Is there such a thing as soul?
Well.. this is a topic that most of the people debates on I personally debate with myself and with my friends whether their is such a thing soul. Is there actually such a thing as soul?
Well, my conclusion upto now is no. (But I also have some arguments for it) If so, is reincarnation also possible? (If yes, how?), we can't see a soul doesn't mean that it doesn't exist right? If a soul doesn't exist, then whose sake we are seeking happiness? I have come up with some answers for these but I need your opinion.
But if your answer is "soul does exist", well where does exist? From what it consists of? What is it made of? How does it feel? Is it actually possible scientifically? Isn't it just a false ideology we made in our mind?
Lemme know in the comments below, your conclusion and the reasons for your conclusion.
Well, my conclusion upto now is no. (But I also have some arguments for it) If so, is reincarnation also possible? (If yes, how?), we can't see a soul doesn't mean that it doesn't exist right? If a soul doesn't exist, then whose sake we are seeking happiness? I have come up with some answers for these but I need your opinion.
But if your answer is "soul does exist", well where does exist? From what it consists of? What is it made of? How does it feel? Is it actually possible scientifically? Isn't it just a false ideology we made in our mind?
Lemme know in the comments below, your conclusion and the reasons for your conclusion.
Comments352
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
the one most neutrally creative invention of humanity i guess.
like holy spirits.
ungendered
immaterial
and ever so influenced
like holy spirits.
ungendered
immaterial
and ever so influenced
Hmm... but such a thing doesn't exist right? It is like water in mirage, we will chase for that forever in our life but still we can't find it..
true.
maybe cuz ghost' r somewhat more socialist than gods.
maybe cuz ghost' r somewhat more socialist than gods.
Hehe 😅😅
That's a paradox since it can be neither proven nor disproven.
It is not a paradox. Paradox contains a truth though it seems false. But soul doesn't. There is no such a thing as a soul.
Still can't prove or disprove it.
Ability or inability to disapprove it doesn't matter. The truth is that it doesn't exist...
I do think a soul exists as you asked where is it located ? Many people would say in the brain but ... i don't really know, if we do an experiment considering it would work obviously: let's transplant the B individual's brain to the A individual's body and A's brain to the B's body. Will the people have their souls transferred ? Will it change something ? In my opinion soul isn't material but need a frame as a living body or perhaps a mechanical one who knows. I can't in any case define what is a soul I don't feel enough wise and mature to. Perhaps it is the union of our free will and other settings, as the ability to recognise a "myself" and the consciousness of "dying one day". In any case the question isn't about who between all of us is right but about sharing opinions because for the moment we didn't find out what was a soul and if it really existed.
I see no reason why a soul has to exist materially if it exists. Why can't it exist in the same sense that the number "2" exists?
i don't think anything that we encountered so far needed supernatural elements to be explained. not saying we have all the answers, just a pattern and rule of thumb
no reason to start thinking there is soemthing randomly magical now
The soul does exist. It is your life force, basically, and isn't some tiny white orb in your heart or something stupid like that. Soul flows through you almost like blood, but not in veins. Like the mind, it is a metaphysical entity. But if you don't have a soul, you are what is called dead.
Psst, this isn't an actual question or even discussion, just the OP reassuring himself that he's the master debater compared to all these idiots who believe in a soul.
Actually, there is no soul, there is just blood and meat and bone inside humans. I was just seeing if he was gonna answer.
There is a soul, but if you can only conceptualize it as being inside something skepticism is warranted.
I believe the you is soul.
I've talked with my friends about it before. And its not a big break through or anything, or even logically valid. But I believe it. So it starts out what is "you." And most people I talked to answer "me, my body and my words." So then I say, if I cut off your arm are you still you, and they go yeah. And I'm sure you've heard this argument a thousand times, but then after playing with them I ask is you your conscienceness and thats where people get devided. Some of my friends say yes some say no, to them I always ask "So when you're asleep you're not you, if I knock you out you're not you? You're only you when you're awake. So if I did horrible things to your body in your sleep I'm not doing anything to you?" And it really gets them there, most people at that point will be like no consciousness isnt my you but its apart of it like everything else." And then I have like two die hard friends who are like "yeah I'm only me when I'm conscious."
So yeah, I subscribe to belief you is alot of things, and those things combined are soul and both tangible and intangible.
I've talked with my friends about it before. And its not a big break through or anything, or even logically valid. But I believe it. So it starts out what is "you." And most people I talked to answer "me, my body and my words." So then I say, if I cut off your arm are you still you, and they go yeah. And I'm sure you've heard this argument a thousand times, but then after playing with them I ask is you your conscienceness and thats where people get devided. Some of my friends say yes some say no, to them I always ask "So when you're asleep you're not you, if I knock you out you're not you? You're only you when you're awake. So if I did horrible things to your body in your sleep I'm not doing anything to you?" And it really gets them there, most people at that point will be like no consciousness isnt my you but its apart of it like everything else." And then I have like two die hard friends who are like "yeah I'm only me when I'm conscious."
