What is the soul?
- Thread starter Xgen
- Start date
M
Mr Anonymous
Guest
Its a fish. Lovey with a slice of lemon. But then again, really. What isn't?
M
Mr Anonymous
Guest
Who can? Breaded fish comes and goes, but a slice of lemon lasts for ever...
It's like the beak on a turkey, y'know? All the great taste of turkey, but concentrated in a form you can still be sucking on for months into the new year.
Except of course, y'can't sit there in a corner and click your slice of lemon at people derisively whilst there trying to concentrate on something actually important, like you can with a turkey beak and hiss threateningly at them when they turn to stare....
But, then again, there's the colour...
I'm torn in my affections, really I am!
It's like the beak on a turkey, y'know? All the great taste of turkey, but concentrated in a form you can still be sucking on for months into the new year.
Except of course, y'can't sit there in a corner and click your slice of lemon at people derisively whilst there trying to concentrate on something actually important, like you can with a turkey beak and hiss threateningly at them when they turn to stare....
But, then again, there's the colour...
I'm torn in my affections, really I am!
Xgen said:
read the emotional brain by jeff ledoux
this text describes emotion as being the unconscious magnitudes of our mind, where as we are overpowerred by something in us that we cant describe
Xgen said:
The soul (brahman) is consiousness, it contains no material particles. The consciousness within a body is called a living entity (soul). When the soul (consiousness) leaves the body, the body is a dead body.
Jan.
ever listened to good soul music.......?Xgen said:
well its called Soul cause singer is really expressing feeling, and if done with much feeling this is received by te listener/dancer...bringing out deep feelings in you
Soul derives from te black gospel church. there it was called 'getting the spirit'
piture it......you got tis preacher man, and he bgins preachin in te way that they do....kind of lik a rythmic speak, and the audience returns wit 'praise the lord....alleleua'...etc....ad there are tambourines and handclapping........then there happens a gosel song, and all tis isinterfused and trance inducing.......And when tis feeling comes they calls it ...getting the spirit. tey translated tis feeling to 'Soul' when it came out of the church
so is soul feeling? yes
does this mean only humans feel?
no obviously....all Nature feels
all Nature got soul...IS soul....isminded
whre i think christian dogma goes wrong is in its insistance that therer are separat INDIVIDUAL souls, rqthe tan a much more ancinet priml understanding of the aliveness of everyting
The human soul is a fabrication. People are lazy yet they like to feel they know everything. Therefore when something doesnt yet have an explanation, they usually attribute it to something 'magical' and attach a word to it. Hence the 'soul'.
Consciousness and emotions and all that have concrete and real explanations if you bother reading the science.
(PS. You weren't talking about fish, shoes, or music genres right?...)
Consciousness and emotions and all that have concrete and real explanations if you bother reading the science.
(PS. You weren't talking about fish, shoes, or music genres right?...)
(Q) said:
Why don't you stop acting like a brainwashed, blockheaded gatekeeper, and join in the thread, constructively, for a change.
The question is; what is the soul?
Jan Ardena.
Last edited:
Why don't you stop acting like a brainwashed, blockheaded gatekeeper, and join in the thread, constructively, for a change.
That is exactly what I did. You made a wild unsubstantiated claim - The soul (brahman) is consiousness, it contains no material particles. And in the true tradition of this forum, I asked you to provide the evidence on which you based your wild unsubstantiated claim.
But as usual, your wild unsubstantiated claim remains such. So, why don't you stop acting like a brainwashed, blockheaded theist and substantiate your wild claim?
The question is; what is the soul?
Yes, that was the question. Funny though, that you failed miserably to address this issue in Boris' thread and now are doing so again.
You're batting a thousand, Jan.
That is exactly what I did. You made a wild unsubstantiated claim - The soul (brahman) is consiousness, it contains no material particles. And in the true tradition of this forum, I asked you to provide the evidence on which you based your wild unsubstantiated claim.
But as usual, your wild unsubstantiated claim remains such. So, why don't you stop acting like a brainwashed, blockheaded theist and substantiate your wild claim?
The question is; what is the soul?
Yes, that was the question. Funny though, that you failed miserably to address this issue in Boris' thread and now are doing so again.
You're batting a thousand, Jan.
duendy,
"me:: hah. see what i mean? is that so? you ar claiming science knows all about
emotions an consciousness do you?"
