Is There a Soul?

  • Thread starter Thread starter itinerant1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
redhen said:
So clever birds that figure out how to raise the water level in a tube so they can get the food floating on it have immaterial souls? Chimps that have a non-verbal vocabulary and communicate abstract concepts, like numbers, have immaterial souls?
Click to expand...
Concepts are universals. Non-human animals do not communicate using concepts. The recognition and manipulation of one, two or more objects or symbols representing such does not entail the conceptual awareness or ability to grasp the abstract meaning of “one-ness” or “two-ness”, and so on.

Chimp communication is completely explainable according to “perceptual” thinking. To invoke a higher order cognitive ability, “conceptual” thinking, to explain chimp behaviour, would be a violation of Lloyd Morgan’s Canon.
 
Hooding_Trees said:
No, it doesn’t.

Your claim, your burden. All you presented was a god of gaps type argument.
Click to expand...
How did you end up with “god” from the argument?

And there are no gaps.

I don’t think you know anything about philosophical psychology, or even what a “god of the gaps” argument is. Hence, there is nothing more in your post to respond to.
 
HickmanJosh said:
So we think through our Brains?
Click to expand...
The intellect, which knows through the universal concept, abstracts from the particular notes of the phantasm formed in the brain from sense experience.

There is no concept without a corresponding image provided by the brain-body.
 
StAnastasia said:
Donsnow, what is a “mind” without a brain? Have you seen or heard of one?
Click to expand...
There is such a thing as a ‘gestalt mind’ that is not in any one brain, but found when people cooperate together: whether a choir, marching band, political party, leaderless mob or Twelve Step Program which is rooted in no one brain, but is a result of the focus of the organized people that caused it.

Also, before his Incarnation of Jesus Christ, the mind of God was/is/always will be capable of being a mind without a brain.
 
davidv said:
In the material world, incommunicado.

How does one see the immaterial?
Click to expand...
Among its other attributes, faith also serves as a lamp to illuminate the otherwise unseen. For example, the theory of atoms lived from the 4th century BC to the 20th century AD by faith. People believed there could be atoms, with no way of seeing them, for 2,400 years. When faith illuminates the invisible of the material world, then how much more so the spiritual world, since faith itself is a gift of our Creator?
 
StAnastasia said:
That’s precisely my question!
Click to expand...
StAnastasia, you, davidv and I are all Catholics. The same faith. How come ya’ll are questioning faith? We’re here to question that which questions the Catholic faith, not vice versa, I would think.
 
donsnow said:
StAnastasia, you, davidv and I are all Catholics. The same faith. How come ya’ll are questioning faith? We’re here to question that which questions the Catholic faith, not vice versa, I would think.
Click to expand...
I was hoping that Catholics in this thread would not just cite Church dogma and think thereby they understand the concept of the soul.

There is much, much more to an understanding the subject. For instance, donsnow, since you believe man has a spiritual soul, can you make supporting arguments from reason and experience to one who does not believe in God or Christianity, or immaterial reality?

Your apologetics won’t work if you cite the Bible as evidence to one who does not accept the Bible as inspired.
 
Is it reasonable to claim, as does the behaviourist school of psychology, that “mind” or “consciousness” does not exist? Behaviourists seem to have lost their mind.

Perhaps “life” does not exist either, since no one has seen it under a microscope. :rolleyes:
 
donsnow said:
StAnastasia, you, davidv and I are all Catholics. The same faith. How come ya’ll are questioning faith? We’re here to question that which questions the Catholic faith, not vice versa, I would think.
Click to expand...
Fides quarens intellectum.
 
itinerant1 said:
I was hoping that Catholics in this thread would not just cite Church dogma and think thereby they understand the concept of the soul.

There is much, much more to an understanding the subject. For instance, donsnow, since you believe man has a spiritual soul, can you make supporting arguments from reason and experience to one who does not believe in God or Christianity, or immaterial reality?

