Only three Theories explain the Relation between our Soul and Matter
 

Many asked: Is there a soul? If yes, what is its nature and how does it relate to our material world? And what is matter?
Only three theories give possible answers to these questions:

(A) There is no soul and all that is is matter (classic atheism).
(B) A supernatural soul hallucinates the material world and the material world does not really exist, i.e. in form of a substance (visualization theory).
(C) A supernatural soul connects with the material world whereby soul and matter were two different forms of substance (dualism).

These three theories give answers to the nature of our soul, matter, and the relationship between.
The three theories are mutually exclusive, each one rules out the other two. Furthermore one of the three is necessarily true.
All religions and theories that explain the universe are just variations, e.g. Christianity = dualism C. There are no further possibilities.


2 Questions:

1) A, B, and C are not all equally likely. So, how high do you estimate the likelihood of each of them, and why? In sum you have to get 100%.
My own guess:
A ~ 0
B ~ 70%
C ~ 30%

2) In the case of C and B: How are they realized technically?
How does the soul connect to matter in theory C, and where does soul-enwraping matter come from?
How does visualization work in theory B - and if matter is an visualization, is the soul a computer?


(Terminology: With soul I refere to the thing outlasts our physical body.)

The reason why I think B (visualization) is more likely than C (dualism) is because of its simplicity. In theory C (dualism) you have to postulate two different kinds of substance: soul-substance and matter-substance. In B you need only one kind of substance that explains everything: The substance or energy that our soul consists of.

I would agree with Jyotir's D. 100% :smile:

Okay, I admit there are some errors on my premise. But there isn’t much difference between A und D. I should have written:

A) Our consciousness is created by or identical with matter - independently, where matter comes from.
(As an explanation for the relation between our consciousness and matter.)





So you are 100% sure that it is D. And you KNOW that A, B, or C are definitely not the case?

How can you be so sure?

I believe that the relation between me-here-now and the soul / essence / higher-self / whatever incarnated as me-here-now, is a similar relation with that between me-in-my-dreams and me-here-now.

So, it may be close to your B, without any conclusion about the material world existing, because when we dream, that dream-world is a material world for us-in-our-dreams.

A simple theory is that the Absolute manifests as Purusha (Spirit) and Prakriti (Matter). In this instance, Matter is not necessarily physical, it is more primordial substance. Both Spirit and Matter are limitless. Spirit expresses Will; Matter expresses Intelligence.

Consciousness arises from the combination of Spirit and Matter. Spirit and Matter being everywhere, Consciousness is also everywhere.

As individuals, we reflect this, so we are Beings of Spirit expressing through Matter via the mechanism of Consciousness or the individual Soul.

There are cycles of devolution and evolution. Devolution is the downward arc of the cycle where Consciousness descends into the material aspect, evolution is the upward arc of the cycle where Consciousness ascends to identification with Being.

Peace.

Soul has so many definitions I would say it is undefinable or possibly does not exist.

Matter is a different story. Much agreement what matter is.

You cannot prove wrong that someone thinks something.

So where does the brain stand in here? What about those people with Alzheimer's, or that were left unconscious in a fight. What happened to them? They got their memories lost as the brain shrank or got damaged, so someone would say that this is the evidence for A, that we are our brains, that are like computers and when they die that's the end, on top of the fact that nobody came from the Dead for long enough to confirm that something is out there, like the supernatural soul that stores memories.

This is how I see it too.


What do you mean with “without any conclusion”? Isn’t the conceptualization of the material world as a dream-world and therefore an virtual world already a conclusion?

If matter isn’t physical what else is it, what is primordial substance?

If matter isn’t physical, it would have to be a virtual phenomenon. So you believe theory B is true?

This is no answer to anything.
And I already defined the term soul in my first post (see last sentence).

So you say, you have no reason to believe that it is something else that A?

Hmm, even if I'd like to believe B or C there isn't any proof for them. As for A, many people (Like Richard Dawkins) would say that there is sort of a proof that people are their brains, including memories, thoughts, emotions, personality, feelings, intellect etc. How? Look at Dementia people, look at the Guy who got knocked out in a bar fight. Most that went unconscious would say that there was a blank period of unawareness for them and that death would be also an unaware endless state as before being born. So upon death, when brain dies a skeptic would say that it is the end (as consciousness is a byproduct of chemical and electrical reactions within the brain) and that the brain can't transfer all the information to the soul, or that a soul can hold these information.

