3 ms·

A great many people believe there is some intrinsic connection between body, mind, consciousness and soul. They think that when they die, their soul will retai

A great many people believe there is some intrinsic connection between body, mind, consciousness and soul. They think that when they die, their soul will retain the memories of their life, and will bear culpability for the good and bad actions in life (karma, divine judgment, etc). For this to make sense, the soul has to in some way influence or be responsible for a person's character. My argument was only that it cannot be directly and completely responsible, given the obvious changes to character as the brain undergoes changes. Having read the post I was replying to, you'll note that your suggestion has already been made in the context of physicalism. I merely offered a mild critique of the opposing view, metaphysicalism.

thfuran 3y ago
>For this to make sense, the soul has to in some way influence or be responsible for a person's character. Why couldn't the influence go the other way, with a soul left behind that was shaped by physical events it had no effect on? Insofar as the idea of a soul can make sense, that seems the only way.
- zdragnar 3y ago
  That depends on the brand of mysticism you prefer. Early forms of Buddhism would agree- that which was reborn was the accrued karma. Living a life of enlightenment let you die without karma, ending the cycle. On the other extreme end, Christianity favors a version where the soul is responsible, and held in judgement. Some branches allow for purgation, others are a "go straight to heaven or hell" variety. What's the point of rewarding or punishing a soul that had no agency in life? What of a soul that was shaped by a brain fundamentally different at death than early adulthood? Orthodox Christianity is a little different- there's purgation, without the purgatory. Moreover, the goal in life is theosis- living in such a way that your being aligns with the holy Spirit, essentially attaining sainthood while alive and in direct communion with the divine. So, many very opposing answers, the truth of which is beyond me to decide for you.
  - thfuran 3y ago
    >What's the point of rewarding or punishing a soul that had no agency in life? So we're to assume that the sensibleness of doctrine is what determines the underpinnings of reality, that some kind of Just World force makes the world work in a way to minimize the injustice resulting from it? That makes even less sense. And anyways, the evidence suggests that such a force is not dominating the other fundamental forces.

thfuran 3y ago

>For this to make sense, the soul has to in some way influence or be responsible for a person's character. Why couldn't the influence go the other way, with a soul left behind that was shaped by physical events it had no effect on? Insofar as the idea of a soul can make sense, that seems the only way.

zdragnar 3y ago
That depends on the brand of mysticism you prefer. Early forms of Buddhism would agree- that which was reborn was the accrued karma. Living a life of enlightenment let you die without karma, ending the cycle. On the other extreme end, Christianity favors a version where the soul is responsible, and held in judgement. Some branches allow for purgation, others are a "go straight to heaven or hell" variety. What's the point of rewarding or punishing a soul that had no agency in life? What of a soul that was shaped by a brain fundamentally different at death than early adulthood? Orthodox Christianity is a little different- there's purgation, without the purgatory. Moreover, the goal in life is theosis- living in such a way that your being aligns with the holy Spirit, essentially attaining sainthood while alive and in direct communion with the divine. So, many very opposing answers, the truth of which is beyond me to decide for you.
- thfuran 3y ago
  >What's the point of rewarding or punishing a soul that had no agency in life? So we're to assume that the sensibleness of doctrine is what determines the underpinnings of reality, that some kind of Just World force makes the world work in a way to minimize the injustice resulting from it? That makes even less sense. And anyways, the evidence suggests that such a force is not dominating the other fundamental forces.