A lot of very vocal hubbers believe that the soul( human and other animate entities) do not exist. They are quite adamant in their perception that like the existence of God, the existence of the soul is a man made fantasy, in the level of fairies, unicorns, etc..
Other hubbers do believe in the existence of the Human soul, but they posit that when a human dies, his soul dies as well.....thus there is no existence in the hereafter.
Still others believe that not only does the soul exists, but it continues to exist beyond the earthly existence of the human that once possesed IT.
One could conceptualize that the ENERGY that initiated the process of creation and evolution, continues to breath life into the SPACE that sorrounds all the animate entities that have and will continue to exist into the end of TIME. The equation that undergirds all existence is the energy vis-a-vis SPACE/TIME continuum. I posit that the soul is the manifestation of that equation, because it is the soul, specifically our HUMAN SOUL, that allows us to aspire for a purer level of existence... for a higher level of consciousness.
Humans may aspire to a higher level of consciousness, but it seems to me that all animated matter has to contain the elements that we traditionally equate to the soul. I would think the difference lies more in the form of the matter it is presently animating, than much of a difference in the substance itself.
It is my ardent perception that every animate entities on earth and anywhere else in the universe, at the time of their conception, is given part of that Energy i.e. a soul, that initiated the process of creation and evolution. The Human Soul is unique in that it has allowed him to progress to his current niche in the natural world on earth. Additionally, his soul has allowed him to go above (supra-natural) nature, making his the only specie capable of controlling nature( including his baser animal instincts), thus allowing him to take part in the CREATIVE process. Episodically, Man's EGO has overcome the harmonizing role of the soul, thus the destructive forces that his EGO has wrought upon himself and those other animate entities that share his earthly world.
That is a very interesting idea. Of course if you want anyone to take it as a fact then you will need to demonstrate your claim to be true.
If you can't do that then your claim has as much credence as Santa or the Bogeyman.
Of course I gtake it as a fact that I have a soul...if you take it as a fact that you don't have a soul, that I am crtainly not going to disabuse you from that belief.
Now do I need to demonstrate to you or other non-believers, the verity of the Human Soul...Of course not.
Now about Santa and the bogeyman... you will have to ask the folks who believe in them.
I dont take it as a fact that there is or isn't a soul. There is no evidence either way.
If you are going to claim a fact then I am afraid you are going to HAVE to provide evidence for that claim.
If you are asking for some tangible, physically defined evidence that souls exist....then good luck with that.
Would humans, having evolved with brains that has allowed him to conceive concepts, perceive perceptions, then look for the evidence somewhere else? Would his intuition and inate instincts be able to help him search for the evidence? ABSOLUTELY.
I posit that the soul aspires to a lower level of existence and experience, otherwise what is the sense in my being here.
You might be looking at this issue on the wrong end of the telescope, but I must admit you just posited a very interesting idea....one that deserves a forum all its own.
On further thought, your idea truly resonates in the narrative of the Son of God becoming Human, if for no other reason than to give us his fellow humans insight into how they should live their earthly life as detailed in His sermon on the mount.
Knowing that it is only for a short break from being on the higher plane.
It never wanted to have to stay here ... that would be hell on earth. LOL
Hell on earth happens everytime human EGO overcomes then overides the conscientiously consecrating and conforming role of the Soul on human affairs.
nope not joking....what I meant by conforming is harmonizing
That's an interesting take I would not have thought of. I think the idea is to be it, and
not emulate what is external, which is always window shopping.
What if I haven't read the sermon on the mount? Do I still know how to live or do I live misguided? My soul is something deeper than giving me instructions on how to live my life. Its my whole being, my laughter, my sadness, my inward beauty, my passion.
The Sermon on the Mount has been interpreted and re-interpreted by so many peolple , including scholarly saints as well as scowly scoundrels. My personal take on it is that , as with any or all of the text in the Old and New Testament, common sense applies, i.e. if a passage could and should not be interpreted literally, then it could and should be interpreted metaphorically. Experts on the Holy Book may disagree on what passages could and should be interpreted literally/metaphorically, but my common sense approach to this conundrum is to treat the Sermon on the Mount as insights/guideposts not instructions or commands on how to live a life worth living.
At the end of the day, how I lived my life is a matter solely between me and my Creator.
the soul is precisely the ethics engine, constantly advising about truthfullness in our right-from-wrong choices/asumptions...If soul is sluggish it means its carrier is more asleep than awake...some sort of beta versus alfa waves of the sleeping time; so no, the soul is not your sadness, the sadness is a consequence of not listening to your soul and act mistakingly;; the souls is nt either your happiness, as happiness is that fulfilling sense we get only when we knowingly live in the presence of God and God is present in our daily life
As for interpreting the Bible, we need really a scientific approach to the contents, yep, scientific... When you read stories to kids from the classics, those stories are full of impossible charactrs, yet we manage to ascertain the morals of them, then why be SO picky and distrustful of the Bible teachings??? It is to be interpreted mostly metaphorically as it was written at the time and for readers not illustrated or lost in translations...It is the same way a good teacher introduces layered concepts about a unique topic: by comparison, by extrapolation, by confronting opposites, by eliminating the unimportant, by reductio, etc...,...that's how formal math elaborates on intrinsically complex principles... I find the Bible a most interesting book where one can find answers to understand most of our struggles and be comforted by the assurance that He will be there for whoever call upon Him and asks... "ask and you will receive". Even when the Old testament is full of an irate God, even there, you can see that It is a loving God betrayed by beloved ones, just like an earthly commoner will get mad at his child when he/she won't follow the insructions, given for his/her own good.
