0
Sorry too lazy and too tired right now to reply to your other statements, so I'll just quote these three..
The egg. Simple answer. Chickens aren't the only things to lay eggs. Their ancestors did it too. Also yeah, you can say all those things are beyond human knowledge, but this is you, admitting that we have no reason to believe them. So when you admit we have no reason to believe something beyond wanting to, why do you think this is sufficient to establish truth?
So where do chickens or where did all things that lay eggs come from?..
Yup, I admit you have no reason to believe them and it doesn't have to be the truth for you, as I've said, I'm not going to force my way of thinking to other people.
Your level of evidence required for something to not be faith based is rediculous. Under your system, if a murderer is on trial, there isn't any evidence that they're guilty unless the jurors themselves saw the murderer do it. You reject forensic evidence, circumstantial evidence, expert witness accounts of plausibility, all because, "Well the jury didn't SEE it happened, so it's all just faith based." No. No it's not.
So you don't know exactly what happened, therefore it did happen. Look up the logical fallacy known as "argument from ignorance". Just because we don't know exactly what DID happen doesn't mean you're in any way justified in asserting what you think happened. If it worked like that then I could plug anything I wanted into any gap in knowledge that we have. What happened before the big bang? Great Uncle Arklefunk was playing beer pong with a friend and lost, the temper tantrum when he lost was so insane that his head exploded, and that became the universe.
See? And by your logic, since we don't know what did happen, I'd be perfectly justified in believing that kind of absurdity.
Believe what you want to believe, if that is justified for you, then it's justified for yourself alone and the others who will believe it. As long as it's not bothering others, you're free to believe even the most absurd things one can think of.
One can always have doubts about certain things. The truth can always be bended. Innocent bystanders can be criminals in an instant because he/she has been framed.
Just because someone is had his fingerprints on the knife, he's the criminal. And when a witness says that one is the criminal, this greatly affects the case. You're lying because you failed the lie-detector test. All of this really happens in real life if no one has actually seen the crime being done.
An example, a while ago, my friend got arrested for sexual harassment, the only two who were inside the tricycle, was the girl and him. He was then charged. He was drunk at that time. So now the odds are against him. My friend was decent and all of the people around us know that he cannot do that sort of thing, but still how can we prove that he didn't do it?.. how can we tell who is lying? the girl or him?..
And when you say expert witness, they aren't always correct. So I also have my doubts on expert witnesses.
I have already satisfied the question: too many problems, no evidence or answers, abandon the notion entirely.
It's good that you have satisfied the question for yourself. And I am also satisfied about believing in the soul and have faith in what I believe. I don't need any evidence or answers. So if you want to abandon it, you're free to abandon it but don't expect all of us to abandon it also.
BigLundi wrote...
The egg. Simple answer. Chickens aren't the only things to lay eggs. Their ancestors did it too. Also yeah, you can say all those things are beyond human knowledge, but this is you, admitting that we have no reason to believe them. So when you admit we have no reason to believe something beyond wanting to, why do you think this is sufficient to establish truth?
So where do chickens or where did all things that lay eggs come from?..
Yup, I admit you have no reason to believe them and it doesn't have to be the truth for you, as I've said, I'm not going to force my way of thinking to other people.
Your level of evidence required for something to not be faith based is rediculous. Under your system, if a murderer is on trial, there isn't any evidence that they're guilty unless the jurors themselves saw the murderer do it. You reject forensic evidence, circumstantial evidence, expert witness accounts of plausibility, all because, "Well the jury didn't SEE it happened, so it's all just faith based." No. No it's not.
So you don't know exactly what happened, therefore it did happen. Look up the logical fallacy known as "argument from ignorance". Just because we don't know exactly what DID happen doesn't mean you're in any way justified in asserting what you think happened. If it worked like that then I could plug anything I wanted into any gap in knowledge that we have. What happened before the big bang? Great Uncle Arklefunk was playing beer pong with a friend and lost, the temper tantrum when he lost was so insane that his head exploded, and that became the universe.
See? And by your logic, since we don't know what did happen, I'd be perfectly justified in believing that kind of absurdity.
