The metaphysical purpose of the soul

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

kennethamy
 
Reply Tue 8 Sep, 2009 12:49 am
@Aedes,
Aedes;88905 wrote:
Really, because Russell himself divided the verb "is" into submeanings including statements of existence, and therein divides the sentence in question into three separate existential assertions.

Your statement about unicorns contains an assertion that unicorns exist, see point 1 (there is an x such that x is a unicorn). This has nothing to do with whether you believe it or not. But the crux of the problem is that Rich's statements about the soul ALSO contain this point -- and the entire ensuing conversation is entirely contingent upon that point 1 (there is an x such that x is a soul).

Well, Russell asks what that statement means if there in truth is no king of France. I more or less asked Rich what the thread means if there is no such thing as a soul. And now I'm asking you what your statement means if there's no such thing as a unicorn.


Russell distinguished among: the "is" of existence, the "is" or predication, and, the "is" of identity. It is the "is" of predication that is being used in, "The present King of France is bald". Not, the "is" of existence, as you appear to believe. According to Russell, proper names, and definite descriptions, have existential import, so that when a proper name or a definite description has no referent, the entire sentence is, false. It has, to repeat nothing whatever to do with the meaning of the term, "is" (which is the "is" of predication. So, according to Russell's theory, my unicorn statement is false. Yours is the right answer, but for the wrong reason.
 
Arjuna
 
Reply Tue 8 Sep, 2009 05:37 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;88947 wrote:
So, according to Russell's theory, my unicorn statement is false. Yours is the right answer, but for the wrong reason.

It seemed to be the is of identity to me. No?

Aedes;88908 wrote:

So this is why I asked Rich to support the existence of a soul in a way that a non-believer or a skeptic could go along with.

In my brain, rf is always translated: radio frequency. Every time I see richrf, it reminds me of what I was told in childhood: that the radio waves carrying Roosevelt's speeches are still bouncing around under the upper atmosphere... the air we breathe is rich with rf.

Flag ascends. Salute as tolerated: Rationally speaking, your existence was implied prior to your birth. Deterministically, you were something destined. Probabalistically, you existed as a possibility. Long after your death, the traces of you will continue to swirl around like Roosevelt's speeches. Every person you've touched carries a living reflection of you.
You existed prior to your birth and will continue to exist after death.

richrf;88916 wrote:
... and the evidence that I have presented are skills that appear to evolve as a species (instincts)
Rich

Again, however you look at instincts, rationally, they connect you to a past and future devoid of your particular physical body.
 
Khethil
 
Reply Tue 8 Sep, 2009 06:50 am
@Arjuna,
Good Discussion here, Thanks to Rich for sharing his thoughts...

The idea that there is a soul separate from the physical body/brain is an old one that's not likely to ever go away, no matter how much we understand about the human brain. My opinion is that it's a natural permutation of a being that is aware of its own existence and is intelligent enough to comprehend its own death. We see death and we're disturbed; as well we should be. But whether fear-based or otherwise, on the whole, I don't think many of us are ready to accept that this is all that we are, despite the fact all we can reasonably claim as knowledge know points to it.

