slant eyes

not sure if this belongs here. i'm hoping i stumbled onto the right place, if not, could a kind moderator please point me in the direction of home? thanks.

well, i have always held the belief that people have souls. i can see things, i can feel things and so it suffices to believe that others believe things and can feel things as well. to be put in a more general sense, i would take the plunge and say that every living thing has feelings, thus would also have a soul. would most of you agree with me on this?

ok, suppose that they all do. what happens when there is a large trail of army ants in your house, and you lay down the mighty hand of science and douse them with raid. they look as if they are squirming, but i can't really grasp the thought that i have just taken the souls of sooooooo many in one foul swoop.

i watched the movie 'antz' and that set some sort of perspective on things, however i still find it hard to believe.

for some reason, i kill cockroaches and other large insects with no problem. when i killed a squirrel once, watched it squirm to death, i felt bad. partially because i really felt as if i had taken a soul. but i don't get this same feeling when i amass destruction on a whole army of ants.

um, i know this doesn't really have a point, but i guess what i'm asking is do you think all living things have souls, and thus so do ants. and what happens when i kill them? was it like hiroshima with the atom bomb?

druhim

Although I'm probably in the minority, I don't believe in souls at all. Before someone assumes that I believe we are the sum of our physical constituents only, I believe that's certainly a possibility but I'm not assuming that to be the case. There's so much we still have to learn about biology in general and brain chemistry specifically that it seems presumptious to assume that there must be a soul simply because there are some facets of our experience we can't yet explain.

Just my .02

__________________
"It's about morale. With weak legs and a good head, you can go a long way. With good legs and a weak head you go nowhere." - Paul Kimmage

phukraut

i bet the closer on the evolutionary ladder a creature is to us, the more likely we will feel bad for killing it.

Jonsgirl

I believe that while not every single thing has a "soul," everything has an essence. *This may be hard to explain, please bear with me* I believe that, in everything living, there is a spark that gives us life. I believe in reincarnation, but not nessicarily that the same soul, made of the same "particles" (or whatever they're made of), comes back. Kinda like a melting pot, where everything shares it experiences and learns from each other.
I don't know if everything experiences pain, so I don't know how much suffering you would have inflicted on the ants, but I don't think it would've been much.

__________________
Someday, someone will best me.
But it won't be today, and it won't be you.

CSflim

Woah! bringing up Antz in a philosopical discusion! That's gotta have some profound implication...I just can't put my finger on it!

I don't believe in a soul. I have no reason to.
Why is a soul required in order to feel pain?

__________________

hobo

I don't believe in souls. If scientists can use chemicals and electrical signals to change the way you feel, do we have the power to manipulate souls? No, because they don't exist (IMO).

ARTelevision

we clearly generate electro-magnetic field potentials.

perhaps counsciousness participates in that procerss.
if so, it coud be said that we have an immaterial "essence"

make of that what you will.

__________________
create evolution

Jesus Pimp

Isn't a soul the same thing as an esscence? I know where you're trying to get at though. It's kind of the like the force in Star Wars. How the force is in everything etc... Every living creature experiences pain. If you shout a dog it will welp and scream.

__________________
Never date anyone who doesn't make your dick hard.

asaris

I don't really believe in souls either. While I don't think you can explain consciousness by some scheme that reduces it to the merely material, it seems to me that some theory of emergent properties that supervene on the material has a pretty good chance of working. So, by Occam's Razor, souls are out.

I don't think that any animals other than humans are conscious (or sentient, or whatever you want to call 'self-awareness'). I'm at least slightly familiar with the arguments for apes/elephants/whatever being coscious, but I haven't seen any convincing arguments. Do they feel pain? Sure. Are they aware that they are feeling pain? Not in the same sense as humans.

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

Jesus Pimp

How can animals not be aware of pain if they feel pain?

__________________
Never date anyone who doesn't make your dick hard.

sixate

I don't believe in souls. We live then we die. That's it. There's nothing more to it than that. If people want to believe they have a soul that's gonna float around or whatever that's just fine by me, but I think it's rediculous.

asaris

Well, they aren't aware of anything, strictly speaking. Of course, they feel pain, and act as if they 'knew' they felt pain, but they don't have the cognitive faculties to actually be aware of feeling pain. Of course, this is based in both philosophical and theological preconceptions, as well as the belief that 'science' has not yet disproved it. There's nothing serious riding on it. The fact that animals feel pain is sufficient to establish for them all the 'rights' that I would want to give them anyway, and my beliefs in God and Christ in no way hinge on humans being somehow unique, either in the universe or on the planet.

