What is our soul?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-03-2016, 07:17 PM
RE: What is our soul?
(14-03-2016 06:52 PM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Don't keep it all bottled up, let us know how you really feel...

I have many virtues.

Tact is not among them.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Unbeliever's post
15-03-2016, 01:25 AM
RE: What is our soul?
(14-03-2016 05:12 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Alice Bailey was an idiot obsessed with "the wisdom of the Orient", and her views on the soul are remarkably incoherent even by the standards of other would-be theologians.
Seems to me she included a lot of occidental sources too. It's not wisdom of the Orient, as much as the premise that people all around the globe who meditate for centuries are bound to discover some common patterns in subjective explorations.

(14-03-2016 05:12 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  "The Soul and Its Mechanism" isn't so much a coherent dissertation on the soul as it is a collection of vaguely-related ramblings based on New Age idiocy. It offers no coherent definition of "soul" or explanation of its mechanism, even in the section explicitly titled "The Nature of the Soul and Its Location". It simply regurgitates quotes from various schools of philosophy en masse, fails to produce any sort of coherent definition, and generally wanders in circles being as silly as possible.

Reading it doesn't produce understanding of anything. That would require the author to have understood what they were talking about to begin with.
Let OP make his opinion too. It's a big topic that requires preparatory reading. I didn't start with her 26 books, but I didn't need to debate Christians either.
FYI, the soul is simply defined as a "causal body" - an external individualized storage of past life experience and personal karma, a mediating principle between the "spirit" or "monad" and the personality. It's nice to be in contact with, but can be destroyed during one of major initiations (so-called Crucifixion / Great renunciation in Buddhism). But first it's better to have other authors from the whole world to illustrate it, so it's more compelling than a Christian assertion. There's a whole cosmology to describe, the soul is just a small part of it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-03-2016, 01:38 AM
RE: What is our soul?
Quote:"electric universe" model hidden in dark matter and interacting with our visible world through living things

Wow, looks like i missed the latest Deepak Chopra random quote generator going online. Can you provide a link please? Facepalm
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-03-2016, 02:31 AM
RE: What is our soul?
Laughat Lumi's back.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-03-2016, 02:42 AM
RE: What is our soul?
(15-03-2016 01:25 AM)Luminon Wrote:  Seems to me she included a lot of occidental sources too.

All of which she tended to place as secondary to whatever eastern philosophy she thought sounded most impressive, but that's rather beside the point.

(15-03-2016 01:25 AM)Luminon Wrote:  Let OP make his opinion too.

Everyone involved in this thread is free to reach their own conclusions, but there is no reason to treat obvious stupidity as anything other than obvious stupidity.

(15-03-2016 01:25 AM)Luminon Wrote:  It's a big topic

Not really. The study of various ideas of the soul can be very wide and expansive, as every culture tends to come up with a different one - but the study of the soul itself is straightforward, simple, and can be summed up in a single sentence: "there isn't one and everyone who believes otherwise is making shit up."

(15-03-2016 01:25 AM)Luminon Wrote:  FYI, the soul is simply defined as a "causal body" - an external individualized storage of past life experience and personal karma

Memory needs no external storage (and, if "past life experience" actually refers to past lives, that just brings up even more problems). Karma is a nonsense concept. No coherent mechanism or medium of this "external individualized storage" has been or can be advanced.

The idea is, on its face, nonsensical.

(15-03-2016 01:25 AM)Luminon Wrote:  a mediating principle between the "spirit" or "monad"

Themselves nonsensical, natch.

(15-03-2016 01:25 AM)Luminon Wrote:  There's a whole cosmology to describe

I'm sure.

Unfortunately, it's all very, very silly.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Unbeliever's post
15-03-2016, 02:47 AM
RE: What is our soul?
How dare you contradict the great Lumi!
Don't you know you were illuminated?
By the light that shined
From his behind.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-03-2016, 06:22 AM (This post was last modified: 15-03-2016 06:30 AM by Luminon.)
RE: What is our soul?
(15-03-2016 02:42 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Not really. The study of various ideas of the soul can be very wide and expansive, as every culture tends to come up with a different one - but the study of the soul itself is straightforward, simple, and can be summed up in a single sentence: "there isn't one and everyone who believes otherwise is making shit up."
Summing things up as a rejection is not the same thing as study.

(15-03-2016 02:42 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Memory needs no external storage (and, if "past life experience" actually refers to past lives, that just brings up even more problems). Karma is a nonsense concept. No coherent mechanism or medium of this "external individualized storage" has been or can be advanced.

The idea is, on its face, nonsensical.
You're entitled to your opinion, which is worth as much as the methodical work you've put into it.
FYI, karma is described cause and effect. It says so at multiple opportunities in the Bailey books and unrelated theosophical pamphlets.

(15-03-2016 02:42 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Unfortunately, it's all very, very silly.
Things you know nothing about and have no use for generally seem very silly. Most people then just write TL;DR.

