The eminent and prominent physicist, Stephen Hawkings avers, in an interview with a British magazine, that the human brain is nothing more than a computer, and when that computer malfunctions then stops operating altogether, the human who has that computer( brain), dies and does not live in the hereafter, thereafter.
So what gives? Is human life nothing more than the operative functioning of a biologic entity(brain)? If and when that biologic entity becomes so functionally mechanized and computerized, stripped of its soulful essence, would humans lose their connectivity to their immediate world, thus cutting off their path to their ultimate destiny... that of creatively understanding the mysteries of the universe?
Yes, human life is nothing more that the functioning of a biologic entity and when it dies it dies. To claim that the ultimate destiny of a human is understanding the mysteries of the universe is silly - the ultimate destiny of any one human is to eventually return to the dust it came from.
The ultimate destiny of mankind as a species is unknown, but best bet is that it, too, will eventually return to dust without ever understanding all the mysteries of the universe.
The human brain might be likened to a computer, but it is a very poorly functioning one. None of us would accept a computer with the foibles of the human brain as it would be almost useless for what we use a computer for. If you could remove all the right brain functions (emotion, desire, artistry, creativity, etc.) it might make a better computer but I would suspect that you are right. That the human would lose the connectivity to the immediate world and to the rest of humanity. Mr. Spock made a poor human.
I think I agree with that. our brains might be nothing more than a computer and it is programing our destiny by the words that our brain hears our mouth speek. Talk about a self fulling prophesy ???
I choose a differsnt destiny for myself so I am going to make my mind here a different kind of song coming out of my mouth.
I think it might work?
If you read my post carefully, you will know that I never advanced the "silly" and if I may say so, absuredly illogical idea that a single human, acting on his own, and uninformed of the accumulated knowledge of his fellow humans, could unlock, and thus understand the mysteries of the universe.
I do strongly disagree with your pessimistic/nihilistic view of Homo Sapiens. As a specie, I believe, that man should and could aim for an earthly journey that not only allows him to fulfill his physical and physiologic needs but most importantly also allows him to sublimate those needs to the spiritual and cosmic. Humans having been created through the evolutionary process with the cerebral capacity, temerity and perspicacity to conceptualize endless possibilitie should aim straight towards that destiny.
@villarasa pessimistic view...obviously humans are one of species...how can that be view...view can be on god , on holy book , on heaven etc...one cant have view on shape of earth or gravity or being speices...those are called facts not views...
secondly it is most empowering place to stand...what a awesome journey we have had as species...it feels with pride as well as responsibility for coming generation as a species...
This non material essence are called concepts and concepts don't exist. Concepts are conceptualized. By your very on description soul does not exist yet you are describing it, as though it exist!
Sorry pisean I was replying to Villarasa's comment "The non-material(soul) essence of human beingsreside in the consciousness " I don't know how it came as a reply to you.
If the soul is conciousness and that is the result of the bio electrical chemical operation of the brain, then the soul certainly does exist.
Certainly, but then that soul is not eternal!
All thoughts are brain function, concepts.
Agreed. According to the bible man is flesh only, and that dies. Eternity is only possible after resurection with a perfect immortal flesh body. There is no immortal human spirit. However no matter how much I say this the fundamentalists insist on a pagan view of man with an immortal spirit that leaves the body upon death retaining consciousness and memories. Yet they can never prove this from the bible.
If your experiential instincts lead you to the conclude that reality are all material, and that anything that does not have a measurable physical form could not exist ....thus your insistence that concepts, devoid of material form do not exist. You eliminated from you formulation, the role perceptual instinct...in man's ability to conceptualize non-material relialities , I.e. gravity, justice, soul, God.
So, gravity is on par with souls and gods?
Yes, but only in so far as they are all conceptually speaking non-material realities. I told the other hubbers, just like you who have no use for anything spiritual, that my perceptual instincts led me to believe the existence of npm-material realities.
Why would anyone have any use for that which has never been shown to exist outside ones imagination?
Perceptual instincts, indeed.
I do because anything conceptualized fits neatly to the greater narrative of human creativity....which he will need to acces on his ultimate destination of unraveling cosmological mysteries and realities
That makes no sense, what you're saying is that anything one can conjure from their imagination must be true or must exist, which is completely false.
