Do you believe in souls?

[Mistral]

I would rather state that the soul, if nonexistent, was created to allay fears rather than to inspire them. Fears of the unknown, especially death and the continuation of life after death. Basically, the soul is something that would carry on even after the physical body is gone, something that will remain even after things of this material world cease to be. That is, if I believed it didn't exist...I haven't even answered the question for myself, yet, though. After all, consider anecdotal evidence. It could be dismissed as heresay and the desire of people still living to have something survive of their lost kin, but could it not be true, still? Is it not possible that, despite the lack of proof, it does exist in some way not yet measurable by material instruments due to its nature of transience and nature unaffected by the material world? If the observer affects the observed, and the theorized observed cannot be affected and return a reaction, is it not plausible the observer could not thus observe its existence?

Or is it like the invisible pink unicorns, believed to exist only because there is no proof to the contrary? One cannot prove a negative; the burden of proof, out of necessity, must fall upon the one who asserts that something exists, because of this. For the lack of proof of the existence of the soul, there is proof therein that the soul does not exist. Scientific rigour has failed to find the soul in all of these years, and does this mean that we have been searching for something that does not exist?

Haa~, but such things I should not discuss too much...I just get lost in my own musings...

[Mikey_]

i don't believe in soul or ghosts. when you die, you die. thats it. you = non existent. i don't believe in afterlife either. no physical evidence of any of it = not real, logically.

[Dingy]

Or is it like the invisible pink unicorns, believed to exist only because there is no proof to the contrary?

I have a blue unicorn named Dandy, thank you very much!

On topic, I agree with you Zephyr, it doesn't stand the test of negation, thus one can't really say. However, its also a very subjective question. What soul means to people, if it all it means anything to them, differs greatly.
But what truly perplexes me is why we call the world we live a 'material world', when we create spirituality (thus the spiritual world), we create ideas and ideologies (thus the ideational realm), why then would we call our world 'material' if we didn't believe in the existence of another kind of world elsewhere. Damn, language is so prejudiced.

[Nel]

i don't believe in soul or ghosts. when you die, you die. thats it. you = non existent. i don't believe in afterlife either. no physical evidence of any of it = not real, logically.

Do you enjoy ghost movie?? How do feel about it when watching it?

[jesai]

Yes the soul as a way to allay fears is a much stronger arguement. I really really liked your post zephyr. When i think about stuff though, how often does science prove anything. The basis of most advanced sciences, especially those that intend to explain our reality, rest entirely on a few key theories. What is a theory afterall but something that has yet to be disproven. Heck some of these foundation theories are eventually proven false and spin the scientific world on its ear until a new one replaces it.

As much as i dont like to share my personal beliefs, i suppose its not fair to dodge the question. Yes i believe in a soul. As for ghosts, well i like the idea of them, but cant help but notice that the myths and reports of ghosts seem to have them act in a simplistic manner and/or emotional state. My feelings are that ghosts are kind of an impression of a soul, a residue of the thoughts and emotions. Especially makes sense since many reincarnation religions say the soul is something far more permanent and different then someones personality. In this way a ghost is more an imprint of the present personality as the more permanent soul moves on.

[Mikey_]

name a ghost movie and i'll tell you how i feel

[Mistral]

But what truly perplexes me is why we call the world we live a 'material world', when we create spirituality (thus the spiritual world), we create ideas and ideologies (thus the ideational realm), why then would we call our world 'material' if we didn't believe in the existence of another kind of world elsewhere. Damn, language is so prejudiced.

Ooh, I finally found a use for Sociology class. It's Francis Bacon's Idol of the Marketplace. He theorized on the existence of four idols that cloud our understanding of true reality.

Taken from here
3. The Idols of the Market Place. These are hindrances to clear thinking that arise, Bacon says, from the �intercourse and association of men with each other.� The main culprit here is language, though not just common speech, but also (and perhaps particularly) the special discourses, vocabularies, and jargons of various academic communities and disciplines. He points out that �the idols imposed by words on the understanding are of two kinds�: �they are either names of things that do not exist� (e.g., the crystalline spheres of Aristotelian cosmology) or faulty, vague, or misleading names for things that do exist (according to Bacon, abstract qualities and value terms � e.g., �moist,� �useful,� etc. � can be a particular source of confusion).

Basically, our own languages affect how we see and interpret our world. The division of the world into material, spiritual, and ideological, among others, is a convenience to denote how certain things, theories, and their ilk can affect themselves and each other, but can also pigeon-hole us into limiting it to that.

[jesai]

m79 if you indeed insist on 100% rational in your experiences then i must point out the most accepted quantum theory, the Copenhagen model which states that reality itself is subjective, and science cannot find a deep reality(that is a definition which adequately describes what really happens in our world). Even Neils Bohr has said leave it to the philosphers, scientists are only interested in the workable.

As such any attempt to define the entirety of ones reality using only logical means is doomed to failure.

[Mikey_]

.....oooooooooooook. well anyway like i said, if i can't see it, feel it, hear it, etc. i don't believe in it. i have no reason to believe in souls or ghosts and all that other junk.

[Mistral]

As such any attempt to define the entirety of ones reality using only logical means is doomed to failure.

I agree, but that is actually partially a failing of the present logical system, just as our present system replaced the earlier Aristotlean and Scholastistic methods because of their flaws. In part, to explain some of the greatest problems, we may well need to wait until a genius comes along and expounds a new method of thinking.

[Dingy]

In this way a ghost is more an imprint of the present personality as the more permanent soul moves on.

Very well put.

Zephyr, why you studying Bacon in socio?

[Mistral]

It was only his four idols that we studied in sociology, and how they related to human explanation of the world around them.

Um...I think it was sociology, at least. It might have been psychology, though: I had the same teacher and the same classroom, but the only difference was that the classes were taken in different years...

[jesai]

Im sorry, been reading up lately guess i was itching to use it. Anyway my point is science itself has been wrong many times, and still is right now on some things. They are quite honestly giving up right now, which to me is amusing.

Edit: in truth i think that most theories on quantum ideas are complete bunk, the one that makes the most sense is that actions are occuring faster then the speed of light, but in order to accept that one has to go against Einstein's theories that set the speed of light as the speed limit. Doing so kinda brings the physics world crumbling down(yet again) and as such this is one of the least accepted theories.

[Saeveo]

You can't see, hear or feel death...do you believe in it? Sort of a stupid way to think about things if you ask me. The problem with judging whether the soul is real stems from the fact that it's so damn difficult to pin down what exactly a soul IS.

[Nel]

name a ghost movie and i'll tell you how i feel

Shutter