I'm also struck again by this propensity to equate continuance to meaning, worth and/or value. Why is it that so many of us find the human being to be bereft of purpose and value unless we can come up with a basis, no matter how spurious, to buy-in that we somehow continue? Isn't the intelligent-yet-corporeal nature of our existence justification, itself, to imbue our lives with the richest and most precious worth there is? How is it that non-continuance (as enunciated here) robs us of meaning? Or conversely, how is it that continuance, of any kind, gives such value and meaning?[INDENT] Is it the ego of the human mind that says, "This can't be all that I am" Or is it that terror I mentioned above that prevents us from accepting this - as is shown to us every day by what we witness with all creatures of this world? Who knows...
[/INDENT]Rich, in your posts, you talked about instincts and shared memory as potential manifestations of this soul. Suppose that I share, as you've done and spew forth all that I know on how the memory, cognitive, judgment and process-coordination centers of the brain work (what small understanding I do have). Suppose that further, I direct you to all the knowledge currently at your own disposal on the internet - that discusses and delineates the vast cache of knowledge we do have on how the mind operates - likely you still would remain unconvinced; no matter what.[INDENT]And it doesn't much matter anyway: Convincing people is an iffy proposition. There is no fact, no theory and no hypothesis that can't be refuted away. For example, take the seemingly-absurd notion that the moon is made of cheese: Well, why not?! A good number of intelligent people on this very forum remain unconvinced humans have ever been there! You can't convince them - cover them with a truckload of moon rocks and they'll cry 'fraud'! Take them there and they'll craft an elaborate theory of how they were skillfully deceived.
[/INDENT]So too, with the workings of the brain: As long as it remains, to any extent, a gestalt, folks will come with with something, anything to buy into that which re-mystifies the processes. Even then, once the electro-chemical code has been broken, mapped and perfected, many won't buy into it - no, we never went to the moon, JFK was shot by the CIA, 911 was carefully orchestrated and to this very day Hitler runs an ice-cream shop in Berlin with Elvis.[INDENT] Sure, we can call the passing of genetic memory and instinct a means by which we continue after death (and be correct in a sense). But we'd be much more accurate to view these phenomena as they are: the processes of genetic memory and instinct, rather than label them soul.
[/INDENT]So no, I'm not really on board with this, but there's a ton that I don't know or myself, misunderstand. It's always a good move, I think, to accept the possibility. I do; however, worry about what it means to buy into such notions (that one must have a continuing component to have any meaning). But I can understand this belief system and don't think it completely impossible -it just doesn't work for me.[INDENT]I believe that the answers to most of our most deeply-held questions about continuance, the soul, the mind and nature of our existence are right in front of us; that accepting ourselves, as we are on face-value, is the most authentic and 'true' stance we can take. Like every other animal on this planet - of which we share so very much - we're not so different. But grass isn't reincarnated and snails don't go to heaven; even so, our sapience and self-awareness, combined with this temporary existence gives us so much worth and value! Yes - accept that all things beyond our comprehension are possible! But unless and until we've a reason to buy in, they're only possibilities - nothing more.
[/INDENT]Thanks again to Rich for sharing and apologies for the length of this post.
 
richrf
 
Reply Tue 8 Sep, 2009 08:01 am
@Pythagorean,
Pythagorean;88945 wrote:
Hi, Rich.


Hi Pythagorean,

Pythagorean;88945 wrote:
I would use an analogy comparing the entire human body to a book.

If we were to examine a good book empirically, through a scientific microscope, and not see or understand the meanings of the sentences, of the paragraphs, of the chapters or indeed of the whole volume in its singular entirety, then we could never come to understand or to grasp the beauty and mystique of all of its wonderful meanings all in its marvelous pages. The leaves or pages of a great book are, in point of fact, living, breathing, "psychological" and non-empirical. But the scientific eye doesn't understand any of that.


I love this analogy. It is not surprising to me that things that humans create are such beautiful metaphors of who we are. Yes, we are a book and we can only by looking the book as a whole can we grasp the meaning of the book.

Pythagorean;88945 wrote:
So too with the human body. The body houses things which can not be understood without the dynamic force of life that has been lived and experienced. For example, you can't know how much that new red bike that I got on my fifth birthday meant to me just by examining the structure of my brain.


So subtle and obvious at the same time.

Pythagorean;88945 wrote:
Human meanings exist as potential interpretations of experiences. This "potential" is something like a soul.


Yes, I would agree.

Pythagorean;88945 wrote:
So human meaning is transportable (transcendent) as well as hidden from the surface of reality. This is reason to believe in the "soul". Soul that is universal and non-empirical.


Yes, I agree. The soul expresses itself in a universal manner.