I am not a magician, so I don't conjure. I am a thinking man however, and my thinking is informed or inputed heavily both by my experience in the material world and my perception of the npn-material world . In as far as they converge to form my instincts...I rely heavily on them.
How can you perceive the "non-material" world when it cannot be observed. That makes no sense at all.
Matter cannot be observed, really?
Show us some non-material item in the universe, please.
The universe is matter/material -no matter the optic perception.
So you agree they are all concepts and are only in the mind?
So it need somebody to conceive all those and is dependent on the one who is conceiving and is different for each person and will cease the moment the person start thinking about other things. Soul will disappear the moment people stop thinking about it!
Exist is objective.
Sorry if I misunderstood your earlier post - it happens sometimes when there is only a few written words. The reference to "biological entity" (singular) threw me off.
This one, though, I very definitely do not follow. You seem to feel that physical needs of a biological entity should be secondary to something, but I'm not sure what. "Spiritual" thoughts or ideas? "Spiritual" something? Spiritual what? Same thing with "cosmic" - cosmic what? Cosmic is either an adverb or adjective; you think we should place the need for food secondary to a descriptive term of a noun or verb? I'm a little lost, especially when you consider that if the biological needs aren't met as a priority the entity won't exist for long. If eating is sublimated to creating spiritual myths as a primary activity the ultimate destiny (dust to dust) won't take but a couple of weeks.
I also read this post as saying that humans have an imagination and should aim towards using that imagination to find endless possibilities without ever knowing of any of them are true. If so, I really prefer to imagine a possibility and then investigate to see if it is true and would not care to live my own life simply imagining all the possibilities that my brain can come up with. It can be entertaining for a while, but palls quickly for me.
@wilderness: The biologic need to survive is inherent in all animate entities and in whatever way/form that need is met is not unique to any one specie but is universal to all species.. What separates the human specie is their cerebral capacity to conceptualize meanings to those physiologic functions other than the material/physical.
I did not in any way suggest that those physiologic functions(breath, sleep,eat , procreate etc.) should be secondary in the narrative of the survival of our specie, but in the narrative of man's ultimate destination, i.e. exploring, inventing ways to explore, and securing the tools to explore the mysteries of the universe, man should elevate/sublimate, his physicality to his spirituality. I understand that as a non-believer in anything spiritual, the concept is alien to you.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it was Einstein who said,( and I'm paraphrasing here) ....intellect without imagination is like a plane without wings. I might add to that, this....intellect without ambition is like a boat without a rudder. Man should use all his imaginative/comtemplative capacity to explore the meaning of his existence vis-a,vis God, and the cosmos that sorrounds him.
What is soulful essence and what does it have to do with humans and biology?
The non-material(soul) essence of human beings reside in the consciousness mediated via the neuronal connections of a material/biologic entity(brain). I posit that man, as with all sentient beings on earth, have dual consciousness i.e. the material/physical and the spiritual/ethereal. Man, among those sentient beings have been blessed, through the evolutionary creative process, with a brain that not only manifest the inate dignity of man, but also sublimates his material/physical verities to that of his spiritual/ethereal realities.
A lot of folks on HubPages, via their ego-driven propensity towards nihilism, objectivism, reductionism, and ultimately atheism would deny their fellow humans their inate cerebral capacity, temerity, and perspicacity to conceptulize realities that are not immediately inferred from or informed by their 5 physical senses. That to me is intellectual bullyism of the 10th degree.
And, you have hard evidence for this considering no scientist has ever found such evidence for souls?
And, you posit that from what exactly?
So, you're upset and are playing the bully card because your fantasies are being questioned with reality?
I don't need the seal of approval from any scientist for me to believe joyfully that I have a soul...a soul that defines me who, what, why I am. A soul whose existence elevates and sublimates me from the purely biologic/physical to the truly cosmic/spiritual.
I of course have no intention of disabusing you from your idea that as a human being you are no more than the material product of your biologic need to survive i.e. feed, sleep, breath, micturate, defecate and procreate, thus an existence that is no better(or worse, I suppose) from the existence of let say... the rat that I see scampering all over the public dump.
