How can one know they have a soul or spirit?

[Pudding]

How is it that one can posit the self has a seat or permanence to it, when the sense of being is comprised of many factors- mostly things people experience in their lives?

Take away any one of these experiences, and the sense of self wouldn't be the same. We wouldn't feel like the same person.

If people's lives experience are also simultaneously store in their soul/spirit, why can't one then posit the self has a seat or permanence to it?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

How did you start with spirit?

WHY would I look up soul?

Its not important me. It wasnt important that I look it up for conversation.

What is your point?

 

[McBell]

WHY would I look up soul?

Its not important me. It wasnt important that I look it up for conversation.

What is your point?

I merely find it interesting that you took the time to define for yourself "spirit" but are aggressively ignoring "soul".

No worries.
I was merely curious as to why.
Since it is obviously a sore topic for you, I shall drop it.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I merely find it interesting that you took the time to define for yourself "spirit" but are aggressively ignoring "soul".

No worries.
I was merely curious as to why.
Since it is obviously a sore topic for you, I shall drop it.

Oh.

I never saw a use for the word soul. Spirit, yes. I do believe in spirit.

I actually honestly dont know what soul means in religious context. I looked it up years ago in all my religious floundering around and never got the concept. We always used spirit.

 

[Blastcat]

I hear what you are saying. Remember, religious beliefs are personal most who make it their lives.

And in many cases, people don't take their religious beliefs very seriously, so it's of no real consequence.. but the problem is when people really DO take their religious ideas seriously. We can have HUGE problems then.

When you ask difficult questions, especially online in a religious debate forum, you will expect people to have preassumptions that you are attacking their faith not asking to make them think.

I do expect people to judge me.
I can't control how they choose to judge me.

As such, when you notice that your questions spark a specific reaction from people, it may be easier to reword it if you are interested in getting a respectful answer. Both of you may not understand everything; and, at least the common foundation of respect in language (remember, online is different). I notice I have to phrase my words different... put things like "many, some, a lot of" etc to soffen what I say because it sounds like generalizations and if you talked with me in person (heard my voice) that isnt so.

My point is to be aware of how other perceive what you say and if desired, reword your questions if they are patient to continue the conversation.

I welcome a good conversation based on mutual respect. I hope that I have addressed your concerns about my intentions.

I thank you for being patient.

Sometimes I put "this is a sensitive question" or you would see some people put what audience they are refering to etc in their OP, for example to avoid things of this nature. You will find many christians (which is what most people I know on RF use as a example for their arguments) not talk much in conversations not because of the tough questions but because of how they are worded and preassumptions of attack.

I can't stop people from having presumptions.

Some beliefs are rediculous, I agree. In my opinion, if I thought about it and said which ones Id feel like Im talking about the people not the beliefs. Especially if they are beliefs people still practice today.

It's only people who have beliefs. But it's really the beliefs I want to discuss, not the people. People can and do change their beliefs. We should also recognize that most people keep the religious beliefs that they were indoctrinated into as children. Nobody chooses what family they are born into. It's not their fault.

The problem is the false beliefs. Let's challenge those..

Why should they abandon the ideas you feel are bad? (remember, each person has a personal opinion not a fact)

There are true beliefs and there are false ones. False beliefs are dangerous.
We should acquire and keep true beliefs, and abandon false beliefs.\

Why would anyone WANT to believe something that isn't true?

True beliefs are useful and beneficial, false beliefs are useless ( maybe even harmless ) at best.. and we know full well how false beliefs can have dire consequences for humanity.

And it should go without saying that we should always be ready to alter our beliefs if new data warrants it.

If I remember what what quote this was refering to, many religious have terms they define personally. Its not meaningless talk to us.

When someone can't or wont explain what they mean.. that's what I call meaningless babble. "Thanks for nothing" is what I think. It's ok to have personal definitions for terms, but we should be very clear about those.

Most religious concept words don't really convey much meaning at all.. people disagree all the time, even within the same religious groups.

Another thing people do here you will see more common is say "imho" or "imo" so whomever actually reads the post can step back and think this isnt about ME but about what the other person is saying.

IMHO, I only speak for myself.

Haha.. I never heard of that before. I dont see anything supernatual. So, I guess thats your call?

Not at all.. I am asking a question, not making a "call". I ask questions when I don't understand something. If I can't at all understand someone.. I say that the conversation was "meaningless" to me.

If you notice, I asked if you are a supernaturalist.

Touch questions are fine but with my family, it takes on a different context. How you phrased your questions sounded more like mocking.

I'm sorry that you could interpret it that way.
It was never my intention.

As a result, it doesnt sound like questions about my beliefs about my family but an attack with our family beliefs.

