Soul and resurrection?

[Vico]

How soul could exist in various states when it does not have a body to act upon?

The soul is a partial substance, but immortal.

Modern Catholic Dictionary, term: State of Being

The way in which a thing manifests its existence or the condition in which people find themselves under given circumstances. As such, state merely indicates a form of existence that has little or no relation to space or time. Thus the state of a person in divine grace, or in grave sin or, after death, in heaven, hell, or purgatory identifies the spiritual condition of the soul independent of matter or external factors.

 

[Maddie26]

I am puzzled with the concepts of soul and resurrection for a while. The problem is as following: Soul is defined as form of body. Soul gets separated from body upon death. This means that soul is formless after death hence all attributes like, personality, identity, etc are gone upon death meaning that all souls do look similar after death. The act of resurrection is problematic now since all attributes related to a person is gone upon death.

Your thought?

The subject of the thread isn’t the OP?

You begin with the assumption that souls are physical. The discussion cannot continue if you are unwilling or unable to provide proof of this, since your whole argument rests on it. You quoted my definition of soul so presumably you could find it.

Is shape the only distinguishing characteristic? What if you heard someone’s voice but didn’t see them? Would you recognise them? Again- and I want yo hear your thoughts on this- what is the difference between twins, physically and genetically indistinguishable?

Again:Shape is proper to material things and is how physical creatures identify one another. If souls are not by their nature physical then might it not follow that the distinguishing features particular to that kind of organism are different from physical creatures?

Physical things are marked in physical ways. Spiritual things are marked in spiritual ways.

 

[Bahman]

See post #97.

Could you please answer the following question with a yes or no?: doesn’t Soul have any spatial shape either when person is alive?

 

[Bahman]

The subject of the thread isn’t the OP?

Could you please answer to post #98?

You begin with the assumption that souls are physical. The discussion cannot continue if you are unwilling or unable to provide proof of this, since your whole argument rests on it. You quoted my definition of soul so presumably you could find it.

No. I started with the assumption that soul is form of the person. Form is simply life (I took this definition from Geddie here) so must exist in every place of an alive being.

Is shape the only distinguishing characteristic? What if you heard someone’s voice but didn’t see them? Would you recognise them? Again- and I want yo hear your thoughts on this- what is the difference between twins, physically and genetically indistinguishable?

There is no different between a twin from third person point of view but they are different from first person point of view.

Again:Shape is proper to material things and is how physical creatures identify one another. If souls are not by their nature physical then might it not follow that the distinguishing features particular to that kind of organism are different from physical creatures?

What is the difference between the souls of two dead persons if their souls are shapeless?

Physical things are marked in physical ways. Spiritual things are marked in spiritual ways.

Yes, this I agree with it but this requires that spiritual thing to have shape otherwise spiritual thing cannot be marked. It is very simple to understand this: soul is different after being marked hence there must be something spiritual in soul that is subjected to change which unfortunately a shapeless soul lack.

 

[Bahman]

The soul is a partial substance, but immortal.

Modern Catholic Dictionary, term: State of Being

The way in which a thing manifests its existence or the condition in which people find themselves under given circumstances. As such, state merely indicates a form of existence that has little or no relation to space or time. Thus the state of a person in divine grace, or in grave sin or, after death, in heaven, hell, or purgatory identifies the spiritual condition of the soul independent of matter or external factors.

But how we could possibly locate a soul when it is shapeless?

 

[Maddie26]

How do you do multiple quotes in a single post? Really.

Answering post #98 by quoting post #98

Originally Posted by Maddie26 
I believe that the soul, as a non physical entity, informs the body in a special way because part of the quality of life in human beings is to have a soul. Is it the presence of the soul that gives life to the body? Or personality? I don’t know. The Bible does speak of God judging souls. Since I believe the Bible, I therefore believe that souls are distinguishable after death otherwise it would be impossible to judge them.

I would agree that the soul is that which gives life and identity to the body. This is, however, diametrically opposite to everything you have said thus far, stating over and again that souls must have shape.

The soul cannot be located but it can be discerned.

If you think twins are the same from a third person point of view I think you may have a problem if you ever meet any. If a man is married to Mary he might be a little peeved to find her twin sister Sarah has murdered Mary and taken her place. Twins are not interchangeable. They just look the same. Their persons are distinct. That invisible difference between them is their soul.