Pythagorean;88945 wrote:
Things such as beauty and evil are things that can't be explained by the employment of merely physical formulations. Science will never explain things like friendship or music and without these things there can't be any real nations or peoples worth while.

The cosmos is not a physics lab but rather the human sciences have grown out of hidden, historical human values. Scientific facts are dependent upon the human soul.


Yes, it is the soul that drives science to look deeper and deeper into itself. To better understand who we are.

Thanks for sharing with me your view of life. I learn something new everyday.

Rich

---------- Post added 09-08-2009 at 09:06 AM ----------

Arjuna;88968 wrote:
Again, however you look at instincts, rationally, they connect you to a past and future devoid of your particular physical body.


Yes, I would agree. I think connection is a recurrent theme in human existence. Thanks for sharing your insights.

Rich

---------- Post added 09-08-2009 at 09:34 AM ----------

Khethil;88975 wrote:
Good Discussion here, Thanks to Rich for sharing his thoughts...

The idea that there is a soul separate from the physical body/brain is an old one that's not likely to ever go away, no matter how much we understand about the human brain.


Yes, the soul is a recurrent theme. In my image, they are not really separate. The physical body is a manifestation of the soul. Two sides of the same coin. However, just vapor lingers after ice as melted, so does the soul.

Khethil;88975 wrote:
My opinion is that it's a natural permutation of a being that is aware of its own existence and is intelligent enough to comprehend its own death. We see death and we're disturbed; as well we should be. But whether fear-based or otherwise, on the whole, I don't think many of us are ready to accept that this is all that we are, despite the fact all we can reasonably claim as knowledge know points to it.


Yes, I understand you perspective. Sometimes I ask myself why we do not fear sleep as we fear death. Can we be confident that we will wake up from sleep? We think we can. Can we be confident that we will wake up from death? This is the question.

Khethil;88975 wrote:
I'm also struck again by this propensity to equate continuance to meaning, worth and/or value. Why is it that so many of us find the human being to be bereft of purpose and value unless we can come up with a basis, no matter how spurious, to buy-in that we somehow continue?
For me it is a simple observation and acceptance of life. We build things to show people. We create ideas to share with people. We like the idea of continuance. Why? Well, I think it goes to the concept of connection that Arjuna mentioned in his previous post. Why do we seek to connect? Why are there forces that draw us together (e.g. gravity, love)? We connect by sharing and what we share has persistence and therefore value to us. It is what I observe and I try to understand what I observe - not deny it.

Khethil;88975 wrote:
Isn't the intelligent-yet-corporeal nature of our existence justification, itself, to imbue our lives with the richest and most precious worth there is? How is it that non-continuance (as enunciated here) robs us of meaning? Or conversely, how is it that continuance, of any kind, gives such value and meaning?


It reminds me of a quote from the movie/book Into the Wild, where the protagonist, before he dies alone in the wilderness, writes in his diary that, he was wrong - life is about sharing. Why? Something I ponder.

Khethil;88975 wrote:
that discusses and delineates the vast cache of knowledge we do have on how the mind operates - likely you still would remain unconvinced; no matter what.


Yes, I arrived at my view of the world by wondering through this forest and others looking for clues - for bread crumbs as Hansel and Gretal did. I dug deeper and deeper past the neurons, past, the molecules, past the atoms and electrons, past the quarks, deeper and deeper ... It is all connected. But how and what is doing the connecting. Past to present. Person to person. Neuron to neuron. Quanta to quanta? What is connecting everything? Neurons talk to each other. People talk to each other. Planets communicate to each other (via gravitational waves). Quanta entangle with each other. What is it that is pulling everything together and moving everything?
Khethil;88975 wrote:
There is no fact, no theory and no hypothesis that can't be refuted away.


At the end, each of us forms our own belief system based upon who we are and what we have experienced. Each of us is different, and we share what we experience with others. This is the persistent aspect of ourselves. I believe it is universal that we are all peering at each other and everything around us. And we like to create new things and share those things. No different than a child playing with sand.

