The Soul And Its Purpose/Destination

[Zelfouz]

The answer "That's how we're built" does not satisfy that question, and "it's just arbitrary coincidence" is a slap in the face to anybody that wants their life to have meaning.

Why does arbitrary coincidence preclude meaning? So what if nothing we do means anything objectively? I matter to myself and I happen to enjoy life, so my life has meaning. People who feel slapped in the face should man the fuck up.

To the op:

Your post seems to assume souls exist. I do not believe in souls. I do believe in brains, because as far as poking and prodding and drugging can show, everything I think and feel can be connected to some structure or process in my brain. My brain dies with me.

 

[Xaixis]

I think the whole idea of a "soul" that lives on forever is pish-posh.

But then again I have been wrong before... I guess that's the fun part about being agnostic :thumb:

 

[Hybrida]

I believe the soul is eternal, you when you die your life will start over as Something/Someone else. I hope no one's soul end up in a new born roach or something. That would suck big time.

 

[sojournen]

Well, it's an interesting topic, that's for sure.

I've died and been brought back. But technically, I wasn't totally brain dead or anything. Saw the tunnel vision thing, all light pinned out. I can't say I saw any pearly gates, but I can say it was a strange experience. From what I did experience, I would 100% say we have a body of energy which is our consciousness, or, soul. My consciousness was still quite active, although my perceptions of time/space were........skewed, don't know a better word. But then again, that might have just been something in my brain experiencing a comatose state. Dunno. I can say though that some weird shit happened, and I wouldn't know how to begin to describe it. Certainly I'm not the religious sort though.

What is a soul? I have absolutely no idea what it is, nor do I claim to understand it's purpose, or true nature, but I still believe in it.

What happens to a soul once a person dies? Well, I think the energy continues, and perhaps changes form.

If you believe in afterlife, describe it: I don't believe in a heaven or hell in the biblical, or religious sense. I think that we move on if we are at peace when we die. I think punishment for guilty feelings and wrong doings are inflicted upon ourselves by our own higher consciousness. I couldn't be more specific without getting heavily into psychic phenomenon and such, which most people are very skeptical about.

If you believe in reincarnation, describe its process: I think the law of conservation in thermodynamics sort of sums it up.

 

[Ellie]

Pratchett's theory in Discworld is an interesting one: when we die, we go wherever we think we should go. For example, the monks who believe in rebirth are reborn as new creatures. Atheists go nowhere, believers in heaven go to heaven, people who think they belong in hell go to hell. You go where you think you deserve, or where you think you will end up. Completely fictional but a nice twist nonetheless.

 

[Venetia]

I've died and been brought back. But technically, I wasn't totally brain dead or anything. Saw the tunnel vision thing, all light pinned out.

sort of OT i guess but i wanna hear more about this :O

when my dad had his first and biggest heart attack 10, 11 years ago, he died for a time then was brought back. He said though that time just kind of skipped for him and he was only met with the realization that he was in a different place in a different time upon waking. He was fairly religious before this and then afterward it kind of ... idk, died out a little. I think he was given some validation that he never really wanted that day.

 

[rey meustrus]

I was trying to find the name of a specific group of early Christians that were considered heretics (whom we have discovered many texts from, preserved in southern Egypt) that believed that Earth was Hell, and I found this very interesting Wikipedia article. It didn't answer my question, but it was very interesting nonetheless, if only for the (imho) very mature tone and neutral point of view that I just don't see anywhere on the internet besides Wikipedia, and seldom anywhere in the academic world either.

 

[sojournen]

I was trying to find the name of a specific group of early Christians that were considered heretics (whom we have discovered many texts from, preserved in southern Egypt) that believed that Earth was Hell, and I found this very interesting Wikipedia article. It didn't answer my question, but it was very interesting nonetheless, if only for the (imho) very mature tone and neutral point of view that I just don't see anywhere on the internet besides Wikipedia, and seldom anywhere in the academic world either.

That is interesting. Someone once proposed to me the idea that we live on a prison planet of sorts, and that our souls are caged in the flesh-cell of our body. It was his idea that reincarnation was done until you paid penance for whatever it is you did.

 

[rey meustrus]

That's where the idea of hell on earth leads, I think. If we consider hell to be on earth, and hell is a place you can go when you die, it leads naturally to reincarnation.

But that is assuming that hell exists. If it did not, and we could not go to heaven, where would we go? If there were also no heaven, where would we go? Reincarnation is still an option in those cases, however so is annihilation.

The answer to this question defines the validity or necessity of religion. Were we absolutely destined for annihilation, there would be no purpose for life outside of one's lifetime, and therefore the only valid or necessary religious practices are those conducted for our happiness and harmony on earth, during our tangible lifetimes. In that vein, sin is only valuable so much as it causes guilt or sympathy; a person who felt no guilt or sympathy would no longer have reason not to sin, and the lack of extra-existential consequences would contribute to a state of guiltlessness.

 

[mawk]

The answer to this question defines the validity or necessity of religion. Were we absolutely destined for annihilation, there would be no purpose for life outside of one's lifetime

yes because the sum total of our actions also crumble the moment we kick the bucket

have you heard of ontological inertia? everyone worth their salt changes the world in some small measure. even if we all die permanently, there's an incredible amount of human experience that we pass through and change in our own ways.

unless you somehow manage to go through your life without affecting a single thing, your life is significant no matter what comes afterward. I don't need a big bearded guy after the end to tell me I did good.

 

[rey meustrus]

I suppose that the longevity of those we care about (which for some, may encompass the whole human race, or even so much as the planet and all of its inhabitants) can be considered an agnostic motivator. But to that end, without extra-existential consequences for our actions, morality becomes personally defined and "sin" practically non-existent. Under such circumstances, any action becomes justifiable so long as it promotes our wellbeing and the wellbeing of those we care about, even if it is to the detriment of those we do not care about.

 

[mawk]

you're ignoring society and pretending that without religion, we can only be motivated by our own gains. I don't know what kind of crazy world you live in, where everyone is fundamentally amoral without a god breathing down our collective shoulder, but that's not how things work in this one. yeah, people can act as total sociopaths and do harm to others for personal gain. however, in doing so, one ostracizes him/herself from society, and all its protections. humans are inherently social animals, and there's a great deal of psychological baggage that forces us to project ourselves onto those around us and feel adversely inclined to doing them harm, with or without the two hypothetical angels to your left and right marking down your good and bad.

and, uh, I'm just gonna pretend you didn't imply that all atheists are sociopaths.

 

[mawk]

like, did you actually just argue that an eternal reward is the only possible motivation for altruism? your examples are losing touch with the real world.

 

[rey meustrus]

I'm not trying to make arguments for or against anything in particular; I guess I was just following a thought to its natural conclusion, something which doesn't always end in reality where it may have begun.

As in my last post, however, it is very possible to possess an agnostic motivator (I like that term, don't know if anyone else has used it before) such as the well-being of your family, your town, or humanity in general. Altruism can easily arise from a genuine love for humanity, which in itself does not require (or even suggest) a religious motive.

I am certainly suggesting that people behave immorally if they believe it will benefit themselves or someone they love, religious or not. The concept of hell is far too abstract for most people and does not serve as an adequate motivator in an age where the fire and brimstone preacher can be tuned out like a soap commercial. From this, as I explored earlier, guilt would be a stronger motivation not to sin than hell is, because guilt is there, and it is built into our minds.

At this point I'm not debating so much as exploring a thought.