IMHO, it would be best to take me at my word, until you have proof that I can't be trusted to say what I mean to say.
I am very precise. IF I meant to mock your family in any way, you would have NO DOUBT about it.

I do know how to mock.
I'm actually quite good with words.

They may seem rediculous or odd from an outsider; and, that doesnt disvalue it being logical to the person who holds that belief.

Logic isn't variable from person to person. If something is logical, it's logical to everyone. That's how math and logic works.

I will need to reread what you post if youd like me to answer that particular question.

It would be great if you answered my questions. Thank you. All too many people flee in anger before they do.

I have the habit of numbering my important questions and observations.
I really WANT clarity.

Exactly.

Opps.. I don't know what you are agreeing with.. I only see that you say "Exactly" but not what is exactly said.

The definition of soul? I cant answer that. I dont understand what that means in context.

It's odd to me that you understand what spirit means.. but not what soul means.

In my view, everyone has a spirit. However, I never tell people they are wrong based on how I see reality.

And to so many others.. everyone has a soul. They might not have good reasons for having their beliefs. I don't know that you have shown that your beliefs about the spirit makes any sense yet. You have STATED your beliefs, but I have yet to see any reason for them.

There isn't all kinds of personally variable "realities" .. there is only the one. We have different IDEAS about the one reality.

If you have any evidence for any other "reality" out there.. let us know. I am not aware of any.
I HEAR a lot of claims about .. "other" realities. I question those claims.

I dont understand this comment? Whats it refering to?

Sorry, but somehow.. I can't read what you are asking me about... I can only see your text, not mine. I'm new here.. so I don't know all the bells and whistles. Maybe some expert reading this can help me out.

The problem is that many outsiders may not ever understand it and that is something they have to accept. For example, I do not believe in any deities. I have tried wraping my head around different types of gods, definitions of gods, and so forth and it just doesnt figure into to my way of thinking of the world.

I asked my questions, tough to soft, and did my pondering and research and now I accept that that is one of many beliefs that I will never get. I dont say its rediculous, of course; and, I do find it quite odd, the idea in general. I do tell people that... but in a manner that hopefully they understand Im talking about the religion and not their faith or their relationship with the religion itself.

Do you find that people get upset when you question their religious beliefs?
I do.
All the time.

For example, instead of saying "god is rediculous. Why do you believe in something that doesnt exist"?

I don't go around saying that god is ridiculous.. I might say that the belief is unsupported by any evidence.
I might ask "How do you know that your god exists?"

But if something someones says is really ridiculous.. it's not my fault. I wont pretend that he made sense when he really doesn't even try to. If someone were to say "All cats are yellow and blue so you owe me ten dollars", I might say they're being ridiculous.

Id say more "I dont believe god exists. In my opinion, that is odd (for lack of better words), how did you come to belief this?"

or something to that affect.

Not everyone wants to keep it soft but online its best to lighten up a bit.

When I'm serious, people tell me to lighten up.
When I lighten up, they tell me I mock.

I can't please everyone, so I try to please myself.

We ask the same kinds of questions.. "How do we know that any god exists?.. "
So, you seem to be an atheist.

And you seem to believe in a spirit... And so, in all respect to you and your family and to each and every deserving person in this forum:

1. How do you know that a spirit exists?
2. How is spirit different from "breath"?

Also, I write long posts. I rather someone to take time reading my posts within the days they have time then pick and choose what they want to comment on. It makes it easier to explain my points without being misunderstood.

I don't know if you have noticed, but I have the very annoying habit of addressing almost ALL of what a person writes to me.
One thought at a time.

In detail.

I pay attention to what people write to me. I quote what they write, as well, so as to be as clear as possible as to what I am talking about. I even make numbered LISTS about what I consider to be important points. And I usually put a smiley face at the end, so that people know the torture is over. FOR NOW.......

 

[Blastcat]

WHY would I look up soul?

Its not important me. It wasnt important that I look it up for conversation.

What is your point?

The problem is that the OP asks how can we tell soul from spirit. If you can't tell what one is.. then you can't answer the question at all.

Like I can't.
I don't know what the soul is.. or the spirit.. both quite meaningless terms for me.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I do know how to mock. .. I pay attention to what people write to me.

Perhaps, but when people are in a mocking mood, you fail to notice. You pay attention to what people write, but you do not pay attention to why they are writing that.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The problem is that the OP asks how can we tell soul from spirit. If you can't tell what one is.. then you can't answer the question at all.

Like I can't.
I don't know what the soul is.. or the spirit.. both quite meaningless terms for me.

I kinda ditch the soul because when I hear it explaind it sounds like spirit to me. Thats the word I usually use. So, the OP question....based on what I know/experience, they all seem the same to me just different words to describe it.

