Difference between revisions of "Talk:Soul"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Philosophers, we need you.) |
(if various parts of the brain are destroyed or severed, then these functions are impaired) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Looks suspiciously like satire to me... but I cant take it out, it does make an argument, and I cant see the counter-argument! We need a philosopher to take a look at it and produce a nice solid proof that the soul exists. Or at the very least, explain what it does. | Looks suspiciously like satire to me... but I cant take it out, it does make an argument, and I cant see the counter-argument! We need a philosopher to take a look at it and produce a nice solid proof that the soul exists. Or at the very least, explain what it does. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Cut from article: | ||
| + | |||
| + | :To date, there is no definitive record of a soul being observed and detected, although Dr. Duncan MacDougall did conduct an experiment that recorded a weight of two-tenths of an ounce in 1907. As the soul clearly exists - without it, an afterlife would not be possible and all of Christianity would be wrong -the only possible explanation for the lack of observations is that the soul must me invisible in all wavelengths, able to pass through ordinary matter, and thus difficult to detect. As an undetectable object cannot be proven not to exist, it follows that it must exist. | ||
| + | |||
| + | :The soul is widely considered to be responsible for some function [citation needed]. Exactly what this something is remains a subject of debate, as all of the traditional functions for the soul - higher thinking, emotions, a moral sense, memory - have now been identified as a function of the brain. However, as there would be little point in saving a soul without memories, it is likely the soul replicates the contents of the brain. | ||
| + | |||
| + | I dispute the part about "identified as a function of the brain". Researchers have merely determined that if various parts of the brain are destroyed or severed, then these functions are impaired. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 06:42, 27 April 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 10:42, April 27, 2007
Cleaned up this article a bit, needs to cite sources though. - anon
Looks suspiciously like satire to me... but I cant take it out, it does make an argument, and I cant see the counter-argument! We need a philosopher to take a look at it and produce a nice solid proof that the soul exists. Or at the very least, explain what it does.
Cut from article:
- To date, there is no definitive record of a soul being observed and detected, although Dr. Duncan MacDougall did conduct an experiment that recorded a weight of two-tenths of an ounce in 1907. As the soul clearly exists - without it, an afterlife would not be possible and all of Christianity would be wrong -the only possible explanation for the lack of observations is that the soul must me invisible in all wavelengths, able to pass through ordinary matter, and thus difficult to detect. As an undetectable object cannot be proven not to exist, it follows that it must exist.
- The soul is widely considered to be responsible for some function [citation needed]. Exactly what this something is remains a subject of debate, as all of the traditional functions for the soul - higher thinking, emotions, a moral sense, memory - have now been identified as a function of the brain. However, as there would be little point in saving a soul without memories, it is likely the soul replicates the contents of the brain.
I dispute the part about "identified as a function of the brain". Researchers have merely determined that if various parts of the brain are destroyed or severed, then these functions are impaired. --Ed Poor 06:42, 27 April 2007 (EDT)