Here we differ:
Originally Posted by Maddie26 
Physical things are marked in physical ways. Spiritual things are marked in spiritual ways.

Bahman: Yes, this I agree with it but this requires that spiritual thing to have shape otherwise spiritual thing cannot be marked. It is very simple to understand this: soul is different after being marked hence there must be something spiritual in soul that is subjected to change which unfortunately a shapeless soul lack.

When I say "marked in spiritual ways " I also meant that shapeless things, non physical entities, are marked in shapeless, non physical ways. It does not make sense to me that a thing (a soul) which is initially shapeless and individual would suddenly cease to be individual because the physical thing it was attached to was lost. Shape is not required for recognition.

You ask “What is the difference between two dead persons if their souls are shapeless?” .In reply I ask, what is the difference between two living persons since their souls are shapeless?

 

[Bahman]

How do you do multiple quotes in a single post? Really.

You need to press Quote instead of Post Reply. You then need to put the part you want to quote between two commands:

Bahman:

and

. Your reply should be after the second command. You need to press Quote first to see how the system works and what I mean.

I will answer to your post shortly.

 

[Vico]

Could you please answer the following question with a yes or no?: doesn’t Soul have any spatial shape either when person is alive?

Post #47 you choose:

This is the definition of shape: that quality of a thing which depends on the relative position of all points composing its outline or external surface; physical or spatial form

Using that definition, the answer is no. (I quoted St. Augustine who answered no to that question, also St. Thomas Aquinas, example using whiteness of paper analogy.)

Also in your most recent post to me you asked:

But how we could possibly locate a soul when it is shapeless?

The soul is not located (with respect to your chosen definition of shape). The soul is a partial substance and is immortal. The body does not exist without the soul, but the soul exists without the body.

The body and soul can be distinct only as distinct parts of the same whole (substantially). Because the whole they constitute is a complete substance, they cannot be distinct in the same way as the whole is distinct from other wholes of the same kind.

(The Catholic Church does not declare a particular metaphysics to be used, rather there are some mysteries to be accepted from revelation which are expressed in dogmas of faith. These may be explained with logic in various ways, however we do not comprehend them.)

Catechism of the Catholic Church

365 The unity of soul and body is so profound that one has to consider the soul to be the “form” of the body: 234 i.e., it is because of its spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living, human body; spirit and matter, in man, are not two natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature.

234 Cf. Council of Vienne (1312): DS 902.

366 The Church teaches that every spiritual soul is created immediately by God - it is not “produced” by the parents - and also that it is immortal: it does not perish when it separates from the body at death, and it will be reunited with the body at the final Resurrection. 235

235 Cf. Pius XII, Humani Generis: DS 3896; Paul VI, CPG § 8; Lateran Council V (1513): DS 1440.
​

 

[Bahman]

Answering post #98 by quoting post #98

I believe that the soul, as a non physical entity, informs the body in a special way because part of the quality of life in human beings is to have a soul.

You need to define what do you mean with special way.

Is it the presence of the soul that gives life to the body?

I think that the catholic believe that the difference between a dead and alive person is the soul.

Or personality? I don’t know.

Please read the previous comment.

The Bible does speak of God judging souls. Since I believe the Bible, I therefore believe that souls are distinguishable after death otherwise it would be impossible to judge them.

A quote from bible cannot justify anything to a nonbeliever.

I would agree that the soul is that which gives life and identity to the body.

So you believe that the soul which make a difference. Why did you say that you don’t know.

This is, however, diametrically opposite to everything you have said thus far, stating over and again that souls must have shape.

Because I can justify it. Consider a person with Alzheimer. The person cannot recall his identity while he is alive.

The soul cannot be located but it can be discerned.

Could you please elaborate what do you mean with “it can be discerned”?

If you think twins are the same from a third person point of view I think you may have a problem if you ever meet any. If a man is married to Mary he might be a little peeved to find her twin sister Sarah has murdered Mary and taken her place. Twins are not interchangeable. They just look the same. Their persons are distinct. That invisible difference between them is their soul.

I mentioned that they are different from first person view meaning that only twin can say who is who.

Here we differ:
Originally Posted by Maddie26 
Physical things are marked in physical ways. Spiritual things are marked in spiritual ways.

