Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Do animals have souls?

Page 4 of 7 [ 97 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Do you believe animals have souls?
Yes 45%  45%  [ 25 ]
No 5%  5%  [ 3 ]
Only humans have souls 4%  4%  [ 2 ]
Souls don't exist 45%  45%  [ 25 ]
Total votes : 55

Nosirrom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 683
Location: Inside my cranium.

06 Feb 2011, 5:44 pm

Can you try to be clearer as to what the difference is? I couldn't comprehend.



AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

06 Feb 2011, 6:06 pm

I don't believe in souls. I just think that people assume that matter can't be that awesome so there must be an immaterial aspect contributing to the awesomeness of the brain.



Nosirrom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 683
Location: Inside my cranium.

06 Feb 2011, 6:15 pm

Oh I see. yeah matter is pretty awesome.
I like to think of the "soul" as the way "people back then" used to think of matter being awesome. (if that makes any sense) Just because there was no other way to comprehend it.



Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

07 Feb 2011, 1:27 am

Nosirrom wrote:
Can you try to be clearer as to what the difference is? I couldn't comprehend.


I don't think any of us are going to get much closer. As you rightly point out "soul" is not well defined, being [if we assume it to exist] immaterial and currently still detectable only through its effects which are not readily distinguished from phenomena with other causes.

The fact that a number of languages [among others Semitic ruuH, Bantu mwoyo, Chinese qi, Latin anima and Greep psukhe - though the Latin may have copied the Greek - and Suriname Creole winti] use words basically referring to air / breath / wind for soul / spirit / life force i think reflects that - until technology and scientific theory made enough progress, air - clearly a vital force - was invisible, apparently immaterial, and detectable only through its effects.

By the way - the fact that to Latin an ANIMAL is that which has a ANIMA answers the originakl question - at least for the Latin language, though that is not binding even on conservative Caholic theologians.

When talking about something we just cannot readily research fully, the only people who can give you clear confident answers are the ones talking through their various hats.



Nosirrom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 683
Location: Inside my cranium.

07 Feb 2011, 1:31 am

Yeah, I like the hats part. Good synecdoche and metonymy. (on a side note I love how we can use literary devices without even knowing the "proper" word for them)



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

07 Feb 2011, 1:36 am

Does anyone even have a soul?



Nosirrom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 683
Location: Inside my cranium.

07 Feb 2011, 1:37 am

IMO you would have to define soul. as definitions vary, so would the answer.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,281
Location: the island of defective toy santas

07 Feb 2011, 3:10 am

"I died as a mineral and became a plant;
I died as a plant and rose to animal;
I died as animal and I was a man.
Why should I fear? When was I less by dying?
Yet once more I shall die as man to soar
With angels blest. Yet even from an angel
I must pass on; All except God must perish.
When I have sacrificed my angel soul,
I shall become what no mind ever conceived."

[Rumi, a 12th century persian mystic]



ryan93
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Apr 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,315
Location: Galway, Ireland

07 Feb 2011, 3:29 am

Nosirrom wrote:
Oh I see. yeah matter is pretty awesome.
I like to think of the "soul" as the way "people back then" used to think of matter being awesome. (if that makes any sense) Just because there was no other way to comprehend it.


Here is a picture of matter, for your respective enjoyments.

Image


_________________
The scientist only imposes two things, namely truth and sincerity, imposes them upon himself and upon other scientists - Erwin Schrodinger

Member of the WP Strident Atheists


Pistonhead
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,732
Location: Bradenton, Florida

07 Feb 2011, 3:35 am

What is this soul crap you speak of?!


_________________
"Some ideals are worth dying for"
==tOGoWPO==


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

07 Feb 2011, 5:32 am

ryan93 wrote:
Nosirrom wrote:
Oh I see. yeah matter is pretty awesome.
I like to think of the "soul" as the way "people back then" used to think of matter being awesome. (if that makes any sense) Just because there was no other way to comprehend it.


Here is a picture of matter, for your respective enjoyments.

Image


The both look like carbon to me.

ruveyn



ryan93
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Apr 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,315
Location: Galway, Ireland

07 Feb 2011, 8:02 am

ruveyn wrote:
ryan93 wrote:
Nosirrom wrote:
Oh I see. yeah matter is pretty awesome.
I like to think of the "soul" as the way "people back then" used to think of matter being awesome. (if that makes any sense) Just because there was no other way to comprehend it.


Here is a picture of matter, for your respective enjoyments.

Image


The both look like carbon to me.

ruveyn


Yup, the king of all elements :)



Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

07 Feb 2011, 9:46 am

Is not that excessively life-form chauvinistic?

I tend to put hydrogen higher.

Forget terrestrial life - go back a bit in time and meditate on whence carbon.



AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

07 Feb 2011, 10:07 am

Nosirrom wrote:
Oh I see. yeah matter is pretty awesome.
I like to think of the "soul" as the way "people back then" used to think of matter being awesome. (if that makes any sense) Just because there was no other way to comprehend it.
Yeah exactly. Back then people were less educated and there was more illiteracy so I guess religious books were written in a way that makes em easier to understand.



Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

07 Feb 2011, 9:46 pm

AceOfSpades wrote:
Nosirrom wrote:
Oh I see. yeah matter is pretty awesome.
I like to think of the "soul" as the way "people back then" used to think of matter being awesome. (if that makes any sense) Just because there was no other way to comprehend it.
Yeah exactly. Back then people were less educated and there was more illiteracy so I guess religious books were written in a way that makes em easier to understand.


I have been over this before professionally - it is totally wrong to refer to someone as uneducated just because of being low on "book larnin".

A tribal elder with a memorized body of oral tradition and familiarity with traditional law and experience building houses and maintaining livestock and dispensing herbal remedies is at LEAST as trained - learned - educated as the average US university professor - who is likely a lot narrower in mind and experience.



AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

07 Feb 2011, 9:49 pm

Philologos wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
Nosirrom wrote:
Oh I see. yeah matter is pretty awesome.
I like to think of the "soul" as the way "people back then" used to think of matter being awesome. (if that makes any sense) Just because there was no other way to comprehend it.
Yeah exactly. Back then people were less educated and there was more illiteracy so I guess religious books were written in a way that makes em easier to understand.


I have been over this before professionally - it is totally wrong to refer to someone as uneducated just because of being low on "book larnin".

A tribal elder with a memorized body of oral tradition and familiarity with traditional law and experience building houses and maintaining livestock and dispensing herbal remedies is at LEAST as trained - learned - educated as the average US university professor - who is likely a lot narrower in mind and experience.
I'm talking about education dude, not intellectual capacity. Where did I say uneducated meant stupid? Yeah I agree it can get to a point where they start living in an ivory tower and lack practical intelligence.