By the way, your post reminded me of the nippy-nappy comments that Mark Knowles used to throw on fellow hubbers who he thinks are intellectually inferior.... thus the bullying tenor. For now, and until such time that you can post something lucid, anything luminous and levitating that adds a substantial girth to the discussion at hand...I would appreciate it very much if you could keep those comments to yourself.
No, you certainly don't need a seal of approval to maintain that belief. You do need that seal (or equivalent facts) to KNOW you have a soul or to (accurately) make the claim that it raises you to the spiritual.
But far be it from me to try to disabuse of the notion. If it keeps you joyful and you have no expectation that others need to or somehow should share the belief then I cannot see it does any harm.
True, you are free to wallow in that fantasy.
We are all a material product of biology, but we aren't rats either. Perhaps, you should look up the differences. But, now that you mention it, we do share about 85% genetics with rats.
Ah yes, playing the bully card. How quaint. It's hilarious you believers play that card when your irrational beliefs are exposed as nonsense.
You actually believe you're irrational beliefs are substantial and luminous to a discussion?
@ A troubled Man:
True... you are free to bathe in the polluted waters of your "sanity".
Makes total sense to me.
We are all not only the material product of our biology, but most importantly, the spiritual product of our cosmology....thus we are not rats. I have looked up the difference, and in your case.... apparently , not much. But now that you mention it, we do share about 99% of our genetic code with our closest chromosomal "kin", the bonobo chimpanzee. Perhaps you should use the monicker "A troubled Chimp", instead of "A troubled Man.".
Ah you play laughing idiot card. How boorish. It's more than hilarious... in fact it is bordering on the troubling that you non-believers play that card when your non-spiritual beliefs are exposed as nonsense.
You actually believe that your non-transcendental beliefs are substantial and luminous to a discussion?
My what a high opinion you have of yourself. What a shame none of you self-professed Christians do as Jesus told you to do.
This is why your religion causes so much ill will and hatred.
Once again, you impose as fact that which has NEVER been shown to exist, which is anything that constitutes the "spiritual" hence your claim is completely unfounded and pointless.
Perhaps then, you can explain why your God would do such a thing as opposed to how evolution works and the fact we share the same ancestors as a result?
Non-spiritual beliefs, non-transcendental beliefs? Why do you continue to impose concepts that have never been shown to exist?
Wow... I did not know that I deserve to be honored by the appearance of the supreme provocateur/ranter, Mark Knowles. I assume that his presence, was due to the fact that A troubled Man extricated him from wherever he was to be his relief pitcher or designated hitter.
Either way it won't work. Mark Knowles rants are as old as God-knows-what, and reading them again just gave me the worse case of "deja vu all over again".
Tell you what - you stop spouting hatred and majikal super beings - I stop telling you why it causes conflict - deal?
See how that works? How it is all down to you. You.
Interesting, once again the believer is unable to respond to questions and criticisms of their claims and must constantly resort to attacking the person, instead.
@MK: You must be mistaking me for someone else.
@TM:I only respond to debating points..and so far you and MK have not given me enough debating meat for me to bite into.
The brain may be "just a computer", but that's not the only organ that indicates life, no. There's the heart and lungs and etc.
And the intangible soul can't be said to exist literally in any of those.
Mice have brains. They work in the same way that ours do. We are not special.
@hippy: Stunning statement from someone who would use the name of the Nazarene in his HubPages monicker. In the Nazarene's narrative He did not assume human form to save rats.
"Of mice and men", if I'm not mistaken, is the title of a book written by, was it Hemmingway?. Anyway, I'm not sure if you are referencing the book or just to privide an alibi for why some humans sometme act like rats.
The brain itself is not a computer, because a computer is a sum of many parts working together to perform a function. Diodes, chips, fans, power source, memory, display/output, etc.
However the brain is the/a processor of light sequences and frequencies.
Its purpose is to properly process inbound and outbound light. Another way to approach this is to say the brain takes the invisible and processes it for visible; and vice versa.
I would like to add to what you wrote, this pargraph from a recent editorial piece on Discover Magazine:."...we give computers too much credit. The average human brain operates for about 70 years without crashing or needing a system upgrade, and it requires just 20 watts of power to think. Machines are feeble in comparison; a computer would need at least 10 million watts to do what the brain does everyday. And consider this: would you trust your consciousness to a system running Windows?
