You don't have a soul...

[mia]

Love this quote.

[bluerum]

1. Yes. Very nice.

[darkstar3]

2. Yet another of Lewis' writings in which I do not see the wisdom.

Lewis always seemed like he was trying too hard to me.

[patrice]

4. Perhaps your assumptions about what a soul might be are more narrow than Lewis's?

[darkstar3]

6. Or perhaps Lewis uses heavy handed and unimaginative metaphors.

Or perhaps a tautology like "You are a soul" isn't wisdom.

[bluerum]

8. I don't think the op is claiming wisdom. Just said he liked the quote.

Claiming wisdom in such a simple observation would indeed be a bit pretentious.

[darkstar3]

10. Lewis is often touted as one of the great apologetics.

It has been stated repeatedly in my presence that he is one of the wisest people to ever defend the faith. His "Mere Christianity" is held up as an amazing work that should convert anyone with a thinking mind.

I've simply never seen the wisdom in his words. Nor do I see them here. And if I see no wisdom, then I see no reason to "like" (Facebook or otherwise) the quote.

You are right that the OP never claimed wisdom, but of course, I never said they did...

[bluerum]

18. Wow. That's a lot to read into that short simple quote.

Frankly, I think you have an ax to grind. So have at it.

[darkstar3]

25. I read nothing INTO the quote.

If you're going to accuse me of something I'd at least appreciate it if you could get it right. I simply commented on the fact that once again I find Lewis' words lacking. If I'm guilty of anything, it's of bringing a little of Lewis' history to the thread.

[patrice]

21. It's also possible to perceive pretention in rejecting that possibility.

Isn't it pretentious for the color-blind to say "There is no green"?

[darkstar3]

26. Always the accusation of blindness.

Funny, no one "in their right mind" accuses the skeptics of UFO sightings and ghosts of being blind. Yet when someone doubts the existence of a soul, an afterlife, or a god, they are suddenly blind and closed minded.

Tell me what else clearly exists even though you have zero evidence, oh insightful one.

[patrice]

31. At minimum, it is clear that I referred to a "possibility" so you tell me why you refer to that as

an absolute.

And, while you're at it, perhaps you can tell me why is it so necessary to be so snotty?

[darkstar3]

32. Accuse others of pretention. Witness the self-fulfilling prophecy.

Crow about it.

I guess I should have seen that trap coming...

[patrice]

34. You may have noticed that #8 made that accusation and I asked a question about that accusation. nt

[darkstar3]

36. More passive aggression.

Have fun with that.Genevieve.

[patrice]

39. Said an inhabitant of the infinitely regressive mirror world. Speaking of tautologies, btw... nt

[patrice]

33. It WAS a hypothetical analogy. If the shoe doesn't fit ... So, why do you insist on wearing it?

[darkstar3]

35. Oh spare me your passive aggressive denials.

I'm really not interested in debating with you when the shoehorn is in your hand for a reason.

[patrice]

40. Deflection. Avoidance. You need to tell DU -ers they are not permitted to challenge you.

"a reason"? Well yes, I wanted to examine your propositions. Apparently that is not permitted.

[darkstar3]

43. I parried your passive aggressive thrust. I'm really not interested in continuing down that line.

Now if you have anything of interest to say rather throwing barbs at me, go for it.

[patrice]

46. No thank you. I'm bored with this now. Time to sleep. nt

[darkstar3]

47. Good night.

For now, I'm sure...

[mia]

9. Share your wisdom in imaginative metaphors.

Please.

[patrice]

20. Perhaps, if you are God, you can assume those things absolutely. If you're not, there's

no perhaps about it; you do not define what is and isn't wisdom for others.

Absolutism is as limiting as whatever it critiques.

The phrases, "to me", or IMO, or any reference to relativity are useful to validity.

To me, Lewis's reference to soul is quite imaginative and it evokes very rich relationships and experiences, but I would never tell you that you have no wisdom because you don't know those things, though I might say that there is a strong possibility that your wisdom is not all that there is of that particular phenomenon.

