Do you believe in ...?

[hoope]

Do you believe in the existence of Soul?

And if you do .. who gets to control it ?.. Is it us ? our bodies , or God?

You are your soul ! and when you soul is taken away you die.
Many people don't know what is soul? .. others deny it existence .

So lets share our ideas......

[TheInsomniac]

I'm a very blunt and bold kind of guy, i do not believe in a soul

We are in control of our actions, one life, one legacy. The entire ideology of having something inside of us that leads us to become "evil" or "good", i believe is entirely religious. And also leads to the 'life-after-death' concept. I would like the idea of reincarnation actually...although my view is that once you die, you are nothing.

[NikolaiI]

Yes, I believe in the soul. The soul is the living spark of the body. The difference between a live and dead body is the soul. The individual soul is present in a body, and is conscious of the whole body, and there is also the Supersoul, which is present in the heart of every living entity, and is conscious of them all.

You are right that we are the soul. We are conditioned to think we're nothing more than the body, however. The soul is the highest part of us, below that is intelligence, mind and the senses. If someone is uncontrolled, the senses will control the mind, if they are self-controlled, then the mind controls the senses. Then the mind can also direct towards unintelligence or intelligence, if it is controlled by intelligence. And then if the intelligence follows the soul, then one will live perfectly, and spiritually. All else is material; even if it is in goodness, it is still material goodness, but trasncendental to that is the spirit soul.

[Dark Muse]

I belive in the soul that that the essence of all that we are is contained within the soul. The body I view is just a vessel which holds the soul within. I belive that we are in control over ourselves and our soul. Being a reincarnationist I see death as being just a transistional phase, when the body no longer is able to contain the soul, when it has been worn down by the years, then the soul leaves it and the body "dies" becomes just an empty shell, while the soul will move one again into a new vessel.

[billyjack]

the soul isnt in the body. the body is in the soul

[blazeofglory]

The soul is what is said to hold the body. When the body dies the soul is said to die.

It is said that the soul is immortal but the body is not. That raises a question, a doubt in mind. If the soul is really immortal why will it escapes the body if the body is not maintained.

[hoope]

When the body dies the soul is said to die.

when the soul is taken then the body dies.
the body is created .. and then the soul is put in ..
so that makes the soul in the body not the opposite.

there are many religious and philophosers concept regarding that
but i would like to take an example of the ISLAMIC religion

In part 15 verse 29, the creation of humans involves Allah "breathing" souls into them.
we understand that Allah assigns an Angel to "breathe" soul into an embryo after 40 days of pregnancy

The non-physical ( i.e the soul and physical is the body )aspect, namely the soul, is one's soul-related activities like his/her feelings and emotions, thoughts, conscious and sub-conscious desires and objectives. While the body and its physical actions serve as a "reflection" of one's soul, whether it was good or evil, and thus "confirms" the extent of such intentions



the soul isnt in the body. the body is in the soul

i agree billyjack


We are in control of our actions, one life, one legacy. The entire ideology of having something inside of us that leads us to become "evil" or "good", i believe is entirely religious.

well it might be religious but it exist .. and in fact that is what leads us
so.. u can't separate religion from ur life coz its part of it.
And the existence of the soul is one part of that



You are right that we are the soul. We are conditioned to think we're nothing more than the body, however. The soul is the highest part of us, below that is intelligence, mind and the senses. If someone is uncontrolled, the senses will control the mind, if they are self-controlled, then the mind controls the senses. Then the mind can also direct towards unintelligence or intelligence, if it is controlled by intelligence. And then if the intelligence follows the soul, then one will live perfectly, and spiritually. All else is material; even if it is in goodness, it is still material goodness, but trasncendental to that is the spirit soul.

your right Nikolia.. thx alot for ur comment and for clearing it.:)


I would like the idea of reincarnation actually...although my view is that once you die, you are nothing.


Being a reincarnationist I see death as being just a transistional phase, when the body no longer is able to contain the soul, when it has been worn down by the years, then the soul leaves it and the body "dies" becomes just an empty shell, while the soul will move one again into a new vessel.
DARK MUSE , TheInsomniac .. guys all this concept of reincarnation is a bit superstitious.. there is no such thing as that.. or u can say that there is a limited reincarnation.

"How can you deny God, when you were dead and God gave you life? Then God will cause you to die, and then revive you, and then you will be returned to God."(Quran 2:28)

there is only one death.. and when that happens the person gets to be judged for his doings.. either he'll go to heaven or suffer in hell..

[islandclimber]

I am confused by your statements... such as:


DARK MUSE , TheInsomniac .. guys all this concept of reincarnation is a bit superstitious.. there is no such thing as that.. or u can say that there is a limited reincarnation.

"How can you deny God, when you were dead and God gave you life? Then God will cause you to die, and then revive you, and then you will be returned to God."(Quran 2:28)

there is only one death.. and when that happens the person gets to be judged for his doings.. either he'll go to heaven or suffer in hell..

You are stating this as though it is fact? I mean you can have faith in your own ideas, but to tell other people that there is no such thing as reincarnation because it is not in your religion... well you can think there is no such thing as reincarnation, but others may have faith in the idea that there is, so who is to say which idea is right... there is no way to prove it...

secondly the idea of dualistic creation, with the existence of separate entities as good and evil, with the idea of heaven and hell.. that provides that there can never be harmony in this universe... read the chapter "mutiny" in TBK by Dostoevsky, Ivan has some quite interesting ideas on this subject... and again you will find many religions with no dualistic ideas on good and evil, on creation, on the sources of existence and the afterlife...

religions like buddhism are great because they say there are many paths to nirvana/god... they are accepting of all people, of all faiths... when it comes to faith no one has a claim to the truth.... so it is kind of pointless to quote the Quran as proof of a religious idea being correct.. I mean you can quote it as part of your faith, as a reason for your faith in that idea.. but as proof it is irrelevant to anyone who is not islamic...

same with telling someone who is an atheist that they can't separate religion from their life because it is part of it, and the soul is part of that... can you prove this? or again this is just an opinion... stated as though it is fact...

all I am saying is you can have faith, and that is all fine and dandy, but you cannot tell others that your religious beliefs are fact for everyone... for the simple reason that they aren't and never will be...

