What's the justification for believing in the soul?

[serp777]

It doesn't seem like there's any good evidence or rational justification for the existence of a soul. Most of the things i've heard are fallacious appeals to identity, and appeals to consequences like if we don't have a soul, then we can't have free will. I've also seen no demonstration that free will and consciousness is impossible within a purely physical environment. It seems to me that you'd have to show that a physical basis for free will and a soul is impossible in order to make the case that a metaphysical soul is a necessary claim. I think you'd also have the make the case that free will actually exists as well because there's no demonstration of that either. Otherwise the working, non absolute hypothesis should be that consciousness and free will is at least possible within a materialistic worldview given the facts that there are sentient humans, the only world we know is a physical world, and that physical material seems capable of producing a wide variety of advanced and complicated phenomena and synergistic effects.

So please let me know what kind of evidence or reasoning or logic exists to back up the assertion that at soul exists.

 

[George-ananda]

So please let me know what kind of evidence or reasoning or logic exists to back up the assertion that at soul exists.

In my thinking, step 1 is my study of so-called paranormal phenomena that has convinced me beyond reasonable doubt, that the materialist view can not be correct.

So what is the most correct view out there? I have found that the eastern and Indian (Hindu) and Theosophical model of reality best describes this 'more' than materialism. This models provides a detailed description of reality that shows how so-called paranormal phenomena is really just normal phenomena in this expanded view of reality. This model was formed by those believed to have the ability to perceive beyond the physical plane.

In this model we have a physical body and an interpenetrating astral/mental body and beyond those is the reincarnating Causal (soul) body. Hence, I believe in the existence of a soul.

 

[Milton Platt]

It doesn't seem like there's any good evidence or rational justification for the existence of a soul. Most of the things i've heard are fallacious appeals to identity, and appeals to consequences like if we don't have a soul, then we can't have free will. I've also seen no demonstration that free will and consciousness is impossible within a purely physical environment. It seems to me that you'd have to show that a physical basis for free will and a soul is impossible in order to make the case that a metaphysical soul is a necessary claim. I think you'd also have the make the case that free will actually exists as well because there's no demonstration of that either. Otherwise the working, non absolute hypothesis should be that consciousness and free will is at least possible within a materialistic worldview given the facts that there are sentient humans, the only world we know is a physical world, and that physical material seems capable of producing a wide variety of advanced and complicated phenomena and synergistic effects.

So please let me know what kind of evidence or reasoning or logic exists to back up the assertion that at soul exists.

I see no good evidence that there is anything like a soul. I also am extremely skeptical that free will exists. If all of out decisions are influenced by our genetic makeup as well as all of the experiences and learned things from our lives, real free will is a mirage. The fact that you had a choice in a situation and made a choice is not a demonstration of free will, but conditioning.

 

[Grandliseur]

It doesn't seem like there's any good evidence or rational justification for the existence of a soul. Most of the things i've heard are fallacious appeals to identity, and appeals to consequences like if we don't have a soul, then we can't have free will. I've also seen no demonstration that free will and consciousness is impossible within a purely physical environment. It seems to me that you'd have to show that a physical basis for free will and a soul is impossible in order to make the case that a metaphysical soul is a necessary claim. I think you'd also have the make the case that free will actually exists as well because there's no demonstration of that either. Otherwise the working, non absolute hypothesis should be that consciousness and free will is at least possible within a materialistic worldview given the facts that there are sentient humans, the only world we know is a physical world, and that physical material seems capable of producing a wide variety of advanced and complicated phenomena and synergistic effects.

So please let me know what kind of evidence or reasoning or logic exists to back up the assertion that at soul exists.

While I believe the soul to be the entire being, be it cat, dog, lion, or human, so that when this being dies, the soul dies -- I think something is going on that I cannot explain.

Please entertain yourself with this Youtube series:
NEAR-DEATH EXPERIENCE #

This is not a link, so you need to find it yourself. But, things cannot be explained by means of the materialistic universe.

 

[serp777]

In my thinking, step 1 is my study of so-called paranormal phenomena that has convinced me beyond reasonable doubt, that the materialist view can not be correct.

So what is the most correct view out there? I have found that the eastern and Indian (Hindu) and Theosophical model of reality best describes this 'more' than materialism. This models provides a detailed description of reality that shows how so-called paranormal phenomena is really just normal phenomena in this expanded view of reality. This model was formed by those believed to have the ability to perceive beyond the physical plane.

In this model we have a physical body and an interpenetrating astral/mental body and beyond those is the reincarnating Causal (soul) body. Hence, I believe in the existence of a soul.

That's a sufficient but not necessary account. Where's the evidence or logically necessary argument? Also, why would paranormal phenomena confirm the existence of a soul? Its consistent for the paranormal to exist and for humans not to have souls. I see no reason why dubious paranormal claims would confirm the existence of souls. And also, how would the paranormal give credence to specific Indian philosophies?

