What is a Soul?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

This question came up in a conversation that I had recently with a dear friend of mine, and neither of us were quite sure what we thought about it. Just to clarify, as I have indicated before, I do believe in some form of a "God" even though I don't participate in any organized religion. And while my friend is a member of a church, she has very similar views about spirituality as I do. So we really were coming at this question from very much the same point of view, which is why I am particularly interested in hearing the views of others across of the spectrum, from those who believe in no God at all to those who are firmly rooted in different traditions. I do want to emphasize that this is a very sensitive (though potentially fascinating) subject, and so I ask that people be mindful of not being critical of other people's beliefs. Asking questions to clarify what others are saying of course would be fine, as would be making clear what your own views are, but please do not be judgmental of others. That would pretty much negate the whole purpose of this thread.

The initial question that we had was "is it necessary to believe in some form of God to believe in the existence of souls?" Since we both believed in some form of God, it was difficult for us to answer that question. That question of course gives rise to other questions. First and foremost, simply "what is a soul?" And where does it come from, particularly if you believe that souls exist but you don't believe in a God. I know that statement sounds a little provocative, but I really don't mean it to be. I am genuinely interested in people's views on this subject, and I hope that other people are willing to explore this subject in a non-judgmental way.

[axordil]

I can give you the answer of someone who has drifted, over the years, into the camp of the strict materialists. I believed in souls longer than I believed in God, because I had a need to. Beyond that I can only paraphrase a definition offered in a previous related discussion: the soul is not memory, or consciousness, or thought, or perception, or awareness, or knowledge, or emotion. Take all those things--everything that defines, for an individual and for the world, who they are--away from a person, and what's left is the soul.

The question is of course whether there IS anything left.

There is one alternate thought I have, from time to time. Perhaps the soul is one's ineffable desire to be, and to be who it is. Of course that's a materialist construct to some extent, since we are hard-wired with it, and it's clearly a product of our brain's structure. But it's a functional definition, not an existential one, so it may not be what you're looking for; although it's not all that different than some Buddhist trains of thought, being as it is the fundamental desire, and thus the last one that would have to be overcome for enlightenment, perhaps? I am rusty when it comes to Nirvana.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Thanks, Ax! (I do intend to respond more substantively, but I want to wait until there are a few different responses.)

[Teremia]

Well, I think I think of souls as a kind of "fingerprint" of a person, the essential uniqueness that makes that person so much him-or-herself, and nobody else. That definition might work with or without God, don't you think?

I should clarify that I'm thinking in terms of that person's character and thoughts and feelings and longings and hopes, not really of exterior physical characteristics.

(With some amusement I realize my definition is almost exactly opposite to ax's! V, you're going to have some work cut out for you!)

[Voronwë the Faithful]

With some amusement I realize my definition is almost exactly opposite to ax's! V, you're going to have some work cut out for you!)

But that is exactly why I think this is such a fascinating subject to explore!

Thanks, Teremia.

[axordil]

Teremia--

I suppose it depends on whether one think selfhood flows outward from an inner point that is not dependent on any of those external layers. Not believing there is such a point beyond genetic temperament, and being loathe to identify DNA and epigenetic configuration with the soul, I couldn't do that. But I don't think the reductive method--what isn't a soul?--necessarily leaves one with an undifferentiated soul as a matter of course.

[MithLuin]

The soul is the seat of memory, will and reason. I am not suggesting that our brains don't have something to do with those things, but rather that our souls work together with our brains. We are...very integrated, so you can't tease out the soul and see what it is apart from a human being. Without the soul, you don't have a human being, and without the rest...the soul isn't much, either.

The soul is eternal and indestructable, as well as having no physical component. It is how we are made in God's image - God is spirit, so if we are made in his likeness, we also are beings of spirit. It is how we relate to God. Our bodies are how we relate to everyone and everything else - seeing, hearing, speaking, typing, reading, writing...all of our communication is very much a result of us being physical beings.

