This is a podium to discuss the continuum we humans have assigned to different forms of life. Naturally, homo sapiens is at the top rung. We think, therefore we are. …Except the truth is more like, “We think, therefore not only are we, but we consciously think ourselves supreme among all the species on the face of the Earth.”
Christians believe that only the human being, made in the image and likeness of God, is capable of having a soul. Other, less by-the-GoodBook believers in God, cannot bear the proposition that their beloved pets will never be seen again in heaven. While PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals… not People Eating Tasty Animals! ;)) and other animal rights groups predicate their whole existence on treating the kingdom animal with at least as much dignity as the human animal.
What do you think determines the value of life? Who’s to say? God? Maybe. How about in our society, though. Who’s to say that your beloved dog or cat has more inherent value than a roach? Than a one celled amoeba? Than an unborn child destined to be sucked down the sink of a society which endorses this practice–just so long as the baby isn’t yet “born”?
That last comparo may sound inflammatory, but it’s really no more than an uncut illustration of how we arbitrarily assign value and worth to life in our society.
Define ‘soul’
If you define it as most religionists do, as some sort of life force capable of existing and continuing after the body dies, I have yet to see any kind of convincing evidence such a thing exists in humans, much less cockroaches or anything else.
With that being said, it is my personal opinion life is life, human, animal, or insect. I don’t think life has any objective value, but we assign subjective value to specific lives, on a personal level.
I could squash a bug. I won’t cry if I see a dead dog on the side of the road.
Hearing about murders and fatal accidents on the news doesn’t phase me.
Most people seem to react the same way as I do to such things.
However, the death of MY loved one, or MY dog would be devastating to ME.
Although im sure, if such an accident made the news, not many people (or anyone) not in the direct sphere of influence of the deceased would lose any sleep.
Haha, nice try DocSatan but your beliefs hold no room for such a thing anyway, therefore why bother?
Ahh, but what about when survival is no longer the pressing issue? A roach doesn’t search for meaning! Indeed, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs has no application for the animal kingdom beyond that of physiological (survival).
Anyway, the question seemed intriguing enough to me. Inellectually we are the highest-performing sentient inhabitants of Earth, and it has been suggested that aside from possessing the ability to reason, the quality of being self-aware is what makes us uniquely human.
Does this alone give us more worth? A baby in the womb isn’t self-aware. I think (I’m not sure) the ability to reason is a developed one, such that a very young child’s capacity for these traits only becomes evident as it grows.
Me, I don’t know. But somewhere a line has to be drawn. The one-celled amoeba and countless billions of sperm that get flushed down the commode every day certainly aren’t possessed of souls. Somewhere, a line has to be drawn and the determination of worth and value assigned accordingly.
I am fairly sure you have completely the wrong idea about me.
My ‘belief’ is to avoid belief altogether.
Belief suggests closing your mind to a subject.
Asking you to define soul was a perfectly reasonable question, given the topic.
You are asking if a cockroach has a soul, how can you do that without first defining what a soul is, and giving some kind of indication that such a thing actually exists?
You are making the assumption that insects are self-aware and able to consider their lives as “important/unimportant.”
These behaviors are programmed and instinctual, aren’t they?
You are making the flawed assumption that insects are self-aware and have a “mind” to read.
…lol You’re all right, anarchistangel.
Are ya now. Well, when seeing a username like Dr.Satanical, one is given to certain prejudices or predispositions. Also, sporting the upside-down pentagram and going out of your way to call God a mythical being in discussion with believers is pretty indicative of one who is a “devout” atheist at the least, and worshipper of Satan or evil at the worst.
[Dr.Satanical: I am not saying that is you. I’m just a n00b here pointing out the obvious first impressions which any newcomer would get.]
That’s not a belief, that’s a false philosophy akin to nihilism. It’s effectively self-negating (annihilistic). It is akin to the guy who proclaims to “stand for” a philosophy which stands for nothing. The concept collapses under a closer scrutiny.
Au contraire, my wicked worshipping wayfarer. Belief suggests a bold embrace of a set of ideals–not the opposite (though religion can certainly do just as you said).
Simple. The object is to discuss the question, not defend its implications with every nihilist and atheist who happens by.
