Hello, I'm new here, and young, 13 years to be exact.. so please don't mind if my philosiphies, and opinions seem a little obsurd. The thing I was wondering about, that sadly, I cannot seem to disscus with my parents, siblings, or peers.. is what constitutes being human.

I'm not talking about only physical aspects, either. I'm really not sure.. we may say that if AI was really possible.. if a machine had the ability to feel emotion.. to learn, and to change.. to be able to make desicions on it's own, just as all "humans" can supposedly do.. it still would not be human. Since it is not flesh and blood.. but, suppose you had a human, that was completely devoid of emotion. I'm not talking about someone who is cold-hearted, and can kill someone without feeling remorse. I'm saying, what if there was a "human" that was entirely devoid.. could not feel. Almost as if they had been rid of, or born without a soul.. an empty vessel, if you will. Would you counsider this person a human? They say that inhuman.. is the same as unhuman..

maybe you answered your own question.

you state a list of characteristics that you find important qualities in a human being. The question of a human is a human will therefore always depend on the list of human qualities that is used.

i personally would call a human devoid of 'human' feelings still human, but that is because I have a different list.

yea, that question has a lot of answers depending on your personal beliefs.

I personally don't believe in souls or any of that stuff (I'm an atheist), so everyone is human!

Cruelangel,

What you describe reminds me of philosophical zombies (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~chalmers/zombies.html).
Regarding souls - I think soul is a small word that contains
a big concept. The concept of the soul is debated often by
many with no conclusive answers as to what it is exactly.
Not sure if there ever will be. I'm with Lartox on this one,
the answers you get will be dependant on what the beliefs
are. I also thought this link might be of interest. :)

The Phaedo by Plato (http://plato.evansville.edu/texts/jowett/phaedo.htm)

welcome to sciforums Cruelangel!
I wonder, why do you think a 'perfect' AI could not have a soul? Is it because a soul must be linked to a biological body, or because a soul can not be created by man (and this machine is created by man) ?
And what, do you think, is the 'soul'? is it some kind of devine energy? Or is it another word for the totla of emotions, thoughts, etc. of a person?

I am glad you have come to sciforums! When I was about your age, I had the same situation, but there was no internet yet (at least not for most people).
It's a great place, we can learn much from eachother.

hey cruel angel--i'm somewhere around your age. glad to see some people as young as me here.

Personally I think a human without a soul is basically braindead. In other words, a big pile of meat. No more, no less.

If however you believe a soulless person could continue walking and talking I would still consider them human. They might be without altruism or various factors of self control but so are many widely accepted humans. They might even be able to partake in society as a usefu member if they realize what is bad for society is invariably bad for them.

Why would a souless person kill? Pleasure? If they had no soul they would feel no pleasure in ANYTHING. Perhaps if they had a big enough incentive for killing someone they would but that would be dissuaded by the knowledge of the judicial system.

There are likely many people here on earth who would qualify using your peramiters as soulless.


The best of people do not sin no because of guilt or fear of reprisal by god or the judicial system but just because its right not to. Some could be soulless and still be better people than many with souls.

Clockwood,
Can you be more specific about what you think is a soul?
Then maybe your post will mean something to me, now I am in the dark.

Personally I think it is the part of you that does the thinking and survives afer one's body dies.

All but the first part of my post is based on the alternate hypothosis that it merely involves the altruistic and emotional parts and perhaps the personality.

Clockwood,
I am very glad you arte concearned with the subject! Too many people just assume that if one knows the brain, one knows everything about humans.
Still, I get the feeling your ideas are yet a bit incoherent. Also, I have some problems with this one:
"Personally I think it is the part of you that does the thinking and survives afer one's body dies."
What reasons are there to assume that your thoughts survive the body? Would it not be reasonable assuming the thoughts to have their roots in sensory processes. No body, no senses, no thouhgts?
And how does something that survives the body interact with that body?

soul is just what some call the best of our qualities hidden deep. Those qualities show up in important situations.
anyway that's just imho

no after death though

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=13188

Imo all vessels are full.

I guess I believe in the existence of the soul because I have to. It gives me comfort to believe such a thing exists and it dosnt hurt to think so.

Might be right, might be wrong. If im wrong it wont matter.