For someone like Dawkins , there is no need for a soul as the brain does everything. It is easier to say and explain A rather than B or C. (As the soul would be sort of a fairy tale). " A "sort of has proof as most skeptics will tell you " Death would be like before being born as you being unaware", or that NDE represents an anoxic (Oxygen deprived) brain struggling for survival thus hallucinating. The thing is that all those explanations for A can serve as proof and are easier to grasp than something like a soul . It's like believing in Santa Claus and his flying raindeer. If I would tell someone that I saw a living unicorn they would tell that I'm crazy, but if I would tell I saw a living brown mustang horse,they won't be surprised, that would be mundane. The same analogy can be made with a fire spitting dragon and a Komodo dragon, God or any other Fairy tale

It is said that our consciousness is separate from our brain and that the Brain is just a reciever.So when our brain gets damaged it cannot receive through our consciousness carries on.

Compare it say to a television.A tv wont work without the input of electricity to get to the various places that make different things on it to work.Electricity is your consciousness,the brain is responsible in making the parts of your body work.

Yes...the brain is a "processor", it transforms thoughts from "Soul'self/mind", into content that the sences can react to.

The brain also transforms information from the sences into content that we the Soul'self can react to. We then react to the incoming content & our response is sent back to the brain, & the brain transforms it & sends it to the sences.

& it all happens in split seconds, back & forth.

& if the brain is damaged the brain can not process info as well.

SMILES.

I am the substance that expresses Divine Love / Light.
No matter the form.

You wrote (my highlight):

It depends what we mean by "really exist" and "substance". Do my dreams exist? I'd tend to say they exist. When I dream they seem even made of real substance.

In a way everything exists, made of some kind of "substance", that might not be made from periodic table elements.

But, I don't have a rigorous opinion about this, and I don't believe to be an important subject.

Matter (from an esoteric perspective) is considered as the building substance of each plane.

So the physical plane is composed of physical matter.

The astral plane is composed of astral matter.

The mental plane is composed of mental matter.

And so on.

Peace

Dawkins is, like all atheists, an ignorant. Atheists use this: “I don’t believe in Atheism, I just refuse to not believe in souls or god. Therefore Atheism isn’t a believe but a form of knowing.”-argument. But this argument is faulty.

If you ask yourself the question: Is it more likely that what we perceive as matter is
A) a “substance-ish” ultimate reality or
B) a virtual visualization generated inside our souls just like a dream?
What would you answer?

I think, you would say A is more likely. But from an objective and mathematical view this isn’t the case! B is at least as likely as A. If you disagree try to find at least one argument that makes A more likely than B.

The empirical data you presented, the correlation between brain damage and loss of consciousness or memories, can appear in both theories. Of course, if the brain were just a virtual construct, it wouldn’t do anything. But it could be part of the game that you loose consciousness if someone hits you on your head. So this brain damages fit perfectly in both theories: A and B! (I myself understand the brain as a kind of a projection (a mock-up) that reconstructs what’s going on in our soul.)


You can reverse this argument 100%. -> There is no need to believe that matter in form of a substance exists. All we perceive as matter, the whole universe, can be explained in terms of an virtual visualization generated inside our soul. The only things that really exist are our souls. Isn’t this theory at least as frugal as Atheism?



Why is it easier? -> Reversion: The theory that matter exists (as real existing substance) is a fairy tale.

Okay, this would be a somehow diluted version of the dualistic theory. So you believe in something I described as:
(C) A supernatural soul connects with the material world whereby soul and matter were two different forms of substance (dualism).

Do you have any reason to believe in this theory or do you just blindly believe? I mean do you have any arguments that speak against the idea that matter is just a virtual simulation inside our soul? And that nothing exists except our souls?

The only senseful definition of substance I can imagine is:
Things can be virtual or substantial.
Substantial things can exists independently from other things.
Virtual things (a dream) can only exist on or in a certain medium.
A substance is the opposite of a virtual phenomenon.

The question isn’t if they exist. The question is if they exist in form of a substance. The answer, of course, is no.

Okay, but it think it’s clear that the “seem even” is the crucial point in this sentence.

No, only things that can exist independently of a medium exist in a form of substance.
Your dreams can’t exist without you (your soul or your brain, as some would say) so they are no substance. They are just virtual phenomena generated by a substantial computer which is you.


Imagine, as another example, the 3D-world of the movie Avatar or Shrek. These worlds are virtual. They do only exist on a medium, namely the computers or DVDs were the virtual worlds are programmed or saved. Same is true for each computer-game.