 

[Pudding]

There is a belief that a person have 3 souls and 7 spirits in Daosim.

 

[McBell]

Oh.

I never saw a use for the word soul. Spirit, yes. I do believe in spirit.

I actually honestly dont know what soul means in religious context. I looked it up years ago in all my religious floundering around and never got the concept. We always used spirit.

Fair enough.

 

[Pudding]

When one die, if they have soul/spirit they probably will know it.
If there is no soul/spirit after one die, then one just die without knowing they don't have soul/spirit.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Im on a tablet with a extra tiny keyboard. I try to catch the grammar and spelling errors.

Also, I agree. I rather people take me literally at my word rather than finding hidden agendas of what I say.

And in many cases, people don't take their religious beliefs very seriously, so it's of no real consequence.. but the problem is when people really DO take their religious ideas seriously. We can have HUGE problems then.

Do take it too seriously? As in in a good or bad way or doesnt matter?

It's only people who have beliefs. But it's really the beliefs I want to discuss, not the people. People can and do change their beliefs. We should also recognize that most people keep the religious beliefs that they were indoctrinated into as children. Nobody chooses what family they are born into. It's not their fault.

The problem is the false beliefs. Let's challenge those..

To tell you honestly, I see more harm coming from the people. I always use a gun as an example. A gun does nothing oon its own. Its just a metal object (or whatever its made of), with bullets and a trigger. If someone uses that gun for ill purposes, that I have a problem with.

With some people, they are comparing religion as if they are guns. I was never comfortable with that. People can use a butter knife to kill someone but its main use is for butter and so on and so forth.

If I were to challenge a belief, Id challenge how the person comes to the belief he does. So instead of asking "does god exist?" Id ask more "How did you come to that conclusion? What in your brain (I wouldnt say that bluntly) click to where you feel a deity takes care of you?"

I mean, you can challenge a persons belief until they are blue in the face with all its inaccuracies. However, in all belief systems, if its that persons reality even If they see contradictions, if it works for them, they keep it. Just not many admit that they have some false beliefs (and even more so, false based on what? My view or objective? If objective, what is the common denominator Im basing my opinion on?)

Instead, if a believer is up for it, the only way to really get through is to challenge the psyche of that believer. Really get him to question why he believes what he does and even more important, how. Not to make him see his beliefs are false based on my views but question him about his views and see if he sees it himself IF it is false. I wouldnt know. I rarely do that because people are attached to their faith. Its not like debating what Plato meant by the Myth of the Cave type of thing.

When someone can't or wont explain what they mean.. that's what I call meaningless babble. "Thanks for nothing" is what I think. It's ok to have personal definitions for terms, but we should be very clear about those.

Most religious concept words don't really convey much meaning at all.. people disagree all the time, even within the same religious groups.

True. Havent you had anyone got far enough that you understand at least one religious concept and belief they had even though you disbelieve it?

Not at all.. I am asking a question, not making a "call". I ask questions when I don't understand something. If I can't at all understand someone.. I say that the conversation was "meaningless" to me.

If you notice, I asked if you are a supernaturalist.

Actually, it sounded like saracasm because I dont even think thats a word.

I ran over natualist before. There is such thing as a spiritual natualist. Then you got all these isms etc. I never knew anything about pantheism, atheism, this ism, that ism, and all the ists until I came online.

I think ever since I came on RF Ive been in what 10 boxes already.

But supernatualist doesnt make sense going by language. Closest I can think of to that is spiritual natualist but even that I dont claim because a lot of isms sounds like pop words.

Like seeing someone who is: A neo-christo polytheistic, druidic pantheism with buddhist leanings and muslim practitioner.

I leave it alone.

I'm sorry that you could interpret it that way.
It was never my intention.

Thank you.

IMHO, it would be best to take me at my word, until you have proof that I can't be trusted to say what I mean to say.
I am very precise. IF I meant to mock your family in any way, you would have NO DOUBT about it.

I do know how to mock.
I'm actually quite good with words.

Will do, Likewise please.

Logic isn't variable from person to person. If something is logical, it's logical to everyone. That's how math and logic works.

It would be great if you answered my questions. Thank you. All too many people flee in anger before they do.

I have the habit of numbering my important questions and observations.
I really WANT clarity.

That will take me a bit on a tablet.

It's odd to me that you understand what spirit means.. but not what soul means.

I thought they were interchangable and never questioned it. I just prefer the word spirit instead.

Do you find that people get upset when you question their religious beliefs?
I do.
All the time.

Yes. I try not to as much. I did when I went into Catholicism and left it I asked a lot of questions. Now I understand why a lot of christians belief as they do, I just dont understand how.