[librarius_qui]

I don't know.

I'd have to check the origin of the word ... In Portuguese, there are two words that are commonly mistaken for each other: alma (Lat. anima) & espírito (spiritus). Alma has to do with life, and espírito with meaning and wind. I used to question whether espírito existed, but it was until I went into Languages & Literature studies. I can't deny the existence of any existing word, be it soul, spirit, god ... The way you use them, however, will vary.

I think I used to be a fool in denying the existence of meaning for each of these words ... Now I accept that at least the words (names) exist. And they exist for naming something. There's a reason for each of them to exist, whether I "put" them in my dictionary or not.

Tricky subject, aye? ...


librarius
:crash:

[Jozanny]

I do not believe in a soul that goes to heaven, unifies to god and happily fawns there for all eternity, nor do I believe in souls in anguish that sizzle and flail in hell in a farce on toasters; I don't quite buy Dark's reincarnation sensibility either, except that it stems in large part from life's ability to recycle on a huge piece of stable rock.

However, I do not deny that soul may exist--but I think human evolution may have fashioned them on its own, possibly in the way Foucault envisioned it. I will have to think about it, as I am a slow student on Foucault, fed by my attraction to his methodology more than a clear understanding of his deconstructing thesis of physical manipulation which served middle class pretension.

[NikolaiI]

I've heard it said before, that there are so many paths to God, but is this true? If I buy a ticket for Chicago, I will not go to New York. Similarly, if I take up sinful activities, I will not go to God but into ignorance. Buddhism also says if you wish to understand the causes of the past, examine the results in the present. Cause and effect applies-- if we act wrongly or unintelligently, we will suffer. But if you act in goodness, and more so, in devotion and surrender to God, then your heart will be purified, your past reactions cleansed, and you will return to God. But only if you make God the center of your life, thoughts, actions, etc.

Simply-- some actions would purify your heart and take you closer to God, whereas other actions, harmful to yourself, others, etc. would do the opposite. Lead you to suffering, ignorance, darkness, etc.

[islandclimber]

oh I agree.. but there are many paths with different actions that "would purify your heart and take you closer to God".... to say there is only one path is to say that only one person can become close to god.. because even if one follows the same religion, one's path will be slightly different from everyone else in the religion... everyone has a unique and different path to realization, enlightenment, understanding.. this is because everyone is unique and different...

[librarius_qui]

Do you believe in the existence of Soul?

And if you do .. who gets to control it ?.. Is it us ? our bodies , or God?

You are your soul ! and when you soul is taken away you die.
Many people don't know what is soul? .. others deny it existence .

So lets share our ideas......

Question #1. Is there "soul"?
answer ... if there's a word (noun) for it, there's a meaning for it, therefore, yes (...)

Question #2. Who rules it?

Your question nb. 2 makes me think that you needed not question nb. 1 ...

It depends on the teaching. In my belief, souls aren't ruled, but they subject themselves to someone. To gods ... Whichever god. Souls are followers. They need to follow someone. This is according to what I've been taught, though. Probably someone will disagree, and have their own ... gods. &/Or/Besides opinions. Some will follow external gods (here enter sacred texts), some, their own opinion. This is a very simplistic answer. There's no way I wish to answer this but simplistically. As well as I don't intend to defend this in or with discussion. I'll make my efforts, though to hear other opinions, but I admit: quite possibly I won't have the patience for doing so.


libr_q
:crash:

[B-Mental]

I strongly believe in the soul. It is a matter of faith, and the more spiritually attuned you are to all living things, the more likely you are to recognise the essence of soul in all living things. All souls are part of a universal soul, and therefore I don't believe they are ruled by anything/anyone other than God. I do believe in free will, so I don't know that I would accurately say that God rules them, rather he permits.

[hoope]

I am confused by your statements... such as:



You are stating this as though it is fact? I mean you can have faith in your own ideas, but to tell other people that there is no such thing as reincarnation because it is not in your religion... well you can think there is no such thing as reincarnation, but others may have faith in the idea that there is, so who is to say which idea is right... there is no way to prove it...

secondly the idea of dualistic creation, with the existence of separate entities as good and evil, with the idea of heaven and hell.. that provides that there can never be harmony in this universe... read the chapter "mutiny" in TBK by Dostoevsky, Ivan has some quite interesting ideas on this subject... and again you will find many religions with no dualistic ideas on good and evil, on creation, on the sources of existence and the afterlife...

religions like buddhism are great because they say there are many paths to nirvana/god... they are accepting of all people, of all faiths... when it comes to faith no one has a claim to the truth.... so it is kind of pointless to quote the Quran as proof of a religious idea being correct.. I mean you can quote it as part of your faith, as a reason for your faith in that idea.. but as proof it is irrelevant to anyone who is not islamic...

same with telling someone who is an atheist that they can't separate religion from their life because it is part of it, and the soul is part of that... can you prove this? or again this is just an opinion... stated as though it is fact...

all I am saying is you can have faith, and that is all fine and dandy, but you cannot tell others that your religious beliefs are fact for everyone... for the simple reason that they aren't and never will be...


i may disagree with the point of Reincarnation.. but you have the right to believe in whateva you want.. but its all about giving your opinion about the subject & reading other view as well..

