The scientific proof of the existence of the soul (and God)

[GAHD]

LOL, his maby, I personally beleive there must be a higher order to the universe. At the sime time I scorn all beleif in Religion as it is merely a tool of controlling and placating the masses.
A key point in most religion is that 'god' wants to protect you etc... which is about as much nonsence as you caring about one specific bactirial cell in your digestive tract.

[cnfsdnlostinside]

I must disagree that the original site proves the existance of a soul. The way in which systems of organisms interact is incredible, and the more complex the organisim becomes, the more delicate the balance becomes between each of the systems. Perhaps the 'sensations and emotions' that seem to be expressed by some organisms (like humans) is correlated with the interactions of the nervous system and a seemingly endless array of stimuli. As far as we know, humans have a relativly complex body and intricate nervous system. Our brain is relativly developed, and not exactly like any other organism. These emotions etc. that we experiance could be nothing but a series of chemical/biological reactions that affect the entire system.
I do not see how animals are just "biological robot(s), feeling nothing at all," or how humans are superior to the rest of the animal kingdom, as there are many animals that too, have relativly complex and developed (nervous) systems. Any animal may become frieghtened from a sudden sound or movemnet; we humans become scared, and we may scream or hide, but most definitly addrenilane (sorry for the spelling errors) is released in prepatation for fight or flight. The same is true for horses and even rats.
Certain animals are gregarious, and when secluded for long eriods of time, become nervous, depressed, or a number of other emotions. This can be seen in humans (childeren and/or lonely introverted people especially), horses (they may develop a habit of chewing on things when left a lone for long bperiods of time), and dogs. I'm sure those who have pets (esp. dogs) have at some point in time needed to leave for an extended period of time. My own dog chews the fur off of her forelegs when she's left in a Kennel for a week or so.
From what i have gathered of previous statements, if there are emotions and senstations etc, then there is a consiousness, therefore there is a soul, and the existance of a soul undoubtedly means the existance of a god. I do not see the nessecary connection between the consiousness and a soul, and i do not see how science can conclude that there is a soul, and that the things we experience as we do and not similarly experianced by other living organisms.


it is entirly possible that i have completly lost myself somewhere in here, so some sort of constructive responce would be appreciated.

[Drakon1323]

After reading that article, from my viewpoint, i must logically conclude
(in not so many words)

everything is made of atoms
cells are complex arangements of atoms
we are made up of cells
we have a consciousness
the laws of physics backup what we have figured out and proven true
we have not figured out consciousness
physics do not apply
we know that we have consciousness
we must assume that any arrangement of atoms or at least cells must have consciousness

we have no viewpoint or information prooving otherwise.

by the laws of physics we cannot conclude that there is a god
we have not figured out the idea of god
physics do not apply

[sanctus]

Welcome to the forum cnfsdnlostinside.

Yes, it actually seem to me that you lost yourself somewhere inside, because first you describe how animals and humans have sensations and emotions. Starting from there you say that having sensations and emotions implies (I don't see why) consciousness what implies (I don't see even more how) existence of a soul and that eventually this implies the existence of a god (this implication is the only one I might understand).
In the paragraphe just after you say that you don't see any connection between consciousness and soul, so it seems to me you contradict yourself.

[beccareb]

I understand that scientists do not, as of yet, understand why we are conscious. What I don't understand is how this (supposedly logically) proves that we have a soul and that there is a God.

[infamous]

Untill we can talk to the animals "Dr. Doolittle" I don't see how we can prove they have a conscience awareness, even though I do personally believe that the animal kingdom does have this ability to some degree. I'm not prepared to show any evidence, but it seems however logical to assume so because they react to external circumstances in much the same way that we humans do. I think the big difference between us and the animal kingdom is perhaps the abstract sense of a future. I'm not certain about this, but to think in terms of the future seems exclusive to human behavoir.

[hefner]

I agree pretty much with the skeptics' posts heretofore. The brain is complex enough to encompass nearly any abstract concept and embrace it, or owe allegiances to it, eg. "society" and "manners" etcetera ad nauseum, all of which adds to what we handily simplify to the word 'consciousness' -- so it doesn't denote that there's a soul or a god. And if there is a god, it's definitely not with a capital-G. The Special Theory of Relativity tells us that nothing can permeate through space at any more than a crawl, so there can be no universal supreme being, as his messages and fiats could not be effectively transmitted from "on high" to Earth. If then you retort with the typical, "God's above all that science; He can do anything", I might point out that despite all that supernatural ability, God can't even show His face.

Ah, but I have a righteous answer indeed: there can be local demigods, haunting entities, quasi-potent spirits living on the cutting edge of darkness, but no "The Almighty". The localization of variability that we know as quantum dynamics might so facilitate such.

[pgrmdave]

Is it possible to prove the existance of consiousness, or is it merely something which is so obvious, that we all assume it's true?

[Tormod]

Originally Posted by pgrmdave

Is it possible to prove the existance of consiousness, or is it merely something which is so obvious, that we all assume it's true?

I think it needs some definitions. What is consciousness, self-awareness, intelligence, existence? If we can find some fundamental platform for these, we could establish a theory of how to prove the existence of consciousness.

[lindagarrette]

Julian Janes' theory of the bicameral mind which I've referenced several times is that many entire civilizations were not conscious. His example is the Greeks during a period Homer wrote his epics. In the Illiad, everyone acted based on "voices" from the gods. In the Oddysey, the gods are there but their messages are indirect. People appear to act on their own volition. Children are not conscious until a certain age. In other words, it is a learned trait. Janes explains his theory very convincingly. I was almost taken in. He could be right. People in the Julian Janes Societies seem to think so.