I don't want to sound like a Lenovo commercial, but ultimately, some things are only "for those who do". I meditate with interest in the :soul" for 10 years (laya yoga, not relaxation stuff) and I found some books useful and others not.
What great deeds do you intend to do with things that aren't silly? If you don't do anything, then your rationality is just for show and you're not much different than people who show off their 26 books.

(15-03-2016 01:38 AM)Deesse23 Wrote:  
Quote:"electric universe" model hidden in dark matter and interacting with our visible world through living things

Wow, looks like i missed the latest Deepak Chopra random quote generator going online. Can you provide a link please? Facepalm

That's just me giving you a rough but informed approximation. Dumbing things down smartly is not an easy thing to do. I have a hobby. The OP's friend has a hobby. You don't care, so I don't bother you or me with extra obligations. Otherwise, what's in it for me? More sarcasm? I've been through these things already, who could catch on, already did. People want links and then complain that it's an infodump. When I give the dumbed down version, then it's Deepak Chopra. That would be if I tried to convince anybody here, which I don't.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-03-2016, 07:04 AM
RE: What is our soul?
(15-03-2016 06:22 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(15-03-2016 02:42 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Not really. The study of various ideas of the soul can be very wide and expansive, as every culture tends to come up with a different one - but the study of the soul itself is straightforward, simple, and can be summed up in a single sentence: "there isn't one and everyone who believes otherwise is making shit up."
Summing things up as a rejection is not the same thing as study.

(15-03-2016 02:42 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Memory needs no external storage (and, if "past life experience" actually refers to past lives, that just brings up even more problems). Karma is a nonsense concept. No coherent mechanism or medium of this "external individualized storage" has been or can be advanced.

The idea is, on its face, nonsensical.
You're entitled to your opinion, which is worth as much as the methodical work you've put into it.
FYI, karma is described cause and effect. It says so at multiple opportunities in the Bailey books and unrelated theosophical pamphlets.

(15-03-2016 02:42 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Unfortunately, it's all very, very silly.
Things you know nothing about and have no use for generally seem very silly. Most people then just write TL;DR.

I don't want to sound like a Lenovo commercial, but ultimately, some things are only "for those who do". I meditate with interest in the :soul" for 10 years (laya yoga, not relaxation stuff) and I found some books useful and others not.
What great deeds do you intend to do with things that aren't silly? If you don't do anything, then your rationality is just for show and you're not much different than people who show off their 26 books.

(15-03-2016 01:38 AM)Deesse23 Wrote:  Wow, looks like i missed the latest Deepak Chopra random quote generator going online. Can you provide a link please? Facepalm

That's just me giving you a rough but informed approximation. Dumbing things down smartly is not an easy thing to do. I have a hobby. The OP's friend has a hobby. You don't care, so I don't bother you or me with extra obligations. Otherwise, what's in it for me? More sarcasm? I've been through these things already, who could catch on, already did. People want links and then complain that it's an infodump. When I give the dumbed down version, then it's Deepak Chopra. That would be if I tried to convince anybody here, which I don't.

You have never, ever provided one bit of scientific evidence for your outré claims.

They are therefore criticized, mocked, and dismissed.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-03-2016, 07:13 AM
RE: What is our soul?
(15-03-2016 07:04 AM)Chas Wrote:  You have never, ever provided one bit of scientific evidence for your outré claims.

They are therefore criticized, mocked, and dismissed.

But but but but... He's a *genius*. He knows about magnets and electricity and politics and economics! And spirits too! Lots of spirits!

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-03-2016, 07:53 AM
RE: What is our soul?
(15-03-2016 07:04 AM)Chas Wrote:  You have never, ever provided one bit of scientific evidence for your outré claims.

They are therefore criticized, mocked, and dismissed.
This is a topic on philosophy, not science. There is no science as such, there are just scientific fields with their own methods and instruments and their own definitions of evidence.
What you really mean are journal articles. And that's a little different from philosophy or science. It's a community of sorts. You are asking me for a community reference about things you don't understand. Which is great, we rely on community all the time, for the most usual things. But you ask for a reference to community that gets the most of government money, as if that was the only scientific community. I can only tell you that much, inter-community scientific communication is difficult, almost impossible, and there's very little motivation for it. This kind of complicates this sacred cow of yours, which is peer review.
If scientists have different jargon and equipment, they can not be peers and they can't do peer review. They literally can't understand each other. And they don't have to, because it has nothing to do with their funding. If it has, they can even fake the peer review, which sometimes happens.
Which is why there is no single "science", and there is no one scientific community either. Maybe if there was an anarchistic free market, things would be different.

You'd have to be really specific about which field and which kind of evidence do you have in mind, or you won't recognize it as such and I don't have to provide anything. If you can't show with your knowledge where that particular piece of a puzzle would fit, then you probably wouldn't recognize it in the first place.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: