Studying the workings of the human brain from a functional point of view would give no indication that there is such a thing as a soul, because the different things that make us unique conscious beings do not have some central CPU and they're physically and functionally separated.

So when we refer to the soul, we refer to some aggregate of things that are centered on our self-awareness.

To speak of someone else's soul or the soul's transcendence is a generalization of this self-awareness,

though we need to be cognizant that we're probably talking about how it seems the world should be rather than how the world is.

Perhaps I could contribute if only I knew what a soul was...

The soul, as I define it, is a very basic concept. It is that part of the human being that transcends a single physical life.

Why suggest a soul? Because it gives purpose and meaning to life, just like day to day existence gives meaning to a physical life, so does the soul give meaning to a transcendental life.

Physical life has memories of yesterday. It is our accumulated experiences up until present in this physical life.

Where are the memories of past physical lives? They do exist:

1) Instincts: these are accumulated experiences and memories of most all living existences. Humans have evolved with their own shared instincts.

2) Inherited characteristics: these are the combination of memories of those share by a single soul and those of the parents souls.

3) Innate capabilities: these exist in all of us, since these are the sum total of everything we are up to and including present. However, some capabilities are more evolved than others because of what we did our prior lives. So some of us are better a business, or sports, or lying, or music and singing, or arts, or begging, or being able to relate to another human being (empathy). These skills are learned not only over one physical time but many, many.

If anyone has another way of looking at souls, I would be interested.
Rich

Okay, so how is it powered? What allows it to do anything?

So are you forgetting conservation of energy or are you saying that the soul is not bound by this law of physics. If so then you are making a extraordinary claim which requires an extraordinary explanation. Please explain this to me.

I do not need to have a soul to bring purpose or meaning to my existence.

Yes contained within the brain and if parts of the brain get damaged where either the memories are stored, OR the parts of the brain that retrieve or store or process memories are damaged then odd things happen.

If the soul kept the memories why is it you can have memory loss?

Then after you die you will somehow retrieve those memories perfectly? I don't see how this is possible. Please explain how this works.

. Instincts don't always pan out for the best.

I am not even sure what inherited characteristics are. You mean like height, eye color, hair color, physique, or allergies? In other words do you mean genes are passed memories? Na, I wouldn't call them memories however; they definitely play a role in your existence but I wouldn't say the soul has anything to do with this.

So if I am good at computer programming it was because I was really good at it in the past?

I really don't buy this past influences the creativity or interests of future existences. Some times a person who becomes a really great musician didn't actually start of wanting to play the instrument but were forced to as a child.

I don't have anything to offer other than that I don't think there is a soul. I feel there is absolutely no basis for one to exist and if there was it would mean a horrible existence awaits us.

I always liked the saying
"First philosophy lost its "soul" and then it lost its "mind".

I believe that the soul is located at the depth of your being. From there to the utmost periphery, you recollect and construct forms that you believe, will fit the content of your world intuitively yet precisely, until you realize your dream, or you realize your mistake.

I see no reason to suppose that I have an immortal soul that never will perish.

Rich,

From an epistemological point of view, I do not see in this thread an argument that justifies the existence of a soul at all. I see description of a 'putative' soul, but there is no necessity that this description is of a soul at all.

So convince the unbeliever that there is such a thing. When you say (for instance) "the soul may or may not be immortal", you are implicitly saying "there is a soul, and it may or may not be immortal". I can't get beyond this "is". I'm happy to consider the soul a romantic metaphor -- but why should anyone take the "is" for granted?

Rich, let us assume for a moment there are two souls, not one; one of the Earth and one of the heavens to give it "balance" as it were, both "being" vehicles traveling the terrain of the Earth both complimentary representations of the "one" that created each. I find we run into difficulty when we consider the soul as "one" as we observe the two very distinct and different vehicles that represent man and woman and NOT the same. Like two legs. If we only consider the male soul, it is like trying to move forward with one foot nailed to the floor and causing him to go around in circles. Ha! But when we consider both we move forward together in complimentary fashion creating harmony between the two souls and the vehicles they are traveling in. Make sense? Hmmm?

Now the female soul has been observing this circularity in this male singular thinking as she tries to attract him and distract him from his image of himself of which assumes a singular sole autonomy of that which created "both". How so very out of balance that is when you think about it. How so very un-erotic it is as it relates to the obvious innate desire they have been programmed to have for one another meant to continue the soul of both. How so very amused Erato must be as she patiently tries to bring the two together in all her poetic license as she giggles in her amusement at the inanity of this male dominate thinking expressed in all the poets of inspiration, mostly male, I might add, as Dante Aliegheri mused:

"O Muses, O high genius, aid me now!
O memory that engraved the things I saw,
Here shall your worth be manifest to all!"

and Milton:

Of Man's first disobedience, and the fruit
Of that forbidden tree whose mortal taste
Brought death into the World, and all our woe,
With loss of Eden, till one greater Man
Restore us, and regain the blissful Seat,
Sing, Heavenly Muse,


both expressing a paradise lost and the hell of it all created by this singularity of "mankind" wrong thinking, as Shakespeare goes on to say:

"Chorus: O for a Muse of fire, that would ascend
The brightest heaven of invention,
A kingdom for a stage, princes to act
And monarchs to behold the swelling scene! "

relating to the swollen ego of the soul of man and the scorn of that most beautiful soul left out of his scholarly thought. See how it all begins to make sense once one starts putting the pieces together.

Watcha think, my friend?

William

How about, "the unicorn is a mythical beast"? What am I taking for granted there?

Rich,

So convince the unbeliever that there is such a thing. When you say (for instance) "the soul may or may not be immortal", you are implicitly saying "there is a soul, and it may or may not be immortal". I can't get beyond this "is". I'm happy to consider the soul a romantic metaphor -- but why should anyone take the "is" for granted?

Rich, let us assume for a moment there are two souls, not one; one of the Earth and one of the heavens to give it "balance" as it were, both "being" vehicles traveling the terrain of the Earth both complimentary representations of the "one" that created each.

I find we run into difficulty when we consider the soul as "one" as we observe the two very distinct and different vehicles that represent man and woman and NOT the same.

How so very amused Erato must be as she patiently tries to bring the two together in all her poetic license as she giggles in her amusement at the inanity of this male dominate thinking expressed in all the poets of inspiration, mostly male, I might add, as Dante Aliegheri mused:

relating to the swollen ego of the soul of man and the scorn of that most beautiful soul left out of his scholarly thought. See how it all begins to make sense once one starts putting the pieces together.

Watcha think, my friend?

That you are wandering. It may make sense, but there is no reason to think that anything like this is true.