[darkstar3]

23. There is no assumption in the fact that the statement is a tautology.

It is completley unfalsifiable, and unverifiable, and it provides no extra insight into the idea of a soul.

If absolutism is limiting, then tautologies are moreso.

As for the post-modern relativism that says wisdom is wherever you find it and whatever you make it...meh.

[patrice]

28. Whether it is a tautology or not depends upon how one relates to that which is referred

to by means of the word "soul".

To you, it is a tautology. To me, it is more than that.

And post-modern relativistic wisdom is not the same thing as false equivalencies. It is recognizes that relative understandings may or may not be wisdom, but it accepts that, whether it is wisdom or not, it IS relative to the individual's understanding, not someone else's.

[darkstar3]

30. No, it really doesn't.

"Tautology" is a word with an accepted definition, not some concept you can stretch to mean (or not mean) whatever you like.

There is an objective reality, and if it doesn't jive with your reality (oi), that doesn't mean that both are valid. Attempting to claim so is nothing more than special pleading designed to let you live in your own little bubble where you can never be wrong.

[patrice]

37. We don't disagree about the definiton of "tautology". We disagree about what is referred to by

the letters s, o, u, and l.

IMO, objectivity is relative too. All anyone has is their own understandings. We can put those together and find some overlap. We call that overlap "objectivity", but it would not exist independently of those individually relative understandings and it does not refer to that which is outside of any of that, that which is not understood, but possibly no less real.

[darkstar3]

38. So you're still stuck in "The Cave".

Good to know.

[patrice]

42. Such assumed superiority! You do think you are a god, don't you. Admit it. nt

[darkstar3]

45. So now because you refuse to accept objective reality,

and I point out that this exactly the problem of Plato's Cave, I am presuming to be superior to you?

And what of all of your passive aggressive barbs in this thread claiming that I am blind, that I am closed-minded because I won't accept your post-modern relativism, or that I have a God complex because I refuse to give on facts?

For you to claim now that I'm just assuming superiority is rather a poor exit strategy.

[GliderGuider]

54. My goodness, you found someone else to accuse of this behaviour too?

Passive aggressive behaviour, post-modern relativism and veiled accusations of closed-mindedness seem to be common themes in exchanges with you, Mr. darkstar.

I think you're projecting.

[darkstar3]

55. Yes, I did.

You see, there is this growing contingent of wishy-washy "spirtualists" who seem to think that their version of solipsism is somehow new. When confronted with this idea, I think it fitting to point out that there is nothing more in their ideas than what can be found in Plato's Cave. Inevitably, this leads to the post-modernist accusing me of having a superiority complex, and/or of being closed-minded.

It's a cop-out, and I'm beginning to think it's being taught somewhere.

Good for you, I guess, for finding someone who agrees with you, but just because there are two (or even two hundred) of you doesn't magically make your views valid.

All of the technology that we rely upon to make our lives easier (and even post on this board) relies on the fact that there is an objective reality that exists beyond the subjective personal reality to which the two of you would like to limit all frames of reference. The scientific method itself relies upon this. If you continue to wish to reject it, then I suggest you go and actually live in a cave for a little while and see what it's like.

[tama]

63. Objectivism and subjectivism

What about giving chance to not being limited into either subject(ivism) or object(ivism)?

[GliderGuider]

67. Post-modernist!

Last edited Wed Feb 15, 2012, 07:05 PM - Edit history (2)

The unapproachable infinite; the unthinkable absolute: of these I am utterly sure.
In reality's shimmering solidity and seeming motion there is no possibility of certainty at all.
Rejoice!

[bluerum]

7. Seems a simple observation. So easily overlooked and ignored in our daily lives.

It takes less effort to see this than to actively ignore it. A simple simple observation.

[darkstar3]

11. And how does one "observe" a soul?

I fail to see how this can be an observation. A misguided insight, perhaps, but not an observation.

[bluerum]

16. The observation is that one is a 'soul'.

I personally do not like the religious connotation in the word soul. Maybe spiritual being, conscious entity, or existential self would be more descriptive.

