/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11662581
Yes but more accurately; we /are/ souls. Souls aren't something "we have" (that's a weird Christian idea). The word soul should really be seen as synonymous with "the self", with our sense of individuality.

>>11662609
but... then we have body and rest of the brain that's material and isn't our soul, or in your interpretation then, isn't "us"

>>11662644
No, you are your body as well. Think of it like a computer and its operating system and the signals with info/data/zeroes&ones flowing throught the circuity (the soul) and the hardware, the mobo, gpu, etc (the body).

The data on the drives and the OS (the soul) can be copied over and installed on new drives and run on new hardware, and live again there.

>>11662664
sounds stupid desu. but i don't feel like arguing about it rn. there's no soul in your interpretation btw. IF there is soul, it's part of physics we haven't yet discovered.

>>11662581
I do, Idk if you do.

here's an alternate theory

try to imagine what a non-physical reality would be.
There are still people in it, and they still interact with each other and live their daily lives, but do so in a non-physical way. Think of it as people interacting on the internet if that helps. In this non-physical reality the ONLY thing that exists is though and logic.

Now what if somebody used the principals of that reality, that is being of pure thought and logic, and created a pocket reality that runs off pure logic of mathematics. Almost like a simulated reality within the non-physical one. I believe this is us. Our universe is this math based simulated reality that exists within this universe of pure logic and thought. Our physical bodies are parts of us that have been converted into this math based reality, but really we extend much further than our physical bodies and into this non-physical reality of pure thought and logic.

if you were born into the physical reality, or somehow lost all memory, then your attempt to perceive this non-physical reality would be like that of platos cave.
I personally believe we are much much larger than our physical bodies, and that even our physical bodies are part of our soul. It's just our physical body is the part of our soul that pokes into this simulated reality. Kinda like tip of the iceberg if you will.

>>11662581
No

>>11662609
Adding on, soul is not "the self". Soul is your translation of the singular soul you speak of, you are one of many interpretations of it.

>>11662674
Soul, if you're averaging many translations of it means "animated", "living", "the driving force" or literally energy. Matter would be the corruption, condenser and retardation of soul. Eventually you die and become just matter with less soul in the form of carbon atoms, still maintaining their animated form, each once slightly different than the rest. Atoms with their own "souls" in the form of dynamos.

>>11662718
>>11662664

idk why i don't feel like arguing about this on an anon board but i'd fucking sledgehammer you guys into the ground w my arguments if i did want to fire them here

>>11662703
Except if they inhabit a non-physical reality how are they generating a physical simulation? If this simulation is just the result of a billion calculations interacting why in the fuck would anyone want to make this particular one? How are these entities interacting with anything at all if they are entirely non-physical? Communication through the some substance that acts like a physical medium to transmit information but isn't actually physical?

Souls and afterlife are the ultimate cope for people who can't accept that they won't perceive anything anymore after death.

>>11662732
denying the possibility of something of you carrying on after your death is cope for people who can't accept that the suffering may last much much longer than a single lifetime

>>11662732
denying the possibility of something of you carrying on after your death is cope for people who can't accept that the suffering may last much much longer than a human lifetime

>>11662732
OR a very low iq thing stemming from the inability to comprehend that we may still have only discovered an extremely tiny fragment of the physical laws of the universe

>>11662609
bless you anon, Odin smiles on your deeds

>>11662732
>you are coping by talking about things I assume you can't prove but I'm not by talking about the same thing like I can

You are a fucking moron and I can prove you wrong conclusively

>>11662824
>and I can prove you wrong conclusively
Ad hominem isn't a proof. You can't prove that souls exist, so they don't exist.

>>11662581

are you asking for yourself or for a friend?

What's a soul

>>11662725
I..I w-would destroy you guys, I..I just dont want to

>>11662725
"I could argue with you but I'm too lazy and scared to acknowledge a term that's been bastardized".
It's okay, it doesn't have to be about God or Jesus you know.
>>11663468
>You can't prove that souls exist, so they don't exist.
This is an argument from ignorance and doesn't even warrant a response. You must also believe there isn't mice in your house because you can't see or hear them at this moment.

>>11662703
Math quantifies what exists. It does not actually pertain to the events that take place in reality. The thing exists and then is measured. The non physical reality could only be memory itself, not something specific such as the act of thinking or logic. Memory is just the stability of knowledge, just a lost recalling of something that was to be known about. Memories of the previous iterations of whatever are imprinted on future iterations to grow upon as a foundation.
In a way, you are memories. DNA based on other DNA causes matter to condense and eventually form into an organism. This organism, this memory did not exist prior and will interlace/corrupt its own memories as it progresses. Like Plato's cave, we'll never be able to see or know "the sun" just as we'll never see the original "source" or uncorrupted memory.

>I personally believe we are much much larger than our physical bodies, and that even our physical bodies are part of our soul. It's just our physical body is the part of our soul that pokes into this simulated reality. Kinda like tip of the iceberg if you will.
Sort of the opposite with me. That we're infinitesimally smaller than our physical bodies in the form of memory. That the loss and corruption of the idea/coherency/memory that makes you "you" is what makes "matter". That what you do, how you are, your personality, and the actions you want to do is not actually "physical" at all, it just requires that you be "physical" in order to do those things translated in this physical world of overlapped and corrupted memories.

>>11664500
>You must also believe there isn't mice in your house because you can't see or hear them at this moment.
Nice strawman, but it has nothing to do with your inability to prove or back up your claim that souls exist.

>>11664500
>The thing exists and then is measured

quantum mechanics tells a different story

>>11662581
ABSOLUTELY NOT.

We are biological robots programmed by our own instincts which are programmed by our DNA, which in turn are controlled by neurotransmitters that, in the right combinations and in the right quantities, evoke specific reactions, emotions and feelings in us.

This is how science strips people of an atmosphere of mysticism, of belief in "free will" , religions, Gods and the so-called "soul".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurotransmitter

>>11663604
the human condition
it's a feeling, how we perceive our self and consciousness and feel about it
its a term we made up for the vast group of stuff that makes up our experience of self

>>11662703
interesting. i never thought of it like this

>>11662581
No

>>11664859
>Nice strawman
I'm not misrepresenting it. The argument never explains why you can't claim a soul exists and even goes so far as to imply that things can only exist if you can prove it. So by that logic if you can't prove there are mice in your house then they aren't there, even if they actually are. What is the problem?

>but it has nothing to do with your inability to prove or back up your claim that souls exist.
You cry strawman then put words in my mouth? Where did I claim the soul exists?

>>11665005
>quantum mechanics tells a different story
Of course it does. It quantifies. That's all it can do. It can't explain the qualitative, it can only quantify it. Hence "quantum".

>>11662581
>>11662581
>do we have souls, /sci/?

Dont fool yourself in belief of some spirituality or existing of "soul" .Vast majority of humanity are souless biological robots driven by : Lust or lechery , desire of money, food, fame, power, or sex , gluttony , greed , laziness , wrath , envy , pride .

This is WHAT WE REALLY ARE! And now try to in a rational manner explain how people can be spiritual beings having souls in a soulless, deprived of spirituality modern civilisation.

P.S. : I am waiting for your answer OP .

>>11665022
>radios exists and we know the physical mechanisms that drive the speaker and influence the sound quality, therefore radio signals don't exist

>>11662581
I hope so, otherwise I've been eating the hearts of my enemies for nothing.

>>11662581
is that the pic of an ass?

>>11662581
Yes

>>11665022
Your model would work if all humans reacted to all stimuli the same way but they don't. Your conscious perception of experience determines outcomes.