What is consciousness? Is it the soul?

  • Thread starter Thread starter AgnosticBoy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

AgnosticBoy

Guest
I tend to not consider things as being supernatural just because scientists can not explain, except for when something is traditionally thought to be supernatural or non-physical at the least. Such is the case for ‘consciousness’ if it is indeed synonymous with what we’d call the ‘soul’. And as such, if it is supernatural or non-physical, then we can not expect for it to follow any physical laws, or at least not in any strict sense.

Discussion:
What is consciousness? (Define it!)
Is it natural, supernatural, or both?
Is it the same as what we call the ‘soul’?
 
I tend to not consider things as being supernatural just because scientists can not explain, except for when something is traditionally thought to be supernatural or non-physical at the least. Such is the case for ‘consciousness’ if it is indeed synonymous with what we’d call the ‘soul’. And as such, if it is supernatural or non-physical, then we can not expect for it to follow any physical laws, or at least not in any strict sense.
Well, we’ll see as we discuss it. 🙂

Discussion:
What is consciousness? (Define it!)
the state of being awake and aware of one’s surroundings.
“she failed to regain consciousness and died two days later”

•the awareness or perception of something by a person
“her acute consciousness of Mike’s presence”

•the fact of awareness by the mind of itself and the world.
“consciousness emerges from the operations of the brain”
Is it natural, supernatural, or both?
It is both since we may be conscious while alive on earth or after the death of our bodies. It appears the soul takes our consciousness with it. Therefore, it cannot merely be a function of the physical brain, although injury/illness may affect consciousness.

An example from my life: I once fell off a horse and lost consciousness for a very short time. While unconscious I was aware of nothing, like being anesthetized. Does it mean I have no soul? No, it simply meant that I was not dead, so my consciousness had not left me. My physical brain simply wasn’t able to “tune in” to it. If I had died from my injury, then my consciousness would have left my body with my soul.
Is it the same as what we call the ‘soul’?
No. The soul is the life of the body. When our bodies die, the soul and our consciousness, leaves them.
 
I tend to not consider things as being supernatural just because scientists can not explain, except for when something is traditionally thought to be supernatural or non-physical at the least. Such is the case for ‘consciousness’ if it is indeed synonymous with what we’d call the ‘soul’. And as such, if it is supernatural or non-physical, then we can not expect for it to follow any physical laws, or at least not in any strict sense.

Discussion:
What is consciousness? (Define it!)
Is it natural, supernatural, or both?
Is it the same as what we call the ‘soul’?
Chapter 2 – Spirit (Theology for Beginners - Frank Sheed)

“To say that “a spirit has no shape, no size, no color, no weight, and does not occupy space” is closer to a definition of nothing, or rather a definition of what a spirit is not, rather that what a spirit is.”

[1] Spirit Knows, Loves, Is Powerful

“Spirit is the element in us by which we know and love, by which therefore we decide. Our body knows nothing; it loves nothing; it decides nothing. Spirit has power too – the mind uses the body, not asking the body’s consent. The mind is the principal, the body the instrument.”

[2] Spirit Produces What Matter Cannot

“Spirit produces ideas. Since we are continually producing things which have no attribute of matter, it seems reasonable to conclude that there is in us some element which is not matter to produce them. This element we call spirit.”

“Our ideas are not material. They have no resemblance to our body. Their resemblance is to our spirit. They have no shape, no size, no color, no weight, no space. Neither has spirit, whose offspring they are. But no one can call it nothing, for it produces thought, and thought is the most powerful thing in the world – unless love is, which spirit also produces.”

[3] Spirit Is Not in Space

“A spirit differs from a material thing by having no parts. A part is any element in a being which is not the whole of it, as my chest is part of my body, or an electron part of an atom.”

“Our soul has no parts, for it is a spirit. There is no element in our soul which is not the whole soul. It does a remarkable variety of things – knowing, loving, animating a body – but each of them is done by the whole soul.”

Spirit and soul are not two words for the same thing. Spirit is a partless, spaceless, immortal being, which can know and love. Soul means principle of life in a living body.

“A being which has no parts does not occupy space. Think of anything one pleases that occupies space, and one sees that it must have parts. Space is simply what matter “spreads” its parts in. But a being with no parts at all has no spread. Space and it have nothing whatever in common; it is spaceless; it is superior to the need for space.”

