Human Value

[Tinker Grey]

Quantum experiments suggest that objects only exist with real properties if they are observed. This may suggest that a part of the mind – the soul – is immortal and exists outside of space and time.

A) No it doesn't.
B) If the only things that exist are those things that are observed, then the soul certainly doesn't exist.

 

[dlamberth]

OK. The way I worded my original question was ambiguous. What I want is a demonstration that there is such a thing as spirit.

I work with spirit, it’s my reality. It’s the lens through which I view the world. But there’s no way I could demonstrate it to you or anyone else. But it works for me.

 

[Tinker Grey]

I work with spirit, it’s my reality. It’s the lens through which I view the world. But there’s no way I could demonstrate it to you or anyone else. But it works for me.

That's fine for you. But as it stands, I have no reason to believe such a thing.

 

[dlamberth]

That's fine for you. But as it stands, I have no reason to believe such a thing.

Which is fine. But it does give me a little insight into those here who look to the Soul. The main difference is that I don’t know how to limit Soul to Human Beings like some here are doing. For my self it’s an aspect of being alive with all beings, animals or people.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Which is fine. But it does give me a little insight into those here who look to the Soul. The main difference is that I don’t know how to limit Soul to Human Beings like some here are doing. For my self it’s an aspect of being alive with all beings, animals or people.

What is soul to you? I'm glad we appear to agree that a soul as a uniquely human thing is not demonstrable. But I have hunch that you are reusing the word soul to mean something like life. In which case, why not use the word life?

Please elaborate.

 

[atpollard]

OK. The way I worded my original question was ambiguous. What I want is a demonstration that there is such a thing as spirit.

Oh ... we’ll probably have to wait until we die and then find out for sure (or not if there is no spirit). I don’t think anyone can provide physical evidence of the metaphysical.

philosophically:

• Cogito, ergo sum.
• I am more than my physical body, I am “me”.
• Whether “me” survives after death or not, “me” is more than just an animal. More than a biological machine.
• I am a conscious being ... a spirit (even if only a temporal one born of electrons and neurons in brain cells).

 

[renniks]

A) No it doesn't.
B) If the only things that exist are those things that are observed, then the soul certainly doesn't exist.

The soul may be immaterial until we die, and then take on another form.

 

[dlamberth]

What is soul to you? I'm glad we appear to agree that a soul as a uniquely human thing is not demonstrable. But I have hunch that you are reusing the word soul to mean something like life. In which case, why not use the word life?

Please elaborate.

I don't know if I can elaborate. It's like defining Love, it can't be done. Maybe with some questions that can't be answered, but contemplated...maybe? And the depends upon a person's inner exploration of Self. So, what is our essence? Are we just a bunch of stuff? A bunch of matter? When I watched my infant granddaughter laugh and her eyes light up, where's that twinkle in her eye coming from? What I see is her inner essence of Life bubbling up in her eyes, her Soul if you will. Some more questions, where does the creative element of an artist bubble up from? Why are the Mystics of all of the various spiritual trajectories pointing towards our essence or Soul. What are they saying about this sort of stuff. These are a short example of the kinds of questions that the Mystics ask. But that trajectory is pretty unfamiliar territory in this forum. Sorry for not giving a direct answer to your question which really is a good one to be asking. But it also highlights what I said earlier in that I can't demonstrate spirit to anyone, though in a rough way Soul can be pointed to.

 

[dlamberth]

Oh ... we’ll probably have to wait until we die and then find out for sure (or not if there is no spirit). I don’t think anyone can provide physical evidence of the metaphysical.

But...a person can live it. It's kind of interesting that way. It's sort of like trying to prove physical evidence of Love.

 

[Tinker Grey]

I don't know if I can elaborate. It's like defining Love, it can't be done. Maybe with some questions that can't be answered, but contemplated...maybe? And the depends upon a person's inner exploration of Self. So, what is our essence? Are we just a bunch of stuff? A bunch of matter? When I watched my infant granddaughter laugh and her eyes light up, where's that twinkle in her eye coming from? What I see is her inner essence of Life bubbling up in her eyes, her Soul if you will. Some more questions, where does the creative element of an artist bubble up from? Why are the Mystics of all of the various spiritual trajectories pointing towards our essence or Soul. What are they saying about this sort of stuff. These are a short example of the kinds of questions that the Mystics ask. But that trajectory is pretty unfamiliar territory in this forum. Sorry for not giving a direct answer to your question which really is a good one to be asking. But it also highlights what I said earlier in that I can't demonstrate spirit to anyone, though in a rough way Soul can be pointed to.

I appreciate your answer. However, I prefer not to make life mystical. I find life fascinating and joyous, but I don't feel the need to make more of It than It appears to be.

It feels a little like the complaint that unweaving the rainbow removes the wonder. Well, for me it doesn't.

Thanks for the reply.

 

[Bradskii]

Special offer, on the house.

A nightcap.

"If you don't see God everywhere,
you don't see Him anywhere."