YEP! Now that might be SOME of the good news that Jesus was talking about when he hinted; It isn't what goes into the mouth that corrupts but that which comes out of it corrupts (the soul?).
With all due respect to Mr. Hawkings, I agree that the human brain might be a computer, but I reserve the right to disagree with him about the hereafter and what might or might not live on there. On second thought, the human brain is so much more than just a computer, and to distill our humanity down to nothing more than just a simple machine is to do a disservice to us all. We are more than just that which is physical. Of all people one would imagine that Stephen Hawkings would understand the depth and breath of the human soul.
If you could explain to Mr. Hawkings what a "soul" is in concrete, understandable, terms he might be interested. He might even be able to measure the depth and width of that soul, depending on your definition.
Mr Hawkings doesn't have the answers, that's why he's a scientist. He, like everyone else is attempting to find them.
Maybe Disturbia a rewording of your statement "the human mind, and not just the human brain is so much more than just a computer." There is a distinction between brain and mind. The mind is that which is in and beyond the brain. The brain is the organ stimulated to animate thoughts, bring them into something concrete - via the act of doing something with them.
wilderness, If Mr Hawkings doesn't understand the concept of a soul and has to measure everything by algorithms and test tubes to prove the existence of all things, he is missing out and quite tunneled in his vision.
I did see a documentary on Hawkings and how his motivation for his work is because of his father's death. He is looking, like alchemists before him, for the body of immortality. He's trying to avoid the very thing most humans fear most. I found that fascinating for such a learned mind.
So, please enlighten us all on exactly the soul is and I'll make sure to pass that on to Hawkings, I'm sure he's be very interested to hear all about it.
I'm sure Mr Hawkings doesn't know you from a bar of soap! And there are many references to the soul, you just have to google the term and I'm sure you yourself can become enlightened. Or are you wanting me to do that for you? Mind you, it may open you up to a world of literature that, I am sure you are not interested in.
A hint - in Greek literature the term psyche and soul - the seat of emotions, passions and lower rational faculties were intertwined - basically the same. So your soul is that which contains your emotions, your passions, and your lower rational faculties.
It's a term, just as air is the term for an unseen substance we inhale that keeps us alive. Without a soul you'd be an inanimate moron, with absolutely no means to be conscious that you are conscious.
Please pass this onto Mr Hawkings if he has the time to speak to you. But I have a feeling he already knows the meaning. It was just you who needed to know. There you go
Yup a bar of soap. Funny how we all came to be on the level of animals with the same rights as trees and amoebas. What a great green future we all have.
There are references to unicorns and dragons, too, but no evidence that they exist.
Oh, I see, so it's a container somewhere in the human body. Where exactly? Besides, our emotions, passions and rational faculties have already been explained by other means that have nothing to do with souls.
No, that would be oxygen and nitrogen molecules in the atmosphere that we can actually see with a microscope.
No, that's our brain.
Sorry, but you've provided nothing that explains the soul that hasn't already been explained by other biological means.
So are you saying psychology doesn't exist? Psyche? No? Hmmmm, wonder how you could grasp the concept? Don't worry, I am sure Mr Hawkings knows what it means.
Try looking at a little closer at my posts and you'll see quite clearly that I said no such thing. Why are putting words in my mouth? Have you not noticed we were discussing souls, not psychology or the psyche?
Curious debating tactics you have there, when you can't support your claims, change the goalposts altogether.
Not putting any words in your mouth. You asked for a definition of soul, I gave it to you. You had difficulty understanding that definition, and still do apparently. I used the term psychology, it is derived from the word psyche, the word psyche and soul are interchangeable in Greek literature.
I have supported my claims using literature. Soul is a title, same as a book is a title for two bits of cardboard with pages in the middle with words on them.
For you to understand Soul in a deeper context you have to understand your own personal psychology. And to understand your personal psychology you have to put yourself on a chair, perhaps in front of a mirror and ask who you are......not just the physical body, you know arms and legs and organs and blood and the like. Brain is part of the physical anatomy - the body. No......you have to go a bit further than that. You have to analyse yourself. For many that is quite difficult. So good luck with that. Hope you enjoy your self analysis on the road to understanding your own soul. If you have trouble understand who you are then perhaps go to a psychologist or psychiatrist. They may give you some hints, but be aware they will charge you money.