“The trouble is that we find it hard to think of a thing existing if it is not in space, and we find it very hard to think of a thing acting if it has no parts. As against the first difficulty we must remind ourselves that space is merely emptiness, and emptiness can hardly be essential to existence. As against the second we must remind ourselves that parts are only divisions, and dividedness can hardly be an indispensable aid to action.”

For example – the judgments we make all the time. If we judge that mercy is more useful than justice, we have taken three ideas or concepts, mercy, justice, and usefulness – found an identity between them in our mind for comparison. There must be no “distance” between the concepts in our mind. The power to make judgments is dependent upon the partlessness of the soul – one single, undivided thinking principle to take hold of and hold in one all the concepts we wish to compare.

[4] Spirit Is Always Itself

“Spirit is the being which has a permanent hold upon what it is, so that it can never become anything else. Material beings can be destroyed because they can be broken up into their constituent parts; what has parts can be taken apart. But a partless being lies beyond all this. Nothing can be taken from it, because there is nothing in it but its whole self. For the whole self to be taken out of existence, that would be annihilation.”

“A spiritual being, therefore, cannot lose its identity. It can experience changes in its relation to other beings – knowledge, love, death of the physical body – but with all these changes it remains itself, conscious of itself, permanent.”
 
…The soul is the life of the body. When our bodies die, the soul and our consciousness, leaves them.
I think that’s essentially it. I have nothing to add but an affirmation thanks to Della’s post.

The hyper-critic in me can find a few things to nit-pick about the post, but in essence I think that was a solid explanation. There may be 100 other posts in this thread, but none likely as cogent as that one.👍
 
In secular philosophical terms the soul is responsible for our consciousness and qualia.

Atheists perceive the soul as defined by Dennett as the “zombic hunch”.
 
Rational consciousness is a combination of incorporeal operations (intellectual and volitional; operations natural to the human soul, in a sense) and corporeal operations (namely sensation and imagination). Animal consciousness would just be the corporeal faculties. Incorporeal, however, does not mean supernatural.

One can see that death for a human, the separation of body and soul, would not be a liberation but more like a severe amputation leaving an incapacitated stub behind (this description assumes no additional action of God. Certainly the experience a saved soul has in such great union with God can supersede in experience any deficit caused by lack of corporeal operations in life, but for mere philosophical purposes on what the soul and consciousness are, we don’t need to delve into that).
 
Consciousness is not the soul; it is a state of the body.

Your soul is not directly affected by being asleep or anaesthetised, or after a head knock; but in those states, you are unable to see, think or use your limbs.

The soul is there while the body is alive.

The soul is the life. Consciousness is the body-state, mediated by the brain stem, that allows seeing and smelling and limb movement – ie, actually living life.

ICXC NIKA
 
So a soul after death of the body has no consciousness?

Obviously the consciousness is produced by the soul because consciousness is what differentiate us from other animals.

The lost of consciousness while alive can be a simple state of limbo when your body is malfunctioning or deep sleeping but still alive.
 
So a soul after death of the body has no consciousness?

Obviously the consciousness is produced by the soul because consciousness is what differentiate us from other animals.

The lost of consciousness while alive can be a simple state of limbo when your body is malfunctioning or deep sleeping but still alive.
Well, I don’t think it’s a matter of either/or, but rather of both/and. Consciousness lies in both the body and the soul. Indeed, I believe it may be what keeps us aware of having a soul, of being alive. Since the soul survives bodily death, and we know from Sacred Tradition that people are aware of their state of being after death, consciousness must be both physical and of the soul. At least, that’s how it appears to me. 🙂
 
So a soul after death of the body has no consciousness?

Obviously the consciousness is produced by the soul because consciousness is what differentiate us from other animals.

The lost of consciousness while alive can be a simple state of limbo when your body is malfunctioning or deep sleeping but still alive.
Going off of my previous post, I’d say that it has a reduced state of consciousness, or perhaps would say it’s missing some of the corporeal operations of consciousness. That is only accounting for the soul by itself and its natural functions, not taking into account anything God may do above what is natural to the human soul’s intrinsic abilities.
 
