Is there a soul?

[Norsefire]

Just say "no" to religion.

~String

Define religion in this sense.

 

[Norsefire]

So just say no to all forms of belief?

 

[lightgigantic]

Lg,

The best example to show how this makes no sense is to consider a computer.

The dead person is the equivalent to the computer turned off.
The live person is the equivalent to the computer turned on.
Consciousness is the equivalent to the running program.

Now ask the question – what is the program made of? It is a direct correlation to consciousness.

Here LG would have to say that a program is made of program. A bit like asking what is bread made of? Well, bread of course. All such responses are of course nonsense, including LGs reference to consciousness being made of consciousness.

Is there a running program when the computer is turned off? No.
Is there a consciousness when the body is dead? No.

A running program is a specific sequence of electrical stimuli that enables the computer to fulfill its function.

Consciousness is a specific sequence of bio-electrical stimuli that enables a brain to fulfill its function.

Your spiel would hold if you could specifically indicate the bio-electrical stimuli - then the analogy of the computer would hold. Since there is no evidence for these claims its obvious you are only talking about your ideas of consciousness.

The clear fact is that consciousness cannot be indicated separately from life nor can it be re-invested into something that has died or reconstructed from lifeless matter. Rather life is seen to only come from life which makes it distinct from being analogous to a computer program.

 

[Reiku]

If so, what is it made of? How is it any different to the physical self? And is it any different?

Yes, there is a soul, but i prefer to call it ''spirit.'' But it may turn out, keeping all possibilities open, that spirit may just be a metaphor for ''self''.

For what it is made of, there may be relations to it having an energy. Dr Wolf believes it exists beyond matter and energy, but i disagree.

 

[Cris]

Prince,

Show us where the Cartesian theatre of the first-person perspective and qualia appear from a physicalist paradigm.

I don't understand the question. There is only physical. There is no alternative.

 

[Cris]

LG,

Your spiel would hold if you could specifically indicate the bio-electrical stimuli - then the analogy of the computer would hold. Since there is no evidence for these claims its obvious you are only talking about your ideas of consciousness.

Are you denying the existence of neural networks?

The clear fact is that consciousness cannot be indicated separately from life

Right, consciousness is the result of active neural networks.

nor can it be re-invested into something that has died

Exactly like the computer having been turned off. Unfortunately with a person if the neural networks have decayed then we have no way to repair that damage. And since they are the basis of consciousness then there is currently no possibility of recovery.

or reconstructed from lifeless matter.

Implying it can never be done? You cannot claim that, apart from indicate that we don’t know how to do that yet. It is simply an engineering problem.

Rather life is seen to only come from life which makes it distinct from being analogous to a computer program.

You’ve mixed the analogies. Consciousness is analogous to the program; life is analogous to the computer in an on state. Consciousness is dependent on a living biological entity, a program is dependent on a powered on computer.

The analogy remains valid.

Life isn’t analogous to consciousness.

 

[CutsieMarie89]

I think there is. I feel it is more of a life energy though. It is your essence, but if it does linger after the body has died then I think it can be reinvested into something else or someone else. This would make that person or thing you, but you would not or should not at least have any of the experiences or memories of the life you had lived earlier. I've been trying to disprove this theory to myself, but I keep hitting walls. I guess its all comes down to faith.

 

[mis-t-highs]

I think there is. I feel it is more of a life energy though. It is your essence, but if it does linger after the body has died then I think it can be reinvested into something else or someone else. This would make that person or thing you, but you would not or should not at least have any of the experiences or memories of the life you had lived earlier.

lol, the essence of "You" is all the experiences and memories you had lived, else it would be Tabula rasa, not you at all.

I've been trying to disprove this theory to myself, but I keep hitting walls. I guess its all comes down to faith.

No, I guess it comes down to trying harder, or thinking clearer.

 

[lightgigantic]

Prince,

I don't understand the question. There is only physical. There is no alternative.

there are also ideas about the physical too ... at the very least there is no physical evidence for them

 

[Stargate]

The soul is a name given to the concious energy that makes up your mind.

Agreed.

And other than that, No, there is not a soul.

 

[lightgigantic]

Cris

“
Your spiel would hold if you could specifically indicate the bio-electrical stimuli - then the analogy of the computer would hold. Since there is no evidence for these claims its obvious you are only talking about your ideas of consciousness.
”
Are you denying the existence of neural networks?

no
I am denying that consciousness can be reduced to bio-electrical causes

“
The clear fact is that consciousness cannot be indicated separately from life
”
Right, consciousness is the result of active neural networks.

so activate them in a dead person then you can talk business

“
nor can it be re-invested into something that has died
”
Exactly like the computer having been turned off. Unfortunately with a person if the neural networks have decayed then we have no way to repair that damage. And since they are the basis of consciousness then there is currently no possibility of recovery.

yes it certainly is unfortunate ... obviously all you have is an analogy and not evidence

“
or reconstructed from lifeless matter.
”
Implying it can never be done? You cannot claim that, apart from indicate that we don’t know how to do that yet. It is simply an engineering problem.

assuming your thesis that everything is physical holds

“
Rather life is seen to only come from life which makes it distinct from being analogous to a computer program.
”
You’ve mixed the analogies. Consciousness is analogous to the program; life is analogous to the computer in an on state. Consciousness is dependent on a living biological entity, a program is dependent on a powered on computer.

