|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The soul -- does it exist? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hoostino Inactive Member |
The vast majority of humans believes in the concept of a spirit or soul belonging to each individual. This entity is often considered an extension of the human body, and many consider it as real as their anatomical and psychological selves. Obviously, no empirical evidence supports its existence. And personally, I think it's obvious that what we consider "spiritual" is merely misidentified elements of our psychology. What do you think?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
keenanvin Inactive Member |
Consciousness, memory and personality are consequences of the biochemical and electrical processes of the brain. These properties are dictated by genes, environment, and health, and require a supply of oxygen and energy (ATP). If the brain is changed - injured by trauma or stroke for example, or stricken with cancer - cells die, synaptic pathways are disrupted, energy metabolism can be drastically skewed. These disruptions at the cellular level mean that memories can be lost, personality changed, consciousness ended. Death is a permanent extension of this end of consciousness, and once those cellular changes occur there really is no going back. There is no magick entity of "consciousness", soul or spirit that exists apart from or longer than the biochemical workings of the brain.
_kV
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joz Inactive Member |
Ah dualism what a load of steaming bovine excrement.......
There is no ghost in the machine folks.....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
KingPenguin Member (Idle past 7883 days) Posts: 286 From: Freeland, Mi USA Joined: |
this is what you atheists and evolutionists could use to prove their is no god. a conscience and a personality is what defines a person and without this ghost in the shell i think that we would be entirely impulse based like animals. this also means that a computer could possibly develop a personality of its own, if its as simple as it seems. how would explain emotions though? there is nothing gained from love other than maybe satisfaction and a reason to aspire to something, but why waste time like that if you dont need to and if its not helping you survive. why would we develop something that makes us worse and more dependent on others. i dont know any man that doesnt want a girl very badly or that wants to die alone. why would we need to do anything other than work if it didnt help us progress our species, the developement of emotions just doesnt need to be.
------------------"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5195 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
quote: As keenanvin pointed out, any brain damage changes behaviour, ergo behaviour is a physical function of the brain. I know you believe otherwise, but can you show it? We are impulse based animals, across the globe men & women are shagging like bunnies, christian or not. Our inherited territorialism is translated into terrible wars.
quote: Love does help us to survive. It allows mating & other non sexual bonds. It helps cement & reinforce social structure. A tribe is greater than the sum of its parts. ------------------Occam's razor is not for shaving with.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
KingPenguin Member (Idle past 7883 days) Posts: 286 From: Freeland, Mi USA Joined: |
can you show that it effects there personality? i know that theyre behavior and methods of thinking change but i still think its the same person in there.
------------------"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5195 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
quote: Well, if it's the same person in there, why does their behaviour change? Wouldn't the soul override the brain & shine through? Can I show it affects personality? Yes. People with progressive diseases that affect the brain are excellent case studies. People who are un-artistic become artistic, as the dominant "maths" (for example) part of the brain is destroyed, for example. Agressive people become unaggressive & vice versa, depending on where the damage occurs. The point is, our behaviour & personality are SOLELY the result of our brains processes. Change the brain, you change the behaviour. Which begs the question, if we DO have a soul, is there any reason to believe it thinks & acts like us anyway? Mark ------------------Occam's razor is not for shaving with. [This message has been edited by mark24, 02-13-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GregP618 Inactive Member |
It would appear that the general concensus of opinion is that animals act entirely based on primeaval instincts. Their instinct being to survive, and this being displayed in them protecting their territory, developing defence mechanisms against potential predators, developing ways to catch their prey etc. The big question appears to be whether the same can be applied to man?!
It would appear that some distinction has been made (and rightly so) between humans and animals. It's true that animals CAN be said to have a personality, perhaps in a similar way to humans, and this can, along with emotions, be termed a "soul". The soul and the physical body are what we use to relate to what we see around us in the physical world. The thing that sets animals apart from humans is that they have no God concious. This is the part of you that relates in the supernatural realm as opposed to the natural, and would be termed a "spirit". This is the part of you that is eternal and will go on after the physical body dies and can exist without the need for a physical form.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2169 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Well, that's a great theology and all, but it's still not based upon evidence of any kind. I think one of the major things that sets humans apart from the rest of the animals is self-awareness, and the ability to conceptualize far into the future. The part of self-awareness that religion has grown out of is that we are the only animal that knows ahead of time that we are going to die. The invention of a non-corporeal soul was a way for early people to explain why we had emotions and thoughts. Remember, for quite a long time, people thought that all thought and emotion resided in the heart, not the brain. People thought the brain existed to cool the blood. People also fear(ed) death, so the invention of a soul which lived on for all of eternity, beyond the death of the corporeal body, was a way to feel comforted.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2169 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: How do you define "same person"? What defines a person, other than their personality? There is a wonderful book I am reccomending to you called "The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat" by Oliver Sachs, which would help you understand a little better about neuroscience and the brain. It is a sensitive and intriguing collection of unusual case studies of people with different kinds of brain damage which explores what their lives and personalities were like and how they changed because of illness or trauma. Also consider the famous story of Phineas Gage:
http://www-instruct.nmu.edu/psychology/mmacmill/gage_page/PGSTORY.HTM 'Phineas Gage is probably the most famous patient to have survived severe damage to the brain. He is also the first patient from whom we learned something about he relation between personality and the function of the front parts of the brain. Phineas Gage was the foreman of a railway construction gang working for the contractors preparing the bed for the Rutland and Burlington Rail Road when, on 13th. September, 1848, an accidental explosion of a charge he had set blew his tamping iron through his head. The tamping iron (pictured below) was 3 feet 7 inches long, weighed 13 1/2 pounds, and was 1 1/4 inches in diameter at one end, tapering over a distance of about 1 foot to a diameter of 1/4 inch at the other. The tamping iron went in point first under his left cheek bone and out through the top of his head, landing about 25 to 30 yards behind him. Phineas was knocked over but may not have lost consciousness even though most of the front part of the left side of his brain was destroyed. He was treated by Dr. Harlow, the young physician ofCavendish, with such success that he returned home to Lebanon, New Hampshire 10 weeks later. Some time later, Phineas felt strong enough to resume work. But because his personality had changed so much, the contractors who had employed him would not give him his place again. Before the accident he had been their most capable and efficient foreman, one with a well-balanced mind, and who was looked on as a shrewd smart business man. He was now fitful, irreverent, and grossly profane, showing little deference for his fellows. He was also impatient and obstinate, yet capricious and vacillating, unable to settle on any of the plans he devised for future action. His friends said he was "No longer Gage."'