Let me try to explain a bit better. It's a hard subject, and it doesn't help that it's not really my area, but I'll give it a shot. The reason humans are able to be aware of things in general is because we have a reflective capacity. So we not only feel pain, we can think 'hey, I'm feeling pain', and so we can either react to it or not react to it. Animals don't have that kind of choice, since they don't have the capacity to reflect on their feelings. It's this second-order sort of phenomenon that I mean to refer to when I'm talking about 'awareness'.

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

CSflim

Do you believe I am conscious?
If so, can you prove it?
No.
Why do you believe I am conscious?
Because:
a) You can observe its effects.
b) YOU are conscious. There appears to be no fundamental difference between you or I, so by extrapolation you can assume that I too am also conscious.

We can observe the effects of a consciousness in many animals. So that's a), what fundamental difference is there between us and animals? None, imho. I mean we are all related! Are you suggesting that a man-ape was born which suddenly was consciousness, where his/her parents were mere automata? Is consciousness really THAT simple as to arise over a SINGLE generation? Because that's what you're saying.

To me, there is no fundamental difference between a man or a mouse. They are all conscious, but are all at different levels of consciousness. In the same way that a human can experience different levels of consciousness. (Alzheimer’s). So a monkey would possess almost an identical level of consciousness as ourselves. A dog, a reasonable level. A cat, a low level of consciousness. A mouse barely aware of it's own existence, right the way down to very simple organisms, who would be not conscious. I see consciousness as a wide spectrum of levels, not simply a matter of conscious or not conscious

People with a cat or a dog will surely back me up when they say that their pets certainly seem conscious.
I have had a number of cats. Each one had very different personalities. And I know that it's not just me "projecting" qualities onto the animal. My parents would agree with me on the particular traits evident in the individual animals. In the same way that people are "unique" individuals, so too it seems are cats (and dogs) albeit on a much simpler level.

I have personally seen my cat display "problem solving skills", which would surely point towards possessing intelligence. (again a vastly inferior one to our own). A person and a dog will often form a very strong social bond, and the dog certainly appears to display signs of emotion. The dog is also known to mourn the loss of it's master.

Apes seem to posess the closest approximation to our own attributes.

-Roger Penrose, The Emperor's New Mind.

This to me certainly shows signs of a human-like consciousness. But does it prove consciousness in apes? No. But like I said, similar behaviour from a human would be taken as evidence that said human was conscious.

Since the above book was written (1989) communication with apes has gone even further than sign language. One particular ape was taught how to use a "Steven Hawking" type machine to "speak". Coherent conversations could be had with said ape, albeit at a basic level, like that which you would expect from a young child.
I don't remember being a young child. I cannot claim that "I thought, therefore I was". Perhaps I "wasn't"? Do you think it is fair to suggest that young children are not in fact conscious?

__________________

Moonduck

"Are you suggesting that a man-ape was born which suddenly was consciousness, where his/her parents were mere automata? Is consciousness really THAT simple as to arise over a SINGLE generation?"

I read part of a very interesting piece one whose premise was that Man has only evolved full self-awareness within recorded history. They author was stating, in basic terms, that there are signs within various ancient Greek (and other early cultures) that man had no concept of internal dialogue. In essence, the "gods" that the Greek referred to and the messages they received were simply the early stirrings of complex internal dialogue. It was a fascinating piece, and I regret that I did not write down the title and author before having to return it.

CSflim

Are you saying that "internal dialogue" is a prerequisite for consciousness?

__________________

Jonsgirl

I don't think that's what Moonduck is sayng. More like self- awareness is. You would have to be self aware, first, in order to recognize that you were having an internal dialouge.

__________________
Someday, someone will best me.
But it won't be today, and it won't be you.

MacGnG

i feel that everything has some sort of essence or whatever u wanna call it and living things have souls. recently i had an epiphany that if everything does, it would be in their perspective.

for example: ants are used to things stepping on them and lager animals eating them.

if you have seen toy story, the green alien toys in the arcade machine are so excited when the claw comes to get them, no knowing what is going to happen next, just that the claw is supposed to take them to outside of the glass dome.

life is in perspective to the life of the organism. it is sad when any living thing dies, but that is just a part of life...

