Do we have souls? This is my idea on souls. We live in this physical world, material world. It has its certain methods of operation and its certain laws, etc. Consciousness is perception through a brain by a soul. Let me clarify; the soul exists, and operates and is alive (within this world) via our bodies. The reason I can sense this world is because my soul resides in a body that can. If one body is blind, his soul shall not see. The organs, excluding the brain, exist to keep the body alive, of course, and to keep the brain alive, etc, you know the story, to keep us alive and do their jobs, in this material world. The brain, on the other hand, is a complicated network, with all sorts of chemicals and areas and etc, but just like our senses, it exists to allow the soul to perceive. For instance, when we are happy, the endorphins and everything, it's entirely physical, in order to allow for the soul to feel happiness within the body. When we eat, the physical brain, via the free will of the soul, and to keep it alive, does the physical work. Basically, to make it simple, the brain operates as hardware, hardware that operates within a certain place. The soul, or the software, however, exists independently of the hardware. However, you might say "well the software only runs if the hardware runs" ~That's true. However, that doesn't mean they have to be one in the same; i.e, the software is being run in a different place, in a different way, and the hardware in the other place, is running it. We are conscious through the brain, but the conscousness isn't caused by the brain, and the consciousness exists independently. ~ It makes no sense that any amount of complexity will lead to consciousness, the sense of "me" or of being.
Proof? How can a brain, made of carbon and water and other non conscious elements, create consciousness?
Argument from incredulity = I can't understand how X is true, therefore Y must be the answer. Just because you can't see how carbon etc come to create consciousness does not necessarily mean that it didn't happen. And that second quote is from....? Regardless. "None of the physiological models are adequate..." So what? Does the author assume that we currently know everything there is that can be known or is he prepared to accept that we have maybe a few more years or a few more decades or even a few more centuries before we can answer questions like that? That is not the attitude of a scientist, it's a five year-old demanding his cookie NOW!
Anything regarding consciousness is an argument from incredulity; we have no clue why and how consciousness works. However, as I stated, I think it is more logical that the consciousness exists independently of the brain. I don't think nonconscious material can ever form true consciousness and free will. Ok, so by your own logic, we shouldn't assume that we DON'T have souls either, since you said we don't know. Basically, physiological models are unnecessary, a soul is a simpler explanation. *mimicks atheists*
There we are again: you don't think it's true. Soul is not a simpler explanation, since it postulatres something intangible and unverifiable by science: therefore science cannot investigate it. I assume we don't have one due to balance of probabilities: there is no evidence whatsoever for it so why should I consider it?
Please explain that logic. I often see you say that this or that is more ligical, but you seldom explain why. I'd like to see you break down why it is illogical that inanimate matter can work together to produce the apparent synergistic effect of self-awareness. I'm not certain how I feel about the "soul" myself just yet, so I would like to see some clearly explained viewpoints and arguments.
Sure.... and you don't think the soul is true Science can't explain consciousness either; and as I said, no amount of complexity equals a consciousness. Is your computer conscious? No. The universe might be one universal consciousness; hence, God!
That's right: but I don't state it as fact... So what? Really, so what? And your credentials for saying that are... (I mean other than personal belief) Point being? Might,if, maybe...
You might as well, with the way you state it. So...we have no clue. Besides, I've already explained my idea in another thread titled "the soul" in this subforum. The brain doess all of these things for the body and can help the mind to operate....but what is perceiving the mind? What IS IT that the brain works for? The soul More logical than nothing Well just based off my knowledge of conscioiusness Complexity doesn't create conscousness It makes sense; after all, that would explain the lack of "empirical evidence" or "action" for god Not to mention the theory I told you about about consciousnes being a function of the universe; therefore "God" is the ultimate conscoous being it also explains NDE's
You mean as " there's no evidence" or "there are simpler explantions". Yeah I see your point. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! There's lots of things we don't know. Yet. How abnout the mind being self-aware. Otherwise you need a soul to perceive the mind then something to perceive the soul... Knowledge of your own consciousness or just awareness of it? Oops flat statement again. Computers aren't "complex" to our level. Disagree. So do drugs...
A long time ago i made a thread about the location of the soul, if there is one, in the human body. I postulated that it is at the front of the chest directly centered between the breast bone. I base this upon the concentration of electrical energy in the area. An energy similar to electricity but not entirely understood or harnessable by present human understanding.
"Simpler" explanations aren't always ACCURATE explanations. The simplest explanation could be that magical fairies keep the world in motion... Ok so don't make conclusions Not at all; see "quantum conciousness" What is the "self" that the brain "creates"? Something needs to perceive the brain's complexity. And they likely, while certainly surpassing our complexity, will never be "true" AI. Notice how we don't know how to create, or even where to begin, to create true self aware AI. Why? Not at all; drugs don't explain mass NDE's; drugs don't explain the fact that people who have NDE's can accurately report events that may happen far away; drugs don't explain the fact that the healthiest people who have never used drugs can, after death, have an NDE And most importantly: drugs don't explain the fact that a man was dead for THREE DAYS and had an NDE, and later came back. Let me guess, all halucinations?
Correct, but they're easier to work with and investigate. Don't add complication just for the sake of it. No 'cos then you'd have to explain what size they are, what they eat, what their names are... I haven't. I've avoided complication by not adding other stuff. Oh, yeah, something that might work, might be true and has, as yet, no validation. The only thing that perceives the brains complexity is an MRI scanner... If you mean consciousness then that question is being worked on. Yet. But it's being worked on. We can't cure cancer. Does that mean we never will? We couldn't cure measles once, we can now. It's an added complication with evidence. The links YOU gave stated explicity that DMT can cause exactly the same effects as NDEs. The drugs, as stated in YOUR links, are created in the brain in some people under conditions of extreme stress. Occam's razor. We know about DMT... And the links that purported to provide hard (actually any) evidence for NDE didn't, most flatly contradicted it.
the soul is pretty much exactly what ancient traditions tell us: a non-physical body. it exists even if we don't have a physical body. modern materialistic humans often have a problem with this... they just can't imagine that it could be true, so they think the soul is "consciousness" or something.
Shit Norsefire, try as you might you'll never be LG. You need a new shtick. My neighbor has a Down's Syndrome child/adult living with him. Its pretty severe case of mental dysfunction. I sometimes look at him and wonder, if he had a soul then wtf is it doing there? I don't think old George is aware of himself or even if his consciousness is working a little bit. By your definition does George have a soul inhabiting his rather simple brain? If he doesn't is George human?
That is an excellent question. I think it might have to do with self referential feedback loops. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel,_Escher,_Bach