Believe what you want to believe, if that is justified for you, then it's justified for yourself alone and the others who will believe it. As long as it's not bothering others, you're free to believe even the most absurd things one can think of.
One can always have doubts about certain things. The truth can always be bended. Innocent bystanders can be criminals in an instant because he/she has been framed.
Just because someone is had his fingerprints on the knife, he's the criminal. And when a witness says that one is the criminal, this greatly affects the case. You're lying because you failed the lie-detector test. All of this really happens in real life if no one has actually seen the crime being done.
An example, a while ago, my friend got arrested for sexual harassment, the only two who were inside the tricycle, was the girl and him. He was then charged. He was drunk at that time. So now the odds are against him. My friend was decent and all of the people around us know that he cannot do that sort of thing, but still how can we prove that he didn't do it?.. how can we tell who is lying? the girl or him?..
And when you say expert witness, they aren't always correct. So I also have my doubts on expert witnesses.
I have already satisfied the question: too many problems, no evidence or answers, abandon the notion entirely.
It's good that you have satisfied the question for yourself. And I am also satisfied about believing in the soul and have faith in what I believe. I don't need any evidence or answers. So if you want to abandon it, you're free to abandon it but don't expect all of us to abandon it also.
0
The way I see it, a "soul" is technically the static running up and down our spines that the brain/ nerves pick up and give us sentience. If I shock a corpse and it moves, does it have a soul? It is just the nerves detecting raw electricity and reacting the way it would, but only with out a brain.
0
If I accept the work of science thus far, I am still utilizing faith. There is no escaping faith. I have to have faith that any of the day to day reality I experience is real, I have to have faith that collectively science isn't operating on a mistaken premise, I also have to have faith that things we don't understand yet will eventually be reduced and understood scientifically.
The key difference is that science has produced a ridiculously high level of results. And yet, there still may be key misconceptions at its core. There's always a better theory. One day people will look back on this time in history and our 'science' and dismiss it as utter quackery, much like the 'vital life force' idea. If there is one thing I'm fairly convinced of, it's that.
So, what is a soul, and does it exist? It's not worth discussing at this time. Perhaps I'll think about it again once we can map the entirety of brain function and represent all of it graphically in real time. See you in a hundred years?
The key difference is that science has produced a ridiculously high level of results. And yet, there still may be key misconceptions at its core. There's always a better theory. One day people will look back on this time in history and our 'science' and dismiss it as utter quackery, much like the 'vital life force' idea. If there is one thing I'm fairly convinced of, it's that.
So, what is a soul, and does it exist? It's not worth discussing at this time. Perhaps I'll think about it again once we can map the entirety of brain function and represent all of it graphically in real time. See you in a hundred years?
0
gwynt659 wrote...
If I accept the work of science thus far, I am still utilizing faith. There is no escaping faith. I have to have faith that any of the day to day reality I experience is real, I have to have faith that collectively science isn't operating on a mistaken premise, I also have to have faith that things we don't understand yet will eventually be reduced and understood scientifically. The key difference is that science has produced a ridiculously high level of results. And yet, there still may be key misconceptions at its core. There's always a better theory. One day people will look back on this time in history and our 'science' and dismiss it as utter quackery, much like the 'vital life force' idea. If there is one thing I'm fairly convinced of, it's that.
So, what is a soul, and does it exist? It's not worth discussing at this time. Perhaps I'll think about it again once we can map the entirety of brain function and represent all of it graphically in real time. See you in a hundred years?
Lol, I'll be the guy with his head in a fish bowl on top of a robot, futurama style!
But yes, I completely agree with the second paragraph, one day our science will be proven wrong, well some of it anyway. I mean, just look at the notion regarding black holes, if I recall correctly, a black hole defies the laws of physics or something, or was it a worm hole I'm thinking of?
Meh, you get the gist. It's kind of a, the more we find out about the universe, the less we know situation.