Bahman: Yes, this I agree with it but this requires that spiritual thing to have shape otherwise spiritual thing cannot be marked. It is very simple to understand this: soul is different after being marked hence there must be something spiritual in soul that is subjected to change which unfortunately a shapeless soul lack.

When I say "marked in spiritual ways " I also meant that shapeless things, non physical entities, are marked in shapeless, non physical ways. It does not make sense to me that a thing (a soul) which is initially shapeless and individual would suddenly cease to be individual because the physical thing it was attached to was lost. Shape is not required for recognition.

So you need to say what is that quality in soul which changes after the soul is marked. Obviously the act of marking change the soul hence what is that thing which is subjected to change upon marking.

You ask “What is the difference between two dead persons if their souls are shapeless?” .In reply I ask, what is the difference between two living persons since their souls are shapeless?

If soul is shapeless then the only difference between two persons are their bodies from the third person view point.

 

[davidv]

You need to define what do you mean with special way.

I think that the catholic believe that the difference between a dead and alive person is the soul.

Please read the previous comment.

A quote from bible cannot justify anything to a nonbeliever.

So you believe that the soul which make a difference. Why did you say that you don’t know.

Because I can justify it. Consider a person with Alzheimer. The person cannot recall his identity while he is alive.

Could you please elaborate what do you mean with “it can be discerned”?

I mentioned that they are different from first person view meaning that only twin can say who is who.

So you need to say what is that quality in soul which changes after the soul is marked. Obviously the act of marking change the soul hence what is that thing which is subjected to change upon marking.

If soul is shapeless then the only difference between two persons are their bodies from the third person view point.

What if the third person is the wrong view? What if the third person is God who can see non-material entities? What if shape does not matter?

 

[Bahman]

Post #47 you choose:

Using that definition, the answer is no. (I quoted St. Augustine who answered no to that question, also St. Thomas Aquinas, example using whiteness of paper analogy.)

Also in your most recent post to me you asked:

The soul is not located (with respect to your chosen definition of shape). The soul is a partial substance and is immortal. The body does not exist without the soul, but the soul exists without the body.

The body and soul can be distinct only as distinct parts of the same whole (substantially). Because the whole they constitute is a complete substance, they cannot be distinct in the same way as the whole is distinct from other wholes of the same kind.

(The Catholic Church does not declare a particular metaphysics to be used, rather there are some mysteries to be accepted from revelation which are expressed in dogmas of faith. These may be explained with logic in various ways, however we do not comprehend them.)

Catechism of the Catholic Church

365 The unity of soul and body is so profound that one has to consider the soul to be the “form” of the body: 234 i.e., it is because of its spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living, human body; spirit and matter, in man, are not two natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature.

234 Cf. Council of Vienne (1312): DS 902.

366 The Church teaches that every spiritual soul is created immediately by God - it is not “produced” by the parents - and also that it is immortal: it does not perish when it separates from the body at death, and it will be reunited with the body at the final Resurrection. 235

235 Cf. Pius XII, Humani Generis: DS 3896; Paul VI, CPG § 8; Lateran Council V (1513): DS 1440.
​

Good. We are back to busyness now considering the definition you propose. So soul is shapeless. Now there are two basic questions: 1) How souls could be distinguished from each other? 2) How resurrection is possible?

 

[Bahman]

What if the third person is the wrong view?

The third person point of view is God point of view also hence it cannot be wrong.

What if the third person is God who can see non-material entities?

God can see non-material entities but he cannot see a shapeless non-material entity. Hence the act of resurrection is impossible.

What if shape does not matter?

Shape matters. Otherwise there must exist a quality in soul which make different souls distinguishable. What is that quality if it is not shape?

 

[Vico]

Good. We are back to busyness now considering the definition you propose. So soul is shapeless. Now there are two basic questions: 1) How souls could be distinguished from each other? 2) How resurrection is possible?

Souls are different because they are individually created with a body for each person. The person is the totality with a body and soul. The soul gives existence to the body but has attributes, just as the body has its own attributes.

Resurrection is that each individual soul will be reunited with the selfsame body. God does this at the Parousia.

 

[Bahman]

Souls are different because they are individually created with a body for each person.

What is that quality which make different souls distinguishable?

The person is the totality with a body and soul. The soul gives existence to the body but has attributes, just as the body has its own attributes.

What are those attributes? We as persons have different experiences and memories. These experiences give shape to our personalities. What happen for our memories? They are all gone upon the death hence we lose our personalities and identities.

