"How do we demonstrate that we have a soul?"

  • Thread starter Thread starter KatecheoAlpha
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
To be quite honest, I don’t recall the exact arguments he used to demonstrate the existence of a soul. It is a rather lengthy but very worthwhile book to read, and I don’t know where the book with my handy dandy notes is located among my stacks of books. When I posted, I was in a hurry, and couldn’t look up the major arguments he used to demonstrate the existence of souls. I would guess thought that the book is readily available online. The arguments he makes are philosophical and moved my friend to drop her atheist beliefs and become a Catholic. For those who are Catholic, I am pretty sure St. Thomas Aquinas quotes extensively from this book. For those who are of any belief or state of non belief, this is purely philosophical in terms of a proof for the existence of soul and thus religion is not invoked. For those who believe that science disproves the existence of soul, I suggest you actually read what Aristotle actually wrote. Once you read what he says, then give us your opinion as to whether any contemporary advance in science actually has any relevancy to his arguments, and try to prove with authentic science that Aristotle was wrong! Thank you. I would suggest that **only **if you have read what Aristotle wrote and understood what he wrote, would you be in a position to reasonably assess what he wrote, weigh the merits of his case, and be in a fairer position to try to prove that his theory is clearly false because of developments in science, etc. The OP wanted a philosophic argument for the existence of souls. I referred him to this book because it presents what I believe to be the best case for this that is philosophical not theological. I don’t have time to do much else at the moment than to point him/her to this great resource!
 
KatecheoAlpha said:
One of the more effective responses that I have been blessed hearing from Mr. Tim Staples regarding this query is :“We know we have souls, and this is evident because we don’t eat each other.”

How else can I philosophically frame a response? (Without citing scripture verse or CCC doctrinal quotation). Church Father/s or Saint/s, or Encyclical references would be very helpful!

Thanks for helping out!

Ave Maria †
Click to expand...
How 'bout a Jimmy Akin reference?

The soul is something that causes something to live. Everything that has ever lived, lives, or will live has a soul.

The difference is that humans have an immortal soul.
 
capoly said:
You seem to confuse the properly materialistic working of the brain (called “mind”) with some ill-defined and hazy concept of a “spiritual soul”.
Click to expand...
The two are not mutually exclusive. The Soul includes the rational abilities, emotions, motivation, will, and the transcendent function, which is spiritually expereinced and connected. You are right that “soul” is difficult to define, and she inherintly resists restriction. As Granny has pointed out, Soul is expressed in art, literature, culture, and religion, much more evident in these expressive ways possibly than in science. I am not saying that science does not also manifest soul, becasue there is an aspect of soul that enjoys being measured.

From a Catholic point of view, the soul is created in the image and likeness of God, and therefore, is not restricted to the functioning or measurement by the rational sciences. There are aspects of humanity that defy scientific inquiry.
capoly said:
We are making excellent headways into the working of the brain, using repeatable experiments, and there is no reason to assume anything beyond the concept of the mind.
Click to expand...
We are not “assuming” anything, but just noticing what exists. The soul can be scientifically observed, as well as observed in non-scientifc expressions such as music and art.

Where did we come by our “concept of mind”? Did this concept create the mind, or is it a product of mind?

It seems that you would be more comfortable reducing the human organism to that which can be scientifically measured or rationally understood. This box is too small for the human soul. Such everyday experiences as the dream prove that there are aspects of human existence that exist outside of rationality.
capoly said:
The mind is, of course not a physical object, in the same sense as “walking” itself is not a physical object. But that does not lend legitimacy to the assumption of some “non-physical entity”.
Click to expand...
This statement makes no sense at all. You are saying that the mind is not restricted to physical existence, and yet, your assertion does not lend legitimacy of what you are asserting?

clearly you admit here that the human person exists on a non-physical plane as well as the physical.
 
atheistgirl said:
And it’s been roundly discredited.

Sarah x 🙂
Click to expand...
Sarah,
No, it hasn’t been roundly discredited because I am religious person and I don’t need science (even I like science) that I believe.

Ad maiorem Dei gloriam,:extrahappy:
Attempto
 
Attempto said:
Sarah,
No, it hasn’t been roundly discredited because I am religious person and I don’t need science (even I like science) that I believe.

Ad maiorem Dei gloriam,:extrahappy:
Attempto
Click to expand...
They’re not mutually exclusive.

You can be a religious person, and recognize really bad experimentation, really poor conclusions, really bad instrumentation and inaccuracy, and well, just plain daftness.

The good doctors experiment to demonstrate the soul and it’s weight is roundly and thoroughly discredited. By the people that know.

That’s not the same thing as saying there is no soul.

Whether you’re religious or not.

Sarah x 🙂
 
atheistgirl said:
They’re not mutually exclusive.

You can be a religious person, and recognize really bad experimentation, really poor conclusions, really bad instrumentation and inaccuracy, and well, just plain daftness.

The good doctors experiment to demonstrate the soul and it’s weight is roundly and thoroughly discredited. By the people that know.

That’s not the same thing as saying there is no soul.