Khethil;88975 wrote:
So too, with the workings of the brain: As long as it remains, to any extent, a gestalt, folks will come with with something, anything to buy into that which re-mystifies the processes.


I believe the mystery is always there. I don't deny it. Instead, I accept it. I look for clues to solve the mystery. The mystery begins the moment a baby is born and mysteriously begins to cry for its mother and food. From where did this cry come from?


Khethil;88975 wrote:
Even then, once the electro-chemical code has been broken, mapped and perfected, many won't buy into it -


People will buy into it. But it is not deep enough just as the sun is not deep enough. There is something deeper. There always is.

Khethil;88975 wrote:
genetic memory and instinct, rather than label them soul.


Yes, we can switch labels and names but the mystery remains. That is why people keep searching deeper. One chooses the label that is most accommodating to one's life. Some forget about the mystery once the label is applied while others keep looking. We can call it Zeus, God, the Universal Consciousness, the Gaia, genetics, there are many, many names.

Khethil;88975 wrote:
So no, I'm not really on board with this, but there's a ton that I don't know or myself, misunderstand. It's always a good move, I think, to accept the possibility. I do; however, worry about what it means to buy into such notions (that one must have a continuing component to have any meaning). But I can understand this belief system and don't think it completely impossible -it just doesn't work for me.


Yes, I agree. And beyond this, everyone should give themselves lots of time. Life is too long to discover everything all at once. The mystery keeps us active and busy and I am thankful for it. Life would be so boring without it. Smile
Khethil;88975 wrote:
I believe that the answers to most of our most deeply-held questions about continuance, the soul, the mind and nature of our existence are right in front of us; that accepting ourselves, as we are on face-value, is the most authentic and 'true' stance we can take.


Yes - we are what we are, and we are changing all the time. Life is a great discovery process, and here we are, on this forum, sharing with each other what we are discovering.


Khethil;88975 wrote:
Thanks again to Rich for sharing and apologies for the length of this post.


Thank you for sharing with me your thoughts. I love learning something new every day.

Rich
 
Arjuna
 
Reply Tue 8 Sep, 2009 09:23 am
@richrf,
Khethil: (by the way... what do you do with the h in that word?)

I've recently become fixated on definitions.

I was taught as a youngster that soul is a translation of word that originally meant breather. As in: SOS.

A man once gave me his definition: the biggest cell in the human body is a neuron, the body of which is in your head. It's little axon tail goes all the way down your spine, down the sciatic nerve and on down to the bottom of your foot. It's a proprioceptor which allows you to know where your foot is in space without looking at it. The man told me to feel my foot. I did. The thing that experienced that feeling, he said, that was your soul.

Another definition I recognize is the notion of the oversoul, which is kin to the phrase 'higher self.' In the spirit of Aedes' recent question, this idea could be translated as 'potential self.' It contains all the things you could be. If I ask you what wisdom you've gleaned from life so far, if only in the shadows, this notion of a higher self is present... although you may use a different word and a different context of human experience.

Cautions were recently given in the Religion forum about evangelizing. Reading them, it occurred to me that a successful evangelist doesn't convey new ideas... he/she only offers new names to what a person already believes. In other words, an evangelist is only seeking to shift focus. I don't think you can teach somebody something they don't already know. All you can do is refer to common experience. Sorry if seem to be rambling.
 
richrf
 
Reply Tue 8 Sep, 2009 10:37 am
@Arjuna,
Arjuna;89003 wrote:
I don't think you can teach somebody something they don't already know. All you can do is refer to common experience. Sorry if seem to be rambling.


Hi Arjuna,

Thanks for your post. I enjoyed it.

A woman once told me, that people can understand what they know plus a little more. So, as you say, we learn from experience, and experience is our teacher, and we are its students.

