Have science proved that we have spirit/soul?
- Thread starter Saint
- Start date
Methodological naturalism prescriptively excludes supernatural affairs as explanations. IOW, such is not part of the guiding presuppositions that science operates under.
Philosophical naturalism may either deny the existence of supernatural affairs or decree that such would be undetectable even if they did exist, because they make no causal contribution to the natural domain (no influence).
Thus, any researcher who tests for a spirit/soul is potentially as much a rogue or crackpot (in the context of science practice) as one who proclaims a spirit/soul is the case (either by personal revelation or as the results of a test).
It's a job, a profession, a set of skills. Not religion, a philosophical thought orientation (that's scientism), or metaphysics.
Last edited:
In my opinion there is no such thing as a spirit or a soul and modern science has definitely not detected such a thing.
Everything in the universe can be explained by physics and then by chemistry and then by biology so there is definitely no place for souls/spirits/deities/monsters/unicorns anymore.
Humans are definitely no different than the other animals in the animal kingdom and our DNA is not so much different than that of chimpanzees. Just because humans got very smart doesn't mean humans have a soul. So if humans have a soul than chimpanzees must also have a soul (because we are genetically related) but modern biology and zoology shows that it's clearly not the case.
Everything in the universe can be explained by physics and then by chemistry and then by biology so there is definitely no place for souls/spirits/deities/monsters/unicorns anymore.
Humans are definitely no different than the other animals in the animal kingdom and our DNA is not so much different than that of chimpanzees. Just because humans got very smart doesn't mean humans have a soul. So if humans have a soul than chimpanzees must also have a soul (because we are genetically related) but modern biology and zoology shows that it's clearly not the case.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
I agree, but that does not make the universe less awesome. As a 13.8 billion year collection of self-forming physical patterns, from simple fractals to galaxies and black holes, this place is an astounding example of self-organization.
But consider that a simple fractal iteration of a triangle can yield the most astounding naturally forming art forms, it becomes understandable that such processes happen throughout the universe and are responsible for what we currently experience.
Consider that it all started as a total state of chaos and self-organizing patterns started to emerge from this soup and gradually evolve from simple to greater complexity, into biology and living things. In the end everything is a pattern formed from three fundamental quanta of several flavors.......
The spiritual part lies in the mathematical guiding function in physics. 1 + 1 = 2 + 1 = 3 + 2 = 5 + 3 = 8 + 5 = ........
Last edited:
Maria T-M
Registered Member
Just for the sake of argument. How do physics, chemistry, and/or biology explain why a cell is alive while its component organelles are not alive? And why living cells can only come from other previously existing cells?
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
There is nothing to say that cells can only come from previously existing cells. If that were true, life could not have originally arisen.
Science can of course explain why a component part of a cell cannot generally be said to be alive on its own, since it depends on other parts of the cell to sustain itself. But there is no neat definition of what is alive and what is not, so such matters can sometimes be a subject of debate.
NO
“Life” is just a definition that we choose. Physics/chemistry/biology can easily conclude that component organelles are alive if we tweak the definition accordingly. The facts of the biological world are the facts. Whether they indicate that something is “alive” or not is purely up to us. (Hence the interminable interwebs debate on whether a virus is alive.)
Tell us what you think, Saint. You have been here a while. Has any part of the scientific method rubbed off on you? (Clue: Can you precisely define what a soul is? What are its physical properties? How do you measure them?)
And note that since spirit/soul was submitted as something within the province of science to test, HR's questions in bold are applicable.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
It's the dynamic pattern in which they are arranged.
When you freeze to death, nothing has changed in your body. The only difference is the unfortunate pattern your cells have become arranged.
Oh, yes. So much, in fact, that it eventually turns bright red and explodes in a big puff of smoke.
OTH, in Heaven, it shrivels up, turns blue and finally disappears.
Then both are recycled into new good and bad babies.
Beaconator
Valued Senior Member
Magic?
Maria T-M
Registered Member
There is something to say that cells can only come from previously existing cells: Cell Theory, proposed by Schleiden & Schwann. As of today, all cells can only come from existing cells. Lab attempts to create cells from non-living components have not succeeded so far. That doesn't mean they couldn't, but we haven't seen it.
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
That is 200 years old, fifty years before even Origin of Species. Things have moved on a bit since then, you know
.Life had half a billion years in which to form the first cell from precursors, using the whole surface of the earth and all its processes. It is hardly surprising that a single lab biochemist can't do it in a couple of decades. Be serious.
Synthetic life is much closer than most people realize, I think. For example, take a look at the work done by the J. Craig Venter Institute. They’ve helped to identify the smallest possible genome for life (bacterial, obviously), and it’s small enough for artificial chemical synthesis. We just have to encapsulate that in a synthetic phospholipid bilayer and cell wall and……. a synthetic bacterium.
We’re close, very close.
foghorn
Valued Senior Member
And, even if a longer a period is required, that could be found elsewhere and then via Panspermia to here to further evolve.