The Science of "Souls"

teilhard

Posts: 42,607

One of the Reasons I have SO long deeply LOVED The Life Sciences ( Biology and Its Kin ) is ( in part ) that Life Sciences are ALL ABOUT The Scientific Study of "Souls" ... !!!

In The Primordial History Universal Deep Mythological Creation Stories, EVERYTHING that has "The Spirit-Breath of Life" ( Genesis 1:30; 2:7 ) IS a "Living Soul" ( Heb., "nephesh" ) ...

In The History of Living Things on The Earth, we see ( EXPERIENCE !!! ) The History of "Souls" ...

In Ecological Sciences, we come to Understand The Ongoing DEEP Relationships of "Souls" ...

Discuss ...

Wendyness

Posts: 3,013

"Soul" is not a thing, but a quality or a dimension of experiencing life and ourselves. It has to do with depth, value, relatedness, heart, and personal substance........Care of the soul begins with observance of how the soul manifests itself and how it operates. We can't care for the soul unless we are familiar with its ways. Observance is a word from ritual and religion. It means to watch out for but also to keep and honor, as in the observance of a holiday. The-serv-in observance originally referred to tending sheep. Observing the soul, we keep an eye on its sheep, on whatever is wandering and grazing---"

CARE of the SOUL by Thomas Moore

teilhard

Posts: 42,607

Yes, yes, yes ... !!! I too am a Fan of Tom Moore ... His "Re-Enchantment of EveryDay Living" is ALSO Excellent ...

Oncomintrain

Posts: 2,533

What are the definitive qualities of a soul? One doesn't necessarily need to know that for the purposes of religion or philosophy, but its tough to study scientifically if you can't set clear parameters on what is or is not "soul-ful."

Is soul synonymous with life? If not, how are they distinguished? If so, why the redundancy (and what is life?) ?

Can either one (soul & life) exist without the other? How would one recognize an entity that expressed one but not the other?

A practical case: viruses - are they "ensouled"? Why or why not?

I have no beef with the idea of a soul --if real -- as a "fuzzy" concept that is hard to define or measure... even as a potentially poetical or metaphorical concept. But science demands definition and measurement, so I'm curious whether you're actually interested in (and capable of) the SCIENTIFIC study of "soul."

Oncomintrain

Posts: 2,533

Feb 17, 2010 -- 1:12PM, Wendyness wrote:

"Soul" is not a thing, but a quality or a dimension of experiencing life and ourselves. It has to do with depth, value, relatedness, heart, and personal substance........

CARE of the SOUL by Thomas Moore

Teil, I'm also curious how this gels with your definition of soul as a property apparently common to all living things. Are you saying that bacteria enjoy a "quality or dimension of experiencing life and themselves?" That they experience "depth, value, relatedness, heart, [and/or] personal substance?"

To me, these definitions of "soul" seem at least different, perhaps even mutually exclusive. Your thoughts?

teilhard

Posts: 42,607

Feb 17, 2010 -- 5:09PM, Oncomintrain wrote:

What are the definitive qualities of a soul? One doesn't necessarily need to know that for the purposes of religion or philosophy, but its tough to study scientifically if you can't set clear parameters on what is or is not "soul-ful."

Is soul synonymous with life? If not, how are they distinguished? If so, why the redundancy (and what is life?) ?

Can either one (soul & life) exist without the other? How would one recognize an entity that expressed one but not the other?

A practical case: viruses - are they "ensouled"? Why or why not?

I have no beef with the idea of a soul --if real -- as a "fuzzy" concept that is hard to define or measure... even as a potentially poetical or metaphorical concept. But science demands definition and measurement, so I'm curious whether you're actually interested in (and capable of) the SCIENTIFIC study of "soul."

For sure, the Understanding ( whether by Definition or otherwise ) of what IS ( or is NOT ) "Alive" IS a Tricky Thing, isn't it ... ???

teilhard

Posts: 42,607

Feb 17, 2010 -- 5:20PM, Oncomintrain wrote:

Feb 17, 2010 -- 1:12PM, Wendyness wrote:

"Soul" is not a thing, but a quality or a dimension of experiencing life and ourselves. It has to do with depth, value, relatedness, heart, and personal substance........

CARE of the SOUL by Thomas Moore

Teil, I'm also curious how this gels with your definition of soul as a property apparently common to all living things. Are you saying that bacteria enjoy a "quality or dimension of experiencing life and themselves?" That they experience "depth, value, relatedness, heart, [and/or] personal substance?"