So are you getting it? Soul = psyche = psychology. Nothing woohoo about that, easy peasy.
No, you only redefined other known concepts and ideas and called them a soul. Sorry, but that doesn't work.
SYKHE (or Psyche) was the goddess of the soul, wife of Eros god of love and completely irrelevant to this discussion.
A title of what, exactly. And please don't go and redefine other things to suit your agenda.
All that is pure gibberish and does absolutely nothing to support your claims.
No, psychology is psychology and is not the soul. Obviously, you're just making this crap up as you go along.
Ummmmm! I really am at a loss as to how to help you understand what is easy to grasp. Having spoken to a psychologist (with a Masters), there is nothing to quibble about in the definition of soul as above and the study of psychology - thoughts, emotions, passions, desires, feelings, psychosis, neurosis, issues of a mental nature. Are you following?
Names/Words have a root - whether they have come via mythology, Greek philosophy, Latin, or American slang. Your reference to Eros and Sykhe didn't really say much other than give a title to a God/Goddess. So what!
Again I will repeat what I said (as you asked title of what which was already answered). Soul is the seat of emotions, passions, and lower rational faculties. For you to understand your own Soul and to fathom it's diversity you have to look at it. That's called being conscious of your own inner thoughts and emotions. As a human being with a soul - a soul being a term for your emotions, passions, lower rational faculties (your psychological makeup), how do you see yours? If you were able to ponder your own psychological makeup you may understand. Perhaps you are a kind man, you are sensitive to feelings, or you are impatient, you have wild passionate sex and you like this because it makes you feel content and powerful. Or maybe you are violent, had an abusive father, The result of your upbringing, your peers, your experiences, your reactions and responses make up your soul. Soul and Psyche are interchangeable. Not crap, not making it up. Even Freud speaks of a Soul. I suppose he spoke crap, depends on your perspective most likely.
"Soul is the seat of emotions, passions, and lower rational faculties"
Actually it is called BRAIN.
You're at a loss because you have nothing to offer.
Yes, I am following, but no, thoughts, emotions, passions, desires, feelings, psychosis, neurosis, issues of a mental nature are already defined and can be measured by science, those things are not the soul. Are YOU following?
And, the point of my reference was to say exactly that to you - so what!
No, they aren't and you can repeat that till the cows come home, but it is simply not true.
You can't look at something that isn't there.
Ones psychological makeup is not the soul, neither are emotions, passions or any other rational faculties, that is complete bs.
Yes, crap and making it up as you go along. That is obvious.
It's very sad believers take well known concepts that can be observed, measured and tested by science and dishonestly wrap them all up in their ridiculous belief system and call it a soul. Terrible behavior.
Sorry to burst your bubble i.e. what passes for scientific knowledge, but as far as I can recall, I have never seen Oxygen and Nitrogen under the microscope. Unless the microscopes that we used whike in medical school were so totally defective. The so called electron microscope was not named to indicate that it could see atoms and their component protons and electrons.
"The Scanning Tunneling Microscope
The scanning tunneling microscope (STM) is a type of electron microscope that shows three-dimensional images of a sample.
The stylus is extremely sharp, the tip being formed by one single atom. It slowly scans across the surface at a distance of only an atom's diameter."
http://www.nobelprize.org/educational/p … index.html
I read the brochure on your microscope and it doesn't claim what you are claiming. Btw oxygen and nitrogen are atoms not molecules.
Yes, it does support what I said.
"Recording the vertical movement of the stylus makes it possible to study the structure of the surface atom by atom. A profile of the surface is created, and from that a computer-generated contour map of the surface is produced."
Thanks for the correction, I was probably thinking about the molecules in the air comprised of oxygen and nitrogen. Does that make all the difference?
@TM: If in fact you could see through the microscope the actual Oxygen proton and 2 electrons orbiting it, why have I not seen any pictures of it reproduced from the "image" that this microscope ostensibly "sees" and records. Have you? If you have, I would be very happy if you could share it with me.
