A soul is only worth what value others put on it? (talking of the divine and sin, again can soul reasonable be measured weighed by ethical standards, morality immorality, law)
Can the law be the yard stick for the soul?

---------- Post added 06-05-2010 at 03:26 AM ----------


Is not all soul communion, community, communication?

---------- Post added 06-05-2010 at 03:30 AM ----------


Perhaps we have it all wrong and the ONLY thing that can be owned or owns is the soul and all else including flesh is nought but worthless?

Perhaps soul owns us?

---------- Post added 06-05-2010 at 03:33 AM ----------

And Deckard perhaps sacrifice is the ultimate souls control?
Perhaps the soul fights us all its existence to be able to sacrifice the body so as to let the soul be truly free?

---------- Post added 06-05-2010 at 03:36 AM ----------

Deckard;
Perhaps the soul is looking for the other to be the sacrifice?
Perhaps the soul is working to be worth enough for someone else to sacrifice for it?

---------- Post added 06-05-2010 at 03:37 AM ----------

Deckard; does a soul teach soul?
or does a soul only learn soul?
Which has the more valuable 'soul' the teacher or the pupil?

---------- Post added 06-05-2010 at 03:40 AM ----------


Is the soul the sayer or the said?

---------- Post added 06-05-2010 at 03:44 AM ----------


This says you own their life because you killed them.
So to say this Hitler owns the souls of all the people he killed.

Even if you want to take soul out of the picture, did not they die FOR something not because of something?

You could say here FOR is soul, but don't if you don't want to.
FOR is still a value is it not?

---------- Post added 06-05-2010 at 03:51 AM ----------


Soul then is expression of self?
What is expression?
It is the measurable action or reaction of things.
Yes psychology could mean soul.
Now we delve into sanity or insanity also and whether if you are reasoned as more insane whether you have more or less soul?
Can the soul or psyche here be weighed and measure by the criteria of either the common mind or even intelligence be the weighing evaluation?
EVALUATION.
Can any one soul be heavier lighter than another one soul?
Common?
Is the soul intelligence?
Is there more or less intelligence?

---------- Post added 06-05-2010 at 03:59 AM ----------


Emphasis on SATISFACTION.
What is the quality that satisfies?
What is the quality of satisfaction?
EQUALITY?
Opposite of equality is???
Can the soul be referenced be prejudicial?

Must the soul be paid?
Must the soul earn?
Can the soul skive off?

Is the soul the skivvy?

---------- Post added 06-05-2010 at 04:05 AM ----------


Soul is....
Sublime is sublimation?
Apparent is transparent?
Reflection is deflection?
Preserved is reserved?

---------- Post added 06-05-2010 at 04:09 AM ----------


Ownership is an agreement between the owner and the owned?
Possession is an entitlement between possessed and possessor?

---------- Post added 06-05-2010 at 04:11 AM ----------


Karma the ultimate in debt collectors.

---------- Post added 06-05-2010 at 04:13 AM ----------

Karma; what pays the life or the death? Both? soul?

---------- Post added 06-05-2010 at 04:19 AM ----------


Higher auctioner adding value or cheapening it?
Is there an auctioner or is it only the seller and purchaser?
In other words do souls have choice over the body to the body over the soul?
Soul soul serving?
Self self serving?
SERVICE?
Is the soul a service?
Is this how one can measure soul by the service?
What not who is being served first or last or all instantaneously?

---------- Post added 06-05-2010 at 04:21 AM ----------


Back again, the 'where'.
Can something be valued by the position it takes or is shown its seat?
Is there a place for soul?
Is it seated somewhere?
Is it waiting to be seated?

---------- Post added 06-05-2010 at 04:24 AM ----------

Sorry Twirlip I did not quite get to you, will see you tomorrow.

It appears that ownership is strictly a human value.

Thank you Somtime sun for your response.
I would like to share with you a somewhat closer view of what comes to my mind when I think of the soul. :detective: YouTube - Naturalization of MInd (Patricia S. Churchland, UCSD), Pt.1

Originally Posted by Krumple
I'll sell mine, any buyers?

I'm not buying, but if you ever wanted to give it to me freely I may accept if I thought I had earned it.

Are there some humans who have no soul?
Or may it be there but unusable?

Well, I would have hoped that one of the reasons you are here is that you wish to learn and become enlightened (I don't mean that spiritually). Perhaps by the time you leave, we can get you to start understanding that having confidence in some things is reasonable, and that some things do exist. That would be a good start, don't you think?

As opposed to your experiences being imaginary, like in a dream? If all your experiences are imaginary, then, how can we express the dichotomy between real and imaginary?

I aint got no money, I aint got no woman and aint go no friends but man I have soul brother ;-)

I'll sell mine, any buyers?