The analogy remains valid.

the only problem is that you cannot separately indicate consciousness like you can a computer program

Life isn’t analogous to consciousness.

given that there isn't a shred of evidence to suggest otherwise, its not clear how that is the case

 

[Cris]

lg,

there are also ideas about the physical too ... at the very least there is no physical evidence for them

Ideas are dependent on a physical existence. Ideas cannot exist outside a physical medium, i.e. they have a physical cause.

 

[Cris]

Lg

Your spiel would hold if you could specifically indicate the bio-electrical stimuli - then the analogy of the computer would hold. Since there is no evidence for these claims its obvious you are only talking about your ideas of consciousness.
”
Are you denying the existence of neural networks?
”
no
I am denying that consciousness can be reduced to bio-electrical causes

Oh Ok that’s just you talking about your ideas of consciousness.

The clear fact is that consciousness cannot be indicated separately from life
”
Right, consciousness is the result of active neural networks.
”
so activate them in a dead person then you can talk business

The structure of a dead person is different to that of a live person. You seem to keep forgetting this vital observation. Consciousness requires active neural networks; a dead person does not have them. The structures are not available in a dead person so there is nothing that can be activated.

nor can it be re-invested into something that has died
”
Exactly like the computer having been turned off. Unfortunately with a person if the neural networks have decayed then we have no way to repair that damage. And since they are the basis of consciousness then there is currently no possibility of recovery.
”
yes it certainly is unfortunate ... obviously all you have is an analogy and not evidence

And you have neither evidence or an analogy.

or reconstructed from lifeless matter.
”
Implying it can never be done? You cannot claim that, apart from indicate that we don’t know how to do that yet. It is simply an engineering problem.
”
assuming your thesis that everything is physical holds

We have no reason yet to conclude anything other than physical is possible.

Rather life is seen to only come from life which makes it distinct from being analogous to a computer program.
”
You’ve mixed the analogies. Consciousness is analogous to the program; life is analogous to the computer in an on state. Consciousness is dependent on a living biological entity, a program is dependent on a powered on computer.

The analogy remains valid.
”
the only problem is that you cannot separately indicate consciousness like you can a computer program

Sure we can. By surgically probing and isolating brain cells and groups of brain cells it is clinically possible to alter/destroy identity, ability to think, to remember, to emote, etc. IOW everything that causes consciousness, the brain, can be modified, just like a computer program. Now in the case of consciousness we do not know enough yet to alter it in much of a positive manner but we can certainly mess with it enough to know it is caused by the brain. Much like a running program is only possible inside an active computer.

Life isn’t analogous to consciousness.
”
given that there isn't a shred of evidence to suggest otherwise, its not clear how that is the case

A leaf is part of life, so is an acorn, and a carrot, and bacteria. Are you going to conclude that the carrot you just ate had consciousness making it capable of reasoned thought?

Life exists separate to consciousness, and consciousness is only possible in complex lifeforms that have appropriate levels of neural networks. I.e. consciousness is caused.

 

[lightgigantic]

lg,

Ideas are dependent on a physical existence. Ideas cannot exist outside a physical medium, i.e. they have a physical cause.

and the physical cause of an idea is what exactly?
(no ideas please)

 

[Cris]

lg,

and the physical cause of an idea is what exactly?

Neural networks.

 

[ronan]

Of course the soul exist, else we won't be able to experience anything

But there is only one soul, one consciousness. what you believe you are (your self) are only a bundle of perception.

Lg,

The best example to show how this makes no sense is to consider a computer.

The dead person is the equivalent to the computer turned off.
The live person is the equivalent to the computer turned on.
Consciousness is the equivalent to the running program.

Now ask the question – what is the program made of? It is a direct correlation to consciousness.

Here LG would have to say that a program is made of program. A bit like asking what is bread made of? Well, bread of course. All such responses are of course nonsense, including LGs reference to consciousness being made of consciousness.

Is there a running program when the computer is turned off? No.
Is there a consciousness when the body is dead? No.

A running program is a specific sequence of electrical stimuli that enables the computer to fulfill its function.

Consciousness is a specific sequence of bio-electrical stimuli that enables a brain to fulfill its function.

A software is only meaningful because of consciousness
Without consciousness there is no software, only electrical pathway in a computer.

Prince,

I don't understand the question. There is only physical. There is no alternative.

Cris, remember the hard problem, you did not solve it yet.
how can an unconscious matter giver rise to consciousness ?
It magically arise from a complex organziation, that is what you believe?

 

[MR. Champagne]

yes there is a soul
it is the construction of the human mind that separates us from the animals
the triangular shape is older than euclidean geometry
and is often used as a "program"
i like to define the soul as the link between the separate parts of my consciousness
Mind Body Spirit
These three parts of my "self" are combined to make my soul
The soul is the source of "my" time
That said
I feel that my soul is dead and death is the future for me that dwells within my soul.

 

[Prince_James]

Mr. Champagne:

I feel that my soul is dead and death is the future for me that dwells within my soul.

Cheer up, emo kid!

 

[Prince_James]

Cris:

Neural networks.

How does syntax produce semantics?

 

[Cris]

Prince,

How does syntax produce semantics?

How would a collection of metal pieces enable a person to travel at 65mph on a Freeway.

Complexity always arises from simplicity.

If the syntax is wrong though the meaning does not occur.