Thanks again,

Rich
 
Khethil
 
Reply Tue 8 Sep, 2009 02:03 pm
@richrf,
Awesome response, Rich. It's nice to have varying differences of opinions that can be expressed openly. There's only one part of your response that I'd like to respond to - as if I've not beaten this horse enough...

richrf;88985 wrote:
... Sometimes I ask myself why we do not fear sleep as we fear death. Can we be confident that we will wake up from sleep? We think we can. Can we be confident that we will wake up from death? This is the question.


I understand. For me; however, the question is do we need to be confident that we'll wake up, in order for it to have meaning and purpose. For me, the answer is 'no' - and if that answer begets some unsurety, some insecurity and anxiousness about the quality of my existence, so be it - so much the better for me to place it in high value.

Thanks again
 
William
 
Reply Tue 8 Sep, 2009 07:06 pm
@Khethil,
Khethil;88975 wrote:
The idea that there is a soul separate from the physical body/brain is an old one that's not likely to ever go away, no matter how much we understand about the human brain. My opinion is that it's a natural permutation of a being that is aware of its own existence and is intelligent enough to comprehend its own death.


In all respect Khethil, IMO it cannot be comprehended, it can only be observed. at least what we can observe of it. What we can observe is the cyclical nature of everything and what we "can't" observe is still a part of that cycle. We just spent billions of dollars trying to find the smallest particle in the universe with no luck whatsoever. In my opinion, it doesn't exist and that distorts all our computations. I provide the link above to show how complicated efforts to compute are when all is not known. I can only assume we are looking for evidence of the "soul". As Nassim Haramein postulates in his UNIFIED FIELD EQUATIONS, infinity in both directions--micro and macro. In other words there is no empty space/vacuum for in all our equations we are bound at the micro level and infinite in the macro. very "lopsided" to say the least such as this clip illustrates.The fundamental origination of fear in that we think death to be finite and it is not, it can't be. We keep expanding for ever and ever.

In other words death does not exist for we/humans are an infinite part of that universe as life/expanding/positively and death/contracting/negatively represents that balance and it's complimentary function. Once we truly understand and just adhere to this very basic law of physic that states very clearly "for every action there IS and opposite and equal re-action such as is illustrated in the clip just who is blowing up the balloon as popular thought gets so bogged down in frustratingly trying to prove the big bang and "something from nothing". It will burn your brain to try and figure that one out, for it CANNOT be done.

Khethil;88975 wrote:
We see death and we're disturbed; as well we should be.


Yes, we SEE/OBSERVE/REACT to death for it represents in our ignorance of all things that are occurring we cannot observe, that instills that fear and the very catalyst of our greed to prolong that which never ends. A paradox indeed, represented in MY LIST and the core understanding of my signature itself. We are all a part of that God/universe and are inner connected. In it's very essence it is a fear vs faith paradigm in that the more faith we have in our eternal nature the less fear we have lessening the friction that ensues when we think it to be finite. We rush llike hell to experience all this life has to offer instill greed and promoting waste and we "burn up" as we are going much to fast as our fear causes us to contract exponentially faster than we are expanding. It a mental thing and we pay a price for fearing so also represented in my list.

Khethil;88975 wrote:
But whether fear-based or otherwise, on the whole, I don't think many of us are ready to accept that this is all that we are, despite the fact all we can reasonably claim as knowledge now points to it.


Yes, I can understand why you would say that. The scientific ego is the biggest balloon of all and it refuses to contract or hear any contradictory opinion other wise. Ha! I think you will find if you sincerely, open mindedly research all that Haramein is saying you will see that science and it's processes are coming around like a quantum leap in understanding, as it were.

I am so very happy I did not allow anyone to exploit my brain and drain it of it''s common sense as Nassim speaks a language all can understand and science cannot, at least in the language it currently is using illustrated by the link I provided on the definition of PERMUTATION.

