Evolution & the soul An invitation to comment

[sk8Joyful]

Hello,

I'm not looking for argument, just the thought of evolutionists.
This topic is addressed to evolutionists.

At what point does 'soul' occur and what is the biological, evolutionary mechanism?

Thank you for your time!

-Myhrrhleine (AKA Merlin)

Hello Merlin,

I have observed you respond very *nicely/politely*. And
one can hope some of *this* will be adopted by yet more 'evolutionists' here

When you: 'address evolutionists', may I ask you: do you wish to exclude *creationists* from this discussion? or
may we also contribute, based on our experiences of *Helping other people succeed*

I would enjoy participating should this be ok with you.

 

[sk8Joyful]

www.mdx.ac.uk/www/study/mhhglo.htm<LI>The spiritual life force or essence, carrying an individual's personality and consciousness of all actions.

That one appears to match most closely, what many people report as well.

Now, many Christians are of the opinion that 'only humans' have a 'soul'. -
However,
based on what I have read re: 'scientific'-studies/data, plus
many people's experiences, including my own, I believe that Christian opinion is not altogether on-target.

 

[sk8Joyful]

The concept of a soul, aka spirit, is totally outside the realm of science

Might you add to that, 'in my opinion'.

Have you ever worked in medicine, or more particularly *healing*?, Sir

Your questions are pointless for this forum.

Might you add to that, 'in my opinion'.

Do you believe you are, yet, able to continue... learning??, even *gaining new awarenesses*, Sir

(or are you proposing, re this subject: 'I know it ALL' ) -
and I pose this question in *all humility*,
because
I, for one, in keeping my mind open, continuously *gain new awarenesses*... And
how about your mind?, Sir

 

[Dark_Lite]

Hello,

I'm not looking for argument, just the thought of evolutionists.
This topic is addressed to evolutionists.

Is there a soul? Yes.
At what point does the evolving lifeform have a soul? When God puts it there.
What is the evolutionary mechanism of a soul? There is none.

Do chimps have a soul? No.
Do all mammals have a soul? No.
Do worms have a soul? No.
Do bacteria have a soul? No.
Do algae have a soul? No.
Does a protein have a soul? No.
How about a carbon atom? No.
At what point does 'soul' occur and what is the biological, evolutionary mechanism? Redundant question.

Thank you for your time!

-Myhrrhleine (AKA Merlin)

Comments in bold...

 

[sk8Joyful]

Should only theologins have an opinion on Souls?
and
it raises another question, all that I read in this thread...

do you believe in anything outside the realms of science?
If it doesn't fall under science, is it completely invalid? Because souls aren't the only thing science doesn't address.

especially Medical-scientists 'pride' themselves in being able to
1. 'Visually'-observe
2. Slice, Dice, Cut, Stain, Copy, Duplicate, Replicate. iow, intending
3. Control
yes -
UNable to control *souls*: most don't bother, and have no interest.

But SOULS are not outside the realm-of-science.
You can study them, and their effects, IF that is - you keep your mind OPEN.

Quite a number of scientists, in fact, have and will continue... studying *souls*.

Happy Research !

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

Quite a number of scientists, in fact, have and will continue... studying *souls*.

In which case you should be able to direct us to where their research is published.

 

[Tomk80]

especially Medical-scientists 'pride' themselves in being able to
1. 'Visually'-observe
2. Slice, Dice, Cut, Stain, Copy, Duplicate, Replicate. iow, intending
3. Control
yes -
UNable to control *souls*: most don't bother, and have no interest.

But SOULS are not outside the realm-of-science.
You can study them, and their effects, IF that is - you keep your mind OPEN.

Quite a number of scientists, in fact, have and will continue... studying *souls*.

Happy Research !

As a medical scientist and having a brother studying psychology, I would be very interested in that research. I have never heard of it. Studying things like 'consciousness', 'thought processes' etc, yes. The 'soul' (whatever it may be), no.