 

[serp777]

While I believe the soul to be the entire being, be it cat, dog, lion, or human, so that when this being dies, the soul dies -- I think something is going on that I cannot explain.

Please entertain yourself with this Youtube series:
NEAR-DEATH EXPERIENCE #

This is not a link, so you need to find it yourself. But, things cannot be explained by means of the materialistic universe.

Near death experiences are not a reliable way of determining the truth. I would ask what justification you have to make the claim that things cannot be explained in a materialistic universe. Near death experiences can certainly be explained in a materialistic worldview in many different ways. When the brain is near death, it is likely operate very unusually and unreliably. Furthermore, the underlying cause can also wreak havoc with how the brain works, which begs the question of why should we trust a malfunctioning brain anyways?

Other claims about NDE's can also be explained with confirmation bias, coincidence, probability, guessing, etc. Those are all sufficient explanations in a material universe.

"I think something is going on that I cannot explain."

This is what's know as the argument from ignorance-- I can't explain this, therefore souls, therefore the supernatural, therefore (insert whatever you want). A claim does not suddenly become rational to believe just because we lack an explanation. I don't know becomes a totally acceptable answer at this point.

 

[Grandliseur]

it is likely operate very unusually and unreliably

When a person who is on the operating table and being 'dead' sees herself on the roof of that building where she never has been, sees objects she has never seen which she can describe and can be verified - denying this kind of falsification is only possible by brain-dead atheists -- who hold on to their paradigms no matter what. I have seen one or two such videos where the person describes things not possible under the circumstances.

That much of it may be brushed away is neither here nor there. There is enough evidence to show that something beyond the materialistic universe is going on. Atheistic mumbo jumbo can only be endured so much so start paying attention to what is going on out there.

 

[YmirGF]

I believe in an expanded vision of self that is not contained within the present models available. I do so simply because I have directly experienced aspects of being that defy description although after experiencing said aspects it is fairly easy to see where our species primitive ideas of god(s) came from. I simply refer to it as the inner self and am uncomfortable with the term soul due to the excessive religious baggage the term has accrued over the ages. I much prefer the term entity due to its more amorphous connotations or energy personality essence if one wants to be slightly more specific.

To use a phrase that is popular nowadays, once seen, it cannot be unseen.

 

[George-ananda]

That's a sufficient but not necessary account. Where's the evidence or logically necessary argument?

I was only giving my ‘justification’ for my belief in a soul. That is what the OP asked for; justification, not a logical argument for necessity.

 

[YmirGF]

I was only giving my ‘justification’ for my belief in a soul. That is what the OP asked for; justification, not a logical argument for necessity.

Where I come from, that's commonly known as moving the goalposts. Proving something to oneself is one thing, proving to another is where the rubber really hits the road.

 

[YmirGF]

Atheistic mumbo jumbo can only be endured so much so start paying attention to what is going on out there.

This "strong" atheist takes mild exception to this. Jus' sayin'...

 

[Kuzcotopia]

When a person who is on the operating table and being 'dead' sees herself on the roof of that building where she never has been, sees objects she has never seen which she can describe and can be verified - denying this kind of falsification is only possible by brain-dead atheists -- who hold on to their paradigms no matter what. I have seen one or two such videos where the person describes things not possible under the circumstances.

That much of it may be brushed away is neither here nor there. There is enough evidence to show that something beyond the materialistic universe is going on. Atheistic mumbo jumbo can only be endured so much so start paying attention to what is going on out there.

Atheism, the belief in no gods, has very little to do wth this. Not sure why your bringing it up.

Also, a link would be helpful. The "brain-dead" may desire an opportunity to shift their paradigms.

 

[Kapalika]

Well, how do you explain reincarnation without something like a soul, huh???

No, but seriously, soul itself comes from matter/physical universe as far as I can tell.

To me the soul is the summation of yourself, starting with the physical all the way to the spiritual. I got a theory of sorts about this I actually took up to writing about a bit ago:

Hastily made intro to my “Theory of Aspects”

Not a perfect explanation, but maybe explains a little bit where I'm coming from.

TL;DR from matter, instincts grow for life, then it creates more layers of complexity, in humans the next one is base emotions, then our thinking minds then our spiritual side. "Soul" in this system is the total sum of the distinct entity. (I plan to explain in a future, fuller article, that explains what parts survive and how and how that works into my beliefs about reincarnation).

Sorry to mostly drop a link like that. No point in me putting in huge effort to basically rewrite the darn thing for just one post.

Essentially my argument is that a soul is inevitable as a series of rising complexity to a point where streams of consciousness can find ways to survive death and possibly reincarnate. I think this is an eventuality and inevitable so long as complex life is around.

 

[Grandliseur]

This "strong" atheist takes mild exception to this. Jus' sayin'...

Yesterday, I endured some of your club's irrational claims and meanness. So, start living in the real world, wake up and open your eyes to the facts of the world, to the thing that there are evidence for.