[billyjack]

there is only one death.. and when that happens the person gets to be judged for his doings.. either he'll go to heaven or suffer in hell..

this isnt meant to be taken literally? just analogously right?


I'm a very blunt and bold kind of guy, i do not believe in a soul

We are in control of our actions, one life, one legacy. The entire ideology of having something inside of us that leads us to become "evil" or "good", i believe is entirely religious. And also leads to the 'life-after-death' concept. I would like the idea of reincarnation actually...although my view is that once you die, you are nothing.

i'll second that. its probably better to live this life like its the only one we've got.

"speak of heaven, ye disgrace earth." Thoreau


Question #1. Is there "soul"?
answer ... if there's a word (noun) for it, there's a meaning for it, therefore, yes (...)


my opinion is that you're mistaking grammatical rules for realities. for instance: tooth fairy (noun) has a meaning-- creature in pink that buys teeth from kids--

[hoope]

this isnt meant to be taken literally? just analogously right?



well.. i think i take it real.. and infact a truth which many people believe in
but i reapeat that everyone has his own thoughts & beliefs which i respect


I strongly believe in the soul. It is a matter of faith, and the more spiritually attuned you are to all living things, the more likely you are to recognise the essence of soul in all living things. All souls are part of a universal soul, and therefore I don't believe they are ruled by anything/anyone other than God. I do believe in free will, so I don't know that I would accurately say that God rules them, rather he permits.

well ! it says that we are given the free choice , whether you want this pathor not it u who decide , whether you want to do that or not.. coz its after all our choice, or else why would we be judged if we don't have a free will??


I've heard it said before, that there are so many paths to God, but is this true? If I buy a ticket for Chicago, I will not go to New York. Similarly, if I take up sinful activities, I will not go to God but into ignorance. Buddhism also says if you wish to understand the causes of the past, examine the results in the present. Cause and effect applies-- if we act wrongly or unintelligently, we will suffer. But if you act in goodness, and more so, in devotion and surrender to God, then your heart will be purified, your past reactions cleansed, and you will return to God. But only if you make God the center of your life, thoughts, actions, etc.

Simply-- some actions would purify your heart and take you closer to God, whereas other actions, harmful to yourself, others, etc. would do the opposite. Lead you to suffering, ignorance, darkness, etc.

I agree with you as many good action purify our hearts and makes us closer to GOD.. and your words are so true but hopefully we'll be able to perform that and make it a reason for our living.Then we would become a better people and live a better life.If just each person would supervise himself & his actions there would have been no need for all this destruction and cruelity in life .
THANKS ALOT Nikolai:)

[billyjack]

well.. i think i take it real.. and infact a truth which many people believe in
but i reapeat that everyone has his own thoughts & beliefs which i respect

and i respect them as well. but belief isnt a measure for reality; rather the opposite. belief implies the non-existence of something--thats why it needs to be believed in, wished for

[NikolaiI]

and i respect them as well. but belief isnt a measure for reality; rather the opposite. belief implies the non-existence of something--thats why it needs to be believed in, wished for

I don't really understand this. If I say I believe in my son or daughter, I am not implying the non-existence of them, their self... nor do I imply their good qualities are merely to be wished for. Instead it is affirmation and love of them.

Can you imagine if someone took the attitude atheists hold towards God, to the people in their own life? "Prove your existence to me," "Prove your love for me." They would be alone very quickly, or else seriously hurt the people they are with.


I agree with you as many good action purify our hearts and makes us closer to GOD.. and your words are so true but hopefully we'll be able to perform that and make it a reason for our living.Then we would become a better people and live a better life.If just each person would supervise himself & his actions there would have been no need for all this destruction and cruelity in life .
THANKS ALOT Nikolai:)

You're welcome... I was glad to see your first post as this is a very good thread. We're at a time in history where we know so much about the physical world around us, and as a collective species we are ready to learn about our spiritual side. We really must learn how to live correctly or we will never have knowledge.

[hoope]

and i respect them as well. but belief isnt a measure for reality; rather the opposite. belief implies the non-existence of something--thats why it needs to be believed in, wished for
well yea ! i think ur right but believing and convincing in the existence of things that we never saw.. Doesn't really mean they don't exist .

There are many things theat science have proved & we believe it though we never witnessed it.:)

[billyjack]

I don't really understand this. If I say I believe in my son or daughter, I am not implying the non-existence of them, their self... nor do I imply their good qualities are merely to be wished for. Instead it is affirmation and love of them.


from Webster dictionary

1: a state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed in some person or thing2: something believed ; especially : a tenet or body of tenets held by a group3: conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence

you're talking about the first definition. i'm referring to the latter two



well yea ! i think ur right but believing and convincing in the existence of things that we never saw.. Doesn't really mean they don't exist .

science proving the existence of unsensed stuff is done through tools that are extensions of our senses, such as microscopes, telescopes, wave detecting devices, and logical implications.




There are many things theat science have proved & we believe it though we never witnessed it.:)

ah, but all of us have witnessed the scientific method. scientific proof is naturally a result of this method and we can therefore have faith in the existence of unwitnessed events because we have faith in the scientific method's accuracy and honesty. Belief is not required of unseen events that are proven by scientific experimentation bc the results of the experiment will exist regardless of our belief/wishing it to be so. whereas the "existence" of the theistic soul would disappear if belief in it disappeared. No?