Whether you’re religious or not.

Sarah x 🙂
Click to expand...
From what I read about the experiment, I doubt that the release of bodily fluids as ogans permanently shut down (often at death) was considered.

On the other hand, death itself demonstrates the release of a spiritual soul from the decomposing material anatomy.
 
grannymh said:
From what I read about the experiment, I doubt that the release of bodily fluids as ogans permanently shut down (often at death) was considered.

On the other hand, death itself demonstrates the release of a spiritual soul from the decomposing material anatomy.
Click to expand...
While I can not see how death itself demonstrates a release of a spiritual soul, I really don’t want to ask how you feel this is a truth. But, I guess I just did.

Death is a topic that can make many of us change the way we digest information.
 
StrawberryJam said:
While I can not see how death itself demonstrates a release of a spiritual soul, I really don’t want to ask how you feel this is a truth. But, I guess I just did.

Death is a topic that can make many of us change the way we digest information.
Click to expand...
Human nature is an unique unification of spiritual soul and material anatomy. The presence of the spiritual soul gives life to the individual person. When the material anatomy dies, it is a sign that its spiritual soul is no longer present.

In other words, the spiritual soul is conspicuous by its absence.

I agree with you that “Death is a topic that can make many of us change the way we digest information.”
 
We demonstrate that we have a soul because we are able choose good or evil. We demonstrate that we have a soul because we are able choose life or death. We demonstrate that we have a soul because we are able to bless or to curse. We demonstrate that we have a soul because we are able to heal or to harm. We demonstrate that we have a soul because we are able to weep tears of sorrow or tears of joy.

We demonstrate that we have a soul because we can choose to forgive or choose to retaliate. We demonstrate that we have a soul because we can choose to speak or choose to be silent. We demonstrate that we have a soul because we are capable of creating the most sublime or the most ridiculous.

We demonstrate that we have a soul because we thirst for what we do not know, and are restless until we rest in Him in whom we seek to know.

Now we demonstrate that we have a soul because we can choose to thank God, or choose to complain about what we do not have.

God’s peace

micah
 
grannymh said:
Human nature is an unique unification of spiritual soul and material anatomy. The presence of the spiritual soul gives life to the individual person. When the material anatomy dies, it is a sign that its spiritual soul is no longer present.

In other words, the spiritual soul is conspicuous by its absence.

I agree with you that “Death is a topic that can make many of us change the way we digest information.”
Click to expand...
Dear friend,

I won’t disagree with your belief, and that you believe these things upon faith. Or that your belief is truth to you. At least on this point.😉

We agree on things even if at a distance.
 
It’s not correct at all to say that we have souls. To say that we ARE souls sounds more apropriate.

The aristotelian-thomistic philosophy defines soul as the form of the matter, and so does the Cathechism of the Catholic Church and the form is that what organises the matter, in the metaphysical, rather than physical, way.

And since form is one of the aspects of the living matter, all living organisms have souls, plants, animals and human beings.

However, Aquinas distinguished between vegetative, animal, and immortal forms (souls) and the latter one is idoneus for human beings only.

And how do we know that the human being is compound of a material body and an immortal soul?

It’s simply of our ability of abstract thinking, which certainly can’t be reduced to anything material (so, also to the functions of our brain), because abstract thinking is like grasping universal concepts and ideas.

I hope my post is comprehensible, however, if it’s not (it nearly 4 A.M in Poland and i’m quite tired ;)) reading some articles by dr Edward Feser will clarifiy you the thing:

edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/01/against-neurobabble.html

edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/05/mind-body-problem-roundup.html
 
ryzykfizyk said:
It’s not correct at all to say that we have souls. To say that we ARE souls sounds more apropriate.

The aristotelian-thomistic philosophy defines soul as the form of the matter, and so does the Cathechism of the Catholic Church and the form is that what organises the matter, in the metaphysical, rather than physical, way.

And since form is one of the aspects of the living matter, all living organisms have souls, plants, animals and human beings.

However, Aquinas distinguished between vegetative, animal, and immortal forms (souls) and the latter one is idoneus for human beings only.

And how do we know that the human being is compound of a material body and an immortal soul?

It’s simply of our ability of abstract thinking, which certainly can’t be reduced to anything material (so, also to the functions of our brain), because abstract thinking is like grasping universal concepts and ideas.

I hope my post is comprehensible, however, if it’s not (it nearly 4 A.M in Poland and i’m quite tired ;)) reading some articles by dr Edward Feser will clarifiy you the thing:

edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/01/against-neurobabble.html

edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/05/mind-body-problem-roundup.html
Click to expand...
You have made a lot of claims and statements and admissions you are tired, then resorted to links.

None of what you have posted here ought to be taken seriously simply because you have a good feeling about it.
 
Soul has no mass, no form. Neither does the number pi.

Does pi exist?

I think it’s best to look at it from the standpoint of Platonic universals. To “have” a soul is to first define what to “have” means.

Do Platonic universals exist?

I think they do, and I think we do. Have souls, that is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top