That’s exactly why we have a Religion sub-forum at ILP, John. But this is the philosophy forum; and here when you utter the word “soul,” we’re going to ask you what it is you’re referring to. In fact, you can posit anything you want here as long as you’re prepared to explain what it is you’re positing.
Life can be defined as something (namely an organism) that has a barrier (skin or membrane) from the external environment and has continuing processes of interaction between different parts of a genomic structure. I think people get a life confused with a spirit. I don’t think spirits are so separate from their environment. Spirit is life force. Everything that is part of the web of life has a life force or spirit (yes including your swimmies). I think these forces don’t exist as separate from each other as organisms due, but only exist in relation to one another. So do roaches have a soul? No they don’t have a spiritual force separate from the rest of the web of life. Do they have spirit? Yes, they do have a spiritual force even though that force cannot exist on it’s own without the rest of the forces of life. Most things are like this anyway. Humans themselves cannot exist without all the rest of the living species on the planet. We are nearly inseparable from them. I believe that spiritual entities do probably keep some form and separation, but also assimilate external forces and energies, and discard some of their own frequently. If you notice, organisms behave like this too keeping a constant flow of matter going in and out of them at all times.
How is that? That is totally assuming that once you have established a belief, that belief can never change. I change my beliefs all the time. If you don’t have any established beliefs then you can’t really believe anything. How can you have conviction in what you say if you have no beliefs. Do you believe you exist? Do you believe that everyone around you exists. Beliefs, it seems to me, are almost inseparable from individual reality.
If there is an answer to that question it will have to come from those who ask it. It’s fruitless to try to derive ought from is. Worse, is reading tea leaves or looking to some skygod for moral guidance. That is an overt sham, as Sartre correctly noted:
“Man cannot find an omen in this world by which to orient himself, because a man will always interpret an omen to suit himself…" – Existentialism and Human Emotions
Neither do we have the luxury of postponing our decisions until such time as we have some perfect and incontestable moral theory; people live and die in realtime.
Given that we’re the ones asking the questions, if there are going to be answers then it’s up to us to give them. The fact that what began as pond-scum could come to ask such questions is, in itself, a wonderous thing. And the fact that we anguish over the outcome of our decisions says half as much again about us. Our anguish is a sign of our moral well-being. It’s when we’re cock-sure of our righteousness; when we profess to know, without a doubt, that what we’ve done is beyond moral reproach; that is an unmistakable marker along the road to depravity.
Well, it’s a philosophical question with religious undertones, certainly. But it is still a philosophical question–does a cockroach have a soul–and I simply refused to derail my own thread by catering to the semantic parsing of one person. Most of us understand what is commonly meant by the term, “soul”; i.e. I’m not talking about the food. … I’m not talking about jazz music.
I admire your open-mindedness and respect for all forms of life. I was actually basing my statement that an insect is not self-aware on the biological structure of an insect’s brain. -But I am far from an expert on this!
Btw., hi Michael. I have read some of your work and am pleased to make your ‘personal’ (as it were) acquaintance.
whispers: I think he’s one of them new Satan-worshipping, skeptical agnostics, myself Alien. But shhhhhhh!
Aye sir, but given that it is a rhetorical question (there actually is no ‘answer’) designed to provoke thinking and spark discussion, most anyone can take a shot!
It’s not fruitless. It may be an ultimately impossible exercise, but this doesn’t preclude value or benefit coming from the endeavor.
Michael, don’t confuse moral conviction with depravity. It would be more precise to say that a depraved moral conviction is a high-risk marker along the road to terrorism, to use an example we can all relate to. However, a religious or moral conviction in and of itself is not a risky or evil thing at all.
…Yes, I get your clear distaste for organized religion. But I do not share it. Presently in my life I am as much an agnostic as anything; however, I do not condemn people of faith as having fallen for a sham.
You’re all right, anarchistangel.
Well, when seeing a username like Dr.Satanical, one is given to certain prejudices or predispositions. Also, sporting the upside-down pentagram and going out of your way to call God a mythical being in discussion with believers is pretty indicative of one who is a “devout” atheist at the least, and worshipper of Satan or evil at the worst.