Point being, the observation distinguishes the self from the body.

Simple. I am a bit surprised that a smart classy person such as youself has difficulty understanding.

[darkstar3]

17. I think you and I disagree on what constitutes an observation.

I would think you would need to be able to actually observe something first...

[patrice]

24. Rational empiricism has NOTHING to say about that which is not observed, other than

"It, ___________, is not observed". Anything beyond that statement violates the nature of rationalism and is, hence, ir-rational.

[darkstar3]

27. And yet the idea that I adhere to something called "rational empiricism" is an assumption.

You know what they say about those...

[patrice]

29. My assumption is based upon the value that you apparently place on observation. nt

[tama]

64. If "soul" is not an object of observation

then the subject darkstar3 ("I fail&quot fails to see how this can be an observation.

A misguided insight, perhaps?

[roguevalley]

12. my spirit lives in my body. when the body dies the soul/spirit leaves and

goes on. This is believe with all my heart and soul. I had a near death experience and it changes you forever. It is the only reason I don't shoot myself tonight. My 18 year old puppy died today. My great good friend, ever true and a perfect goodness. I know he's going on and some day we will be together again.

[cbayer]

13. I am so sorry for the loss of your puppy.

18 years is a really long relationship. Please stay safe and I am glad you can find solace in your beliefs.

[roguevalley]

59. Thank you, cbayer. It is the only thing that makes this bearable. My dachshunds live

very long lives. Gretchen, the one before Timmy lived into her twenties. If you keep their teeth clean they're very durable. He is my boy. I hug you back.

[darkstar3]

48. I've been looking at this post for hours. I have a beautiful pup myself.

I really don't know what to say.

I hope you find peace.

[roguevalley]

58. Thank you, Darkstar3. I hug you back too. What a strange thing to come into a

house and find the atmosphere diminished because Timmy's sweet energy is gone from the space. He was my buddy and I sure miss him. Take care honey.

[Dorian Gray]

65. I am so sorry for your loss

losing a pup is horribly difficult! Hugs!

[leveymg]

3. It does seem that I mostly just look, touch and speak out of it.

It's nice to have a body, but it isn't really me.

Don't think I'd want to try to do without it, though, anytime soon.

[hyphenate]

5. That's fine

I don't mind being a soul. Soul is cool. I think of it as an essence. It's what makes me, me. I can't say I like the body that goes with it, though!

[dmallind]

14. May your chakras enlighten your kundalini's third eye, kemosabe.

For then your atman will become brahman in the next life.

[jody]

15. Our senses known and to be known help us understand nature composed of energy and matter. We know

nothing about the preternatural, all things other than nature, and religions describe a soul as something in the preternatural.

Like most people I also wonder if, indeed hope, I have a soul, a word to describe an entity that survives the death of my body, remembers experiences from this physical existence, and can experience pleasure in an after life.

My beliefs are shaped by my life and those around me but I also accept the observations of scientists who say one can not prove or disprove the existence of a soul in the preternatural.

Still I have hope . . . . . .

In the meantime I believe in the immutable laws of nature and cause and effect.

I do not believe in magic, that is a preternatural entity that can intervene in nature and negate those laws.

[patrice]

22. I don't think the preternatural is necessary to soul.

[jody]

51. Isn't that the basis of faith, a belief that does not require energy and matter and is not a cause

and effect result governed by the laws of nature?

[patrice]

52. Not sure why I need faith. What we call "reality" seems enough, to me. Did you see that

scalable model of the universe someone posted somewhere around here earlier?

[jody]

53. Missed the model but I'll search for it. Thanks. nt

[patrice]

56. Here it is. En- joy!

http://images.4channel.org/f/src/589217_scale_of_universe_enhanced.swf

[agent46]

78. I think

You have strong ideological ties to some dogma you dare not reveal publically for fear of losing what little credibility you have.