Thank you for reading for it is how I understand it. You are more than welcome to understand it otherwise.:bigsmile:

William
 
onehorn
 
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 04:04 am
@richrf,
I think soul is a projection of mind, a very powerful concept but a concept only at last.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 06:37 am
@onehorn,
onehorn;89146 wrote:
I think soul is a projection of mind, a very powerful concept but a concept only at last.



I think you may mean that there is a concept of the soul, but that there is no soul. You see, it can be said clearly.
 
William
 
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 07:33 am
@richrf,
I suggest it is very much there, we just can't see it and those that say it is not is because they can't see it yet we are all it's manifestations. In other words we ARE THE SOUL and we do continue; it's just we do not understand or see "all" the soul represents. It's like offering a cell phone to Constantine and trying to explain all it implications and knowledge that created it. Good Luck? It's like someone coming back from the distant future and telling us how ignorant we truly are. Do you think they would marvel at our brilliance of laugh at our stupidity? Would they say thank you or burn us at the stake, Ha!

William
 
Khethil
 
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 08:03 am
@William,
Hey William,

Thanks for responding. I never cease to be amazed at the diversity with which we can view, see and have access to the same information and phenomena, yet come up with such vastly divergent conclusions.

After reading your response a couple of times, I can only conclude that we're talking about very different concepts.

Thanks for sharing and Good luck
 
richrf
 
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 08:30 am
@onehorn,
onehorn;89146 wrote:
I think soul is a projection of mind, a very powerful concept but a concept only at last.


Yes, this is what I mean by clues. There are clues all around us, and it is a matter of becoming more aware of them. For example:

Listen to someone criticize someone else. It happens all the time. And then reflect on whether that person is not saying something about himself/herself. This is a clue. This is something that the soul is telling itself about what it needs to change.

There are many of these little clues and mysteries that we encounter everyday. And slowly we become more and more aware of them. It is really a game of Where's Waldo? The Soul is searching and evolving along with the physical body which it is. Smile

Rich

---------- Post added 09-09-2009 at 09:32 AM ----------

William;89180 wrote:
I suggest it is very much there, we just can't see it and those that say it is not is because they can't see it yet we are all it's manifestations. In other words we ARE THE SOUL and we do continue; it's just we do not understand or see "all" the soul represents. It's like offering a cell phone to Constantine and trying to explain all it implications and knowledge that created it. Good Luck? It's like someone coming back from the distant future and telling us how ignorant we truly are. Do you think they would marvel at our brilliance of laugh at our stupidity? Would they say thank you or burn us at the stake, Ha!

William


Yes, we are all looking at the Soul every time we look into the mirror as it observes itself. It is that which is observing.

Rich
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 09:38 am
@richrf,
richrf;89194 wrote:
Yes, this is what I mean by clues. There are clues all around us, and it is a matter of becoming more aware of them. For example:

Listen to someone criticize someone else. It happens all the time. And then reflect on whether that person is not saying something about himself/herself. This is a clue. This is something that the soul is telling itself about what it needs to change.

There are many of these little clues and mysteries that we encounter everyday. And slowly we become more and more aware of them. It is really a game of Where's Waldo? The Soul is searching and evolving along with the physical body which it is. Smile

Rich

---------- Post added 09-09-2009 at 09:32 AM ----------



Yes, we are all looking at the Soul every time we look into the mirror as it observes itself. It is that which is observing.

Rich


And don't forget the Music of the Spheres, either. We are always hearing it, but since it is always there, we cannot notice it. It is that which is sounding.
 
William
 
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 12:40 pm
@Khethil,
Khethil;89191 wrote:
Hey William,

Thanks for responding.


Hey Khethil, You are more than welcome, my pleasure.

Khethil;89191 wrote:
I never cease to be amazed at the diversity with which we can view, see and have access to the same information and phenomena, yet come up with such vastly divergent conclusions.