0
I love the conceptual! Science, religion and philosophy. They're all conceptual theories, theories created by mankind. We seek an answer to all things and when we find it, we want to give it to all so that our answer becomes truth. Truth is a human concept of what is universally seen as true but not the universe's truth. A single word cannot properly name and thus contain something, thus we explain what we named within the best parameters that associate with it when in fact we only from then on associate with those terms and it loses its previous form. Many things that we cannot see are considered real while others are tossed aside because we lose faith iin them. Faith and hope go hand-in-hand in the fact that the more you lose faith in something, the more your hope of it being real is diminished. Yet, if someone restores your hope, you're faith in it is restored.
So saying we should give up faith is the same as giving up hope. Not just any hope, but all hope. Hope that our halcyon days will return. Hope of love, light, of significance, of worth and life. The simpliest way to argue against this is this:
"My reality, is mine alone." -Cloud Strife to Sephiroth at the Planet's Core.
No one will ever know the answers to everything. To do so would constitute being everything, yet nothing. Humans aren't meant to understand because we are beings of emotion first and foremost than beings of rationality. Rationality gives us the ability to look at the word and precieve our actions better. Your truths are your own as mine are my own. My reality is the thoughts and feeling that can never be properly explained and never should be because if they are, they lose the majesty they held before being another word.
"What then is truth? A movable host of metaphors, metonymies, and anthropomorphisms: in short, a sum of human relations which have been poetically and rhetorically intensified, transferred, and embellished, and which, after long usage, seem to a people to be fixed, canonical, and binding." Nietzsche.
This is our precieved thruth, what every other human sees, and thus it is only our truth. The truth you created has existed, but was always ignored because if we accepted it, what is life then than nothing more than blind faith through darkness. So your reality is your own. Live it.
So saying we should give up faith is the same as giving up hope. Not just any hope, but all hope. Hope that our halcyon days will return. Hope of love, light, of significance, of worth and life. The simpliest way to argue against this is this:
"My reality, is mine alone." -Cloud Strife to Sephiroth at the Planet's Core.
No one will ever know the answers to everything. To do so would constitute being everything, yet nothing. Humans aren't meant to understand because we are beings of emotion first and foremost than beings of rationality. Rationality gives us the ability to look at the word and precieve our actions better. Your truths are your own as mine are my own. My reality is the thoughts and feeling that can never be properly explained and never should be because if they are, they lose the majesty they held before being another word.
"What then is truth? A movable host of metaphors, metonymies, and anthropomorphisms: in short, a sum of human relations which have been poetically and rhetorically intensified, transferred, and embellished, and which, after long usage, seem to a people to be fixed, canonical, and binding." Nietzsche.
This is our precieved thruth, what every other human sees, and thus it is only our truth. The truth you created has existed, but was always ignored because if we accepted it, what is life then than nothing more than blind faith through darkness. So your reality is your own. Live it.
0
I don't think there is a physical soul, nor a real part of a one's mind that constitutes it, but it's a nice way to think about things.
I guess it's just a truly comforting construct. I mean, there's a reason people have held onto the belief in it for so long, no? It's the idea that there's a unique portion of oneself that extends beyond the known.
I guess it's just a truly comforting construct. I mean, there's a reason people have held onto the belief in it for so long, no? It's the idea that there's a unique portion of oneself that extends beyond the known.
0
Livided
FAKKU Writer
I do not believe I or we have a soul, we have minds and bodies, which is quite amazing even without a soul. =P
0
There doesn't need to be a physical soul. I can always suspect that there is more to existence than the physical that we can study. That there are some realms that are totally beyond our reach, and yet inexorably part of us and always around us. But that can only ever be a suspicion; there is no evidence.
0
I have no reason to believe that there is a soul, just like I have no reason to believe that there is a God. We can only assert facts supported by empirical evidence, merely relying on faith is pointless.
Why would one feel comfort in believing that we have a soul?
Why would one feel comfort in believing that we have a soul?
0
Superstring wrote...
I have no reason to believe that there is a soul, just like I have no reason to believe that there is a God. We can only assert facts supported by empirical evidence, merely relying on faith is pointless.Why would one feel comfort in believing that we have a soul?
