Enmos
Valued Senior Member
If you are equating the soul to love, that's fine.
But love, like any other behavior or feeling, is a product of the source, receiver and manipulator (AKA the brain).
Arguments for the soul's existence...
- Thread starter one_raven
- Start date
If you are equating the soul to love, that's fine.
But love, like any other behavior or feeling, is a product of the source, receiver and manipulator (AKA the brain).
go deeper and ask why the brain was evolved and created and you will find the brain is a mere tool as well. Go deeper and you will eventually end with zero or absolute nothing that uses everything else as a tool for it's existence as absolutely nothing.
"God uses everything else as a way of experiencing his existence" [ aka God is non-existent except through everything else]
Using the label God in a non-religious [ physics based] sense
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
There is no why. Only many hows.
The key to this debate could be found in the fact that the human heart starts to beat well before the human brain is developed in the process of procreation.
The heart uses the brain to express itself, in a symbiotic relationship of mutual self interest.
The heart can continue to beat with most brain functions dead. But the brain can not functi0n with out blood and energy supplied to it by the heart...
refer to the myocardium of the human heart
The heart uses the brain to express itself, in a symbiotic relationship of mutual self interest.
The heart can continue to beat with most brain functions dead. But the brain can not functi0n with out blood and energy supplied to it by the heart...
refer to the myocardium of the human heart
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
It is a well known fact that the heart can beat on it's own, even outside of the body. However, I don't see how this has got anything to do with the issue at hand.
What do you have to say about this article ?
http://neurophilosophy.wordpress.co...ave-inherited-our-brain-from-an-ancient-worm/
The potential idea that the intrinsic neurology of the heart may be taken as a surrogate brain?
I have no problem with that.... The relationships between the myocardium and other heart muscles are facinating afterall
you said,
and I offered a counter with the fact that the heart can exist independently of the brain. Which of course is true for Love as well...and that it is the heart that is the source and the brain that is used to manipulate...
Last edited:
the heart can beat independently of the brain, but it cannot sustain itself without the brain. just like the brain will die soon after the heart stops, the heart will die soon after the brain dies.
the heart is not the source of any feelings. you are being fooled by old superstitions. people have their heart taken out and replaced with a mechanical one without going through a personality change
the heart is not the source of any feelings. you are being fooled by old superstitions. people have their heart taken out and replaced with a mechanical one without going through a personality change
and there is your proof of a soul....removal of the physical heart and replacement with a mechanical one...ha...
the soul is not entirely dependent on a mortal body [ physical or material body] It can function with bits of that body missing just like phantom feelings and referred pain symptoms..
I know you will refute but your support is based on a premise that is far from adequate..Just like mine is.
NDE's and people who report OOBE's [out of body experiences] will testify to the fact that the soul is independent of the body for it's sustainability.
The soul only uses the body when and only when it is availabel to be used after it is not available it moves on...
I do realsie you are going to quote some sort of medical facts and state that this is untrue when in fact you have no idea of the truth due to our ignorance of how it all functions.
I can justify it all in medical terms as well just as easilly but I know it would be a lie. [ self justifying lie ]
What is propriorception?
How does it work?
What is will? How is it free?
Self determination ?
self animation with free will?
etc etc
replacing the heart with another just proves my point or at least aids it.
Does a soul have a heart? Does it breath? Does it take a dump? Does it pick it's nose?
Is it simply an Overlaying dimension that replicates the material in every possible way?
Does the soul have a brain?
[when a ghost needs to take a dump and is caught picking it's nose that is when I will believe in the reality of ghosts! ~ anon]
Last edited:
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Huh ? :bugeye:
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Ok.. I see you honor your screenname. Especially the latter part.
See you around.
well, you posted a link to a site explaining the evolution of a nervous system using a worm, if I am not mistaken [ with out a brain ] so I don't see how a heart , spinal column or any other conscentration of neurology can not be seen in similar terms.
i.e. The region behind the nose has an incredible concentration of neurological structures...so why is this not a basic brain in concept? [ broaches the subject of "instinctive intelligence"]
yes see ya around!
Last edited:
Do transperant jelly fish have a brain?
Do they have a heart?
or are they a pseudo heart in action?
Do they have a heart?
or are they a pseudo heart in action?
Why do you represent your body and not anyone elses?
Why is your body yours?
If there is no reason then there is a soul, and if there is a reason then that is probably a soul
I think you want a soul so bad that you'll find a reason to have one, no matter how goofy it sounds.
it demonstrates that the heart is not a source for any feelings.
you claim that the soul does not depend entirely on our physical body. that means there is a "supernatural" aspect to it, which you claimed there wasn't. your position is inconsistent.
subjective evidence is not valid evidence.
neither of us know the truth, but one of us is making unnecessary assumptions that stray from what we know through observations
no it doesn't
true..yes guilty as accused...
if you were having regular outof body type experiences in various conscious states but mostly when wide awake you would no doubt reconsider your "unnecessary assumptions" bit.
Is it useful to discuss experience as evidence?...not unless it is commonly shared or sharable by all persons. So this whole discussion is a total waste of time until experience can be tendered as some form of value.
Of course the soul is independent and not reliant on the material bodys function so if the body can be forced to be kept alive such as the use of an artificial heart or even brain for that matter the soul will still continue to be as it shoud be. until the body is no longer useful etc etc..
Yes it is inconsistant with my other postion but my excsue si that with my other position I was simply describing how the soul could be felt as analoguous with the endorcrine system...
But this is only to placate the scientific lobbies attitude to that which it considers to be irrational...which other may consider to be very rational.
Is there, only one soul in here or two. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=MiSuyuOOBR8 Please enlighten.