We are same in the essence but different in the surface

[openmind77]

That would be a mistake if it was not able to explain subject matter well.

That is just different model. The presented model is just simpler so we don’t need more part unless the presented model fail.

My mistake - I thought you were trying to disprove your present model, my apologies.

I don’t know what you mean by ‘present’ model - the Hindu model is literally thousands of years old. It is not something I am inventing.

A plant in the presented model just don’t have a brain and nerve system.

This is true, where did I disagree?

A human with the brain damage in the presented model just has brain damage. So as you can see the presented model is simpler and can explain subject matter well so you cannot discard it unless you find a subject matter that it is not explicable within the model.

I thought you were pointing out something unacceptable - that without the physical brain, a human is the same as vegetable - I was just saying that is not true. But you can stick with the dual model, if you like it better.

 

[Bahman]

The conflict is that a soul doesn’t have any part. The rational soul has parts that are not ontological: the powers. The powers are from the essence of the soul as* necessary accidents* of the substance.

Accidents cannot exist in themselves; accidents are incidental and not the identity of something. The substance gives identity.

The rational soul of a person (the person is soul and body) is not identical to all other souls because it is suited especially for that person’s body.

What are substance and accident? I read about them before but I forgot. Thank you.

Moreover, how soul could be immortal if it has parts?

 

[Bahman]

My mistake - I thought you were trying to disprove your present model, my apologies.

I don’t know what you mean by ‘present’ model - the Hindu model is literally thousands of years old. It is not something I am inventing.

This is true, where did I disagree?

I thought you were pointing out something unacceptable - that without the physical brain, a human is the same as vegetable - I was just saying that is not true. But you can stick with the dual model, if you like it better.

It is all right.

 

[Vico]

What are substance and accident? I read about them before but I forgot. Thank you.

Moreover, how soul could be immortal if it has parts?

See post #20. Also. The human soul is a substance (it subsists by itself, per se). So, it has its own reality, and independence of the body. It is substantially united to a body to make one being but it does not depend on the body for its existence.