[patrice]

79. Speaking of dogma: I think you don't KNOW crap about what I think. Q.Proof of YOUR hidden ideology?

A. You didn't ask.

[agent46]

80. Let yr soul light shine for all to see n/t

[Ecumenist]

19. VERY nice. My own belief parallels that statement. I love that sentiment.nt

[rrneck]

41. That may be the only thing I've read by Lewis that makes sense. nt

[patrice]

44. Agreed. nt

[onager]

49. I still haven't read anything by him that makes sense.

Including that piece of bumper-sticker philosophy in the OP.

Years ago, his "Mere Xianity" was waved in my face by umpteen Xians trumpeting it as "the best intellectual argument for Xianity."

After I read it, I wondered if that was the best argument, WTF was the worst.

Around the same time, I read a different argument over the same question - Bertrand Russell's "Why I Am Not A Xian." Now that made sense.

[rrneck]

50. He's just offering a little encouragement.

It won't work for everybody, nor does it have to.

I was actually in a book club full of southern Baptists that wanted to discuss The Screwtape Letters . It was fun till I got thrown out.

[ChadwickHenryWard]

61. I tried reading that book.

I didn't get any further than his definition of "mere Christianity." He was limiting himself to those notions that are held in common between Catholics and Anglicans. If all he's willing to defend are those beliefs that are held by a majority of Englishmen as uncontested and uncontroversial, how can his work have the intellectual rigor to convince nonbelievers? How can somebody in America, let alone some far-flung place like Papua New Guinea, possibly accept such hopelessly provincial arguments?

To me, what really discredits him is the fact that he was an atheist in his youth. He had all of human religious experience, past and present, to choose from, and one day he just realized that the religion that happened to be the established faith at the time and place of his birth was the right one. What are the odds?

[ZombieHorde]

57. OK. What is a soul? nt

[laconicsax]

62. If you ever get a coherent answer to that, can you let me know?

Thanks in advance.

[ZombieHorde]

69. Apparently, a soul is the sound of crickets chirping. nt

[laconicsax]

70. I thought that was "God."

You know--God is a beautiful sunrise, a child's laughter, etc.

Now I'm really confused!

[tiny elvis]

72. that thing that asked what it is

your attention
if its function is explained, as gravity is only explained by its function,
will you see it?

[ZombieHorde]

74. I have worked in a lot of group homes.

The thing that asked can be shattered very quickly. It is nothing more than a bi-product of matter. Change the matter, and the thing that asks changes dramatically.

If you know anyone who has worked for a few months in a nursing home, ask that person what can happen to one's personality if he or she gets a urinary track infection.

[ChadwickHenryWard]

60. This statement is one of the many reasons I dislike Lewis as a thinker.

This is nothing more than a smug assertion of something Lewis has no way of knowing is true. How does he know that? How did he confirm the existence of the soul, besides some combination of holy scripture and church doctrine? Can he demonstrate empirically of objectively that "You are a soul?" Or can he only offer bald assertion?

Further, the cutesy bumper sticker/soundbite formulation of the statement is deeply unbecoming.

[Silent3]

66. The closest formulation of this idea that I could agree with...

...would be that what makes me me is my memories, the way I think, the feelings I have, the ideals I value.

Without getting supernatural about this you could call all of that my "mind", and my mind can at least be thought of in a theoretical if not practical sense as something apart from my body, as the software running on the "platform" of my physical brain and body. My sense of self identity is certainly more a matter of my mind than my body.

If it was somehow possible to copy my mind and transfer it to another brain or a computer that could simulate a human brain, I'd consider that an extension of my life.

If you could keep my body going, but all of my memories disappeared, I'd consider that a form of death.

[deadinsider]

68. Clive Wearing

You may be interested in watching some videos about this guy. Sad and wonderous at the same time:

[2ndAmForComputers]

71. Makes sense if by "soul" you say mind/consciousness/self.

[AlbertCat]

73. Nonsensical platitude

[jody]

75. Wouldn't "nonsensical" be sufficient? "Platitude" seems like overkill. nt

[AlbertCat]

76. "Platitude" seems like overkill

I think it's trite enough for the label. It's little more than a bumper sticker.

[jody]

77. Makes sense to me, I concede. nt