Is it scientifically proven that some animals have souls?

  • Thread starter Thread starter theCardinalbird
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There was this experiment done on humans and dogs.
It’s a deeply flawed and inconclusive study completed in 1907. You would not be able to attempt such an experiment now, rightly so.
 
GodSpawned said:
There was this experiment done on humans and dogs.
It’s a deeply flawed and inconclusive study completed in 1907. You would not be able to attempt such an experiment now, rightly so.
Click to expand...
The experiment is not so much “inconclusive” as inherently absurd in its starting definition of “soul”.
Spiritual realities by definition are not themselves physical and therefore have no weight.
The weight of a dog’s soul is the dog itself.

However, a bit like the Physics concept of “force”, souls act on biological matter without themselves being matter. Of course a soul is neither a “force” or an “energy” because in Physics a “force” always arises from another piece of matter and “energy” is converted matter which is still detectable by instruments. Souls cannot be detected by such instruments.

Souls are detected by reason observing how living things self-move and organise themselves as a unity. Hence the word “animated”.
 
Last edited:
Agree with you. OP asked if science can prove animals have souls. If the study showed anything, then the answer is no.
Whether animals (or humans for that matter) have souls or not is for theologians to answer, not scientists.
 
Last edited:
I’d be very sad if my dog won’t greet me in heaven, when the time comes 😦 True story. I truly believe that our dog is a blessing from above!
 
Perhaps not so much for theologians but for philosophers.

Though philosophers argue over the validity of the proof for souls as they do for the existence of God.
So who knows!

I would have to say myself that the argument of the ancients for the existence of spiritual souls (as opposed to material souls) is probably weak now that modern science has shown that matter can do incredibly “spiritual” things that the ancients never would have believed possible (eg memory, self-learning robotics, image recognition even primitive abstraction).

The other problem is the immortality of the soul. The ancients never argued this, they thought even the spiritual soul of humans ceased at death. It was Aquinas who believed he had proven that souls are eternal (he thought Aristotle did too but historians dispute this).
 
Last edited:
Given I am on forums.catholic-questions.org I would tend towards theology rather than philosophy 😛
Personally I think of the soul as a form of energy- but it doesn’t interact with the four main forces (does it interact with electro-chemical signals in the brain?). Assuming the fist law of thermodynamics applies to souls (energy cannot be created or destroyed- it can only be changed) that would make the soul immortal i guess?

I am not trying to prove anything here, and freely admit I am probably completely wrong, but sometimes its interesting to throw ideas out there.
 
Given we are on forums.catholic-questions.org (which BTW does have a pure philosophy section because even Catholics believe their faith is not against reason and many of its foundations rest on secular reason… and apologetics is also about debating with seculars on the common ground of reason)…

…then don’t be surprised when I gently observe I am not really interested in brand spanking new personal theories. We Catholics already possess 2600 years of well filtered and purified conclusions re what can be reasonably said or not said of the soul and I spent 7 years of my life getting philosophical learning in that area so I hope that explains why 🙂.

I understand where you are coming from but its likely as flawed as the dog experiment approach. Souls aren’t new age “ghosts in the machine”. That was Descarte’s unsuccessful attempt to keep our parents (faith and the new “reason” of modern science) from divorcing during the Enlightenment. It didn’t work and ultimately did no justice to science or Catholic philosophy.

You might also like to explore the origin of the word “lunatic” which is the more ancient equivalent of your hypothesis. Also rejected by Catholic reasoning though popular amongst the uneducated of old. There is a reason why the planets were considered gods who influence our thoughts giving rise to astrology, horoscopes and unavoidable fate (character is destiny) still popular in papers today.

You have your own personal journey of discovery ahead of you on that one if you choose it. Enjoy.

Ghost in the machine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

en.wikipedia.org

Lunatic - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Last edited:
there are philosophical proofs .That’s all we got. By faith we believe that God created everything visible and invisible.
 
After a quick reading of his research site he does seem to be operating from the usual dualist interpretation of Catholic Scholastic philosophy (ie Descartsian) which is a distortion many specialist Thomists have started reacting against in recent decades.

Its a valid effort to align science and faith/reason but looks like a false start, more subtle than most though it is. His acceptance of near death experience’s as proving the existence of the soul is a false step in my opinion. The hypothesis seems as flawed as thinking souls have weight.
Disembodied souls do not float over the body because soul’s don’t have a physical location.
Nor are souls spiritual mini-me’s with spiritual xray eyes that see through walls.
The soul cannot physically do what the body cannot physically do…that’s exactly why souls need complicated, sensitive animal type bodies!

If there is truly something going on in NDE’s (“vertical information”) then its is a phenomenon more akin to telepathy (preternatural gifts) than proof of soul I suggest.
 
Last edited:
BlackFriar said:
His acceptance of near death experience’s as proving the existence of the soul is a false step in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Nor is it on strong theological ground. His opinions are private speculation and is not authoritative, either scientifically or theologically. He’s not doing anything “wrong”, as he is not claiming that his thoughts are authoritative. But that doesn’t mean he’s doing anything “right”, either.

It’s his private opinion and can be treated as such.
 
He seemed to be jumping the gun to me. I think there could be a few theological pitfalls to dodge.What do you think of this> . He teaches that Adam and Eve lived 200,000 yrs ago Which is fine with me what ever it is it is, but he’s teaching it without qualifiers. Struck me as a little off, I dunno.
The cave art in France with the paintings of animals on the walls. Beautiful work… .about 200,000 yrs ago? Looks like intellect to me.

Just getting dualism dominated in my mind… I’m still prone to slip in and out as I’m thinking.
 
Last edited:
Benadam said:
The cave art in France with the paintings of animals on the walls. Beautiful work… .about 200,000 yrs ago? Looks like intellect to me.
Click to expand...
Yep, been there and looked at them (just across the border in Spain actually).
Pity it was a complete replica of the cave next door where they actually were but sealed off from the public. Gone are days you could just drive into the country, walk a track and bowl into these caves…and rightly too. I would have been tempted to chip off a piece of cave with a red animal drawn on it!!! Just kidding…I think.
 
Last edited:
Aah well, I guess I won’t see them anytime soon, Now we know why they sealed it off:smile:😄
 
The Bible says that there are animals in heaven, at least horses with faithful men riding these horses.
The Bible also says that the wolf and the lamb will live together and many people suspect that this will be in heaven.
Isaiah 11:6-9 - The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together
 
Last edited:
I say, old chap. Where do you get these idea of yours? Astounding.
 
Angel,
A Soul is intellect and free will. Animals have intellect. Free will has self control. Humans had a handle on this for awhile. The sexual revolution has changed some of us. Animals have instinct. I don’t care how smart an animal is or how obedient they are, put a female in heat near them=INSTINCT.
Now,I want my animals in heaven. I’ll find out when Im dead.
In Christ’s Love
Tweedlealice
 
Yes, its interesting as to what “empirical” means.

As you say, evidence of being alive is “empirical” data.
From that evidence alone an Aristotelian philosopher would conclude this “thing” is “animated” (self-moving, having a soul) and likely an animal (or plant if it reproduces).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top