Beltruckus

But they can't make you feel Genuine Love for someone or something, or Genuine Hate for that matter.

__________________
The most important things are the hardest things to say. They are the things you get ashamed of because words diminish your feelings. Words shrink things that seem timeless when they are in your head to no more than living size when they are brought out. -Stephen King

CSflim

if that is so, it adds precisely nothing to the conversation at hand.

1. Being self-aware is a prerequisite for internal dialogue.
2. Apes haves no internal dialogue.
3. Therefore....?

__________________

CSflim

Nope. Not yet. Nuurophysiology is still in its infancy. However, various effects can be used on the brain. ever heard of prozac? (or ecstacy for that matter)

Love is a very complex reaction.
What is true love anyway?

__________________

CSflim

I would take a similar philiosophy of live, although I would draw radically different conclusions from it.

I despise when people "persoanlize" the world. For instance the love => soul argument.
Certainly love is a major thing....from YOUR perspective. Certainly it seems "powerful" and "profound", but is it really OBJECTIVELY all that amazing? no.

__________________

Beltruckus

Prozac does NOT make you love and from what i've heard ecstacy just makes you feel more pleasure/lust Lust is not love, i'm willing to bet that there will never be a pill that can MAKE you fall in love sorry.

__________________
The most important things are the hardest things to say. They are the things you get ashamed of because words diminish your feelings. Words shrink things that seem timeless when they are in your head to no more than living size when they are brought out. -Stephen King

CSflim

sorry, just to clarify, I didn't mean to suggest that either of these drugs create the same signals as that of "true love". Just that they both can have a very profound effect on how you feel.

I mean if you are happy then surely you should be so, for a reason.... right? Not so with the correct cocktail of chemicals.

I'm sure that there won't be a pill to "make you fall in love", rather I am sure that there will be a means to allow someone to experience the same sensations that one feels when one is on love.

__________________

Beltruckus

But there is a difference than just feeling it and actually being in love. To me love isn't one sided it takes two to tango as they say, still wouldn't be the same. Whats great about opinions is everyone can have their own

__________________
The most important things are the hardest things to say. They are the things you get ashamed of because words diminish your feelings. Words shrink things that seem timeless when they are in your head to no more than living size when they are brought out. -Stephen King

CSflim

Ok. So how does that prove the existence of a soul?

__________________

Beltruckus

I was just arguing the point that someone made before about chemicals effecting emotion, Hobo it was. The main reason i believe in souls is i believe in the afterlife, no facts to prove it i just have "faith" Also i saw my grandfather die, even in a coma type state i could see something. When he died it was like something left him, I believe it was his soul.

__________________
The most important things are the hardest things to say. They are the things you get ashamed of because words diminish your feelings. Words shrink things that seem timeless when they are in your head to no more than living size when they are brought out. -Stephen King

CSflim

So you are conceeding to hobo's original point, that the existence of emotion does not imply a soul?

__________________

Beltruckus

sorry I meant Arguing against, just because some chemicals make you feel, calm, paranoid, whatever doesn't mean there is no soul thats why i brought up Hate and Love. I don't think there will be chemicals that can control those two at least.

__________________
The most important things are the hardest things to say. They are the things you get ashamed of because words diminish your feelings. Words shrink things that seem timeless when they are in your head to no more than living size when they are brought out. -Stephen King

CSflim

Ok, now we're getting into territory about which I've already posted on this board. Here's a copy + paste of some of my posts on the thread "A Question For The Atheists"
<HR>
Well the point is that our bodies are made of matter, which are controlled by our brains. Our brains are also made of matter, and hence follow the laws of physics. So were we able to explain the behaviour of the brain (at the moment we cannot), we could conclude that the brain follows the laws of physics, leaving no room for "magical" intervention by a soul.
Although we are currently far from understanding the workings of the brain, I see no reason to believe that it is beyond us.
Again being able to encapsulate the workings of our mind in the physical laws of the workings of the brain, does not explicitly prove the non-existence of a soul, but we are, once again, in the territory of the invisible purple llama.

Counter-argument:
A physcially alterable brain does not disprove
the existance of a metaphysical mind or a soul.