As per your formulation (and Mr Hawkings), the brain is just an entity, albeit a biologic one, that does nothing for humans except act as a conduit or terminal for sensory input (from all of our 5 physical senses) so that those input could be immediately processed, then acted upon by the brain's intricate dendro-axonal connections in an almost mechanistic way, so that humans could appropriately react to those sensory input, thus ensuring his "survival".
Recent research on the intricacies of the physiopathology of the brain's anatomy strongly indicates that those superbly integrated dendro-axonal connections, do and can function independently of the sensory input coming from our 5 senses.....thus giving credibility to the idea that the "brain has a mind of its own."
We, as humans, think that we are all, in our full consciousness, captains of our own ship... totally in control based on our perception of the material reality that sorrounds us.. It now appears that the brain, irrespective of those material realties, could intitiate perceptions, thus concepts, that is devoid of and in the absence of any material inference made by our 5 physical senses.
Hi, guys. How you been AV? Long time. The human brain is, indeed, a computer, albeit, unlike any man-made computer yet made. The human brain can beat the pants off of any of them because of the sheer number of simoultaneous sub-routines which are maintained 24-7, 365 days ayear, non-stop, while maintaining a consciousness level unattainable by any man-made computer. Dell isn't even close. Toss that in with the fact that the only super-natural thing on this planet, possibly in this entire universe is...human beings. We alone stand outside and in defference to nature. The nature of energy goes beyond the physical body. All things are a manifestation of energy, including consciousness. And me? I'm a dummy. I hold no degrees, never graduated from community college, All I hold is a G.E.D. And everything that I say, was not of my invention. It was handed to me on a veritable silver platter. Now, it just might all be B.S....then again, I might be speaking from the spirit, and not the material plane. According to the Medicine Dream, I do walk equally well in both planes.
Which brings us to the eternal question... which came first, the chicken or the egg? I would agree with the formulation expressed by paradigmsearch, for the simple reason that even if I am (exist), I may not know that I am(exist), therefore I have to think that I am(exist)... the thinking process obviously comes from the supremely integrated, marvelously connected dendro-axonal structure of the human brain that allows you to think and therefore allows you to conceptualize that you exist.... the I am. The thinking comes first before the conclusion that you exist.( I am).
No, Jomine is more correct. A virus is (exist) but doesn't think. A human can think but cannot think without being (exist). First must come the existence.
Wilderness has explained it beautifully, so I'm just asking you to think about the people with brain defects(syndrome, birth defect, brain injury) too, whose thoughts are drastically different sometimes.
@jomine: I am assuming that the discussion only pertains to non-diseased human brains....brains that are fully functional in all aspects of of its anatomy and physiology.
Why, a fully functional brain is needed for a soul?
I would infer from your post that you do believe in the existence of a soul. A fully functional brain is of course not needed for one to have a soul but a fully functional brain is important, if not critical, for any human being to appreciate his inate dignity, integrity and verity, and spirituality.
So soul is not something that exist but the totality of human personality?
@jomine: The human soul exist because without it we would be no more conscious of our existence as the petunia that decorates our window sill. Humans have soul because without it, he would never ask the why, and the how of his existence. The soul is what makes humans perceive that his existence is not purely material, but most of all surely spiritual.
You are merely confusing your belief in a soul with the functions of the brain.
This statement would be untrue. The Human Mind and Consciousness are not one's soul. That's pure mysticism and intellectual dishonesty to even think so.
So psychotics and mentally retarded people got no souls?
I suggest that you read in its totality a recent edition of Discovet magazine that deal exclusively with the subject of the Human Brain, an orgam so complexly connected and integrated, there is nothing like it all of creation/evolution.
Does that article somehow support your ridiculous claims that the soul is the embodiment of well defined brain functions?
The article(s) basically discussed the Human Brain purely from the biologic point of view....but what was interesting are the experimental models that are now being pursued in various laboratories, that unmistakably shows that the brain functions rhythmically( what scientists call "ionic pulsation"" that course through the dendro-axonal connections, independent of and irrespective of the input coming from our 5 physical senses. This opens up the possibility, that the brain "has a mind of its own" so to speak and is therefore able, via those ionic pulses that are integrated into its supremely complex connections and interactions, to generate thoughts, concepts, ideas, that are totally disconnected from the material reality that sorrounds human beings.