Frankly, today, I am taking no more shiit and idiocy from atheist. The fact that when we encounter new phenomena that this is unknown should not surprise you one bit. That there may be things in our universe which clearly is not materialistic only, means that at times things that do exist cannot be explained. We can try, but just because we cannot explain - does not mean that the event, that reality is untrue.

So, get real, in the real world.

 

[Grandliseur]

The "brain-dead" may desire an opportunity to shift their paradigms.

I wish. It's like walking in deep mud with rain-boots on where the boot is sucked off your foot whenever you try to move.

They deny things that cannot be denied unless you are blind, deaf, even mute.

 

[Father]

Tell me. if we copied your brain. scanned it perfectly and uploaded it to a computer. and you yourself die. is that scan of your brain you? theoretically, its a copy of your brain your conscious and functions exactly the same as you. it has your memories your persona.

most have an issue with uploading one's consciousness for the reason of "is it really you? how do you know its you?
that's not evidence of a soul but it does pose an interesting question on how we see ourselves.
it is better discussed in this interesting video

 

[Jeremiah Ames]

It doesn't seem like there's any good evidence or rational justification for the existence of a soul. Most of the things i've heard are fallacious appeals to identity, and appeals to consequences like if we don't have a soul, then we can't have free will. I've also seen no demonstration that free will and consciousness is impossible within a purely physical environment. It seems to me that you'd have to show that a physical basis for free will and a soul is impossible in order to make the case that a metaphysical soul is a necessary claim. I think you'd also have the make the case that free will actually exists as well because there's no demonstration of that either. Otherwise the working, non absolute hypothesis should be that consciousness and free will is at least possible within a materialistic worldview given the facts that there are sentient humans, the only world we know is a physical world, and that physical material seems capable of producing a wide variety of advanced and complicated phenomena and synergistic effects.

So please let me know what kind of evidence or reasoning or logic exists to back up the assertion that at soul exists.

To me, the soul is what makes us think and reason and learn.
You obviously think and reason, because you asked a very interesting question.
My cat cannot do that.
No other animal life in existence can do that.
There are millions of animal species. No others can do that.
Only humans.
Scientists have shown us that millions of animal species have inhabited the earth for hundreds of millions of years.
Yet, all those millions of life forms, existing for all those millions of years, none of them ever invented a wheel, let alone a car, or a microscope, or a telescope, or anything. None. Never.
Yet, look what humans have done in such a brief period of time.
Humans learn, no other animal can. That’s the soul.

 

[Kuzcotopia]

I wish. It's like walking in deep mud with rain-boots on where the boot is sucked off your foot whenever you try to move.

They deny things that cannot be denied unless you are blind, deaf, even mute.

I might as well be blind, deaf, and mute 'cause I still don't have a link to your out of body NDE evidence.

What exactly are we supposed to be denying here?

 

[serp777]

When a person who is on the operating table and being 'dead' sees herself on the roof of that building where she never has been, sees objects she has never seen which she can describe and can be verified - denying this kind of falsification is only possible by brain-dead atheists -- who hold on to their paradigms no matter what. I have seen one or two such videos where the person describes things not possible under the circumstances.

That much of it may be brushed away is neither here nor there. There is enough evidence to show that something beyond the materialistic universe is going on. Atheistic mumbo jumbo can only be endured so much so start paying attention to what is going on out there.

When a person who is on the operating table and being 'dead' sees herself on the roof of that building where she never has been, sees objects she has never seen which she can describe and can be verified

Could it have been made up? Yes. Could it have been exaggerated? Yes. Would it prove the supernatural or the existence of souls? No. Is this scientifically documented and peer reviewed? Nope. Should we now also accept anecdotes from people who have been abducted by aliens? No.

denying this kind of falsification is only possible by brain-dead atheists

What falsification have you provided? And its possible by anyone with half a brain.

When a person who is on the operating table and being 'dead' sees herself on the roof of that building where she never has been, sees objects she has never seen which she can describe and can be verified - denying this kind of falsification is only possible by brain-dead atheists -- who hold on to their paradigms no matter what.

Where is the empirical data showing the reliability of near death experiences and determining some fact they couldn't otherwise know?

There is enough evidence to show that something beyond the materialistic universe is going on.

Then cite the peer reviewed double blind studies, not just generically refer to some videos containing worthless anecdotes.

Atheistic mumbo jumbo can only be endured so much so start paying attention to what is going on out there.

This assertion is a combination of a red herring and an ad hominem.

 

[serp777]

Tell me. if we copied your brain. scanned it perfectly and uploaded it to a computer. and you yourself die. is that scan of your brain you? theoretically, its a copy of your brain your conscious and functions exactly the same as you. it has your memories your persona.

most have an issue with uploading one's consciousness for the reason of "is it really you? how do you know its you?
that's not evidence of a soul but it does pose an interesting question on how we see ourselves.
it is better discussed in this interesting video

The answer is I don't know. But you're exactly right that it isn't evidence of a soul nor is it evidence of anything else.