Whatever happened to spirituality? To threads that find God as something more than fundy ideas? To threads that explore the positive effects of religion?
the most important thing is how we are behaving…all the rest is good if it helps us from killing one another…that is something to be discussed on a spirituality thread
It might help if you had at least a few “spiritual” people who were interested talking about it and in attempting to fend off all of the judgements and attacks from the non or anti-spiritual.
What is the distinction between spirit and soul? If one follows Plato, the soul is that part of the psyche that is imprisoned in the body. What do we mean when we say someone has spirit? Soul? Is there an entity that fits these terms or are they simply aspects of the human psyche? I think the answer lies beyond the simplistic response that they are merely aspirations or vain hopes.
Both phrases are obviously contested. They are contested as having any meaningful existence.
Soul is not 'part of" the psyche. Psyche is the Greek word normally translated as “soul”, and in practically interchangeable with spirit.
On a experiential level, and on a level of observation of others we tend to say that more energetic, emotional people, or those that appreciate beauty, art, etc… have “MORE” spirit than another. Is this reasonable in Christian ideology? I think not.
Then there is the animals. Is it reasonable that a highly spirited dog, has no soul at all - or indeed do animals have lesser souls? Would that not also mean that some humans would have lesser souls that some others?
But whether this is the basic upon which we can posit an immaterial psyche or soul existing besides, inside or immaterially alongside the body is a large speculation.
But your initial question of making a distinction would have to rest on answering the basic ontological question before you can start subdividing.
The notion of the soul or psyche is an empirical interpretation of the moment of death. Whereas we can still see the body - sometimes intact, at other times with the lifeblood spilt on the battle ground, the conclusion was reached that something invisible had “left” the body. I think this is the most convincing argument as to why humans invented such an idea. It was held that it was such a thing that animated the otherwise lifeless body distinguishing us from rocks and dirt.
In early time the air and the sea were also imbued with such animated qualities and thought that all that moved had soul of some kind.
These days I think that the soul theory is completely unhelpful.
Did you really what to make a distinction between soul and spirit?
I’m not sure where you would want to start, except etymologically.
Excellent post. Thoughtful. I, personally, would see spirit and soul as the same thing. I would not rule out that certain animals have souls. An amoeba may not; a dog may.
In what way is the soul theory unhelpful? And unhelpful for whom?
The idea of the Soul, in this sense is the proposition that what constitutes you and I as a person can exist without a body.
This is not only unhelpful but absurd.
I am the person I am due to a life of living experience, learning and feelings. All that activity has re-structured my brain in a unique way. The same is true for my dog. Much as I lover her I think it likely that she may die before me, and I know that the unique structure that makes her who she is will cease to function.
I think this is a wholly reliable explanation of the evidence we have before us. We know that people can loose their memories and even change their personalities through brain damage. Death is the cessation of the spirit.
I am interested in the persons who identify themselves as secular humanists…I am not sure how much religions have helped us…they may have been more hurtful…