To me, these definitions of "soul" seem at least different, perhaps even mutually exclusive. Your thoughts?

I wouldn't say that a "Soul" is a "Property," but IS a "Reality" ...

But the Question of "Life"-ness or not or "Person"-ality or not is NOT so easy to set up as either-or / all-or-nothing ... The "Relationship" Aspect seems to be The CENTRAL Question ...

Oncomintrain

Posts: 2,533

Feb 17, 2010 -- 5:36PM, teilhard wrote:

Feb 17, 2010 -- 5:09PM, Oncomintrain wrote:

What are the definitive qualities of a soul? One doesn't necessarily need to know that for the purposes of religion or philosophy, but its tough to study scientifically if you can't set clear parameters on what is or is not "soul-ful."

Is soul synonymous with life? If not, how are they distinguished? If so, why the redundancy (and what is life?) ?

Can either one (soul & life) exist without the other? How would one recognize an entity that expressed one but not the other?

A practical case: viruses - are they "ensouled"? Why or why not?

I have no beef with the idea of a soul --if real -- as a "fuzzy" concept that is hard to define or measure... even as a potentially poetical or metaphorical concept. But science demands definition and measurement, so I'm curious whether you're actually interested in (and capable of) the SCIENTIFIC study of "soul."

For sure, the Understanding ( whether by Definition or otherwise ) of what IS ( or is NOT ) "Alive" IS a Tricky Thing, isn't it ... ???

That is a total non-answer. I could give you a working scientific definition of "alive" (arbitrary though it might be). Can you give me a working scientific definition of "soul"?

You say soul is a "reality". That is a claim. If we're to treat the subject scientifically, the claim needs to be testable. To be testable, we need a clear definition of terms. What is "soul"? (See my original e-mail for a further list of useful questions.)

Are you interested in meaningful, substantive dialogue, or aren't you? Or are you just hypocritically trying to squeak your religious views into the realm of science?

Blü

Posts: 21,118

Seems to me that definitions of 'soul' fall into three categories -

1. An immaterial part of each human that continues to exist after that person's body dies and is usually said to contain the person's memories and personality.

2. An emotional capacity or attunement in humans, rather vaguely defined, but in general compassionate, and sensitive to awe and to the arts.

3. A metaphor from either or both of these.

The one that matters in conversations of this kind is the first one. And as is often observed, the dualism involved has all kinds of problems.

teilhard

Posts: 42,607

Feb 17, 2010 -- 5:54PM, Oncomintrain wrote:

Feb 17, 2010 -- 5:36PM, teilhard wrote:

Feb 17, 2010 -- 5:09PM, Oncomintrain wrote:

What are the definitive qualities of a soul? One doesn't necessarily need to know that for the purposes of religion or philosophy, but its tough to study scientifically if you can't set clear parameters on what is or is not "soul-ful."

Is soul synonymous with life? If not, how are they distinguished? If so, why the redundancy (and what is life?) ?

Can either one (soul & life) exist without the other? How would one recognize an entity that expressed one but not the other?

A practical case: viruses - are they "ensouled"? Why or why not?

I have no beef with the idea of a soul --if real -- as a "fuzzy" concept that is hard to define or measure... even as a potentially poetical or metaphorical concept. But science demands definition and measurement, so I'm curious whether you're actually interested in (and capable of) the SCIENTIFIC study of "soul."

For sure, the Understanding ( whether by Definition or otherwise ) of what IS ( or is NOT ) "Alive" IS a Tricky Thing, isn't it ... ???

That is a total non-answer. I could give you a working scientific definition of "alive" (arbitrary though it might be). Can you give me a working scientific definition of "soul"?

You say soul is a "reality". That is a claim. If we're to treat the subject scientifically, the claim needs to be testable. To be testable, we need a clear definition of terms. What is "soul"? (See my original e-mail for a further list of useful questions.)

Are you interested in meaningful, substantive dialogue, or aren't you? Or are you just hypocritically trying to squeak your religious views into the realm of science?

Nope ... I CAN'T provide a "working scientific definition of 'soul' ... "

Rather, I START my Understanding with The Hebrew Term, "nephesh," which is translated as "living creature" or "everything that has the Spirit-Breath of Life" ... ( Heb., "ruach," meaning "Spirit" or "Breath" ... )

Beliefnet On Facebook

What's Hot