Souls

Originally posted by Agerg
Didn't Jesus wear sandals?...do they have soles? 😕

Jesus only wore Jesus boots.

However, snowflakes have knowledge, memory and other innate human conditions. So I guess snowflakes have souls too! 😉

Originally posted by mikelom
Jesus only wore Jesus boots.

However, snowflakes have knowledge, memory and other innate human conditions. So I guess snowflakes have souls too! 😉

Forgive my cynicism but I'm not too optimistic that if I ask vishvahetu how snowflakes access this memory and where it is stored I'll get a satisfactory answer! ;]

Originally posted by Agerg
I disagree, for by tanking myself up on alcohol, though it is true certain aspects of my character are given greater reign, it is also true that this character is operating with greatly decreased perception and reasoning along with other 'disabilities' and so the *me* when I'm drunk isn't quite a suppressed version of *me* when I'm sober.

there may be decreased perception and reason, but that in no way infers that the words and actions are not yours alone. Are there marrionette strings attached to your body and brain that may be accessed by outside forces? No, it is simply your brain functioning on a different level than your "rational" self. People who are schizoid, paranoid, bi-polar etc...often act irrationally, it is not some outside pressure working in, but rather the effects of the brain working improperly...like when someone is drunk.

If I poor a cup of diesel fuel in my gas powered automobile's fuel tank, the car is is still a car, but will buck cough and sputter. It doesn't change its function because a new chemical is added to the mix, rather it malfunctions as it attempts to function normally on a decreased capacity.

Originally posted by Agerg
I don't like asking the question in this way because it gives rise to vague answers. If I'm going to accept there is some part of me that lives on after I die I have to be stopped in my tracks when I try to argue my drives and actions can be reduced down into elementary physical and evolutionary based processes.

I see what you are saying, but I would argue that the best evidence is that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Originally posted by Doward
there may be decreased perception and reason, but that in no way infers that the words and actions are not yours alone. Are there marrionette strings attached to your body and brain that may be accessed by outside forces? No, it is simply your brain functioning on a different level than your "rational" self. People who are schizoid, paranoid, bi-polar etc...o the mix, rather it malfunctions as it attempts to function normally on a decreased capacity.

I don't really think this hurts my argument since given we have established here that *me* is affected by physical events, wiring, and impairments, the question remains as to what parts of *me* are independent of any physical or evolutionary processes. I.e. there doesn't seem to be a concrete *me* who transcends the physical, more *me* seems to be a response to natural events and wholly dependent upon those.

To counter this, can you say "part of you does/desires X" such that I can't go away and come back to you later with a list of elementary physical interactions/actions/processes whose composition gives rise to my doing or desiring of X?

Originally posted by josephw
The part you are referring to. The part of "you" that exists after your body ceases to function. The "soul" is the seat of the will. The "soul" is that part of you that gives you identity.

Can you describe further how it gives you identity?
Agerg has already pointed out that mind altering substances or brain injuries can dramatically change the way we think, our memories and even our character. So clearly this 'identity' you talk of is not every day thoughts, memories, character etc.
Or is the soul itself affected by alcohol?

Originally posted by Doward
I see what you are saying, but I would argue that the best evidence is that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

To that I would say the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts because it is more a function of it's parts as opposed to a summation. ;]

Originally posted by Agerg
I'm not the first to have asked the question which will follow after the preamble... [hidden](and asked it before a while back but didn\'t phrase my question from the outset to get the answer I\'m looking for)[/hidden]

I think of *me*, i.e. the being that perceives the world around him, likes/dislikes things, thinks, plans, etc... as a manifestation of (or ...[text shortened]... *me* cannot be accounted for by natural interactions and processes?...why???[/b]

I know you're not purposely trying to be impertinent, but you are standing up as an unspiritual man demanding an answer to a spiritual question. Deft as you are at analyzing all manner of materially-based considerations, you are here attempting to divide between the soul and the spirit--- which is something only the Word of God is able to do.

The man of flesh cannot fathom or even begin to consider spiritual matters, and attempts to do so will result in nothing more than (to him) gibberish.

Take this question, for instance. You assert that everything which issues forth from you is a result of phenomena emanating either from within or impacting from without, thereby eliminating any need for a soul as animator. Just so.

We ought, then, to be able to replicate all of the chemical influxes and electrical impulses caress them into an appropriate houseing and land upon decisions and actions which perfectly mimic you, right? Call that strike one.

Should trouble come to anyone who either refuses or is unable to control their will? That's strike two.

Imagine doing something you've never done before. Strike three.

Originally posted by Agerg
To that I would say the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts because it is more a function of it's parts as opposed to a summation. ;]

each part functioning on its own does not give rise to sentience, but rather the combination of parts work together to create something more than the base attributes.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I know you're not purposely trying to be impertinent, but you are standing up as an unspiritual man demanding an answer to a spiritual question. Deft as you are at analyzing all manner of materially-based considerations, you are here attempting to divide between the soul and the spirit--- which is something only the Word of God is able to do.

The man o ...[text shortened]... will? That's strike two.

Imagine doing something you've never done before. Strike three.

The man of flesh cannot fathom or even begin to consider spiritual matters, and attempts to do so will result in nothing more than (to him) gibberish.
I agree with you here, whatever exists beyond my ability to perceive or measure is something I cannot, with any degree of honesty (on my part), attempt to describeReveal Hidden Content; Instead I'm trying to let the theist home in on something that I cannot possibly describe without recourse to the supernatural (both now or potentially in the future when I've given it more thought) - if they can do that I'll rethink my position.

