Benadam, a creative exchange of ideas is what I love. What would you say is the disposition of the “soul” in a “person” without a head, such as a parasitic twin? Does a soul have to have a head to “reside in,” or can it reside merely in a pair of legs and arms?
Which is how Etienne Gilson described it in “The Spirit of Medievel Philosophy.” It is more or less analogous to the notion of “energy” as opposed to “matter.” Think of a magnetic field forming iron filings into a pattern. It applies to all living things, but the soul of a man is different because it is part of a “person,” which other animals are not. (pace Peta!)
Americans and Asian NDE’s vary alot, some American NDE’s feature explicitly Christian imagery that is very concrete, whereas some Asian NDE’s are formless/abstract. South Asian, Hindu and Theravada Buddhist NDE’s tend to be more concrete, often describing a trip to the underworld (Naraka), or a concrete “heaven” with fields and flowers. In east Asia, seeing a light is actually not rare at all. Alot of the time this light is described as the light of emptiness, which is the Buddhist religious/mystical term, they describe it mostly in terms of beauty and egolessness or feelings of “oneness”. Americans and Europeans describe the light they see moreso as love, though I have read/heard accounts where they described the intense beauty of the light. It could be due to the limitations of religious language/imagery (Asian religion emphasizes beauty or “the luminous”), or perhaps they are two different lights.
I’m convinced she was outside her body, at least inasmuch as she was aware of what was happening outside her body. I have heard, studied enough of those stories for me to believe that consciousness survives death in some way. Almost no one wants to go back into their body during these experiences, so it seems that there is nothing “lacking” from this experience, people don’t feel “disembodied” in a negative way as the Abrahamic assumption about the soul sometimes suggests. Of course, a fair number of these experiences are unpleasant (“hellish”, or frightening), and they may be under-reported.
I think the soul of a parasitic twin contains the pattern the body would have been had it not suffered the environment that hindered it’s developement to a state that could realize it’s proper order. On the other hand if that condition is a cause of a diciplined life that lead to fulfillment that deformity would become a spiritual reality that would distinguish the soul but not bind it to it’s limitations.
I’m talking about a parasitic twin with no head. How should we conceive of a soul as experiencing anything when it is lodged in a pair of legs, with no head or central nervous system, no vision, no hearing, no taste or smell? I’m trying to wrap my mind around this.
That brings up a few issues. If you die and donate your eyes or hands, living human tissue that was once sustained by the powers of your soul are now sustained by the powers of another. If the twin with no head didn’t die at some stage of it’s formation the twins soul is only able to exercise the powers associated with the necessities of maintaining the living state of whatever bodily organs and limbs it has. The power to emote, to generate cognizance of any sort, etc lay dormant evidently unable to develope and become realized in it’s earthly life.
another body meaning the parasitic twins sibling host.
My question is that since the entire potential of the parasitic twin lies there dormant, what is the status of its personhood? Lakshmi Tatama’s parasitic twin could not independently move its arms and legs that projected as extra limbs from Lakshmi’s body, because it had no head or brain. It could experience nothing, feel nothing, learn nothing; it could not make moral or aesthetic judgements about anything.
One would think, that like anyone without a head, the twin if ever there was, is dead. The potentiality perhaps exhausted at the point the soul required faculties that would not form.
This subject raises some Intriguing questions, Benadam! The legs and arms and one kidney of the parasitic twin were alive (one of Lakshmi’s kidneys was necrotic). Clearly, however, personhood requires more than arms and legs. Lakshmi’s twin never had a conscious life, and never developed a personality. Any personhood conferred would be through the eschatological grace of God.
Sort of… The flesh is that, just flesh the workings of the soul are not contained in nerve impulses anymore than spirits having bodies. The soul is the essence of God’s love poured out for his fellow man. And His workings of mind/body,body/soul are not to try to be fathomed, for we are not God nor do we understand the mystery called life.
Actually, neuroscience is beginning to fathom a lot about the relationship between mind and body, including how consciousness works, and what the neuro-chemical correlates are to religious and mystical experiences. Presumably the mind/soul connection will be more challenging to fathom, and we may not make much progress there.And His workings of mind/body,body/soul are not to try to be fathomed, for we are not God nor do we understand the mystery called life.Mary1173
Ah, but now try producing that idea without using your physical brain, which operates on the basis of its neurons firing electrical signals between each other, and whose chemistry is built upon molecules and atoms and subatomic particles. Remember, you can’t use your brain for this experiment, or your head in which it is contained, or any other part of your body. Good luck!
The fact that we have a physical aspect to our being is not something people are ignorant of, and it has no bearing on the nature of ones experience.
If i am merely the sum total of all the physical processes in my brain, then the term “I AM” becomes meaningless, since there are only physical processes in the brain, there is nobody out side of them influencing or knowing their physical end. So, in reality, the sum total of all inert physical processes, ought to be merely inert physical processes. To assume anything more would be to admit the existence of another reality that is not an inert physical process.
By all means.I didn’t mean to imply that the brain does not play an important role in respect of thinking and consciousness; this should have become more apparent as you read my post. In any case; are you saying that the thought in your head was physical? Are you saying that your comprehension of thoughts is physical?
Not physical in the sense of an object. Rather, they are electrochemical.In any case; are you saying that the thought in your head was physical? Are you saying that your comprehension of thoughts is physical? Wow! Thats a pretty spectacular trick.