I posit that because of this cerebral abililty, humans are now able to conceptualize and therefore aspire to a higher level of consciousness, to a "supra"-natural level of existence. It is not entirely improbable that because of this cerebral capacity, humans were able, early on in their evolutionary pathway, to formulate rthe concept of a God or a Deity or a Supernatural being, without the sensory input of the natural and material world.
I don't have to read any magazine, I studied neurology as a UG.
But that does not answer my question. You say the seat of personality is the soul. If so, a mere brain injury should not change the personality of a person, but it does. Our personality is intimately depended on the proper functioning of all areas of brain and any minor abrasion any where can change personality, sometimes even drastically. And other animals show the properties you have defined as the property of soul(like self awareness) which can also change with brain alterations. So what is this soul and what does it do?
@Jomine: I would have been more impressed if you said that you are still involved , as a PG or as a resident scientist in some research facility somewhere, in the study of the Human Brain. Be that as it may, your first two sentences were pure UG bluster.
The question of whether the human soul, specifically, ( and the souls of all animate entities in the universe generally) exist and what parts of the brain assuage its various manifestations, is not for the biological/physical scientist to prove.
It is for all of us, as members of the specie Homo Sapiens, having been given, through divine initiation, then evolutuionary intervention, the brains to conceptualize, and idealize an existence that is not totally teethered on the objective, the material, the physical to absolutely aspire to a higher level of existence... an existence that is mediated by the soul.
The soul exist because it is the only way we could explain the why and how of our earthly existence.
Nothing "meta-physical" about my statement. Calling it such is just an easy way of blowing off what I say.
I would like to see some thoughts created and/or located inside a brain, before one can figure out how the brain computes them. Until now, such a thing hasn't occured. Physical reactions that thoughts cause to the brain (as well as other body parts) are not proof that thoughts are being made there. Yet, it has been considered a standard fact for decades now. I find it a bit too dogmatic.
I have done several hubs on this topic, ie consciousness being beyond the brain, and the brain being the organ/receptacle to animate the biped.
I am therefore I think -
"Tell me about the rabbits!" The perfection which is evidenced in the mathematical nature of this universe, makes me wonder why many can't see that there is more to our existence than a simple "Darn, look at the mess I've made" accident. The complexities of the human brain would suggest, (Given that it is totally mathematical in it's workings) that those who perceive the intangible are slightly ahead of those who can't.
Mere computers do not have the emotional capacity to become more noble or kind. Also, I simply do not believe emotions, dreams, memories and all that are just electro-chemical reactions. Thats is like saying you can create love and all of these things in a lab with the correct PHYSICAL components. For a human being, spontaneity is what makes you different than a computer. Your brain may function like a computer, but it is NOT a computer. There is much much more going on inside humans. Choosing to do a back flip outta nowhere is a perfect example. Logically, this makes no sense. But if humans were indeed computers, there would be NO back flips EVER, simply because computers "know logically" there is no real reason for a back flip to exist. If we were indeed JUST computers.. wow. No art, no music, no fun.
computer with a capability to process knowledge with human emotions, coupled with life's experiences, effects of inclusion in a society and a particular culture.
Energy. Straight up, Einsteinian energy. E=MC2. E is equal to all. E existed before the universe coalesced into what we experience. Where once was nothing but energy...now I AM!
Hawking said this? - I'm disappointed in him. The brain has been compared to the latest technology for a long time and today it's the Turing test; The Chinese Room Argument
Aristotle thought that the brain is a radiator designed to cool the heart, the seat of the soul.
"Throughout history, people have compared the brain to different inventions. In the past, the brain has been said to be like a water clock and a telephone switchboard " - More metaphors throughout history @ http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/metaphor.html
Hey Al, read this! Your veiws on the duality of man is always enlightening!
50/50 odds on who is confused here. Jomine, it is only by the vision of your myopic consciousness that one could assume that. Do you consider them without consciousness? Do you consider them without life, with no mentality at all? If you do, you should reduce the dosage of whatever it is you're on. Noetics...ever hear the word? Google it. All life that we accept is based on the carbon element. You are a lump of coal...one day you will be a diamond. Pressure, pressure, pressure. I was accused of making things up by Rad Man...blindness seems to have spread.