I experienced an OBE during a conversation I was having while being introduced to someone. I call it OBE but could just as well as call it a shift in consciousness/awareness. I was myself but not the physical self. A very strange and astonishing experience when you're not expecting it. I was left in no doubt once I returned to my "normal" physcial state that we never cease to exist, but we take on many different forms.
I don't think of the soul as supernatural...its the closest thing we have but hidden in plain sight and very natural. While in the physical we are limited within our self beliefs so its where our focus of attention is.

Neither do I think of physical reality as being a hallucination, just a different vibrational dimension of reality...just as other dimensions are invisible to us doesn't mean they don't exist. Around the same time as my OBE it seemed to kick start what we call a Kundalini awakening...I was open to all kinds of different realities thankfully without losing my own rational thinking processes. It left me in awe of the experience and with a better understanding of how all exists in one energetic whole. A bit like cogs in a machine each and every existance matters ...
I believe matter emerges from the soul. Each of us create our reality and also intermingles with other souls versions of reality through a like on like attraction. Its so complex and extraordinary that to be aware of it the human mind would short circuit. I got a very very small taste of it not so long ago and was feeling very disorientated. Its all consciousness related...after all, what are we if not our conscious mind.

The thing is, we can't convince anyone of anything. If we meet life with an open mind, have the honest desire to have our questions answered we will experience what we ask for. When you have your extraordinary moments it can take years for it to make sense and even then you can still pull more understanding from it as time goes by. The answers seem to come in layers, as if they belong in different dimensions themselves and we get fleeting access to them depending on our own state of being and what we are wanting from it. Like I said before, its an attraction based universe. That's my own personal take on it anyhow through experiences...but then again, we experience what we believe so who is to say mine is the truth lol.

How could you know if that isn't the case with you now? I believe that you can't know that. As I wrote, you-in-your-dream are as convinced of existing and being made of substance.

We seem to have to accept that we disagree on existence and substance.

I already said that I think that our physical reality indeed IS a non-substantial dream.


If something is experienced as a substance, it isn’t necessarily a substance it can also be virtual.

There is no other possible defintion for substance as I gave above:
I don't understand why this is so hard to comprehend. I'm frustrated...

It may be the case that we are not on this planet to discover the truth. Apparently, we are just here to make diverse experiences. Having different convictions and beliefs, in turn, allows for different experiences. It doesn’t matter if they are accurate or not.

Or we are here, so that we can create offspring. Is anyone aware that we were created to be capable of creating children in our own essence.

& is anyone aware that we can not accomplish that feat, without the flesh & the organic situation.

"Soooo" why are we here on this planet, instead of starting life, without the flesh & the organic.

Anyone....any ideas....mmm...smiles everyone...BIG SMILES.

Knowledge to experience...quite likely. They say also that we take this life far too seriously...imagine what we must look like viewed from the other side :biggrin:

All those smiles with dimples too I'm sure :smile:

Neil, I wanted to ask you about your view on once the flesh body ceases. The process involved? Everything apart from the body I mean.

One of the main issues I have with B is that it smacks of human projection. It assumes the human mind is somehow the very foundation of the entire universe, which is just nonsensical. It's disrespectful towards other humans and living beings, imagining that they're all fakes and only your mind is real.

I'm going with C. In philosophy, dualism is seen as problematic because how can you have the material and the immaterial, and how do they work together? Many spiritual people seem to think it is problematic too. For me it isn't. I simply do not know how the two interact, they coexist but are separate.

Only 3 huh? Seems a rather narrow perspective.

4. This is a simulation, both soul and matter just a programming constructs.
5. Both the soul and matter are emergent interactive properties of a more fundamental reality, each affects the other but is not fully the source of the other.
6. both soul and matter are part of a 'hallucination' by some other type of being.
7. both soul and matter are part of a fictional story and have whatever attributes and relation the author decides they do in this volume.
8. both soul and matter are labels of convenience to refer to attributes of a holistic system but do not represent actual parts of that system.
9 ....

I think you get the idea

123 Thats How easy Universe can be
 

Soul { :biggrin: } is synomynous with biological i.e. all biologicals { :biggrin: } are a soul.


D} are natural, yet also a synergetic resultant of Universe/God.



This is the first error humans make with the term soul { :D }.


What exists outside ergo beyond our occupied space soul/biological and spirit-2 { fermions and bosoons } is metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts.


EX concepts of soul spirit, Universe, God, Dogs, Cats, Automobiles, Chocolater Ice Cream.


Occupied space reality has mass, spin, charge etc,

Metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts have no mass, charged spin, properties.



All occupied space Universe/God, fermions, bosons are complemented by a set of metaphysical-1, shape, pattern, geometry { dynamic and static }.