 

[AirPo]

Hello Merlin,

I have observed you respond very *nicely/politely*. And
one can hope some of *this* will be adopted by yet more 'evolutionists' here

When you: 'address evolutionists', may I ask you: do you wish to exclude *creationists* from this discussion? or
may we also contribute, based on our experiences of *Helping other people succeed*

I would enjoy participating should this be ok with you.

Actually, the term 'evolutionists' is not very polite.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Actually, the term 'evolutionists' is not very polite.

about as polite as the use of "creationists." The two terms are going to be continued in use though. no use quibbling about it.

 

[RoboMastodon]

As a medical scientist and having a brother studying psychology, I would be very interested in that research. I have never heard of it. Studying things like 'consciousness', 'thought processes' etc, yes. The 'soul' (whatever it may be), no.

Having met various psychology professors and discussed various things in relation to this, I would have to agree. There is no scientific research being conducted in relation to any sort of "souls"

 

[AirPo]

about as polite as the use of "creationists." The two terms are going to be continued in use though. no use quibbling about it.

Hardly. Creationists are self proclaimed. Evolutionist is not generly used by proponents of evolution.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Hardly. Creationists are self proclaimed. Evolutionist is not generly used by proponents of evolution.

I never called myself "creationist" it was a label placed on me because I believe in YEC. But is it really such an issue? Of all the other things us YEC's and EVO's argue about, this seems awfully minor.

It's not like you are calling me a backwards, flat earth, head in the sand dreaming Creationist, and I'm not calling you a souless, evil, materialistic, God denying Evolutionist. (please recognize the humour intended here.) At least not in THIS thread, so far.

 

[AirPo]

I never called myself "creationist" it was a label placed on me because I believe in YEC. But is it really such an issue? Of all the other things us YEC's and EVO's argue about, this seems awfully minor.

It's not like you are calling me a backwards, flat earth, head in the sand dreaming Creationist, and I'm not calling you a souless, evil, materialistic, God denying Evolutionist. (please recognize the humour intended here. ) At least not in THIS thread, so far.

Fine, most creationists are self proclaimed. And I only intended to point out that the OP wasn't a sweet as was claimed. I will say though, it seemed an honest mistake.

 

[Merlin]

Hello Airpo,

>Actually, the term 'evolutionists' is not very polite.

Then I apologise to you and to anyone offended.
It was not my intent to offend.
I thought people would be proud of the term.

 

[Tomk80]

Hello Airpo,

>Actually, the term 'evolutionists' is not very polite.

Then I apologise to you and to anyone offended.
It was not my intent to offend.
I thought people would be proud of the term.

Why would anyone be proud of it. I believe diseases are caused by germs or virusses. Should I now be proud of the term 'germist' or 'virussist'? I believe gravity has a natural cause instead of being caused by the elves of 'intelligent falling theory'. Should I now be proud to call myself 'gravitationist'?

Evolution is just the best current explanation on how species arise from other species over time, given the evidence we have collected untill now. Why should I feel pride over such a thing, anymore than any other theory?

 

[Merlin]

There are many people who believe in evolution who also believe in a soul.

There are those who believe they evolve by returning to life and learning new lessons.
There are those who believe in Astral travel or OBE.
The belief in 'evolution' transcends biological sciences.

 

[Merlin]

Tomk80,

I am proud of any label when someone is thoughtful enough to label me.
I did apologise.

>Then I apologise to you and to anyone offended.
>It was not my intent to offend.

 

[Tomk80]

Tomk80,

I am proud of any label when someone is thoughtful enough to label me.
I did apologise.

>Then I apologise to you and to anyone offended.
>It was not my intent to offend.

I'm not offended at the least. I'm just puzzled as why I would be proud of such a label. Generally, I don't care for labels (unless given to me by a pretty lady and sounding like 'beautiful', 'cool', 'fun to be around with' etc), and I just don't understand why I should be proud if I get one. Especially one that is just a label for holding a certain scientific theory, which is no different from any other scientific theory.