Your apologetics won’t work if you cite the Bible as evidence to one who does not accept the Bible as inspired.
Click to expand...
Gee, itinerant1, I already showed my source for thinking of a physical soul, our body. I submit that the soul is formed of both body and spirit, a whole thing.
As far as my proving that to an unbeliever, I am not moved by the Spirit to do that, at this time. When I am, I will.

Gee, itinerant1, there are centuries of apologetics by much abler men and women than I. And, you are a contmeporary who is much abler than I. Please do not hold me to a collegiate standard, as I have only 12 college credits under my belt. I speak from experience. Jesus says, “Test the spirits, try them one by one.” I have spent decades working the scriptures and seen their results in my life.

And, sir, with all due respect, I will not hide the Bible from one who doesn’t believe in it: just because they intellectually and spiritually cripple themselves or blind themselves by not believing it doesn’t mean that I have to make the same mistake. I have as much as a freedom of choice to cite it as they have to reject it. And I do have a Christian right and duty to stand on it. I will not allow it to be taken from my arguments by unbelievers nor by fellow Catholics.
If you don’t like that, ask me to leave your thread, and I will.

Sincerely,
Don Snow
 
StAnastasia said:
Fides quarens intellectum.
Click to expand...
Nice put down. I can fathom ‘fides’ and ‘itllectum’ but do not understand ‘quarens’. Oh, that reminds of a pet peeve of mine. People who don’t speak or write English in an English language country. Thank you, I’ll visit the “Back Fence” “Pet Peeves” thread before I go to bed, tonight.

As I’ve just indicated, it’s 'way past my bedtime. I’ll be back tomorrow.
 
itinerant1 said:
I was hoping that Catholics in this thread would not just cite Church dogma and think thereby they understand the concept of the soul.
Click to expand...
Since I use Catholic teaching to understand the soul, you would not want my posting.
😊
 
itinerant1 said:
Most ancient cultures believed, however inaccurately understood, that man has a soul. Yet modern man seems unable to find his soul. Interpretations of modern brain studies tend to identify all human cognitive activities with brain states. However, contrary to the prevailing myth of our times that says we think with our brains, I maintain that the evidence, both scientific and philosophic, indicates rather, that we do not think with our brains, though we do not think without them.

Conceptual or abstract thought can only be a function of an immaterial soul. This proposition opposes the position of extreme Darwinians and other materialists who claim that the soul (or mind) is the product of natural evolutionary processes. Is this conflict of views resolvable in such a way as to provide a definitive answer?

What is the nature of the soul and what is its relation to be body? Are there proofs for the immaterial nature of the human soul? Is the mind identical with the soul? Is the will a power or faculty of the soul? Is the soul intrinsically immortal? These kinds of questions are of utmost importance for modern man and will comprise the subject matter of this thread.

What are your thoughts about the soul?
Click to expand...
The soul is not a very well understood idea. Each religion seems to see the soul differently, and even many non-religious people believe in a soul but without giving it any definite definition.

The important characteristics of a soul, to most who believe in them,seem to be:
  1. it is only connected to our bodies while we are alive
  2. it can survive bodily death indefinitely
  3. it must have some method of independent information storage that is not contained in our brains, or else it would cease to be the “person” whose body it had inhabited (which is not much of a problem for those who believe in reincarnation, I guess)
  4. it must have some ability to affect the decision making process in our brain (or else accountability after death makes no sense )
I am not sure how I feel about your idea that “we don’t think with our brains, but we don’t think without them.” If we don’t think without them, then you are saying the soul doesn’t think, which sort of makes it a useless thing. Without thought, it may as well not exist at all.
 
itinerant1 said:
Are you not curious enough even to wonder whether your statement above is an accurate assertion?
Click to expand...
itinerant1, thank you for letting me post here. On my way out, I will try to answer the above question and then warn you of your foolishness.

By my standard, the Holy Bible and history, my statement of the soul is both spirit and body, seems accurate.

Now, on my way out, I am taking me, my Holy Bible and the Catechism of the Catholic Church and leaving this thread and a warning.