Yes, I am saying scientific explanations for emotions and consciousness are currently better than the word 'soul'. Would you like me to repeat a third time?
"me:: hah. see what i mean? is that so? you ar claiming science knows all about
emotions an consciousness do you?"
Yes, I am saying scientific explanations for emotions and consciousness are currently better than the word 'soul'. Would you like me to repeat a third time?
(Q),
This is not the thread for this type of discussion, an enquirey of the soul, not a debate on its existence. I believe what I have written, I have not stated it as a fact. You will observe I am not the only one who as given an opinion.
The 'Boris' thread is nonsense..... not worthy of serious input.
Huh?
Jan Ardena.
This is not the thread for this type of discussion, an enquirey of the soul, not a debate on its existence. I believe what I have written, I have not stated it as a fact. You will observe I am not the only one who as given an opinion.
The 'Boris' thread is nonsense..... not worthy of serious input.
Huh?
Jan Ardena.
fadingCaptain said:
no you are alright.
dont thnk you know what i mean ,regarding a definition of soul. i may have not mentioned ithere, but i am not really beliving i the Cristian version of individual souls....but rather am more attracted to the more primal idewa of realty being alive...Naturee being sentient
the was mainstream science describes 'soul' or consciosness is too reduct-tionist for my liking.....and this is why it has its 'hard problem' rgarding the whys and wherefores of subjective consciousness
Jan, I feel this discussion located in the science section, should consider scientific evidence for the claims made. Opinions are fine, and if they cannot be backed by research, a logical argument would not only suffice, but allow others to consider your point of view. It's difficult to understand, let alone accept, what you're saying if we are not sure what your statements refer to. Duendy, I invite the same from you. I understand it is difficult on such a matter, but a possible reason for having this opinion would be appreciated.
As for my version of the soul, I believe it to be a form of energy instead of matter. Possibly found in genes or proteins, I do not know which, that allows for the incredible efficiency of life. I support this with the evidence that life does infact use incredible efficiency in some respects (like making proteins). When the body dies, these processes will evetually stop. Some arguments against my view include the ability of scientists to replicate life functions in a lab. I haven't yet figured out how to test my theory, but if I think of something, I'll get back to you.
As for my version of the soul, I believe it to be a form of energy instead of matter. Possibly found in genes or proteins, I do not know which, that allows for the incredible efficiency of life. I support this with the evidence that life does infact use incredible efficiency in some respects (like making proteins). When the body dies, these processes will evetually stop. Some arguments against my view include the ability of scientists to replicate life functions in a lab. I haven't yet figured out how to test my theory, but if I think of something, I'll get back to you.
Wings,
The scientific method alone, is ill-equipt to support such a claim, which is why I offered it as my opinion. It is made all the more difficult to have a intelligent conversation, with those who claim meat is all there is, then hide behind such a method, stating that it is the only way to acquire any type of knowledge.
Nothing can change the mind of a blockhead, which is why they are blockheads.
If you wish to understand, you have to un-block your mind of the shackles of modern-science. Once you start the process of understanding, then you can begin to discriminate freely.
What is its purpose?
What is life?
Theory?
Jan Ardena.
The scientific method alone, is ill-equipt to support such a claim, which is why I offered it as my opinion. It is made all the more difficult to have a intelligent conversation, with those who claim meat is all there is, then hide behind such a method, stating that it is the only way to acquire any type of knowledge.
Nothing can change the mind of a blockhead, which is why they are blockheads.
If you wish to understand, you have to un-block your mind of the shackles of modern-science. Once you start the process of understanding, then you can begin to discriminate freely.
What is its purpose?
What is life?
Theory?
Jan Ardena.
I believe what I have written, I have not stated it as a fact.
Oh, it's just another one of your fantasies, thanks for clearing that up.
The 'Boris' thread is nonsense..... not worthy of serious input.
You didn't understand it, how can you know its nonsense? The thread itself is one of the best threads ever written, here or any other forum. The fact you don't consider it worthy of serious input only serves to show how ignorant you really are.
It is actually you who are not worth any input, serious or otherwise.
Oh, it's just another one of your fantasies, thanks for clearing that up.
The 'Boris' thread is nonsense..... not worthy of serious input.
You didn't understand it, how can you know its nonsense? The thread itself is one of the best threads ever written, here or any other forum. The fact you don't consider it worthy of serious input only serves to show how ignorant you really are.
It is actually you who are not worth any input, serious or otherwise.