When our bodies are sick, we usually know. It is good at telling us. When our mind is sick, everyone else knows . But when our spirit is sick....that's harder to see. It can be like depression, when the whole world is grey, and nothing is worth doing. It can feel like disgust with yourself, unhappiness about what you've done or said. Or it can involve fear - fear of the future, of discovery, of the world coming to an end - something like that. These are just...symptoms, though. When the spirit is healed, all these symptoms go away. It can be gradual or instantaneous.

For me personally - when I go home, to the farm where I grew up, I am filled with peace. I do not worry there. That land, that place, that air, those stars...it is good for me. It can be lonely if I am there by myself, but even so, it is refreshing in a way that no other place is. When I go to confession, I always come out with a smile on my face and a lightness to my shoulders. Even when I was suffering from mild depression, this could change everything around. I find that sacrament to be very healing, and since I know it's not doing anything to my body or mind...it is my soul that sees the world scrubbed clean afterwards.

Souls come in all different varieties, just like people. Because...they are people. I think it was St. Therese who said we all can't be roses - that'd be boring. I could be happy to be a buttercup .


And when I was 8 years old, if you had asked me this question, I would have told you that my soul was a black spot residing somewhere in the vicinity of my pancreas (well, I wouldn't have known that, I just would have pointed to my gut). I have no idea what gave me that idea!

I am (fairly) comfortable with Tolkien's distinctions between hröa and fëa, for what that is worth. Creativity residing in the fëa makes perfect sense to me.

Like you and your friend, V, I believe in God, so I see my belief in the human soul intrinsically connected to my belief in God. I cannot say that one would make sense without the other.

[WampusCat]

A few impressions:

The soul is our essence, the part of us that endures even after physical death. It is what recognizes the touch of the Infinite because that is its natural home. It is our umbilical cord to God and thus our connection to all that exists, seen and unseen.

My soul is who I am. It can be covered and weighed down by the trappings of my situation and choices, my physical and mental states, but it remains as it was created: the image of God.

Obviously, someone who does not believe that God exists would not have this exact view of the soul. But perhaps that person could still think there is a true self that is an inborn essence or a material dimension that we have yet to understand scientifically.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Thanks, Mith. Not surprisingly, I was going to bring up Tolkien's concept the fëa as well, but I'm not quite ready to go there yet. I hope more people are willing to share their perspectives first.

[River]

I'm not religious, but I believe that souls exist. I don't claim to have any empirical basis for that belief. As yovargas pointed out somewhere else on b77, you can't get empirical without a formal definition. I'm not sure I can even answer your question coherently, but whenever this topic comes up, a certain experience comes to mind that I'm going to share.

I used to be an EMT. I saw people who were unresponsive. I also saw a guy who was dead. The difference was palpable before checking for vital signs (though in the case of the dead guy, bystanders had already initiated CPR so the vital sign question was moot). There is something in a living person that is not there in a dead one. Now my partner, the paramedic, and the firefighters who showed up all tried very hard to bring him back. It was the most violent thing I have ever witnessed, never mind participated in (bear in mind I'm a martial artist). I was the one who ended up beating on the guy's chest. I have no idea how long the call lasted - I had so much adrenaline in my veins every second felt like an eternity. But I knew as soon as I touched the guy that he was gone and he wasn't coming back. He wasn't sleeping. He was just gone and I could feel the nothing where there should have been something as surely as I could feel the life in someone who was unresponsive.

So what is a soul? To me, it's the thing that ultimately differentiates the living from the dead. But it's more complicated than that - artists of all stripes put something of themselves into their work and the rest of us refer to that as soul. When you've been run through the wringer, you feel it down deep and say your soul is hurting, your soul is tired, your soul is being sucked out, etc. Maybe a soul is the skeleton your personality and emotions hang on. I'm not sure. Beyond the living vs. dead bit. That I am sure about.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Excellent, River. That is very much what I am looking for. Thank you.

(That goes for everyone that has responded so far.)

[Cerin]

Are you thinking in terms of soul being different from spirit?

In my understanding, spirit is the supernatural, eternal aspect of our beings, as opposed to the natural, material aspect. The soul -- that is, the mind, will and emotions -- I understand as being part of both. That is, the soul is manifested in the physical world through our physical body, but will continue as part of our eternal selves (spirit) when this material world passes away.