So yeah, I subscribe to belief you is alot of things, and those things combined are soul and both tangible and intangible.
Soul is a thing by which*** you take a choice. In the science it calls conscious. Unknown and uninvestigated for science and will never be. At least not that way what you are talking about.
Mind is a thing that contains a relapsed experience, all of this calls thoughts. Can be used in a making of a choice. Which after can be used exactly in a taking of a choice. But it isn't necessary for conscious. For soul i mean. 'Cause you can take a choice without a decision. Barely investigated for science. Isn't ''physical''. Rather like thoughts.
Body is a thing that suffer because of your decisions. Also contains a brain.
***by which? with the help of which? How would be right?
You just said like an idea, that data could transfer within reincarnations. And than that there no requirement of soul.
By whom transfers your data?
You just said that data can be moved to another hard drive. And how often data from your hard drive take a choice to do this?
Don't you see that this is doing you. Not a data.
And yes just as you said. Memories have no soul. Exactly! Another way it can be said like "Data have no conscious".
Don't you see that there three things. Hard drive, data, and something else that moves your data. The conscious.
Body entirely with the brain (first thing) Mind that is thoghts (second thing) Soul that is conscious (third thing)
You are a one thing that is a system that have three aspects.
Blue (first thing) Yellow (second thing) Red (third thing)
The light that is white is a system that have three aspects.
Past (first thing) Present (second thing) Future (third thing)
The time is a system that have three aspects.
Here (first thing) There (second thing) That that isn't there or here (third thing)
The space is a system that have three aspects.
Mind is a thing that contains a relapsed experience, all of this calls thoughts. Can be used in a making of a choice. Which after can be used exactly in a taking of a choice. But it isn't necessary for conscious. For soul i mean. 'Cause you can take a choice without a decision. Barely investigated for science. Isn't ''physical''. Rather like thoughts.
Body is a thing that suffer because of your decisions. Also contains a brain.
***by which? with the help of which? How would be right?
You just said like an idea, that data could transfer within reincarnations. And than that there no requirement of soul.
By whom transfers your data?
You just said that data can be moved to another hard drive. And how often data from your hard drive take a choice to do this?
Don't you see that this is doing you. Not a data.
And yes just as you said. Memories have no soul. Exactly! Another way it can be said like "Data have no conscious".
Don't you see that there three things. Hard drive, data, and something else that moves your data. The conscious.
Body entirely with the brain (first thing) Mind that is thoghts (second thing) Soul that is conscious (third thing)
You are a one thing that is a system that have three aspects.
Blue (first thing) Yellow (second thing) Red (third thing)
The light that is white is a system that have three aspects.
Past (first thing) Present (second thing) Future (third thing)
The time is a system that have three aspects.
Here (first thing) There (second thing) That that isn't there or here (third thing)
The space is a system that have three aspects.
Soul is the person called "me". Whatever definition you give to it other than this, its wrong. Think deeply about what I said for a moment. You will understand that it is the person called me. But when you further think about it, you will come into the conclusion that this person called "me" and this thing called "soul" doesn't exist.
I think there's a soul simply because you can't reduce a person to any part of them yet there's still clearly a person there. Some philosophers say things like "if you wake up in someone else's body but remember being you, that means you're your memories!" It's just as coherent to describe someone waking up with someone else's memories, or their personality, etc. in that kind of fantasy situation, so it seems that you have to describe the continuity of a person's identity in terms of a soul. Ideas like flying around in Heaven or getting your buttocks roasted in Hell or reincarnating don't directly follow at all.
Memories have no soul. They are like data get stored inside a hard drive. Sometimes, through complex networks, these data can move to another hard drive like in a conputer. Same mechanism happens inside of our bodies. The memories which are data inside of our brain can get transfered again to and another body which is called reincarnation. There is no requirement of soul for it.
I don't think the brain is like a hard drive. I think it's like map. I don't think a soul is required for it either because you don't even have to be conscious to remember things. My argument was a disagreement with the argument that we are our memories because it's possible in a fantasy scenario to trade memories too and the fantasy scenario is the argument. No one's woken up in anyone else's body or with anyone else's memories.
There is no existence of ourselves lol. Not even in memories. Its just biological machines that works with a specific lifetime. And also, how can brain be like a map lol? Its a storage and processing device. Not anything like you say.
Nothing is stored in a brain. If you open it up, it's a bunch of blood and guts. It just marks where the things around it are by making new connections.
This is called awesome stupidity. What kind of idiot you are lol? Well, nevermind. If you say that hard drive doesn't store data or information just by saying that it is made up iron, copper.etc, you are just an idiot. In the case of the brain, its the same thing. Data and information will be stored eventhough it is made up of neurons, blood, flesh.etc. You have some kind of point but it doesn't fit in this case. True, neurons forms new connections when we use our brain more. Its not because that they mark things by connecting to each other, its because that the coordination(the ability to work with other neurons and body parts) of the brain increases.
View all replies