Resurrection is that each individual soul will be reunited with the selfsame body. God does this at the Parousia.

How God could resurrect when a soul doesn’t have an identity?

 

[Vico]

What is that quality which make different souls distinguishable?

What are those attributes? We as persons have different experiences and memories. These experiences give shape to our personalities. What happen for our memories? They are all gone upon the death hence we lose our personalities and identities.

How God could resurrect when a soul doesn’t have an identity?

There is an identity for the rational soul.

Man is composite with both matter and form. The difference in matter differentiates them in number. The individual soul is proportioned to the individual body. In contrast, and agreement, angels have do not have matter, only form, so each angel is unique (different species).

Summa Theologica 1, Q85, A7: “The difference of form which is due only to the different disposition of matter, causes not a specific but only a numerical difference: for different individuals have different forms, diversified according to the difference of matter.”

(Aquinas) The soul has intellect and will. The habit of knowledge, in the soul, remains after death of the body. The knowledge which resides in the sensitive powers does not remain in the soul.

Summa Theologica 1, Q79, A6: “Thus, therefore, if we take memory only for the power of retaining species, we must say that it is in the intellectual part. But if in the notion of memory we include its object as something past, then the memory is not in the intellectual, but only in the sensitive part, which apprehends individual things.”

In Summa Theologica, St. Thomas Aquinas comments on this in Part I, Q77, A6 and A8:

A6
…the composite is actual by the soul. Whence it is clear that all the powers of the soul, whether their subject be the soul alone, or the composite, flow from the essence of the soul, as from their principle; because it has already been said that the accident is caused by the subject according as it is actual, and is received into it according as it is in potentiality.

A8
I answer that, As we have said already (5,6,7), all the powers of the soul belong to the soul alone as their principle. But some powers belong to the soul alone as their subject; as the intelligence and the will. These powers must remain in the soul, after the destruction of the body. But other powers are subjected in the composite; as all the powers of the sensitive and nutritive parts. Now accidents cannot remain after the destruction of the subject. Wherefore, the composite being destroyed, such powers do not remain actually; but they remain virtually in the soul, as in their principle or root.

So it is false that, as some say, these powers remain in the soul even after the corruption of the body. It is much more false that, as they say also, the acts of these powers remain in the separate soul; because these powers have no act apart from the corporeal organ.

newadvent.org/summa/1077.htm

 

[Bahman]

There is an identity for the rational soul.

Man is composite with both matter and form. The difference in matter differentiates them in number. The individual soul is proportioned to the individual body. In contrast, and agreement, angels have do not have matter, only form, so each angel is unique (different species).

Summa Theologica 1, Q85, A7: “The difference of form which is due only to the different disposition of matter, causes not a specific but only a numerical difference: for different individuals have different forms, diversified according to the difference of matter.”

(Aquinas) The soul has intellect and will. The habit of knowledge, in the soul, remains after death of the body. The knowledge which resides in the sensitive powers does not remain in the soul.

Summa Theologica 1, Q79, A6: “Thus, therefore, if we take memory only for the power of retaining species, we must say that it is in the intellectual part. But if in the notion of memory we include its object as something past, then the memory is not in the intellectual, but only in the sensitive part, which apprehends individual things.”

In Summa Theologica, St. Thomas Aquinas comments on this in Part I, Q77, A6 and A8:

A6
…the composite is actual by the soul. Whence it is clear that all the powers of the soul, whether their subject be the soul alone, or the composite, flow from the essence of the soul, as from their principle; because it has already been said that the accident is caused by the subject according as it is actual, and is received into it according as it is in potentiality.

A8
I answer that, As we have said already (5,6,7), all the powers of the soul belong to the soul alone as their principle. But some powers belong to the soul alone as their subject; as the intelligence and the will. These powers must remain in the soul, after the destruction of the body. But other powers are subjected in the composite; as all the powers of the sensitive and nutritive parts. Now accidents cannot remain after the destruction of the subject. Wherefore, the composite being destroyed, such powers do not remain actually; but they remain virtually in the soul, as in their principle or root.

So it is false that, as some say, these powers remain in the soul even after the corruption of the body. It is much more false that, as they say also, the acts of these powers remain in the separate soul; because these powers have no act apart from the corporeal organ.

newadvent.org/summa/1077.htm

How a dead person could have memories and identity when a person with alzheimer who is still alive doesn’t remember anything including his identity?