Take this question, for instance. You assert that everything which issues forth from you is a result of phenomena emanating either from within or impacting from without, thereby eliminating any need for a soul as animator. Just so.
Pretty much!

We ought, then, to be able to replicate all of the chemical influxes and electrical impulses caress them into an appropriate houseing and land upon decisions and actions which perfectly mimic you, right? Call that strike one.

Should trouble come to anyone who either refuses or is unable to control their will? That's strike two.

Imagine doing something you've never done before. Strike three.
I'm not so sure I agree with this, with your first "strike" we have to consider that any attempts to replicate an exact *me* in some other vessel would require knowledge not only of how each specific "atom" of my brain/nervous system and body interacts (or can potentially react) with each other, they would also need to know for some "snapshot" of me, not only the positions of these 'atoms' but also their velocities and acceleration etc... and again incorporate this information into some vessel. Technologically speaking we are a long way from that capability even if it's possible.

That said, let us suppose hypothetically speaking such was possible and a *me_2* would at some point became operational elsewhere in the world; further let's suppose, for example, *me* has some desire to murder peopleReveal Hidden Contentand therefore *me_2* will also inherit this trait. Trouble should still befall *me* or *me_2* because I have the facility to reason that even though murdering people is something I'd like to do; the person being murdered wouldn't like it, I wouldn't like it if I were in their shoes, and society as a whole does not like it - indeed it would be counter productive to society, and an action they should strive to curtail to further their own survival, effectiveness, cohesion, and competiveness with respect to other societies. To this end I would calculate that the punishment will be severe even if I tried to argue it wasn't my fault! Given that I have such a capacity to reason this out, then if *me* or *me_2* still acts out this 'desire' then they are deserving of whatever punishment should be levied for (at least) the following reasons:
a) To attach a greater weight of importance to the penalties for killing people in other persons' calculations - i.e. to deter others; or supposing the penalty isn't death, to reinforce in my own future calculations the same greater weight.
b) To prevent *me* or *me_2* from killing any other people!


As for "strike three", having supposed, for arguments sake, I might want to go out and murder someone I'll have to wait for you to tell me how I failed your first two strikes before understanding how this was a strike...I can't see it.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Can you describe further how it gives you identity?
Agerg has already pointed out that mind altering substances or brain injuries can dramatically change the way we think, our memories and even our character. So clearly this 'identity' you talk of is not every day thoughts, memories, character etc.
Or is the soul itself affected by alcohol?

already pointed this part out. Nothing eminates from the person that is not already contained within the person; alcohol does not create silly words, it mearly lowers the functionality of the mechanism

Originally posted by Doward
already pointed this part out. Nothing eminates from the person that is not already contained within the person; alcohol does not create silly words, it mearly lowers the functionality of the mechanism

alcohol does not create silly words
It does actually; for example: "hrgg...shyeah, gizza minittt!...hehehe, I thinkkk,..I thin.. *hic* ..I think ahma a bit pissssst!...*hic*"

:]

Originally posted by Doward
already pointed this part out. Nothing eminates from the person that is not already contained within the person; alcohol does not create silly words, it mearly lowers the functionality of the mechanism

I did not claim that alcohol creates silly words. However the combination of alcohol and the brain does. You claim that the silly words derive solely from the brain yet simultaneously admit that alcohol is involved in the effect. Which is it?

Nothing eminates from the person that is not already contained within the person;
You can potentially get away with anything with that claim because you are really talking about what a person might potentially do or say under a given influence (just about anything). But then the statement is essentially an uninteresting statement of fact and not a counter argument to the suggestion that alcohol causes you to say silly words.

A clearer example might be when somebody hurts you and you scream out in pain. Did the scream come solely from your brain, or did the person and pain pathway have something to do with it?

Originally posted by twhitehead
I did not claim that alcohol creates silly words. However the combination of alcohol and the brain does. You claim that the silly words derive solely from the brain yet simultaneously admit that alcohol is involved in the effect. Which is it?

[b]Nothing eminates from the person that is not already contained within the person;
You can potentially g ...[text shortened]... am come solely from your brain, or did the person and pain pathway have something to do with it?[/b]

I did not claim that alcohol creates silly words. However the combination of alcohol and the brain does.

So does the combination of jumping off a roof and landing on your brain bucket. I think its important to stress here that nothing eminates from within that is not already contained within. The alcohol has no sentience, it by itself cannot create language or anything else. All thoughts words and deeds eminate from the self, regardless of how polluted the traffic ways may be.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I did not claim that alcohol creates silly words. However the combination of alcohol and the brain does. You claim that the silly words derive solely from the brain yet simultaneously admit that alcohol is involved in the effect. Which is it?

[b]Nothing eminates from the person that is not already contained within the person;
You can potentially g ...[text shortened]... am come solely from your brain, or did the person and pain pathway have something to do with it?[/b]

A clearer example might be when somebody hurts you and you scream out in pain. Did the scream come solely from your brain, or did the person and pain pathway have something to do with it?

Is the pain felt externally or internally? If someone scratches your arm, does your arm feel the pain, or does your brain feel the pain? I think the evidence is...well...self evident. If the nueral pathways known as the nervous system fail to bring the information to the brain, then no pain is felt. Pain is "felt" in the brain.