems of a normal life. I want to make it clear that there is also a possibility that none of the things mentioned about spirits and religion exist.

[Sir_Thomas]

Re: What's a soul?

I will say this. I am NOT tired of seeing threads get flamed for lack of evidence. Facts are based on evidence.

[ledwix]

Re: What's a soul?

...because if there's no evidence in a person's mind that something exists, there's a 100.000000% chance that it doesn't exist, right?

[Kilroy_x]

Re: What's a soul?

If you can go and go and go and hit a wall, you may be tempted to say "A ha, the universe is finite"

I thought you were going somewhere with this.

but what is the wall? What is on the other side of it? More wall is still something, void is still -something- even if only describable by its lack of other characteristics.

Then you said this. "Void" is something with no characteristics. It's the absence of characteristics, and if you want to call this absence a characteristic that's just defining the void in terms of what you actually understand. The void isn't actually that way.

It seems to me that the (hmm I don't want to say 'universe' but 'multiverse implies other universes full of stuff) Superverse is necessarily infinite because if ever you get to a barrier or stopping point, the question becomes "what is on the other side of it" In that context, the word "nothing" means precisely that.

Well congratulations, you've joined countless other intelligent minds who fell into the "That makes me uncomfortable" trap. How is this notion of yours any different from Aristotle's abhorrence of an infinite causal chain? Or Rene Descartes belief that "nature abhors a vacuum", which despite having extremely limited basis as an interpretation of natural events was largely driven by his own personal abhorrence. It's possible for nothing to exist. The fact that you can give a name to nonexistence doesn't give the nonexistence itself any properties. It doesn't substantiate nothingness.

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Re: What's a soul?

I never say that. Ever. Look at the people who first proposed that the Earth is round. Evidence was not shared with the people because there was none, but evidence was eventually found and shared to most of the people who now knew that the Earth was and still is round. The point is that I always leave my views to a 50/50 chance that they exist. The only exceptions that I make are if a 50/50 chance (living for ever) seems more persuable than a 50/50 chance such as religion and spirits which might take longer if both are possible. The 50/50 chance are if they either exist at all or don't exist at all.

[Moogy]

Re: What's a soul?

a miserable little pile of secrets

[aperson]

Re: What's a soul?

...because if there's no evidence in a person's mind that something exists, there's a 100.000000% chance that it doesn't exist, right?

I'm not all-knowing actually, but I'm really really close.

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Re: What's a soul?

I'm not all-knowing actually, but I'm really really close.

Nice response. What does this have to do with souls at all? Even if it does have something to do with souls, how do you claim that you are even all-knowing (I should probably be banned for asking such a question to such a dumb comment)

[Kilroy_x]

Re: What's a soul?

Just because there are 2 options doesn't mean both are equally likely.

[Kilroy_x]

Re: What's a soul?

I'm not all-knowing actually, but I'm really really close.

You've been wrong on at least one thing, and I bet you can't even guess what it is I'm talking about. Also, even if you somehow knew virtually everything the same arguments against divine omniscience can be applied to you to show there are certain types of knowledge which are contradictory, making complete knowledge unobtainable.