It Galileo's time the Earth was flat and at the center of the universe. We know now that tje Earth is round and revolves around the sun. Facts are always changing. The sky is not blue, it has no color, it reflects light. Black holes are anamolies in space that shouldn't exist. Mankind will never fly or go to the moon, proven wrong.
A fact is canon knowledge of something, it is not the truth.
And your last statement tastes like a taunt that one uses to test people. But it isn't. You're trying to make people mad delibrately. Why?
0
Livided
FAKKU Writer
Superstring wrote...
I have no reason to believe that there is a soul, just like I have no reason to believe that there is a God. We can only assert facts supported by empirical evidence, merely relying on faith is pointless.Why would one feel comfort in believing that we have a soul?
As someone else who dont believe in a soul (or god for that matter) I can still easily understand why some would feel comfort in believing that we do. This topic I believe has less to do with what gives us comfort and more about what each of us feels is believable unless I completly missed the point here. =P
0
Jackpot_King-777 wrote...
It Galileo's time the Earth was flat and at the center of the universe. We know now that tje Earth is round and revolves around the sun. Facts are always changing. The sky is not blue, it has no color, it reflects light. Black holes are anamolies in space that shouldn't exist. Mankind will never fly or go to the moon, proven wrong.There were tons of empirical evidence that suggested the Earth was round, there are none that suggests that we have a soul. What I was trying to say was that it's pointless to believe something without any empirical evidence to support said belief, stay ignorant regarding the matter and wait for empirical evidence to present itself. Do not assert something as a belief with absolutely nothing to support it with.
Jackpot_King-777 wrote...
And your last statement tastes like a taunt that one uses to test people. But it isn't. You're trying to make people mad delibrately. Why?
No, I wasn't trying to taunt anyone nor was I trying to make people mad. I was genuinely interested in why people would feel comfort in believing that we have a soul. I really see no reason.
0
The argument will go roundabout if I try anything and it just gets boring when it's in a loop. I'm more of a perception person than a judgement person. (Look up INFP means to get what I am) I am based on the theoretical and conceptual, all things based in human reality and human religion are what I look at, be they fantastical or normal.
0
As a Philosphy student I think I have some authority in saying that Plato is not as great as people think. He believed the best way to govern society was to put the philosophers in charge and they would, because they know evertyhing, decide what each particular person would do for the rest of their life. Completely crushed the psychological aspect of human nature.
Anyway...
I don't believe in a soul in the metaphysical sense, in other words, that our bodies are just flesh that is animated (anima being the anciet word for soul) by the soul (damn repetions...) It is a clear sign of human arrogance and fear of death that we would come up with those notions. We don't think for a second that elephants, spiders or bacteria have souls. Why should we be the only mammals who do?
But I do believe that the word soul is a very powerful and real (if it makes sense to use that word) metaphor. So I am perfectly capable of accepting and often using expressions involving the idea of soul when we feel something nearly indescribable or when something extremely bad is done which can be described as «soulmurder»
So, if you think your body doesn't matter, I think you are insane. If listening to your favorite song at the beach with the Sun caressing your closed eyes as the love of your life hears your heartbeat makes you feel a soul, I'm okay with it. Science knows what it does but even though we know it too, doesn't mean we can't forget every once in a while if it makes us feel good.
Anyway...
I don't believe in a soul in the metaphysical sense, in other words, that our bodies are just flesh that is animated (anima being the anciet word for soul) by the soul (damn repetions...) It is a clear sign of human arrogance and fear of death that we would come up with those notions. We don't think for a second that elephants, spiders or bacteria have souls. Why should we be the only mammals who do?
But I do believe that the word soul is a very powerful and real (if it makes sense to use that word) metaphor. So I am perfectly capable of accepting and often using expressions involving the idea of soul when we feel something nearly indescribable or when something extremely bad is done which can be described as «soulmurder»
So, if you think your body doesn't matter, I think you are insane. If listening to your favorite song at the beach with the Sun caressing your closed eyes as the love of your life hears your heartbeat makes you feel a soul, I'm okay with it. Science knows what it does but even though we know it too, doesn't mean we can't forget every once in a while if it makes us feel good.