Might it be said, then, that human beings, while alive, as well as being present in soul, and aware of soul, and as well as being present in the physical world, and aware of the physical world, and having the capacity to create forms of matter, may also create forms of soul, which, like our tools and works of art, may outlive us, and may be of use to others, or bring enlightenment to others?

If so, then such individual creations might well be candidates for being called individual souls, even though they are only small parts of the one soul that is. (Also, we might then pass on to the question of considering their ownership; but for now, that would be premature, because none of what I've just written might be true, or it might even have no meaning.)

But even if there is no such creation of individual 'souls' within soul, never mind. I am a bubble, and I will burst; but when I burst, the space within my bubble and the space outside it will all still be there; and I am content with that, even if after I die there is no more space than there was before.

P.S. That was written after very little sleep. I thought it all out before starting to type anything, but I forgot one obvious, straightforward part of what I had meant to write (resulting in the apparent need for the speculative "afterthought"). Now I've had a little more sleep, and remembered that I had intended, as an essential step in the account, to mention that individual innovations in soul may be transmitted via language.

I did also wonder about other possible kinds of transmission, but I hadn't intended to mention them in this post. One thing I was reminded of was the thread "Help! Confronting the Creative Colony Mind" (Thu 4 Mar), but I had meant to leave speculation about the soul of other species for another time, if indeed I had anything I wanted to say about it at all.

P.P.S. (Ugh, no more sleep!) I hope that no-one imagines that when I wrote "I will not try to argue'" I meant "I will not allow anyone to argue with me"! No. Of course, I only meant "I will not try to present these thoughts in the form of an argument.'" Just checking - one has to be so careful!

P.P.P.S. (Well, what else can I do?) In belated response to the OP: Does a farmer own the land on which he lives and works? Yes and no.

What? Souls are commodities? Where can I buy one?

Well, if this whole experience was a dream, than I would've had dreams within the larger dream of which I'm unaware. Like this:

Big Dream = Reality = We are unaware of existence.

Dream Within Dream = Dream = We are aware of its status as dream.

I guess it depends if I am willing to suppress my doubt and take that theory on faith, similar to how I would have to accept Jesus Christ as my lord and savior before progressing further as a Christian

If you put a price on something it is then a commodity?
Is there such a thing as a free commodity?

Why even discuss the value of something before you have proven it exists?

Because the discussion will add or subtract the value.

Value is a function of the self not a function of the object.

Oh, I actually meant my previous response in saying "point up". I now see how that could be confusing in discussing "the soul".


I have an idea, sure. Not what it means to some other world-view, or even in a necessary sense, but I do have an idea of what it means. The Soul is Personhood. The soul is an activity of the brain synthesizing an "I". The soul is mortal, the soul is the body. The value of a soul is equal to the value of a sentient life -- presently, in our system, I believe that puts the minimum at ~ 8 dollars/hour, with some restrictions.

The discussion will add or subtract the value of what?

Right exactly the point. However we know that art exists so you can discuss the worth and value. Even though your brother might not value art, art still exists. The soul however has not been proven to exist. Therefore discussing it's value is completely abstract.

Ah, I would call what you describe consciousness. Not soul. Souls, as most of us understand, don't exist. They are just something the superstitious like to believe in, in order to sustain the wishful thought that we survive, in some form, after death.

So, what is the value of human life? Well, I suppose that answer varies.

The existence is not the value, nor is it the thing upon which value is predecated. Value is based from the percieved benefit of the the object/thought/concept within a specific realm of influence. An imaginary thing can have serious value if the realm of influence treats it as if it were real. And we are discussing the worth and value of a soul right now extant or no. And what is even absolutely less sense is someone arguing in a philosophy forum that discussing the anstract makes no sense. there are entire very lucrative fields based on things that are not proven to exist, if there were not we would not have Intellectual Properties lawyers.

I actually agree with him on this and this is exactly why I don't expect someone who has not actually experienced God for themselves to do so. However I do believe that those who have had such an experience would be within their right to tell others of their experience in the hopes that others could possibly experience it too.

In my opinion, little else is more valuable, though I place the value at sentience/rationality rather than just "human" (takes care of questions about alien life forms and androids). What makes it valuable is that it has a concept of itself. It has an "I". It has a soul. This is personhood, and personhood is that set of qualities that brings a being into the moral sphere as an acting being. While I think there are other attending attributes to personhood, and I'll tell you now that I don't have a fully fleshed out defense of personhood, I think this is a major component.

Soul is conceptualisation?

Soul is a disease?

I do not think that is true at all. Watch various species fight for their young wholly based on genetic proximity to themselves -- they indeed feel some degree of "ownership" for their young (even note the possessive nature of "their") and for themselves. We are instinctual and our ancestry embodies this possessive territory marking..

An itch that wants to be scratched?

We shouldn't scratch our souls in public. :devilish: