Does the Soul Exist?

[rakovsky]

Of course it can. Because your consciousness is a product of your body and mine is a product of my body. Just like it's not a mystical conundrum why I can only run using my own legs, or why I can't drink from a glass located on another continent. No immaterial soul needed.

Just the opposite, I'd say.
If our consciousness is independent from our bodies, you'd expect crossovers, shared subjective experiences between bodies, and ESP to be possible, yet they aren't.
The concept of a soul raises more questions than it answers

Porpoise,

A materialistic science can explain the electrical and chemical impulses making someone's legs run, and the electrochemical processes whereby a brain detects that it is computing - ie. its own awareness. But how can it explain the experience of the Subjective First Person state? Can science explain why I myself am in this body at this moment, as distinct from simply a forum user, Rakovsky, recognizing that he is in his body?

In life experience, many people can sense that they are a subject looking at the world and at their body. This subject as distinguishable from that which they are observing appears to be the being that they call "the soul".

 

[GlennB]

In addition to the point made about brain trauma there's drugs too. If I modify my brain function with drugs does my soul temporarily change too?

Possessing 'a soul' is an attractive idea as the idea of total non-existence after death is a little shocking. It's also impossible to visualise nothingness, at least as far as I can see.

 

[rakovsky]

Which one of those wordy excuses is the "no" option?

Mike G,
If you mean the poll options, the no option is the last one, in case you want to say that you object to the question or if you want to answer "None of the Above".

 

[fagin]

.....Can science explain why I myself am in this body at this moment, as distinct from simply a forum user, Rakovsky, recognizing that he is in his body?.....

Er um whut?

The presumably subtle difference is?

 

[Dave Rogers]

I'm serious. This poll looks like a collection of questions designed to only give one conclusion. It is misleading, and probably deliberately so.

I'm also kind of intrigued by the possibility, suggested as a partial converse of one of the options, that the soul is a legal concept. I only know of one type of person who believes that.

I found that this is one poll in which I can quite honestly and sincerely tick two of the categories and nevertheless also tick the "None of the above" option.

Dave

 

[GlennB]

Can science explain why I myself am in this body at this moment, as distinct from simply a forum user, Rakovsky, recognizing that he is in his body?

Your question presumes that you are somehow "in" your body. This requires your "you (soul)" to be a separate entity from your body. In other words the question you pose assumes the correctness of your hypothesis. What you need to test the hypothesis is evidence, not questions that can only confirm your belief.

 

[rakovsky]

The Eagles put it best some decades ago:

Someone show me how to tell
The dancer from the dance

Mike,

The actor, the dancer, is one component of the entire event, the dance.

To distinguish them, one can follow the dancer's body at every step and pose of the dance. Putting the dancer's steps together creates the dance, as opposed to a single pose.

 

[Darat]

Porpoise,

A materialistic science can explain the electrical and chemical impulses making someone's legs run, and the electrochemical processes whereby a brain detects that it is computing - ie. its own awareness. But how can it explain the experience of the Subjective First Person state? Can science explain why I myself am in this body at this moment, as distinct from simply a forum user, Rakovsky, recognizing that he is in his body?

In life experience, many people can sense that they are a subject looking at the world and at their body. This subject as distinguishable from that which they are observing appears to be the being that they call "the soul".

Don't be so certain that your experience is the same for others. It's only recently that I realised there are a huge number of people in the world that can make pictures in their heads! Can you imagine that? They can "see" in their "mind's eye" an image of their loved ones. Or an image of a red apple. Astonishing and totally unlike my "internal" world.

 

[MikeG]

Mike G,
If you mean the poll options, the no option is the last one, in case you want to say that you object to the question or if you want to answer "None of the Above".

As I said, that is dishonest and deliberately misleading. It is a clear attempt at arriving at a pre-determined outcome. There is actually no hint whatever in the wording of the last option that it is the "no" option, and the carefully chosen leading questions for the other 4 options also aren't explicitly a "yes" option. At the very least, having 4 "Yes" options and 1 "No" option shows how blatantly biased and dishonest this silly poll is. You really should be doing better than this.

 

[MikeG]

Mike,

The actor, the dancer, is one component of the entire event, the dance.

To distinguish them, one can follow the dancer's body at every step and pose of the dance. Putting the dancer's steps together creates the dance, as opposed to a single pose.

Great way to entirely miss the point. Well done.

