Oh I do like the idea of having evolved to not have a soul, but I must
beware the sin of pride in case it awakens my conscience.
Memory would certainly be exchangeable for living / soul in that one can
demonstrate the existence of memory by changes in behaviour and even changes
in the brain
It seems to me that conscience morality and ethics are in a slightly
different category with memory a process running while the body is living
and ethics and conscience outputs of that process
I certainly experience my conscience and sometimes heed it
I'm not sure I have ever met anyone who says they experience their soul. My
mother thought she *had one, but it seemed to be something upon which sin
made marks and grace made erasures as if the soul were some kind of reagent
I do know a number a number of people who have _spirits_ and one speaks of
_aura_, but they seem to be personifying feeling good and maybe even some
image of themselves as they wish they were. I have never had the
acquaintance of anyone who has experience in a different category
One reads of people examining their souls or having their souls being looked
into it; but I think they mean memory, possibly bits of memory tagged by the
conscience for access only on a need to know basis
Dredging up memories of one's behaviour and reviewing them can be very good
for one, as well as bad if it gets out of control and becomes compulsive;
but I don't see that it is other than a rational use of memory
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Hamilton-Emery" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: 14 January 2001 15:47
Subject: Re: Some cheerful reflections on death
| I completely agree with this Lawrence, but you could switch "conscience",
| "morality", "ethics", "memory" for "soul" here too. You can't see them,
but
| we know it's there. I sometimes wonder if people who think they have souls
| actually experience them in the same way I have a conscience. Or if they
are
| just lying. Some might complicate things by saying they have no experience
| at all but "believe" in their soul. The question is what does it matter if
| you've got one or not. Or perhaps some of us have evolved to not have one.
|
| Best
| C
|
|
| > | That the soul exists is obvious: there is a difference between a
| > | person alive and that same person's dead body, and that difference is
| > | the soul.
| >
| > To me that the soul does not exist is obvious. At least, without any
weazel
| > thoughts, it is obvious that there is no sign of a soul. I await *any
| > demonstration that there is a soul. If there were such a thing, then it
| > remains to be seen what it does. Perhaps it is like the appendix. But
the
| > appendix demonstrably exists.
| >
| > The difference between a person alive and that same person's dead body
is
| > that the body *was working and now isn't.
| >
| > If you want to call that ended process a soul, ok. I'd rather call it
| > living. But if you do call it a soul; and if we acknowledge that it
ends,
| > then the question of its mortality / immortality would seem to be
"obvious"
| >
| >
| > L
|
|