What good is a metaphysical mind if it is powerless over the actions of the physical brain? Again, the metaphysical mind is another made up idea used to explain that which we didn't understand. Now, although we don't know in any kind of detail how the mind/brain works, we have certainly made a lot of progress.
People who get a severe knock on the head can turn into completely different people. Their friends and family can no longer recognise the personality of this "new" person..."what happened our old Jimmy?".
In this type of situation what do you believe happened? That the knock on the head actually influenced the metaphysical mind?...not much of a metaphysical mind if you ask me!
The "original" personality is the metaphysical mind, which is has had its "communication link" damaged, and so cannot completely control the brain? What is controlling the rest of the brain? Is it working on its own? In that case what is the need for a metaphysical mind at all, if the brain is perfectly capable of operation in "automatic"? After all it is working perfectly well...just different than before.

What mechanism are you proposing for how this metaphysical soul operates? How can it interact with the physical world of the brain? The brain works on electrical impulses and chemical signals, all of which follow known physical laws. Are you suggesting that the brain defies such laws? That like charges attract? I believe you will find few who agree with you on that one!
The only possible apparent mechanism for a metaphysical mind appears to me to be one the opperates ona quantum level. But such a suggestion, to me feels very cheeky! But I'll continue with it for now.
Quantum level actions are random. They have come up positive in every test for randomness that we have at our disposal. On the large scale we can make very accurate predicitions of the outcome of such randomness, but a single event behaves in acompletely random manner. (In a similar way that we cannot predict the outsome of a single spin of a roulette wheel, but we can make a prediction on the large scale: ultimately the house will win!) So this leaves, ultiamtely no room for the intervention of a metaphysical mind, unless, once again you are to accept the it can defy the laws of physics as above.
<HR>
So, this in turn leads into things I posted about in the Free Will thread, where I expanding on my reasoning for not allowing a belief that quantum mechanics opens the door for a soul.

__________________

CSflim

Why not? What makes these emotions different at a fundamental level to other emotions.
And before you respond please bear in mind my brief post on objectivity, and the "personalisation" of experience.

__________________

Beltruckus

I don't know, maybe i'm not intelligent enough to put how I feel into words, Love and Hate just seem different to me, and that copy/paste thing you have some really good ideas, obviously no way to counter them, but i do know what i've seen like the grandfather thing, perhaps the sould is directly connected to the brain until the body dies, the soul works through the brain if the brain gets damaged then the sould can't communicate? correctly. I don't know just throwing out ideas, i don't think we will know till we die.

__________________
The most important things are the hardest things to say. They are the things you get ashamed of because words diminish your feelings. Words shrink things that seem timeless when they are in your head to no more than living size when they are brought out. -Stephen King

Mojo_PeiPei

I thought I heard that Einstein theorized, or "proved" we have a soul. It has something to do with the brain and electricity. All of our functions are controlled by impulses and electrical currents, electricity never degrades, so perhaps that is our "essence".

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

Sledge

To the original poster:

You seem to be equating "soul" with "consciousness." It's hard to deny that you're conscious, that you have feelings and thoughts, etc., but when people talk about a soul they're usually talking about a life force that lives on when your body dies. Everyone but the solipsists agrees that most live human beings have consciousness; life after death is a much hairier issue.

CSflim

I think that you are falling into my trap of personalising experiences. Love and Hate feel really powerful to you, but that is because you are trapped inside "you", and you cannot hope to objectify these experiences.

__________________

Beltruckus

I guess your right, and honestly I won't be escaping this trap anytime soon, partially because I dont want to. It may be naive but it comforts me to believe that there is something after this life, (and that has to do with souls) That we aren't just a bunch of synopsis firing, that our personality isn't a bunch of cells that are held together by bonding.

__________________
The most important things are the hardest things to say. They are the things you get ashamed of because words diminish your feelings. Words shrink things that seem timeless when they are in your head to no more than living size when they are brought out. -Stephen King

CSflim

Blue Pill

__________________

Beltruckus

I would still take the red pill friend. I just wouldn't be very happy but truth is truth.

__________________
The most important things are the hardest things to say. They are the things you get ashamed of because words diminish your feelings. Words shrink things that seem timeless when they are in your head to no more than living size when they are brought out. -Stephen King