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Member (Idle past 1478 days) Posts: 2161 From: Cambridgeshire, UK. Joined: |
quote: What about lobotomy and electro-shock techniques ? They mangle the brain, and produce meek and mild individualsfrom dangerously agressive ones ... by removing parts of the brain responsible for these behaviour patterns. Personality traits can be REMOVED by excising parts of thebrain. I would contend that we are (OOps) NOT ANY different from any other animalthough. Would anyone care to show eveidence for the lack of self-awareness in other animals or of their inability to reason about the consequences of their actions ? How would you be able to hunt in organised groups without someplanning ability and communication system ? Have you ever watched lionesses hunt (on TV anyhow) ... can you really believe that such co-operation could be instinctive ?? A hunt is an incredibly dynamic activity after all. [This message has been edited by Peter, 03-20-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2169 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Uh, sure, I can show that. It's the "dot on the forehead" test. Take an animal, put a dot on their forehead, and have them look in a mirror. The ONLY animals that reach to their foreheads instead of the mirror are chimps and humans. "Learning" about the consequences of actions (cause and effect) is a lot different from "reasoning" (using logic) about the consequences of actions.
quote: Yes, I really can accept that much of that cooperation could be instinctive, the same way that I accept that birds build nests without being taught, and a housecat who has never hunted a live animal in its life will still stalk and kill a toy mouse exactly like a feral cat does. Animals, such as lions, hunting in groups are using both instinct and learned behaviors, but not reason as I have defined it.[/QUOTE]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joz Inactive Member |
quote: Um Schraf I think dolphins pass the (probably modified) dot test.....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Xombie Inactive Member |
quote: Actually, we are. Rather, we WOULD be, if it werent' for our Frontal Association Area. The Frontal Association Area is the front part of the human brain, that controls personality, associations, and complex thought. It is said that the intelligence of a species lies in how large this part of their brain is. Ours is (I think; correct me if I'm wrong) the largest of all animals. We are thus separated from animalistic behavior. A great example of how important the frontal association area is, would be the case of Phineas Gage, a railroad worker in the 1840's. While packing dynamite into a hole (I assume to clear some rock) with a long, thin steel rod, the dynamite accidentally went off. The rod was shot straight up through his chin, and out the top of his skull, clear through He survived because the parts of his brain that control bodily functions (breathing, movement, physical control) were still intact; however, the connection between his frontal association area and the rest of his brain was severed.The injury resulted in him becoming animalistic in his actions. A man who used to be friendly, polite, etc. now swore constantly, undressed in inappropriate places, urinated anywhere in public, and had temper tantrums. Reference: 'Psychology And You' 2nd Edition (textbook) So as you can see, what you attribute to the soul IS, in fact, part of our brai
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Member (Idle past 1478 days) Posts: 2161 From: Cambridgeshire, UK. Joined: |
quote: Peter::Human babies fail that test until they are several months old, and primitive cultures when shown photographs of themselves fail to recognise that the image is of them. That test shows nothing about self awareness, only of an inabilityto comprehend mirrors (or at least the result is inconclusive either way). (Western at least) humans are inundated from an early agewith images of themselves, and are TAUGHT that the image is themself. quote: What about creatures like squirrels and crows, who 'figure out'how to solve succesively difficult problems in obtaining food rewards. Crows are particularly good at it, and abilities learned by parents have been seen to be passed on to offspring. Even better are the monkeys who wash their sweet potatoesand use the sea to separate grain from sand. One monkey worked out how to do it, and others copied. How did the first monkey find this out ? By accident perhaps, but then why repeat the process another time if there is not some form of reasoning like 'It worked last time I'll try again' ? quote: My cat was taken away from it's mother very young ... andit DOES NOT stalk at all. Sure it'll chase shiny/moving objects, but it doesn't stalk, because it has never been shown how. Hunting is an ACQUIRED skill, not an instinctive activity.
quote: I cannot imagine how an ambush (which lionessesemploy with great success) can be imprinted from instinct, nor co-ordinated without some rudimentary communication technique. I've seen film of lionesses hunting where the lionesses (two ofthem) walk side by side, heads close together, then one sneaks around the edge of a heard and the other waits till it is in position before startling the heard toward the now hidden hunting partner. That seems pretty complicated pattern to be just instinct ... and if it's learned, how did they learn it in the first place ? [added by edit] I think I meant herd [This message has been edited by Peter, 03-25-2002]
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024