I think there are people who believe in a spiritual (unseen) dimension without believing in God, but I think they do believe in a spiritual oneness of sorts (which might be labeled God). I don't think you need believe in God to believe in the soul; in the case that one didn't believe in a spiritual dimension, the soul would presumably just cease to be when the body expires.

[Maria]

The soul is the animating property: it is what allows life to live. I think it is also the conduit for the energy that allows life to proceed against entropy.

It is the extension into this universe of my higher self, and the little me, the person you know as Maria, is too small to understand very much about it. The soul is more than me. I'm a subset of it. When I die, the little me will be but one of who knows how many lives my soul has lived. I'm pretty sure the higher self will remember the life of "Maria", but only as one of many. I can only hope I will be remembered fondly, rather than with embarrassment...

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Thank you, Cerin and Maria; excellent responses both of you. Cerin, to answer your specific question, "Are you thinking in terms of soul being different from spirit?" I am so open on this issue that I am really looking for whatever different ways that different people look at "souls".

[Maria]

River just corrected me on another thread on my use of the word "entropy", and I'm just as wrong here.

I've lost my train of thought. I'm not sure where I was going with that anyway....

[River]

"Decay" would be a better choice of word. I think. Assuming I even know what you mean. But your thoughts in that sentence are similar enough to mine that I think I do. When something dies, their soul leaves and their body falls apart, yes?

And now I am about to stroke off into the thermodynamics of life and death. I think I shall step away and go back to this *)($#&^@)(*#$&)(* paper I'm pretending to write.

[vison]

Yes. The "soul" is the difference between the alive and the not-alive. I can only say that "I think, therefore I am" is the absolute for me: as long as I am thinking, I am alive. One day I won't be. I don't believe I will be aware of it - I think death is the final end, that there is nothing beyond.

In one of the Little House books, Laura's old bulldog Jack died. Laura asked her Pa if Jack had gone to Heaven. Pa figured that God would manage something, for a dog as good as Jack.

I remember the feeling I had then. I already did not believe in God, yet I understood perfectly what Laura meant: why was a dog not good enough for Heaven? Why would an animal not have a soul? I still don't know why, and yet - where does it begin? Does a Lobster have a soul? Does a tree? Is it the "animate spirit"?

It was about that time that I realized that one day my Dad was going to die. I remember crying and crying while he tried to comfort me - and he comforted me without ever saying "Heaven", or "soul". He said that he would always "live" if I remembered him.

I remember reading about Charles Darwin. His little girl died. And Darwin wept and said, "She will never know how much we still love her, and always will." That is something I feel very strongly. It is the hardest thing in the world.

I can't define "soul" any better than anyone else, I don't even know if I can accept that there is such a thing. Yet here we are, and here I am, especially, sorrowing and wishing that somewhere, somehow, those I lost will know how much I still love them, and always will.

[Primula Baggins]

Maybe they do. I understand that you don't, and can't, believe that, but still—maybe they do. There would be worse things to be wrong about.

Voronwë's question is something I have to think about more. I do believe in God, do believe in some aspect of ourselves that persists after death and that in fact matters more than our physical bodies; but none of that is provable outside of religious teaching, and all of it is open to the accusation that people are comforting themselves, accepting ideas that soothe them.

And yet I don't think that facing death would be any easier because I believe there's something beyond, something good. It's still a jump into the unknown; it's still leaving people you love behind. Rationally, there is much less to fear in a simple blinking out, after which you do not exist. But intuitively I find that idea hard to accept, even though I know there's a whole swath of history during which I didn't exist. I think.

It's also occurred to me that it doesn't really matter. If I do blink out, what's wrong with having been comforted up until that moment by beliefs that turn out to be untrue? It's not as if I would be around to feel angry or sad about it. Blink.

But of course I believe and hope that the truth is better than that, for everyone; that our uniqueness is somehow woven into the universe and doesn't depend on our physical state. My religion specifically promises this (though that is not why I chose it).

[vison]

A lovely post, Primula.

[WampusCat]

Agreed.