[NikolaiI]

from Webster dictionary...

I don't wish to argue with you beyond this statement, because I've found people on this site to be, in arguments, completely rigid. Yet I'd like to make one statement...

You said belief implied the non-existence.

2: something believed ; especially : a tenet or body of tenets held by a group

3: conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence

Neither of these has any support of that statement. First one says, body of tenets held by a group.
I do not read "implies non-existence" in this.

Second one reads, "conviction of truth...", etc., followed by "especially when based on examination of evidence." This does not mean that belief implies non-existence. To me. At least.

[PierreGringoire]

I believe in a soul. How it is detached from the body, or where exactly it is located is too abstract for me. My mind and state of being is suffice to designate as "soul." To expand its magnitude the best I can is the only thing I see as worth focusing on.

[Judas130]

DARK MUSE , TheInsomniac .. guys all this concept of reincarnation is a bit superstitious.. there is no such thing as that.. or u can say that there is a limited reincarnation.



the atoms that have existed since the birth of time have made and been in innumerable amounts of things. What made you was in a star, a table, a tree, an ocean, a leg of ham that someone ate. when I die I will become part of the earth, as (sorry) decomposers feed and give out carbon dioxide, and then also die. works the same way as having your body turned to ashes, what made you, takes part in reactions that help the process, fumes, fire, ash, etc. the atom never changes. when our bodies die, we pass on these atoms. So in this way, we continue to exist, but not in mind or body, but in what makes us what we are...which you could argue is our form. and what is a form, according to plato? immortal, as is the soul. I believe, perhaps, that the soul is a network of things -perhaps atoms, that together give us life. the soul is our acquaintance with what has and will always be. Yet for me the soul is a concept, as i attach a degree of non-physical spirituality to it also. there is so much to learn about life...

:thumbs_up

[NikolaiI]

I believe in a soul. How it is detached from the body, or where exactly it is located is too abstract for me. My mind and state of being is suffice to designate as "soul." To expand its magnitude the best I can is the only thing I see as worth focusing on.

How well said!

[muazjalil]

Absence of evidence is not an evidence for absence. Science is squarely based on the firm "belief" that induction and deduction will always hold. There is no reason to "believe" that the law of gravity will hold tomorrow or rather wont disappear tomorrow; there is nothing, at least from a philosophical point of view, that necessitates a linkage between past present and future.

Another serious loophole of scientific method is that it equates (in the mind of general population) consistency with truth. As a result, as far as i know, in quantum mechanics they are moving away from deterministic assertions to more vague interpretation where they basically say that their theories correlate well with experiments, rather than saying reality follows these laws.

Therefore this difference between "belief" and "knowing" might be much more blurred than before.

As far as Soul is concerned, I believe in it. Why???? Because I am 26 but still feel very childish, there must be something inside me that aint growing LOLz

[hoope]

Absence of evidence is not an evidence for absence. Science is squarely based on the firm "belief" that induction and deduction will always hold. There is no reason to "believe" that the law of gravity will hold tomorrow or rather wont disappear tomorrow; there is nothing, at least from a philosophical point of view, that necessitates a linkage between past present and future.

Another serious loophole of scientific method is that it equates (in the mind of general population) consistency with truth. As a result, as far as i know, in quantum mechanics they are moving away from deterministic assertions to more vague interpretation where they basically say that their theories correlate well with experiments, rather than saying reality follows these laws.

Therefore this difference between "belief" and "knowing" might be much more blurred than before.

As far as Soul is concerned, I believe in it. Why???? Because I am 26 but still feel very childish, there must be something inside me that aint growing LOLz


u r completely right.. and i agree with that.. " there is infact a difference between knowing & believing in something"

:)

[billyjack]

Absence of evidence is not an evidence for absence. Science is squarely based on the firm "belief" that induction and deduction will always hold. There is no reason to "believe" that the law of gravity will hold tomorrow or rather wont disappear tomorrow; there is nothing, at least from a philosophical point of view, that necessitates a linkage between past present and future.

Another serious loophole of scientific method is that it equates (in the mind of general population) consistency with truth. As a result, as far as i know, in quantum mechanics they are moving away from deterministic assertions to more vague interpretation where they basically say that their theories correlate well with experiments, rather than saying reality follows these laws.

Therefore this difference between "belief" and "knowing" might be much more blurred than before.

As far as Soul is concerned, I believe in it. Why???? Because I am 26 but still feel very childish, there must be something inside me that aint growing LOLz

well said. however, lack of knowing for certain that gravity will be around tomorrow doesnt mean i have to "believe" in gravity for it to exist this instant--i "know" it does cuz i'm not floating around right now. that's not a blurry line.

knowing lends itself to consistency. believing is hoping for inconsistency.

[muazjalil]

You are right billyjack when you say that we know gravity exist now but what i meant was that when we say these are "laws" or these are the "universal principles" we implicitly believe that they will hold forever and there is no basis for that belief.

Although I am an ardent believer of science and its rigorous methodologies, I do try to remind myself as often as i can that even when it comes to science I have to believe something.

My take on this religion vs science, reason vs belief dichotomy is that, may be its like the wave particle duality problem in physics (i know i am stretching here). I mean in Physics wave and particle where mutually exclusive concepts up until the quantum revolution after which I guess they came to regard it as two different manifestation of an underlying concept; they saw that its our limitation or rather how we measure things that ascribe the property of wave or particle to a particular entity rather than them being an objective property of the entity itself (AM I MAKING ANY SENSE!!!) . On a similar line may be this supposed dichotomy between reason and belief is our limitation or the way we interpret the world or a product of our language structure etc. May be there is no such dichotomy ......

