What is a Soul?

[River]

IIn that book, the people who were in great misery did not engender much sympathy or help. After all, they must have earned all that bad karma in a previous life, right?

I haven't read the book, but I just wanted to say that this is completely orthogonal to the way I've thought of karma. Doesn't compassion result in a karma bonus for you?

[Faramond]

The soul is not part
Or the sum of a whole
Or of any material
The soul observes
It is pain and delight

Death changes the soul
The way water is changed
When the rains of summer
Meet the hot earth below

The soul is why I remember myself
And where I restore myself
And how I foresee myself

The soul is a name being
Written in stardust by God

Love reveals the soul

[MithLuin]

On the origin of souls...


No, I'm not going to write a treatise! I just thought that Faramond's poem was a great response to the question, and very appropriate.

I think that souls are created, uniquely, for each person. Meaning...our souls did not exist at all prior to our own existence. So, our body is a combination of stuff from both our parents, but our soul is...unique. Made by God, for us, sometime, uh, shortly after conception (or roundabouts then anyway...) The breath of life from Genesis.

Souls are...indestructable. So, once they are created, they will exist for eternity. They can be damaged, but never destroyed. I don't think they are 'recycled' either.


But anyway, the short answer is that the soul is the part of us that experiences the transcendental.

[axordil]

Then all communication systems and all intelligent beings are paradoxes.

You may be onto another metaphor here—that a book, say, can have a meaning and importance beyond what kind of paper and ink went in to making it.

Well, given that an idea cannot be transmitted by non-material means, even if an idea can exist immaterially (a big if for me) it can only have meaning materially.

[Primula Baggins]

What is transmitted and what carries the transmission are two different things.

And—ideas can't exist immaterially? What's imagination, then?

Oh, I know—an array of brain chemicals in particular states. I still think there's more to it than that.

[axordil]

The content and the medium are distinct--usually. But without a medium, the content is anyone's guess, save the person whose idea it is. And of course, the idea had to start in a material setting: the brain. Even if there's more to it than that--again, for me a big if--without a brain, there's no way of an idea coming to be that we can perceive or share. And if something cannot be perceived or shared, what is it exactly?

[Frelga]

If an idea passes by and there is no brain to receive it, is it still an idea?

I once read a book that offered this exercise:

First, take a stock of your body. Flex your fingers. Wink. Walk around, maybe.

Second, check out your emotions. Feeling happy? Sad? Can you make yourself laugh by thinking of something funny?

Now, be aware of your thoughts. Do a math problem or recite a poem to yourself.

The question then is, WHO is doing all the stock-taking? Who directs the thoughts and is aware of emotions? The book called this "entity" the you-of-you.

The soul is the me of me. My muscles may operate on electrical impulses, and my thoughts could be just the neurons firing, and the emotions are just the hormones sloshing around, but the real me is the soul. It is the me that can love. The corporeal Frelga is a sort of a vehicle that got issued the me of me for this ride. I just hope it can get a sportier model next time.

[axordil]

The question then is, WHO is doing all the stock-taking?

There is no question that the self exists. At least mine does. But there seem to be different interpretations of the self's relationship to the soul. Eschewing my own materialism for a moment--is there a necessary bond between one's sense of self/self-consciousness and one's notion of the soul?

That bond looks a lot more tenuous in Eastern traditions than in Western, at least with my tyro's grasp.

[MithLuin]

I dunno. I'm reading a Japanese manga where the soul is linked to the physical body by the spirit, and neither can continue to live without the other. The personality exists in the soul, while the body stores all the memories. It's very concrete.

The main characters are all agnostic/atheist (depending on which translation you read ) Westerners, for what it's worth


I realize manga/anime isn't necessarily the most philosophical of introductions to Eastern thought, but I thought I'd share anyway.

[Crucifer]

Fullmetal Alchemist? It's very good!

As for what is a soul, I honestly have nothing to contribute. I just don't know. (I've been saying that a lot lately... Is there a God? Is there a soul? Will I have another biscuit? I just don't know!)