To discuss Catholic concepts of soul without Catholic dogma with atheists is like taking a letter opener to a shotgun fight. Further, to put aside the Holy Bible on this subject is like going naked into modern combat. Imho, a Religious without the Holy Bible is like a bank without money; and without his copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church is like a bank without an accountant. Maybe you’re smart enough to prove by reason alone, or by reason and experience, anything about the soul. I’m not and I wonder if you’re not outsmarting yourself, to leave behind the Holy Bible and the Catechism.

So, good luck, but I will not take part any longer on this thread. And, in my mind, I have done my Christian duty to warn you of your folly. So, I now go back to bed and try to get some sleep.
 
HelenaMT said:
The soul is not a very well understood idea. Each religion seems to see the soul differently, and even many non-religious people believe in a soul but without giving it any definite definition.

The important characteristics of a soul, to most who believe in them,seem to be:
  1. it is only connected to our bodies while we are alive
  2. it can survive bodily death indefinitely
  3. it must have some method of independent information storage that is not contained in our brains, or else it would cease to be the “person” whose body it had inhabited (which is not much of a problem for those who believe in reincarnation, I guess)
  4. it must have some ability to affect the decision making process in our brain (or else accountability after death makes no sense )
I am not sure how I feel about your idea that “we don’t think with our brains, but we don’t think without them.” If we don’t think without them, then you are saying the soul doesn’t think, which sort of makes it a useless thing. Without thought, it may as well not exist at all.
Click to expand...
We have drifted into using the term “mind” as a substitute for soul. This has led to two extreme opinions about the nature of the mind: (1) it is the sum total of properties belonging to the brain, primarily the cortical region, and (2) it is a purely immaterial entity whose whole reason for being consists in thinking processes. This is the fallacious angelistic conception of the soul.

To the contrary of the above extremes, the human soul “entitatively” is the substantial form of the body; “operationally” it is the source of all vegetative, sensitive, and rational acts.

Hence, the soul, considered in itself, is not man, and the powers of the soul are really the powers of man. In regard to thinking, the immaterial intellect (the faculty of thought) depends, in an extrinisic manner, on the brain and the particular images (phantasms) derived from sense experience.

Because concepts are universals, they cannot be the product of the brain itself. Hence, we do not think with our brain. Yet, the intellect’s formation of the concept is dependent on sense data provided by the external and internal senses; and in the activity of thinking there is no concept without an accompanying physical image. So, we do not think without our brain.
 
donsnow said:
itinerant1, thank you for letting me post here. On my way out, I will try to answer the above question and then warn you of your foolishness.

By my standard, the Holy Bible and history, my statement of the soul is both spirit and body, seems accurate.

Now, on my way out, I am taking me, my Holy Bible and the Catechism of the Catholic Church and leaving this thread and a warning.

To discuss Catholic concepts of soul without Catholic dogma with atheists is like taking a letter opener to a shotgun fight. Further, to put aside the Holy Bible on this subject is like going naked into modern combat. Imho, a Religious without the Holy Bible is like a bank without money; and without his copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church is like a bank without an accountant. Maybe you’re smart enough to prove by reason alone, or by reason and experience, anything about the soul. I’m not and I wonder if you’re not outsmarting yourself, to leave behind the Holy Bible and the Catechism.

So, good luck, but I will not take part any longer on this thread. And, in my mind, I have done my Christian duty to warn you of your folly. So, I now go back to bed and try to get some sleep.
Click to expand...
Your statements about the soul are incorrect according to Catholic teaching.

Thanks for the warning, but I don’t think you should have interrupted your sleep to offer misguided advice, even though your intentions are most commendable.
 
donsnow said:
Nice put down. I can fathom ‘fides’ and ‘itllectum’ but do not understand ‘quarens’. Oh, that reminds of a pet peeve of mine. People who don’t speak or write English in an English language country. Thank you, I’ll visit the “Back Fence” “Pet Peeves” thread before I go to bed, tonight.
Click to expand...
Donsnow, it’s not at all a put-down; in fact it’s supportive of you! “Fides quarens intellectum” = “faith seeking understanding.” You asked why I’m questioning faith, when in fact I’m not.

StAnastasia
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top