[billyjack]

You are right billyjack when you say that we know gravity exist now but what i meant was that when we say these are "laws" or these are the "universal principles" we implicitly believe that they will hold forever and there is no basis for that belief.

Although I am an ardent believer of science and its rigorous methodologies, I do try to remind myself as often as i can that even when it comes to science I have to believe something.

My take on this religion vs science, reason vs belief dichotomy is that, may be its like the wave particle duality problem in physics (i know i am stretching here). I mean in Physics wave and particle where mutually exclusive concepts up until the quantum revolution after which I guess they came to regard it as two different manifestation of an underlying concept; they saw that its our limitation or rather how we measure things that ascribe the property of wave or particle to a particular entity rather than them being an objective property of the entity itself (AM I MAKING ANY SENSE!!!) . On a similar line may be this supposed dichotomy between reason and belief is our limitation or the way we interpret the world or a product of our language structure etc. May be there is no such dichotomy ......

I get ya and that's a solid analogy. Now i know analogies are only meant to go so far but,....a particle and a wave--lets call them opposite sides of the same "matter" coin, are both observable with extensions of the senses. belief and reason do not share the same sensibility.

reason's tenets are confirmed in my sense organs. belief on the other hand doesnt have this confirmation to fall back on--i cant sense my soul, i can only attribute certain sensations/thoughts as proof of an unseen eternal soul within me. attribution doesnt equal confirmation

the similarity of reason and belief lies in the mind/self. but a self without other(the sensed world),as in the case of belief, is absurd. thereby making belief absurd?

[jayanthis.fds]

I greatly believe that we are control by super power. He is immortal. And our soul is controlled by some divine power. We cant reject this fact. He is the power which is controlled our soul


----------------

jayanthis.fds

Blaze Infotech (http://www.blazeinfotech)

[romantic novel]

Do you believe in the existence of Soul?

And if you do .. who gets to control it ?.. Is it us ? our bodies , or God?

You are your soul ! and when you soul is taken away you die.
Many people don't know what is soul? .. others deny it existence .

So lets share our ideas......



hi hoope..



Yeah, I believe in the existence of soul.

I think the prominent element in every individual is his SOUL..

Who contorls the soul..differs from one to one..according to his/her beliefs

But to me..as a Muslim ..I think we control our souls..

still, this control is guided by God. I mean God has put two lines ( evil and goodness) we can direct our soul as we wish BUT without overcoming these limitations drawn by God.

Our body, henece, is a mere performer of the actions our soul take. So once this body stops performing his job to perform the actions of the soul..the soul escapes..the soul never dies. It still alive in the grave beside the corpse once accomplishes its desires.

Thus, the body is soul..but soul isnt the body

[muazjalil]

Hmmm, i have a question (thanks to billyjack's comment), Why do we believe? I mean not only in God or Soul or some other religious stuffs ( i do but lot of people dont) but things in general. What utility or benefit does it provide? For a highly developed species like us "Belief" must provide some benefit. All our organs, structure everything fit well with our environment but what about "belief". Does believing in things enables us to get an upper end over other species or make us more fit.

[librarius_qui]

Hmmm, i have a question (thanks to billyjack's comment), Why do we believe? I mean not only in God or Soul or some other religious stuffs ( i do but lot of people dont) but things in general. What utility or benefit does it provide? For a highly developed species like us "Belief" must provide some benefit. All our organs, structure everything fit well with our environment but what about "belief". Does believing in things enables us to get an upper end over other species or make us more fit.

When I was an atheist, I believed in myself (...). (Used to say that a lot, and was taught, at home, to do so.)

Belief has to do with imagining invisible things. I watched a documentary video, once, on a theory that men (pre-historic men) who lived in the -d-e-s-e-r-t- [prairies, actually], learnt to walk in circles, because they stored water in empty eggs they buried, and they had to remember where they should return, to have water, while men in the cold places were strong, but didn't develop the skill of imagining the future.

Future in itself is a very "abstract" thing. However, if we bury an egg full of water in a place, and we make marks in the land to know how to reach it again, into sometime, ... well, we're making something with or by faith ...

Just a thought.


:rolleyes:
librarius

[hoope]

hi hoope..



Yeah, I believe in the existence of soul.

I think the prominent element in every individual is his SOUL..

Who contorls the soul..differs from one to one..according to his/her beliefs

But to me..as a Muslim ..I think we control our souls..

still, this control is guided by God. I mean God has put two lines ( evil and goodness) we can direct our soul as we wish BUT without overcoming these limitations drawn by God.

Our body, henece, is a mere performer of the actions our soul take. So once this body stops performing his job to perform the actions of the soul..the soul escapes..the soul never dies. It still alive in the grave beside the corpse once accomplishes its desires.

Thus, the body is soul..but soul isnt the body



but when evil overcomes good .. then evil directs us; not us..
then we become blind of what is right or wrong
something , an unknown power directs us to where we go
regardless if its good or evil.

[hoope]

I greatly believe that we are control by super power. He is immortal. And our soul is controlled by some divine power. We cant reject this fact. He is the power which is controlled our soul


----------------

jayanthis.fds

Blaze Infotech (http://www.blazeinfotech)

what if there is no such power but us ?
or what if u r the one who controls this power?

soul is us... inside us , we drive it ; and when things go in the wrong way we can't blame the existance of any power over us .Coz whateva happens we brought it to ourselves.