I tend to not consider things as being supernatural just because scientists can not explain, except for when something is traditionally thought to be supernatural or non-physical at the least. Such is the case for ‘consciousness’ if it is indeed synonymous with what we’d call the ‘soul’. And as such, if it is supernatural or non-physical, then we can not expect for it to follow any physical laws, or at least not in any strict sense.
Physical laws are an approximation of how the reality behaves.
Discussion:
What is consciousness? (Define it!)
Consciousness is a mental state which grants ability to be aware.
Is it natural, supernatural, or both?
It is a natural thing. It is an emergent phenomena like other emergent phenomena. It is the result of physical process in a being or thing.
Is it the same as what we call the ‘soul’?
There is no soul. Soul to best of my understanding is a black box that we put all our ignorance about subject matter, consciousness, within.
 
It is both since we may be conscious while alive on earth or after the death of our bodies. It appears the soul takes our consciousness with it. Therefore, it cannot merely be a function of the physical brain, although injury/illness may affect consciousness.
That is not correct. A soul cannot be aware of its surroundings. It needs a body to act and be aware therefore a person has no consciousness after his death until final resurrection. This is part of Catholic teaching, hylemorphic dualism.
 
Is consciousness the soul? Only if you’re René Descartes. The English Idealists, however, had a different view, as does the Catholic Church. Before really engaging here, I’d ask what your background in philosophy is.
 
That is not correct. A soul cannot be aware of its surroundings. It needs a body to act and be aware therefore a person has no consciousness after his death until final resurrection. This is part of Catholic teaching, hylemorphic dualism.
You are wrong, my friend. The Church does not teach what you have stated. In fact, she teaches just the opposite–that souls are alive with God after physical death. The Church states quite clearly that souls are alive. It’s part of her teaching regarding the Communion of Saints. The ruminations of theologians is not necessarily the same thing as the teachings of the Church.
 
Consciousness is not the soul.

I am still an embodied soul - even when I sleep.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s2c1p6.htm#362
Of course, sleep is not full unconsciousness, either; you can still hear, which is why you can be awakened.

Full unconsciousness – the result of general anesthesia, chokeholds and head knocks – is a stage nearer to the separation of soul from body.

ICXC NIKA
 
Of course, sleep is not full unconsciousness, either; you can still hear, which is why you can be awakened.

Full unconsciousness – the result of general anesthesia, chokeholds and head knocks – is a stage nearer to the separation of soul from body.

ICXC NIKA
One is yes unconscious in all of the above in sleep.

We are not Smaug.
 
Well, I don’t think it’s a matter of either/or, but rather of both/and. Consciousness lies in both the body and the soul. Indeed, I believe it may be what keeps us aware of having a soul, of being alive. Since the soul survives bodily death, and we know from Sacred Tradition that people are aware of their state of being after death, consciousness must be both physical and of the soul. At least, that’s how it appears to me. 🙂
Hi Della. I’ve been reading through the different ideas before I made a response. Summing up your that I quoted, post #9, and the posts before post #9, I’m left concluding the that consciousness is not the same as the soul but rather that the consciousness is just one part or aspect of the soul. I also gathered so far that consciousness has a physical aspect and a non-physical aspect, and that non-physical does not always mean supernatural. I think I only read posts from one or two members who tried to isolate consciousness to the physical body, but I disagree with that so far for some of the reasons you stated.

Btw, I’m an agnostic but I am looking for a rational explanation that’s based on the Christian perspective.
 
Physical laws are an approximation of how the reality behaves.
I agree with you here however I tend to disagree with some of your other posts that involve dismissing various viewpoints involving the supernatural just because they do not square perfectly with physical laws. Isn’t it fair to first know if that something (consciousness, angels, God) is completely physical before presuming or concluding that physical laws must apply? Personally, I rarely dismiss things right-off-the-bat unless they violate the laws of logic, and the only exception to not dismissing even things on that level is if a claim is backed by empirical evidence.
Consciousness is a mental state which grants ability to be aware.

It is a natural thing. It is an emergent phenomena like other emergent phenomena. It is the result of physical process in a being or thing.
I appreciate your view since it does not conflict with our scientific understanding. However, I tend to venture beyond science when I feel that my experience and that of others necessitates that I do so. Based on evidence from science and my experience, I believe that consciousness or mind is derived from the brain while still being more than just the brain. This position is called ‘emergent dualism’ and you’ll find it held by philosophers such as William Hasker, David Chalmers, John Searle, etc. Sure it takes ‘emergence’ to a whole nother level but I consider it a middle ground position between materialism and the religious worldview.
There is no soul. Soul to best of my understanding is a black box that we put all our ignorance about subject matter, consciousness, within.
If this also means that there is no afterlife, then I disagree. I’m sorta in the middle leaning in favor of there being an afterlife.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top