Well, let's clear up the blurriness. Are we habitually projecting a supernatural "soul" belief on you (ThazzarBaal) that you don't actually adhere to, as in the case of
Nancey Murphy (at bottom of this post)? Are you one of several contingent exceptions or departures from mainstream rote?
That seems to be what you are indicating in the quote above, something partly akin to Murphy's school of thought, albeit there's still fuzziness with respect to what "we are temporal" means. Does the latter signify no afterlife at all (dead perpetually), or instead that the original body dies and then the person's information configuration[1] is installed in a new (non-decaying) physical body?
- - - footnote - - -
[1] I.e., a "material" version, or perhaps via our being in a
simulated reality, should that be the only way to explain the digital preservation and retention of one's physical identity for later restoration?
- - - end of footnote - - -
From the transcript of an old CLOSER TO TRUTH EPISODE titled "Can Web Believe in Both Science and Religion?":
NANCEY MURPHY: Believing in not just a body, but some other component, generally called the soul, but the concept of soul at certain points in history is equivalent to the concept of mind. So a dualist is a person has been thought to be essential to Christianity.
Now it looks as though the neuroscientists are coming along and they’re saying, ah, there is no soul, in fact there is no substantial mind. It’s actually the brain or the nervous system that does all of the things that were once attributed to soul or mind.
So it looks like yet another place where science encroaches and religion has to step back. But in the, in the liberal half of Christianity, those who have a higher degree in theology are almost all phsyicalists.
MICHAEL SCHERMER: Really?
ROBERT KUHN: Physicalist meaning that there is no…
NANCEY MURPHY: We’re just bodies.
ROBERT KUHN: There is no non-physical element required to make us human beings.
NANCEY MURPHY: We’re just bodies. That’s right.
_