[MithLuin]

Yes, I was talking about FMA I agree - it's very good! I like it alot.

Just because you don't know what the soul is doesn't mean you don't have some ideas about it.

[Crucifer]

Well, the FMA hypothesis isn't bad at all... If I was forced at gub=npoint to actually firmly believe something about the soul or else, I'd probably go with that one.

[PrinceAlarming]

The personality exists in the soul, while the body stores all the memories...

I realize manga/anime isn't necessarily the most philosophical of introductions to Eastern thought, but I thought I'd share anyway.

The nerdy medical professional would like to point out Phineas Gage, who on September 13th, 1848 had a long tamping rod explode out of rock and blow through his temporal and frontal lobes resulting is massive personality changes. His case spurred modern neurology, and was concrete proof that personality, whether it be a collection of memories and/or something more innate, came from those areas of the brain.

Pick's Disease, also known as FTD (frontal-temporal dementia) is the result of atrophy in the frontal-temporal regions of the brain. Someone with highly progressed FTD has no affect, no speech, and sometimes a living but zombie like stare that I can only relate to the glassy look of death River referred to awhile back (and strange hyper sexual behaviors like uncontrolled self stimulation)... Fellow former EMTs unite!

So, my personal deduction is that the 'soul' has very little to do with personality. But FMA is a fantastic work of fiction.

Biologically, the only organ in the human body capable of harboring something as mysterious and awesome as the soul is the brain. There are more connections between the neurons in the brain than there are stars in the universe. Modern science has yet to unravel the cerebral cortex and all of its intricacies. That being said, to kind of connect the soul back to Japanese graphic novels, 'Ghost in the Shell' touches on the whole 'soul' question and introduces the idea that maybe a non-living organism can attain a 'soul' or 'ghost' by growing and developing infinite connections through cyberspace and more; amassing intelligence and a sense of self, a feeling of its own existence.

Still on subject, could an artificial intelligence ever have a 'soul'?

I think 'soul' is a term we give to that feeling of being, that state of autonomous existence we have; that understanding of our own mortality. If I think in terms of a 'spirit', I am overrun with thoughts of our metaphysical energy that makes us who we are. But to me the terms are not interchangeable...

[Primula Baggins]

I heard a story about C.S. Lewis the other day (it may or may not be accurate): Someone once asked him, "Do you believe that we have souls?"

"No," he said. "We don't have souls. We are souls.

"We have bodies."

[PrinceAlarming]

I like that much better than my previous medical babble.

Thanks, Prim!

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Thank you all for your excellent responses to this question. I particularly like something that Faramond said.

Love reveals the soul

That really provides the answer to the original question that I asked, of whether it is necessary to believe in the existence of some kind of God to believe in the existence of the soul. The answer is no, because what the soul really does is provide a means for people to connect with each other (or with other things, or even God himself).

My stepfather, Dick, was largely unresponsive for the the last couple of days before he passed away. But the day before he died, he was visited by his cousin, Lenny, who he has always been very close to. The hospice nurse encouraged Lenny to talk to Dick, reminding him of the good times they had together. Dick opened his eyes and tried to say Lenny's name. The next morning, my Mom and my sister and her husband, and Dick's son John were all with him, but his other son Andy had left the apartment for a while. Dick was fading fast, but he held on until Andy returned. Then, surrounded by the people who loved him the most, he peacefully took his last breath.

That is what a soul is.

[anthriel]

[nerdanel]

That may well be the deepest post in this very deep thread, my friend.

I agree that you do not need to believe in God to believe in souls.

[Holbytla]

I think Edgar Cayce was pretty much a charletain, but he did have an interesting theory. He professed that we are all somehow connected spritually or metaphysically and are able to tap into some kind of "record" that records all events, actions, thoughts and feelings that have ever occurred or will ever occur.

I'm pretty sure I don't buy that word for word, but I do think he hit upon something with how we connect with each other and I do think that is essentially what a soul is; our "spiritual" connection with everyone and everything.

[Primula Baggins]