Absolutely! I am diverging from common convention and I have no qualms with that. You are right, it has everything to do with how we view the same information. I try to explain why I diverge and perhaps do get a bit long winded evidenced by the length of most of my posts. I am the "odd man out" and I know that. If you only knew how so very grateful I am to be in such, what many might call, a predicament. To reach a "new horizon" you have to abandon the old one and in doing that one sees so very much clearly and the mind is not so clogged with supporting what was, and focuses on how to help others see more clearly too. It is not easy by a long shot, for so very many are dependent on the old ways for they are familiar with them as it protects them in there own personal domain. As I have espoused so many,many times this is a "we" existence, not an "I" one.

Khethil;89191 wrote:
After reading your response a couple of times, I can only conclude that we're talking about very different concepts.


Yes, I know. Hopefully one day............................we will observe things eye to eye that will "resolve those differences that separate us".

Khethil;89191 wrote:
Thanks for sharing and Good luck


Likewise:bigsmile:
William
 
onehorn
 
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 07:19 pm
@William,
We use less then 10 percent of our mind.. yet so powerful. What about the 90 percent. Isnt it possible that we r refering soul to the 10 +90.. totality of our psyche.. and not a separate entity?
 
richrf
 
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 07:41 pm
@onehorn,
onehorn;89293 wrote:
We use less then 10 percent of our mind.. yet so powerful. What about the 90 percent. Isnt it possible that we r refering soul to the 10 +90.. totality of our psyche.. and not a separate entity?


Hi onehorn,

Yes, I agree. I personally do not see the soul as a separate entity. It is just the transcendental aspect that keeps evolving and learning. The physical body, from my perspective, is simply a manifestation of the soul as the soul observes and creates physical objects. A hologram would be a good metaphor. The waves that create the hologram and the image of the hologram are one and the same. However, they look different depending on whether or not a laser light is being used to unfold the holographic image.

Here is an Alex Gray painting depicting the soul manifesting as a physical body and creating:

http://www.findingshannon.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/alex_gray.gif
 
Khethil
 
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 09:14 pm
@onehorn,
onehorn;89293 wrote:
We use less then 10 percent of our mind.. yet so powerful. What about the 90 percent. Isnt it possible that we r refering soul to the 10 +90.. totality of our psyche.. and not a separate entity?


Sure, why not!

I think that this lack of a common-concept can make these kinds of discussions very difficult. What each person holds in their mind as what they're talking about can be grossly, humongously-different. Many of us go off in different directions about whether something exists, without first each person saying what they believe _it is_.

But good contribution. For my part, I use the word much in context of one of the established definitions. I really like the definition 5a in Merrian Webster's writeup.

Thanks
 
onehorn
 
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 10:13 pm
@richrf,
richrf;89297 wrote:
Hi onehorn,

It is just the transcendental aspect that keeps evolving and learning.


Hi richrf,
In what sense the word transcendental is used?U seem to believe that soul exist even if the physical body dont but the physical body has no existence without soul, right?
 
richrf
 
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 10:26 pm
@onehorn,
onehorn;89319 wrote:
Hi richrf,
In what sense the word transcendental is used?U seem to believe that soul exist even if the physical body dont but the physical body has no existence without soul, right?


Hi onehorn,

Yes, I would agree. The physical body manifests from the soul. So, I will give you an image that might help.

You have a string (not too different from those proposed in String Theory). You begin to vibrate it (as maybe a rubber band might vibrate), and it manifests in a form. This form would be the physical body while the original string would be the Soul. Now, when the vibration stops, the physical body form is gone but the original string remains.

Another image metaphor: You take that string which is a simple line. You begin to wind it around and around itself. This is how a baseball is formed. The baseball is now the manifestation of the string. You can unwind it, and the string is still there but the ball is gone.

Actually String Theory, which is one Theory of Everything that is being investigated, does have similar metaphors.

I hope these metaphors are helpful in understanding my thoughts on this subject. Everything is preserved. There is no loss of energy or memory. Just like a hologram where every wave is impressed in every portion of the hologram.

Rich
 
 

 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/07/2022 at 02:38:08