Gravity and Dark Energy are metaphysical- 2 and 3, but they do occupy space. They exist as what is called the fabric-of-space is Gravity ( ) and Dark Energy )(.


Gravity and Dark Energy, unlike fermions and bosons, have never been quantised or quantified.

There is nothing nonsensical with the idea that the whole universe is just a projection of the mind! And if B were the case the material universe wouldn’t be the product of just one person but rather a collectively generated dream. If a handful of computer programmers are able to program virtual 3D worlds in animation films like Shrek, Avatar,... within a couple of years, then it's clear that souls – who exist eternal – can program even greater worlds. Just as great like the world we live in now.



This isn’t a necessary consequence of the theory. I indeed do not believe that I am the only creature that exists. I rather think that we dream our world collectively. The planet earth might be a global multiplayer computer game.



Give just one reason that makes C more likely than B.

I assume you have non because you – like most people – do not base your convictions on rationality and logic but on wishful thinking.

Creating offspring is just one out of many games we play in material worlds. The value of creating offspring lies in the experience it provides: family.


We chose this experience just because it is an interesting alternative to life without flesh & the organic. The flesh-experience enables new kinds of development and fun compared to the non-flesh experiences.

The height of human arrogance. And what happens when we remove your brain or were to remove all self-conscious beings? The cracker is: the universe would still exist. Reality is there regardless of whether a thinking creature exists or not. If a fully convinced solipsist dies the world still goes on.

It got nothing to do with ''wishful thinking'', but going by that I'm not really motivated to share any details. :tongue:

Also, if you want to be rational and logical here, than only option A would make sense. B is nonsensical and most irrational. Where I'm coming from, matter and spirit are profoundly different yet they interact. The how and why is not something I can answer.

You do not really offer new possibilities.

Your (4) says: There is a meta-system that creates our consciousness and matter.
What is the difference between (4) and (B)?

Your (6) says: There is a meta-system that creates our consciousness and matter.
What is the difference between (6) and (B)?

Your (7) doesn’t provide any technical explanation. Who writes the story? How is it implemented? What is the technical source of our consciousness resp. soul? How is matter generated?
The same is true for your (8).

In the best case, I consider your (5) to deserve an extra point but we already had that discussion, see first page of this thread. I'm not totally sure but also this point could probably be subsumed under (A) if reformulated (see first page of this thread).

Yes, I didn’t deny that. It would still exist because there were still other users that play the simulated game.


The same again: It would still exist because there were still other creatures dreaming the planet earth.


You are the one who is irrational. Give me one conclusive argument that makes A more likely than B.
Indeed B is the most likely one and A the unlikeliest – from a mathematical perspective.

Interesting, why do you think it's a faulty argument?

Number of Atheists is increasing as there is no accepted evidence for what is spirit and if there is such thing. "We live in 21st century and Robots will soon become like human and take over", they have their empirical proof that humans are just their brains. You'll here from atheists that the term of soul is not accepted as proof, it's just a mere theoretical concept of wishful thinking of those that fear death and cling on to something and hope that there is something after death. Heard some even saying "Do insects also have this soul? What about bacteria and virus, do they have soul?". "How should expect grandmother that died of Alzheimer complication to remember everything after she died?".

For Atheists, there was the Big bang, the Universe was created by this chance, life emerged by chance on this planet starting with bacteria, evolving into marine life then earthly life, and finally flying species. The apes ancestor evolved into humans. What atheists would say is that after we die that's the end as before being born, as it was 13.8 billion years ago, that there is no purpose, life being meaningless. Some atheists just don't want to live anymore after they die, what will be their fate then?

The only argument for A to be more likely than B would be: A is empirical proved, as stated before with brain damage, and not recalling how it was before being born (The void), and all Spiritual experiences explained as brain hallucinations or charlatans, as there is no tested evidence, nobody really came from the actual death long enough to say that something is out there.
Nothing left to say here. Some say we are the brain and consciousness is brain created and some say brain is just a receiver and consciousness is the signal. I explained why most people think we are brain because of empirical evidence: Alzheimer, brain damage, not recalling past lives, or how it was before being born, everything else being hallucination (Talking with spirits, NDE, etc), such that ancient people invented those Gods, mythological creatures (kraken as they probably saw octopus, or dragon as they probably saw a lizard) and stories as they couldn't explain phenomena.


I guess so. For a materialist if they can't see it, well it's not there, if it's not there it doesen't exist, it's just imagination like Santa Claus and his raindeer, or as Tinkerbell in Peter Pan.


Because we can sense matter, everything else could be our brain filling in the gap with hallucinations. You'll often hear that science can provide better explanation with proof rather than stories.