 

[rakovsky]

I cannot explain it
Cannot tell you how
Honey, it’s something you’ll never know
If you don’t know by now
London give you accent
L.A. give you gold
New York give you attitude
But Memphis gives you soul

It's a Memphis thing . . .

Awesome.

 

[MikeG]

Here's your poll again, rewritten without the ********.

Does the soul exist?

1/ Yes

2/ Yes

3/ Yes

4/ Yes

5/ There's something wrong with the question.

 

[John Jones]

Here's your poll again, rewritten without the ********.

Does the soul exist?

1/ Yes

2/ Yes

3/ Yes

4/ Yes

5/ There's something wrong with the question.

Agreed. That's why I didn't bother to answer.

 

[Myriad]

Mike,

The actor, the dancer, is one component of the entire event, the dance.

What are the other components of the dance?

To distinguish them, one can follow the dancer's body at every step and pose of the dance. Putting the dancer's steps together creates the dance, as opposed to a single pose.

At every step of the dance, you'll still find the dancer. But the dancer can temporarily stop dancing. Does that prove the dance is separate from the dancer?

If the dance is separate from the dancer, does it make sense to ask where the dance goes when the dancer stops dancing?

 

[rakovsky]

It has been shown to be simple to trick the brain into thinking that your body doesn't actually belong to you, or that immaterial objects are parts of your body. To me, this suggests that the whole "observer" phenomenon is simply an illusion generated to convey a sense of continuity and narrative, which can provide a distinct advantage when it comes to survival.

I can see how the brain can be tricked into thinking that one's body (like in a mirror) doesn't belong to oneself, or that an "out of body" experience can be generated by events like trauma.

However, it sounds like you are suggesting that the "self" is itself an illusion. Are you saying that "I" am a fiction and illusion, whereas the only reality for me is my physical body observing itself? As a result, "I" am not real, only my physical body is real?

Such a conclusion contradicts my experience in my body, where I feel that I am real and can sense a difference between myself and that which I am observing, my body. Further, how to explain my existence at all as an observer? Why should "I" be observing in this body at this moment? I can understand that Rakovsky's brain is not in another body. But why am I as an "Observer" not in another brain at this moment?

My question may not even make sense unless such things as selves and observers exist, and even then, what I am asking might not make sense to anyone but another observer.

 

[Dancing David]

Poll can't be answered do to lack of definition of soul.

- a body appears to exist

 

[Dancing David]

As a result, "I" am not real, only my physical body is real?

It appears that bodies exist

 

[jrhowell]

Are you saying that "I" am a fiction and illusion, whereas the only reality for me is my physical body observing itself? As a result, "I" am not real, only my physical body is real?

I believe that both are real. They just are not the same sort of thing. Your brain is the organ that produces your sense of self. In that sense the mental "you" is the result of a process, not a physical entity.

As an analogy, this forum is hosted on a physical server. The server produces the forum, but the server is not the forum and the forum is not the server. If you shut down the server and wipe its memory the forum will cease to exist, just as you will when your brain stops functioning. There is no forum afterlife and none for you or I either.

 

[rakovsky]

What are the other components of the dance?

The pattern of movements.

At every step of the dance, you'll still find the dancer. But the dancer can temporarily stop dancing. Does that prove the dance is separate from the dancer?

It proves that the two are distinguishable.

If the dance is separate from the dancer, does it make sense to ask where the dance goes when the dancer stops dancing?

The dance stops when the dancer stops dancing, since the dancer is a necessary component of a dance. A temporary end to the dancing that is later resumed means that the dance itself is ended and then resumed.

 

[rakovsky]

As I said, that is dishonest and deliberately misleading. It is a clear attempt at arriving at a pre-determined outcome. There is actually no hint whatever in the wording of the last option that it is the "no" option, and the carefully chosen leading questions for the other 4 options also aren't explicitly a "yes" option. At the very least, having 4 "Yes" options and 1 "No" option shows how blatantly biased and dishonest this silly poll is. You really should be doing better than this.

Mike,
The poll system does not allow someone to ask several statements and provide Yes/No answers. The closest way to do that is to ask people to select which of the statements they agree with and include an "Object to the Question" or "None of the Above" option as the last statement that they can select.

Here's your poll again, rewritten without the ********.

Does the soul exist?
....
5/ There's something wrong with the question.

The last option says "Object to the Question" / "None of the Above (please explain)". So if you object to the question or want to answer None of the Above, you would choose the last option and explain why you agree with none of the statements above.