[hoope]

Hmmm, i have a question (thanks to billyjack's comment), Why do we believe? I mean not only in God or Soul or some other religious stuffs ( i do but lot of people dont) but things in general. What utility or benefit does it provide? For a highly developed species like us "Belief" must provide some benefit. All our organs, structure everything fit well with our environment but what about "belief". Does believing in things enables us to get an upper end over other species or make us more fit.

Belief is a part of our faith in the existance of things we never seen , never known . But we are fully conscience that its there and there is a stong relations between Belief and knowledge and when belief becomes true its knowledge( true belief ) ; some complicated psycological and philosohical theories . However; i do believe that " One who doesn't believe in anything has no aim in life " ( MY THEORY lol:D)

[hoope]

When I was an atheist, I believed in myself (...). (Used to say that a lot, and was taught, at home, to do so.)

Belief has to do with imagining invisible things. I watched a documentary video, once, on a theory that men (pre-historic men) who lived in the desert, learnt to walk in circles, because they stored water in empty eggs they buried, and they had to remember where they should return, to have water, while men in the cold places were strong, but didn't develop the skill of imagining the future.

Future in itself is a very "abstract" thing. However, if we bury an egg full of water in a place, and we make marks in the land to know how to reach it again, into sometime, ... well, we're making something with or by faith ...

Just a thought.


:rolleyes:
librarius


hey librarius .. thx alot 4 stepping by & for sharing your idea
which i agree with & find it really reasonable reply

[billyjack]

Hmmm, i have a question (thanks to billyjack's comment), Why do we believe? I mean not only in God or Soul or some other religious stuffs ( i do but lot of people dont) but things in general. What utility or benefit does it provide? For a highly developed species like us "Belief" must provide some benefit. All our organs, structure everything fit well with our environment but what about "belief". Does believing in things enables us to get an upper end over other species or make us more fit.

if you view people as a species of fauna it's appropriate to compare them with other animals. this being said, belief could be seen as a social tool, a handy method of keeping the people-- the herd-- together and content. sort of like how a sheep herder keeps his flock together by using boarder collies (the sheep think the collie is a wolf and the herder exploits this belief) to wrangle stragglers and keep the flock safe and together. probably a stretch??




Belief has to do with imagining invisible things. I watched a documentary video, once, on a theory that men (pre-historic men) who lived in the desert, learnt to walk in circles, because they stored water in empty eggs they buried, and they had to remember where they should return, to have water, while men in the cold places were strong, but didn't develop the skill of imagining the future.

Future in itself is a very "abstract" thing. However, if we bury an egg full of water in a place, and we make marks in the land to know how to reach it again, into sometime, ... well, we're making something with or by faith ...


the bold on faith is my doing. its important to separate belief from faith. having faith would be burying an egg full of water and making an educated guess that it'll be there a few weeks later. belief would be skipping the egg burial and then hoping to run across an egg full of water.

[muazjalil]

If we are the sheep, who is the Shepard? And if you suggest that its the ruling class who created "belief"so that they could rule the herd than they wouldn't believe in anything. Believe seems to be way to enmeshed with our society and hence i think its more evolutionary than a "controlling" mechanism. I guess in real life we seldom have perfect information and so have to work on hunches and intuition and thats where belief comes in handy. We are by nature "cognitive miser" (for lack of better words) and belief provides us with that shortcut. It allows us to accept the status quo and refrain from asking hard questions.

[billyjack]

If we are the sheep, who is the Shepard? And if you suggest that its the ruling class who created "belief"so that they could rule the herd than they wouldn't believe in anything. Believe seems to be way to enmeshed with our society and hence i think its more evolutionary than a "controlling" mechanism. I guess in real life we seldom have perfect information and so have to work on hunches and intuition and thats where belief comes in handy. We are by nature "cognitive miser" (for lack of better words) and belief provides us with that shortcut. It allows us to accept the status quo and refrain from asking hard questions.

naturally what we believe in is our shephard.

i dont think belief is evolutionary. rather i think its the product of grammatics. we try to apply grammatical rules to the universe. this is like trying to grab a drink of water with a fishnet.

[hampusforev]

Soul is all well and good as a metaphor, but other than that I personally don't see any reason for believing in a soul rather than the brain. Someone said earlier that what separates a living human being from a dead one is the soul, and I really don't agree with that, what separates a living human being from a dead one is brain activity. Now, if "soul" is supposed to be a simile for this brain activity, then whatever, that's fine, but then I really don't see the point to it.

I'm not trying to "debunk" spirituality, because I think that it's a really valuable view of the world. But personally I think it’s gratuitous to try and bind any “greater meaning” to worldly events. I don’t really see the point in trying to rationalize it with deities or make-believes rather than to marvel in its immense beauty.

[muazjalil]

"don't see any reason for believing", isn't it an oxymoron. Can you ever have reasons for believing. I thought belief per definition meant absence of concrete fact or precise reasoning.

Another idea: if reason and beliefs are two extreme points of "something" i.e. I place reason as something diagrammatically oppose to belief. If thats the case then we need a third objective criteria against which we can compare the two. I mean since they are exactly opposite we cannot compare them (the higher utility they, reason or belief, serve in everyday life is not a justification for their superiority) In absence of a yardstick that will enable us to compare reason and belief, we cannot objectively ascertain ones superiority over the other. However if we make practicality or usefulness as our objective criteria then reason might win over belief. (hmmmmmmm my discussion had very little to do with belief in soul lol)

[NikolaiI]

"don't see any reason for believing", isn't it an oxymoron. Can you ever have reasons for believing. I thought belief per definition meant absence of concrete fact or precise reasoning.