Ebola? Covid? Polio? Cancer?

Oh, yeah. Hang on. We're fallen. I forgot. So God is not involved in disease for some reason. Or tsunamis. Or 'quakes. Or floods. Or bush fires. Or droughts. Or famines. Thems our fault and we 'don't see Him anywhere' in those examples.

You can have some cake and eat it with your nightcap.

 

[Bradskii]

I appreciate your answer. However, I prefer not to make life mystical. I find life fascinating and joyous, but I don't feel the need to make more of It than It appears to be.

It feels a little like the complaint that unweaving the rainbow removes the wonder.

A good book. Should be read by all Christians. But as for the soul or 'the spirit'...

...the sense that it exists comes from our feeling of spirituality. That there might be more than this vale of tears. And if we think that there is actually more than this (not an unreasonable conclusion) then there must be a spirit to map onto the spiritual.

And if you sit around the campfire and discuss it at any length and come to agree on certain aspects of spirituality, then - bingo. You've got a ready made proto-religion.

And next time we're around the fire, let's pause for a moment and think about why we are here. And let's wear something/say something/perform something that differentiates us from those sceptics who think that huntin' and eatin' and sex is all there is.

And whatever is in charge (whoever!), then let's make sure he's happy (always a 'he'). And by the way, I happen to know what he wants so listen to what I say and do what I want and I'll make sure you're in his good books. Keep him happy and you'll reap the benefits. And if you don't...well that's your fault.

All those guys sitting around all those campfires back then have a lot to answer for.

 

[dlamberth]

I appreciate your answer. However, I prefer not to make life mystical. I find life fascinating and joyous, but I don't feel the need to make more of It than It appears to be.

It feels a little like the complaint that unweaving the rainbow removes the wonder. Well, for me it doesn't.

Thanks for the reply.

I get it. Thanks.
The conversation was about Soul and Spirit. I shared a little bit where I go with it. Which is mostly that I'm not able to limit Soul to only people as do the Creationist here.

 

[Bradskii]

I get it. Thanks.
The conversation was about Soul and Spirit. I shared a little bit where I go with it. Which is mostly that I'm not able to limit Soul to only people as do the Creationist here.

Isn't the soul the sense of self that we have? The 'me' that flicks the switches and pulls the levers. The 'me' that is self contemplative. The homunculus in Dennett's Cartesian Theatre?

I'm pretty certain that other animals have it to some degree. Certainly the higher primates. So it's an evolved sense. One that had an evolutionary benefit. Generally accepted as a way to mentally separate ourselves from others as a means to understand what they might be individually thinking. Which certainly is a benefit in aspects of life such as hunting for example.

Whereas most Christians believe it was given to us at one specific moment in time. Either through creationism or through some means of instilling a sense of self into an individual (who we can call Adam). Which means that Adam was self aware but his parents weren't? Does that make any sense?

 

[Ken-1122]

Nope. Only man is in God's image, having a spiritual side.

I’ve got a scenario for you.
If we found a planet that contained intelligent life, but they looked different from us (thus not in God’s image and no souls)Do you think this give us the moral right to treat them as we treat animals here on Earth?

 

[Bradskii]

I’ve got a scenario for you.
If we found a planet that contained intelligent life, but they looked different from us (thus not in God’s image and no souls)Do you think this give us the moral right to treat them as we treat animals here on Earth?

I, for one, would welcome our new insect overlords.

 

[Ken-1122]

I, for one, would welcome our new insect overlords.

But they don't have souls and are not made in the Image of God. If we were more powerful than them, why would you not treat them as you would treat an animal?

 

[Bradskii]

But they don't have souls and are not made in the Image of God. If we were more powerful than them, why would you not treat them as you would treat an animal?

I've no idea what 'in the image of God' actually means. But as far as 'soul', that's just self awareness. A sense of the self. I'm sure they'd have that in which case I'd be able to empathise with our alien chums (although I do recall reading a sc fi story many moons ago that described an alien species that was intelligent but not sentient - a tough one to get my head around). In which case I'd treat them as having value. The same way as I treat a dog as having value but a mosquito as not.

But what would they taste like? If they were similar to suckling pig then they might be in some sort of trouble. 'We mean you no harm. Rubbing oil over you and sticking an apple in your mouth is just our way of being friendly!'

 

[Robban]

Ebola? Covid? Polio? Cancer?

Oh, yeah. Hang on. We're fallen. I forgot. So God is not involved in disease for some reason. Or tsunamis. Or 'quakes. Or floods. Or bush fires. Or droughts. Or famines. Thems our fault and we 'don't see Him anywhere' in those examples.

You can have some cake and eat it with your nightcap.

You forgot death in your list.

 

[Bradskii]

You forgot death in your list.

Death is a plus according to some. It's the gateway to heaven.

We'd all prefer a gentle slide into that good night. But...disease all but ensures we need to rage against it. Or even determine to end it sooner rather than later. The horror!