Conversely, soul can do nothing (see, smell, move, etc) without his or her body, although it would hold the memories of such activities.
When the ‘spirit’ or ‘soul’ leaves the body - it can see without the body.
How would one see without eyes to see through ?
That’s the question, but, that it happens - it does. Keep in mind, Saint John the Apostle. We can consider how and why and perhaps come to a better understanding.
I disagree. Nature is not limited to material substances - at least in my opinion. God made man a part of nature by breathing life into him. So eventhough the soul is a spiritual substance, it is a natural substance. Since the soul functions as God created it, it does not break any laws. Of course it breaks laws of science. I agree that when angels intervine in the physical world, they are breaking laws of nature.
O.K. In post # 57 I said, " The conscious mind ( in some mysterious way we will never know ) observes what is taking place, collates the various types of information and stores it in the soul for later reference. And from this point we get into the discussion that has been going on on the thread. " Yes, we may speculate, but we cannot know with absolute certainty because we cannot " touch " the mind.
By using the type of *a’ posteriori * reasoning used by A & T and some of the Church’s dogma. The Chruch teaches dogmatically that man has a rational soul. We also know that man’s actions are divided between the physical and the intellictual, which Aquinas calls immaterial ( spiritual ). And to me to remember is an act of the intellect. It takes a mind to remember. In my opinion, whatever physical impressions the brain recieves from the outside or from the body are physical and cannot be called memories.Now the only reason why we could never know is that there is something occult, hidden, something which can never be analyzed even in principle, and so could never be described by a law of nature. So, what’s your evidence for your huge claim?
Yes, you said, " And, of course, that would be a huge claim requiring lots of evidence, since it would mean that some aspect of the human mind is the only composite phenomenon in the entire universe which is so disordered that it follows no pattern, even in principle, and is therefore forever inexplicable. "
Yes, until the soul is reunited with the body after the General Judgment it is like a duck out of water. Yes, the soul is, in a metaphysical sense, incomplete with being united to its proper body. But I disagree that the brain is the seat of the mind. In a metaphysical sense there is no thing called the mind or the intellect. It is a power of the soul, it is not a part of the soul. It is more metaphysically correct to say that the brain is the organ through which the soul " sees " the world and through which it governs all the bodies actions.
shaw:I disagree. Nature is not limited to material substances - at least in my opinion. God made man a part of nature by breathing life into him. So eventhough the soul is a spiritual substance, it is a natural substance. Since the soul functions as God created it, it does not break any laws. Of course it breaks laws of science. I agree that when angels intervine in the physical world, they are breaking laws of nature.
O.K. In post # 57 I said, " The conscious mind ( in some mysterious way we will never know ) observes what is taking place, collates the various types of information and stores it in the soul for later reference. And from this point we get into the discussion that has been going on on the thread. " Yes, we may speculate, but we cannot know with absolute certainty because we cannot " touch " the mind.
By using the type of *a’ posteriori * reasoning used by A & T and some of the Church’s dogma. The Chruch teaches dogmatically that man has a rational soul. We also know that man’s actions are divided between the physical and the intellictual, which Aquinas calls immaterial ( spiritual ). And to me to remember is an act of the intellect. It takes a mind to remember. In my opinion, whatever physical impressions the brain recieves from the outside or from the body are physical and cannot be called memories.Now the only reason why we could never know is that there is something occult, hidden, something which can never be analyzed even in principle, and so could never be described by a law of nature. So
Yes, you said, " And, of course, that would be a huge claim requiring lots of evidence, since it would mean that some aspect of the human mind is the only composite phenomenon in the entire universe which is so disordered that it follows no pattern, even in principle, and is therefore forever inexplicable. "
Yes, until the soul is reunited with the body after the General Judgment it is like a duck out of water. Yes, the soul is, in a metaphysical sence, incomplete with being united to its proper body. But I disagree that the brain is the seat of the mind. In a metaphysical sence the soul and the intellect are identical. So we can call the soul the mind. Rationality is the act of the intellect or the act of the soul or mind. The brain is the organ through which the intellect knows the world and through which it governs the body.
But I would say that it is the intellect or soul which holds these memories.
Aquinas thinks the soul is able to think when separated from the body.
Did they live un-anchored to our bodies before we were born? If not, please explain your statement about being timeless.
Ummm…
Beats me.Knowing, understanding is spiritual vision. the soul will not need senses after death, knowledge will be infused directly from God. We will know as we are known, we see now as through a curtain, but then face to face. the body will be spiritualized.
I am exploring this topic with what knowledge and experience I have to come to a better understanding. To say, I am exploring. That said, I would agree with you hear, even though I am not during my exploration stating anything for sure.
"The profession of faith of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) affirms that God “from the beginning of time made at once (simul) out of nothing both orders of creatures, the spiritual and the corporeal, that is, the angelic and the earthly, and then (deinde) the human creature, who as it were shares in both orders, being composed of spirit and body.” (CCC#327).
It depends on what characteristics we speak about. the body is physical, the soul is spiritual, the body is sensed, the soul is understood through it’s effects.
We are not limited to the knowledge we can obtain by the use of our bodies. God can illuminate us. There are people who have devoted their whole life to the study of the Bible and have received much financial support, fame, prestige etc… but miss the boat completely. Yet, a young lady of the poorest family of the town of Lourdes can understand many philosophers from of old would have loved to so much as have an inkling. The Holy Spirit guides and illuminates us and so from the mouth of babes…
This is neither here nor there, I don’t see how or why this would establish that the soul or spirit cannot see etc on it’s own.
You can read over my posts here to see what I have said. The brain, since it is a physical instrument, cannot do anything that is spiritual. So, are memories physical or spiritual? I say they are spiritual, that they are an act of the intellect. But it is only an opinion.
Spirit versus soul is to an extent a word game, particularly in translation.
Nothing except the position that “spiritual sight” is not sight as our human eyes do it.
Modern Catholic Dictionary has for Spirit:… God is uncreated pure Spirit; the angels are created pure spirits. The human soul is more properly called spiritual. Although it can exist independent of the body, it nevertheless in this life depends extrinsically on the body for its operations, and in the life to come retains a natural affinity for the body, with which after the resurrection it will be reunited for all eternity. …
Rational knowledge is not physical but spiritual, if it was physical you could sense it, is meaning physical? Meaning is only known. There is sense knowledge of the animals, but it is not intellectual knowledge the product of reasoning. The spiritual knowledge of the Saints is a product of knowing the truths of our faith, a product of believing and not seeing, a gift of the Holy Spirit through Jesus Christ, it is not a product of reasoning, but is not in conflict with reason. We have knowledge of our world, and we have knowledge of our faith, they are both spiritual All truth and knowledge proceeds from the Holy Spirit, natural, and supernatural.We are not limited to the knowledge we can obtain by the use of our bodies. God can illuminate us. There are people who have devoted their whole life to the study of the Bible and have received much financial support, fame, prestige etc… but miss the boat completely. Yet, a young lady of the poorest family of the town of Lourdes can understand many philosophers from of old would have loved to so much as have an inkling. The Holy Spirit guides and illuminates us and so from the mouth of babes…
It’s not that spiritual knowledge is opposed to rational knowledge (there is a harmony but then spiritual knowledge leaves rational knowledge behind) but it is certainly superior in my book.
The ‘mutual dependence’ is one of the things I am trying to understand in the light of Saint John’s experience. What kept his body alive? Is the spirit an aspect of the soul?
This is neither here nor there, I don’t see how or why this would establish that the soul or spirit cannot see etc on it’s own.
I was expecting this explanation to be presented at some point. I have been given this explanation before. it’s perfect and we can all walk away.