On RF, a lot of religious just watch and read. Thats another annoying thing. I think there is what ten people who interact in this forum. Maybe you meet someone who doesnt mind steping out of the box.then remember, many people cant. Its not that they are dismissing it entirely, but the religion they adopted at adulthood or indoctrinated as a child or whenever is a part of their identity.

Something I find hard to accept and only understand it when I think of my own faith.

I don't go around saying that god is ridiculous.. I might say that the belief is unsupported by any evidence.
I might ask "How do you know that your god exists?"

But if something someones says is really ridiculous.. it's not my fault. I wont pretend that he made sense when he really doesn't even try to. If someone were to say "All cats are yellow and blue so you owe me ten dollars", I might say they're being ridiculous.

I think thats fine. Online can mess up intent behind honest questions and answer either party may never understand. That and I wish we had more discussion rather than question and answer format when learning about each others religions and how we see them as true even though it sounds false.

When I'm serious, people tell me to lighten up.
When I lighten up, they tell me I mock.

I can't please everyone, so I try to please myself.

We ask the same kinds of questions.. "How do we know that any god exists?.. "
So, you seem to be an atheist.

And you seem to believe in a spirit... And so, in all respect to you and your family and to each and every deserving person in this forum:

1. How do you know that a spirit exists?
2. How is spirit different from "breath"?

This is where my natualist view comes in.

I dont know if I gave you the definition, but spirit is a collection of our emotions, thoughts, traits, and so forth of our psyche that lets us relate to ourselves, others, and the world around us

Its basic psychology, sociology, and environmental influence.

In theology, spirit means breathe. The psyche and energy (real energy rather than "religious jargon") that keeps us going and makes us who we are (physical former, mental latter) is sumed up as "breathe"

Its a metaphor. We need air to breathe. Air gives us life. I honestly dont know a one word term for that thats not religious jargon. Energy is the closest.

Thats how I know spirit exist. Without breathe (all the above) I wouldnt be here.

I don't know if you have noticed, but I have the very annoying habit of addressing almost ALL of what a person writes to me.
One thought at a time.

In detail.

I pay attention to what people write to me. I quote what they write, as well, so as to be as clear as possible as to what I am talking about. I even make numbered LISTS about what I consider to be important points. And I usually put a smiley face at the end, so that people know the torture is over. FOR NOW...

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Why do you hold that sense of being is entirely void? Did someone tell you or did you experience it yourself? If you experienced it yourself then did you notice the seat of the one who experienced the void?

I believe I experienced it, or at least the insight myself in understanding that we are not some fixed state of being at anytime in our lives. In each moment, day, and year we are actually a compound of many factors. I am not the person I was ten years ago, so which of those can we call this true self like an Atman? I say neither, and reject any such concept. I have been at a state in meditation where I recognized the factors in my cognition as separate: breathing and so forth, but the brain generates them as a compound.

This is hard to put into words, and I think that's why Buddhists often do not try. They call it wisdom beyond wisdom.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

You sound like a Buddhist.

You don't say

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Seems to me the answer depends entirely upon how each person defines "soul" and "spirit".

There is another question to be had here too. Well played sir.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Well, maybe the sense of being is an illusion of some kind, a persistent one, in any case, and one that seems to be part of our shared human experience. Most people that I know have a sense of "being", or awareness.. of some kind. I don't exactly know why you would call that sense "void" or what you really mean by it.

I mean that it is empty in itself, because it only appears to be through other processes and factors.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

If people's lives experience are also simultaneously store in their soul/spirit, why can't one then posit the self has a seat or permanence to it?

How would we set about proving that people's experiences are stored in a soul/spirit?

 

[atanu]

I believe I experienced it, or at least the insight myself in understanding that we are not some fixed state of being at anytime in our lives. In each moment, day, and year we are actually a compound of many factors. I am not the person I was ten years ago, so which of those can we call this true self like an Atman? I say neither, and reject any such concept. I have been at a state in meditation where I recognized the factors in my cognition as separate: breathing and so forth, but the brain generates them as a compound.

This is hard to put into words, and I think that's why Buddhists often do not try. They call it wisdom beyond wisdom.

Wisdom beyond wisdom? Okay. I am a bit disappointed however, that despite experiencing the void, you did not experience the experiencer of the void.

 

[atanu]

How do you propose that we should do that?

I do not know. There are folks here who have experienced the void. Possibly they can throw some light about the nature of the experiencer?

 

[Blastcat]

Perhaps, but when people are in a mocking mood, you fail to notice. You pay attention to what people write, but you do not pay attention to why they are writing that.

I can't read minds. If someone doesn't actually write something that makes sense, I can't be expected or bothered to pretend to know WHY or WHAT or HOW or anything.

You also cannot read my mind. You cannot "read" my mood unless I TELL you my mood.