Another idea: if reason and beliefs are two extreme points of "something" i.e. I place reason as something diagrammatically oppose to belief. If thats the case then we need a third objective criteria against which we can compare the two. I mean since they are exactly opposite we cannot compare them (the higher utility they, reason or belief, serve in everyday life is not a justification for their superiority) In absence of a yardstick that will enable us to compare reason and belief, we cannot objectively ascertain ones superiority over the other. However if we make practicality or usefulness as our objective criteria then reason might win over belief. (hmmmmmmm my discussion had very little to do with belief in soul lol)

Interesting you give that view of reason and belief. I was just thinking about posting about my opinion of reason and belief.

In my opinion exactly the opposite is true. It's impossible for reason and belief to be at odds. The reason? You don't believe anything you don't think is true. Therefore you only believe what makes sense or is reasonable.


Soul is all well and good as a metaphor, but other than that I personally don't see any reason for believing in a soul rather than the brain. Someone said earlier that what separates a living human being from a dead one is the soul, and I really don't agree with that, what separates a living human being from a dead one is brain activity. Now, if "soul" is supposed to be a simile for this brain activity, then whatever, that's fine, but then I really don't see the point to it.

I'm not trying to "debunk" spirituality, because I think that it's a really valuable view of the world. But personally I think it’s gratuitous to try and bind any “greater meaning” to worldly events. I don’t really see the point in trying to rationalize it with deities or make-believes rather than to marvel in its immense beauty.

It's fair to say this, and it's good... as long as we don't try to force our ideas on others, eh?

Without mentioning the soul, however, I am convinced that even consciousness is more than brain activity.

[hampusforev]

don't see any reason for believing", isn't it an oxymoron. Can you ever have reasons for believing. I thought belief per definition meant absence of concrete fact or precise reasoning.

Yeah, perhaps, don't squabble about semantics! Haha, no but you're right in that. What I meant is merely that I don't see any "motive", if you will, for believing in such a thing as "the soul". This is only my personal belief and the problems I have with "soul" is more personal chagrin with the word as such. It holds too much christian implications for me, I cringe whenever I hear the word god and soul in the same sentence.

As for your other line of reasoning; sure, I agree with you. I think that spirituality and belief isn't bad in it's own right.

[NikolaiI]

This might help you then, hampus, just ask yourself, "What is the self?" The soul is akin to or the same as the self.

[RG57]

I believe that there is a soul within everybody and that the body is the carrier. As to who is charge, if it is our soul than surely we are in charge.

[weltanschauung]

too complicated to TYPE.
BUT:
7:6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
7:7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
7:8 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

<3

[billyjack]

Another idea: if reason and beliefs are two extreme points of "something" i.e. I place reason as something diagrammatically oppose to belief. If thats the case then we need a third objective criteria against which we can compare the two. I mean since they are exactly opposite we cannot compare them (the higher utility they, reason or belief, serve in everyday life is not a justification for their superiority)

belief and reason are both abstract. maybe the third objective criteria is in the concrete. sense experience?




In absence of a yardstick that will enable us to compare reason and belief, we cannot objectively ascertain ones superiority over the other. However if we make practicality or usefulness as our objective criteria then reason might win over belief. (hmmmmmmm my discussion had very little to do with belief in soul lol)

i agree that pragmatism isn't always necessarily a good measure for superiority of an idea or way of thinking or believing. assuming that concrete experience is the measuring stick for belief vs reason, i gotta think that reason wins thanks mostly to its habit of being grounded in the concrete; whereas belief isn't grounded at all but floating around in hopes, dreams, and wishes.

[muazjalil]

I think Bernard Shaw said that reasonable man adjust himself to the environment and an unreasonable man adjust the environment to himself and hence the fate of humanity lies with the unreasonable man. Although I am a very pro reason guy, I think hopes dreams and wishes are what makes us move forward.

If there is no yardstick then our solution, IMO, is not to find a pragmatic solution but rather accept the fact that at the moment there aren't any solution.

As for Sense Perception, I believe its less concrete than we think it is. Empiricism has its flaws. I am reading this book called the Origin of Wealth which is basically on Evolutionary Economics and somehow i think "belief" has some evolutionary implications.

[The Atheist]

Question #1. Is there "soul"?
answer ... if there's a word (noun) for it, there's a meaning for it, therefore, yes (...)[/B]

Goodo.

On that basis, I look forward to meeting yeti, sasquatch and Nessie in the near future.

Seriously, the idea that something exists because we can imagine it and name it is laughable. Google "Bertrand Russell" and "teapot".



I greatly believe that we are control by super power. He is immortal. And our soul is controlled by some divine power. We cant reject this fact. He is the power which is controlled our soul

We can't reject it?

I have done so, totally. Am I now dead?


Soul is all well and good as a metaphor, but other than that I personally don't see any reason for believing in a soul rather than the brain. Someone said earlier that what separates a living human being from a dead one is the soul, and I really don't agree with that, what separates a living human being from a dead one is brain activity. Now, if "soul" is supposed to be a simile for this brain activity, then whatever, that's fine, but then I really don't see the point to it.

I'm not trying to "debunk" spirituality, because I think that it's a really valuable view of the world. But personally I think it’s gratuitous to try and bind any “greater meaning” to worldly events. I don’t really see the point in trying to rationalize it with deities or make-believes rather than to marvel in its immense beauty.

Marvellous stuff.

Bravo!

[billyjack]

If there is no yardstick then our solution, IMO, is not to find a pragmatic solution but rather accept the fact that at the moment there aren't any solution.