And as for the privacy of the matter of whose business it is the way each of us lives our life, yes it is a matter of God and you, but unfortunately 0r fortunately (?) each of us will have to have a LOT of the rest of who crossed your pathways on earth and a record of each encounter is kept on how each acted upon the others...and those who were the good samaritans, and those who were compassionate, etc etc EVEN if they were not Xtians, they will enjoy ethernal life...(see JOB on Old Testament)
So I guess thats how a 'wired' economy started on what one does affects the rest, but specially, oneself...and we certainly do not want to act against ourselves, do we? matter of privacy or of just humanity...let's see
Born already what you naturally are. Essentially my core is not much different than when I was ten.
But I know infinitly more about the condition here. We get lost with everybody telling us what to do and how to think.
That is why it might be nice if the soul existed, not proof that it does.
It would be nice if unicorns existed too. But reality is not obliged to be nice.
The reality of the existence of the Human Soul does not necessarily beg for IT to be materially perceived. How does one prove the existence of the human soul, except to say that if IT does not exist, would we act differently in the course of our daily existence.. Of course we would. If gravity (another non-material entity, like the Human Soul) does not exist, would one be more amenable to jumping off a high building, and expecting not to die? Of course we would. But we know that the Soul exist in the same way that gravity exist... because without them we would behave differently.
The existence of unicorns on the other hand fits nicely in the narrative of human creativity... a creativity that we might not otherwise manifest if we did not possess a soul.... or if the soul does not possess us.
More nonsense. How would be behave differently? We are animals. We behave as our evolution dictates.
Does your evolutionary pathway dictates that you respond to my posts by calling them nonsense?
I need your debating arguments...not your debasing rants.
I call them nonsense because they make no sense. I have no argument against majik other than that is makes no sense.
You say - there must be a soul other wise we would behave differently - I ask how - you attack me for pointing out that you are speaking things that make no sense.
Now answer the question if you are actually looking to debate instead of preach your nonsense.
Ranting is for the ranters, and preaching is for the preachers. And I am neither.
What you call majikal nonsense, makes perfect perceptual sense to me, and to a billion other folks, as of last counting.
I think it would probably help if you started using English properly. There is no such thing as perceptual sense.
What you mean is - you believe something.
It does not make any sense, and I don't really care how many other people need to believe in majik - that does not affect the sense/no sense discussion.
What you say is nonsense, and you are ranting and preaching. I simply reject your statements and ask you to back them up with facts.
As you cannot do that and are not prepared to be honest and admit you have an irrational belief based on nothing but personal needs and "feelings," - we will always be at odds.
If you simply held that belief and did not need to convince others that you were making sense - we would not even be discussing it.
Does that make sense?
I certainly did not write my intitial post to convince you and others of anything.... and if you think that I am hubbing to convince you and your ilks of anything..then you are all seriously deluded. My beliefs might be irrational to you, but then again why did you and your cohorts rant that they are irrational, except for you to satisfy your narcissistic need to be noticed, and to feel being "attacked" and then whine about it.
At least you admit they are just beliefs. No sense involved. Cohorts? Oh you mean rational thinkers? OK - thanks I guess.
FYI...belief and rational are not mutually exclusive. - On the other hand your endless rantings and rational are indeed OXYMORONS.
This doesn't really address my point that you really haven't said anything supporting that the soul does exist. For the very reason that there is no obvious way a soulled versus soulless person would differ.
So even begin to do what your subject line says, we would have to first agree how the souls existence could be measured. To make an argument one must at the very least determine what would constitute proof and them present putative evidence.
And unicorns are not a creative act, but a miscommunication between continents dating from the era of bestiaries. Which just just goes to show you that what is intuitive is not always true.
Do I have any quantifiable/irrefutable evidence to support my contention that the human soul exist? Of course not. I am relying solely on my intuitive/instinctual perception that the SOUL exist.
I am aware of course that some hubbers do not share the same view... and in the process of denying their soul-less nature, some would go to the extent of saying that their existence is no more different than that of other animate entities (rats, cockroaches, slugs etc.)
This I think is nihilism pure and simple.... that emanates from two EGO driven belief systems:. (1) Objectivism, which flatlty says that anything not perceived objectively by our 5 physical senses, do not exist, (2) Reductionism which posits that any physical object must be reduced to its most basic single component.
Wherever and whenever the concept of unicorns started is not as important, as the fact that whoever started the concept, sure had a very vivid imagination. As the great creative conceptualist, Salvador Dali, would say, intellect without imagination is like a bird without wings. I am of course referencing the extinction of Raphus Cucullatus, a flightless bird that once roamed the forest of an island somewhere in the Indian Ocean.
How could one have a real physical life if the Soul was a proven entity?
There is entity above and beyond us, and we, caught in the nature of the universe, are connected to everything in it. This is suggestive of the Gaia concept of the Greeks and the concept of Manitou found among the native people of North America.
So basically believing in the soul matters to people who believe in the soul. This is hardly surprising.
by Alexander A. Villarasa11 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 spease7 years ago
One thing I see in this forum. It appears that the people that don't believe in God don't want to discuss anything. Most of the posts are just name calling or basically saying you are stupid if you...
by Alexander A. Villarasa7 years ago
Secularism, in tandem with other belief systems i.e. atheism/agnosticism, objectivism, reductionism, aim to , ultimately eliminate religion/sprituality/, mysticism/transcendentalism and , metaphysics from ...
by paarsurrey14 months ago
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/51248pisean282311 wrote:do you think god's value would remain if there are no humans..god needs human since humans can only pray , hope and believe..do you agree to this?Paarsurrey...
by Mahaveer Sanglikar5 months ago
Many believers like to say that Atheists should prove that there is no God. Believers should know that existence has to be proved, not the non-existence. If a thing exists, it is possible to prove its existence. So...
by Alan2 years ago
In other words, does the existence of "God" depend upon the mind of Man to support that existence?
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.