 

[Vico]

How a dead person could have memories and identity when a person with alzheimer who is still alive doesn’t remember anything including his identity?

The identity is of the individual soul.

When the body is alive, “the soul understands by turning to phantasms, and therefore it does not understand itself save through becoming actually intelligent by means of ideas abstracted from phantasms; for thus it understands itself through its own act, as shown above (Question 87, Article 1). When, however, it is separated from the body, it understands no longer by turning to phantasms, but by turning to simply intelligible objects; hence in that state it understands itself through itself.” (ST Q89 A2)

But about memory, it seems like you did not understand what I posted from Aquinas. The kind of memory you are referring to is the the sensitive part, which is lost. “But if in the notion of memory we include its object as something past, then the memory is not in the intellectual, but only in the sensitive part, which apprehends individual things.”

This is the view of St. Thomas Aquinas, and there may be others that are compatible with the Catholic dogmas on the soul.

 

[Maddie26]

How a dead person could have memories and identity when a person with alzheimer who is still alive doesn’t remember anything including his identity?

Are you saying that a person with Alzheimer’s does not have a soul? If so, exactly when does the soul leave the body, given that it is usually a long, slow disease? What about a baby who doesn’t know their identity yet?

 

[Maddie26]

A quote from bible cannot justify anything to a nonbeliever.

So you believe that the soul which make a difference. Why did you say that you don’t know.

Because I can justify it. Consider a person with Alzheimer. The person cannot recall his identity while he is alive.

Could you please elaborate what do you mean with “it can be discerned”?

So you need to say what is that quality in soul which changes after the soul is marked. Obviously the act of marking change the soul hence what is that thing which is subjected to change upon marking.

If soul is shapeless then the only difference between two persons are their bodies from the third person view point.

Certainly true that a quote will not justify anything to a nonbeliever… But then, many people are determined to believe things that are false one way and another. Flat earth, vaccines are poison, etc. Some people are open to new ideas, most aren’t. You are discussing souls and resurrection, however, so you have to expect at least a mention of the Bible and faith here and there. There are philosophical proofs but only to those who can and want to understand them, no scientific proofs.

What I believe and what I know and can prove may be two different things. I am ok with that. I don’t know how my kidneys work but I believe they do.

This was funny:

God can see non-material entities but he cannot see a shapeless non-material entity. Hence the act of resurrection is impossible

God can, and must, or God is not God and that is a different thread
Especially if God Himself is not a physical creature. Doesn’t it make sense that an immaterial God can see an immaterial soul?

Shape matters. Otherwise there must exist a quality in soul which make different souls distinguishable. What is that quality if it is not shape.

This is what I was trying to get at. Shape matters for things that naturally have shape. Since a soul never has a shape it has its own special quality that is particular to a soul.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maddie26 
This is, however, diametrically opposite to everything you have said thus far, stating over and again that souls must have shape.

Bahman: Because I can justify it. Consider a person with Alzheimer. The person cannot recall his identity while he is alive

So justify it. The Alzheimer’s argument doesn’t make sense. If your soul is a physical shape of matter, where is it?

When I say the soul cannot be located but it can be discerned I mean that, since I do not believe the soul has a shape it cannot be seen physically. It can be discerned, ie. known about because we see it’s action. It’s the same way we cannot see gravity, but we see the apple that gravity causes to fall.

 

[Bahman]

The identity is of the individual soul.

So you mean that identity is an attribute of soul?

When the body is alive, “the soul understands by turning to phantasms, and therefore it does not understand itself save through becoming actually intelligent by means of ideas abstracted from phantasms; for thus it understands itself through its own act, as shown above (Question 87, Article 1). When, however, it is separated from the body, it understands no longer by turning to phantasms, but by turning to simply intelligible objects; hence in that state it understands itself through itself.” (ST Q89 A2)

Why then soul cannot turn into intelligible object when person is alive?

But about memory, it seems like you did not understand what I posted from Aquinas. The kind of memory you are referring to is the the sensitive part, which is lost. “But if in the notion of memory we include its object as something past, then the memory is not in the intellectual, but only in the sensitive part, which apprehends individual things.”

Could you please elaborate which part of our memories is sensitive and which part is insensitive?