According to basic cardiography, the heart, which is a muscle, is functioned by electrical micro-pulses that make the heart beat. These electrical micro-pulses follow a regular electrical pathway called Einthoven's Triangle: Positive, negative and reset. These micro=pulses are responsible for everything your body does, to include thinking. So, there is one triangle which makes the heart beat, and the same triangle makes your brain think. Energy is what gives us life, makes us who we are, and when we die, we merely become "elemental" in the strictest definition of that word. There is no other way to explain this.
Now, that is something that I would like to do, if I trusted anyone. I don't. Certain parameters would have to be in place to keep me from conveniently disappearing into a society I see as wrapped up in an Orwellian nightmare. Habeus Corpus and al that. If I were put under, what they would get is what I write. I write, what I am. I do have a message. What would you do if you had a message? Slip it under the door at the U.N.? My life has been really strange. Twilight Zone strange. Serling was one of my "homies". Same local roots. Boyz in da hood. Darn his hide!
If Mr. Stephen Hawkings liken the human brain to a computer I question his and anyone else's ability to even understand the functionality of the computer. Computers cannot think nor can they conceptualize. Ask the computer "what is beautiful?" Ugly and beautiful is the same to a computer. Ask a computer what it feels about pain, it feels no pain so how can it relates to someone who does have pain?
The human brain is an incredible marvel which I have my doubts that even the most advanced computer can even come close to the human mind. From nothing the human mind can conceptualize a tool. The human mind understand emotions. The human mind is aware of it self meaning it understands that it exist. The computer does only what the human mind has instructed it to do.
I can't imagine anything more horrific than a human brain that used a Microsoft Windows operating system.
My question for the people who do not believe in soul is, What keeps it going in such a way that it follows order? Sanity. Why does the brain choose THIS state as the most suitable state of mind if it is all just atoms (unintelligent/unemotional) put together to form a brain. Where does the knowledge of how to create reactions, fire neurons, send communications and regulate body function with such speed and accuracy come from? Where do the rules on which it functions exist? We know the brain has a purpose because it does all these positive, vital things for us. Its purpose then is to keep us sane and alive. Where does this purpose it serves come from? Atoms? Chemicals? Electricity? To me all these things are inhuman. Functioning together they are still inhuman. Humanness is beyond these things. Even if human beings with all their emotions, creativity, and spontaneity, are the result of a certain atomic algorithm which creates a being with all these capabilities.. The question of where this algorithm or order came from still exists. If it is a just a result of randomness creating a possibility, look! That same process created ALL the other species here on this planet? The odds of each algorithm (species) existing on this planet at the same time, who breathing the same air, drinking the same water is just... wow. Just some electricity and chemicals? When you break it down. Atoms are just atoms. Molecules just molecules. Grab a bunch of em, and they are still just that. How do atoms make a human. Where is the connection? Forming requires intelligence...
by Alexander A. Villarasa6 months ago
As some Hubbers have suggested empiricism aka scientific exploration is the only destiny that humans must aim for? Empiricism is tethered solely to materialism and physicalism. But humans as a...
by ptosis22 months ago
The soul, by definition, is meta-physical and is thought that the soul would be connected to the brain, not within the brain.It used to be thought that the soul resided in your heart - but getting a heart transplant...
by Alexander A. Villarasa4 years ago
It makes me wonder how far humans would go to reach their "destiny" of unraveling the mysteries of the universe. When do we cross the Rubicon from being a biologic entity to a metallic/plastic one, and...
by ptosis4 years ago
No, I'm not talking about the fandangled mandangler. Your stomach has neurons - about the same as a cat's brain!So even though it's not able to give "specific and articulable facts" having a gut feeling is...
by pisean2823116 years ago
was reading an article by an atheist...punch line was that god exist in human brain...
by helenathegreat9 years ago
In your personal spiritual beliefs, do animals have souls? Are they interchangeable with human souls? In the past few days I've spent some time looking into my dog's eyes, and I can't decide what I believe...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.