Which parts of the human body could you design better?
- Thread starter ThaG
- Start date
I don't over-complicate it by including a mind, body and spirit. In fact, the way I am using the term soul is pretty much synonomous to "spirit." The only possible distinction would be that "soul" refers to an individual, while "spirit" refers more to a "substance" distinguishable from matter.
The concept is this: The soul is the actual living entity. It is evidenced by consciousness, which is our direct experience. All material considerations take a back seat to this direct experience due to the fact that they are merely the interaction between the senses and the sense-objects, which are apparently external to that direct conscious experience. ThaG wants the direct experience to meet the standard of something external. In this way he has accepted a rope for a snake - illusion.
The concept is this: The soul is the actual living entity. It is evidenced by consciousness, which is our direct experience. All material considerations take a back seat to this direct experience due to the fact that they are merely the interaction between the senses and the sense-objects, which are apparently external to that direct conscious experience. ThaG wants the direct experience to meet the standard of something external. In this way he has accepted a rope for a snake - illusion.
Christians usually take God's "thoughts" as negating our having actual existence at that point. But I say to them, are not all of God's qualities absolute? Is not God's word absolute? Wouldn't the same apply to all other things directly pertaining to God? If God has certain thoughts, are they not immediately manifest as reality being that they are just as absolute as God Himself? Those who continue to disagree are creating a false disintinction within God, Who dwells on (and defines) the absolute platform.
OK, now listen (I explain this for the 1456th time):
If you accept that there is a soul, self, spirit, whatever, separated from the physical body and yet controlling it, you have to explain how it does that, You have to do that in order to believe it for two reasons: we have enormous (s enormous that no single person is capable of knowing it all) amount of information clearly demonstrating that the mind is controlled by entirely physical objects and processes - cells, action potentials, receptors, ion channels, protein kinases, transcription factors, coding and non-coding RNAs and lots of other interesting stuff. All of that is confirmed and as true as the fact that I am typing this. So you have to fit your theory in what is already well established.
The problem is that your theory doesn't add anything to what is already established because it has no predictive value, can not be tested and is just not needed to begin with. And you can not fit it within that model..
If you accept that there is a soul, self, spirit, whatever, separated from the physical body and yet controlling it, you have to explain how it does that, You have to do that in order to believe it for two reasons: we have enormous (s enormous that no single person is capable of knowing it all) amount of information clearly demonstrating that the mind is controlled by entirely physical objects and processes - cells, action potentials, receptors, ion channels, protein kinases, transcription factors, coding and non-coding RNAs and lots of other interesting stuff. All of that is confirmed and as true as the fact that I am typing this. So you have to fit your theory in what is already well established.
The problem is that your theory doesn't add anything to what is already established because it has no predictive value, can not be tested and is just not needed to begin with. And you can not fit it within that model..
something interesting and hopefully understandable for the broader audience that illustrates my point:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/your_mamas_soul_doesnt_love_yo.php
Scientists can explain in terms of molecules and cells how and why mothers love their children.
Scandalous, huh?
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/your_mamas_soul_doesnt_love_yo.php
Scientists can explain in terms of molecules and cells how and why mothers love their children.
Scandalous, huh?
The soul isn't controlling the body. At least not directly. It is simply that the soul is present and thus the false ego, intelligence and mind are there and the body is interacting with various objects. The soul is basically going along for the ride. It's presence is required, but it is not itself performing any of the body's activity.
Explain yourself bro
Of course they are
I'm not a Hebrew Major or a high scholar on the hebrew Language, if you look at the Hebrew Name for aDAM, it has the Word Elohim in it, Elohim(meaning The True God or God). Because we were made in His Image. Read your PM, because I can go in depth, and if you like we can use Scripture and Divide the Word of God with Truth and rightly so. Unless you'd like to continue here?
Of course they are
I'm not a Hebrew Major or a high scholar on the hebrew Language, if you look at the Hebrew Name for aDAM, it has the Word Elohim in it, Elohim(meaning The True God or God). Because we were made in His Image. Read your PM, because I can go in depth, and if you like we can use Scripture and Divide the Word of God with Truth and rightly so. Unless you'd like to continue here?
You have to remember that I am not coming from a strictly Christian position.
But let me entertain some ideas you bring up...
First of all, Christians don't believe that such work gets one into heaven. So we can throw out that idea. Secondly, and going more into my own understanding, although the soul doesn't directly cause the body's activity, because the soul is present and because there is false ego (the ego that thinks self as being the body) this bodily conception of life persists. Therefore, "hell" (if we're calling it that) simply means to persist in that illusion of self.
This is actually a very deep topic. It doesn't seem to be a field of interest for you most of the time. Though much of the things you post aren't of much interest to me. So we're kind of in a similar boat. I'll just recommend that if you are ever interested in these concepts and this philosophy, you should open-mindedly consider the explanations of the Bhagavad-Gita. Entire text is here: Bhagavad-Gita As It Is.
But let me entertain some ideas you bring up...
First of all, Christians don't believe that such work gets one into heaven. So we can throw out that idea. Secondly, and going more into my own understanding, although the soul doesn't directly cause the body's activity, because the soul is present and because there is false ego (the ego that thinks self as being the body) this bodily conception of life persists. Therefore, "hell" (if we're calling it that) simply means to persist in that illusion of self.
This is actually a very deep topic. It doesn't seem to be a field of interest for you most of the time. Though much of the things you post aren't of much interest to me. So we're kind of in a similar boat. I'll just recommend that if you are ever interested in these concepts and this philosophy, you should open-mindedly consider the explanations of the Bhagavad-Gita. Entire text is here: Bhagavad-Gita As It Is.