As for Sense Perception, I believe its less concrete than we think it is. Empiricism has its flaws. I am reading this book called the Origin of Wealth which is basically on Evolutionary Economics and somehow i think "belief" has some evolutionary implications.

where there's no solution, a question becomes pointless, absurd. but i dont think this reason vs belief question need be deemed absurd. if you wanna put it into scientific terms belief could be the hypothesis, and reason proves or disproves it. the problem is that things like soul and god, once disproved or better yet, unprovable, are evaluated, people tend to continue believing whatever they believed regardless of the eval. I dont think that this ignore-ance of the evaluation is evolutionary. instead, i think its cultural, herd mentality, and perhaps helps a culture more than it hurts it.

sense perception may be deceiving, but does this mean its less concrete?

[NikolaiI]

I thought this was appropriate... "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed." -Albert Einstein

This one too... "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts." (Sign hanging in Einstein's office at Princeton)

And also, while I was meanly ridiculed for using George Harrison's words on another thread; the same applies here, I am using these because of the content of them not because who they were said by.

[muazjalil]

"I dont think that this ignore-ance of the evaluation is evolutionary. instead, i think its cultural, herd mentality, and perhaps helps a culture more than it hurts it."-----Thats my point. I guess as we were evolving our ancestors came to the conclusion that they couldn't have answer to everything and so they started to take things axiomatically . Obviously some of those beliefs were rubbish but few did payoff and hence those beliefs survived.

May be free thought at early stage of human evolution was detrimental because it would have resulted in anarchism and disintegration of the herd, which was equivalent to death. Hence social cohesion was much more important. Thats why i guess "belief" in authority or the so called herd mentality is so common even now. Its in our gene, may be, to "believe" in things. I guess i have blabbered enough LOL

[hoope]

Hi guys .. i never thought when i start the thread will reach this no. of pages & all this responses. MAN!
Since we are on quotes now , i'll share this with you :

"Belief consists in accepting the affirmations of the soul; Unbelief, in denying them."
Ralph Waldo Emerson

Muazjalil I remember reading this quote ; thought of sharing it with you:

"What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way." Bertrand Russell

[muazjalil]

Thanks Hoope, really loved the quote. So true. Actually my favorite philosopher is Bertrand Russell and its kinda surprising that a forum like this doesn't have Russell in their Author list. What is interesting to note, i guess, is how the topic veered off from the original discussion on belief on soul to a debate on Reason vs Belief.

[hoope]

Thanks Hoope, really loved the quote. So true. Actually my favorite philosopher is Bertrand Russell and its kinda surprising that a forum like this doesn't have Russell in their Author list. What is interesting to note, i guess, is how the topic veered off from the original discussion on belief on soul to a debate on Reason vs Belief.

Yea me too..
I also wondered how we went to discuss alot of things though related to soul but yet the believes we the issue.. :)

I collect quotes & enjoy reading them; Bertrand Russell is infact great !
By the way i don't like philosopher and i hate philosophy i think that its based on theories things that are not proved .. Weird People talking .. and then being put in to real facts without thinking ..I love literature and poetry & has nothing to do with philosophy .
But the reason for getting in this Philosophical forum is the wanting to prove MR.HYDE the opposite of his dark thoughts of the world..replying his threads; so i came ending up here ...blah blah blah..:D

[muazjalil]

It is indeed interesting to see that you hate philosophy because the questions that you ask are really, at heart, philosophical. There was a time when I also thought Philosophy was all air and nothing concrete but then i changed my stance. The thing is when philosophy becomes concrete it becomes a separate subject and so the credit unduly goes to the new subject rather than philosophy.

For instance Economics: The foundation of the subject was laid down by people like Smith (Prof of moral philosophy) Bentham, Stuart Mill, Turgot, Malthus, who were essentially philosophers and not economist. Leibniz Descarte were also philosophers who had profound impact on Science . And i haven't even bought in Aristotle who basically laid the foundation of most of the subjects.

Now when we talk about these people we divide them in to two nonexistent set, e.g. "The Scientist Descartes" and the "Philosopher Descartes" but the fact is they weren't two people. That's why I think most of the time we failed to give due credit to Philosophy.

Another reason why most people don't like Philosophy and think its all mercurial is because we sometime confuse Metaphysics, a subset of philosophy, with Philosophy. Philosophy, as we know, also include Logic, Epistemology, not to mention Philosophy of science language ..... Political Philosophy etc. These subjects have real life implications and shape our lives.

The long exposition was my feeble attempt to defend philosophy: feeble because i was constrained by my lack of knowledge on philosophy LOL

[hoope]

U dnt sound like lacking knowledge in philosophy; u sound pretty smart & u know what r u talking about...
And yet i don't think i will change my point of view on philosophy but i will attempt to always participate in all those ideas that i believe in,even though they are philosophical co'z after all philosophy is about life theories which is kinda based in our life that is why ...:D

Best wishes

[muazjalil]

Thanks for your thumbs up but unfortunately it seems I was unable to influence you :-P . Since you intend to participate in such philosophical discussions then i guess i will see you around LOL

[blazeofglory]

I do both, beleive or disbelieve. At times I beleive in God, and at times I become skeptical, and so are the questions centering around soul, an afterlife and the like.

I am inquisitive.

[NikolaiI]

I do both, beleive or disbelieve. At times I beleive in God, and at times I become skeptical, and so are the questions centering around soul, an afterlife and the like.

I am inquisitive.

Your post is very nice and your position is very logical. It is most logical to be inquisitive. We are not the body, but we are soul, and as the soul, trying to get fulfillment from matter will never work. If we inquire, "What are we?" isn't the most obvious answer that we are part of everything? (I'm not trying to get you to start singing Dear Prudence now. :))