[Daniel P]

These last posts is getting confusing to me.   

[Flipside]

Because 'souls' (for want of a better word) are not limited to people, animals or even this planet, once again, I'm slipping into pure conjecture, but there's no reason why the next turn of the wheel wouldn't take place on a completely different planet.

After all, once upon a time there were none of us, but we evolved, the vase doesn't define the content, after all

[Flipside]

These last posts is getting confusing to me.  

They're pretty confusing to me, and I'm making them.

It's turned into a highly spiritual debate to be honest, which is ok, as long as we all hold in mind that it's all conjecture

[iamzack]

Maybe stars have souls.

It's fun to think about, which is why I hate Turambar telling me "but it's all delusion" all the time.

[Flipside]

They are born, the grow, they live they die, there's no reason why they couldn't have simplistic souls from that particular point of view.

[iamzack]

Well, they don't really "live" but they exist as an entitysorta. But everything does. :\ Wouldn't be as much fun if all our molecules had seperate souls and stuff.

[blackhole]

:[ You done lost me.

Basically, that what we perceive as 'us' is just a projection made by our 'greater' selves. It's a short summary really of what I'd stated earlier.

So how do we then explain the fact that there were about 2 million of us and there are now almost 7 billion of us?

Well, there used to be a couple million buffalo in N. America and now there's like sixteen. We don't have a monopoly on life and death. There's trees, too.

So what about the rabbit incident in australia?

[iamzack]

:[ You done lost me.

Basically, that what we perceive as 'us' is just a projection made by our 'greater' selves. It's a short summary really of what I'd stated earlier.

So how do we then explain the fact that there were about 2 million of us and there are now almost 7 billion of us?

Well, there used to be a couple million buffalo in N. America and now there's like sixteen. We don't have a monopoly on life and death. There's trees, too.

So what about the rabbit incident in australia?

Tch. Smallpox is near extinct.

[Daniel P]

Well, they don't really "live" but they exist as an entitysorta. But everything does. :\ Wouldn't be as much fun if all our molecules had seperate souls and stuff.

yea, if an matter meet with anti-matter.  

Then what happen to that soul.  

[iamzack]

English is not my first language, so you have to speak it better than that for me to understand you.

[blackhole]

English is not my first language, so you have to speak it better than that for me to understand you.

See, now you're going to hell for making fun of him

[Flipside]

Well, they don't really "live" but they exist as an entitysorta. But everything does. :\ Wouldn't be as much fun if all our molecules had seperate souls and stuff.

I've always considered it more a question of interaction rather than simply 'being', a star does interact with it's surroundings, it responds to outside influences and influences things outside itself.

That said it has no 'consciousness' as such, which makes matters unlikely, it's not aware of the Universe around it, which has always struck me as a quintessential definition of higher life-forms. Bacteria, for example responds more to stimuli that through any coherent thought, so the odds, to my mind, of Bacteria having anything that could be defined as a 'soul' are pretty slim to none.

[iamzack]

I wasn't making fun of him. I really can't understand him.

[Turambar]

Yeah, I'm firmly in the 'we are meat machines' camp (along with the 'we are all the scum on a rock floating around a star' camp).  I've experienced nothing to convince me otherwise.

[iamzack]

Well, they don't really "live" but they exist as an entitysorta. But everything does. :\ Wouldn't be as much fun if all our molecules had seperate souls and stuff.

I've always considered it more a question of interaction rather than simply 'being', a star does interact with it's surroundings, it responds to outside influences and influences things outside itself.

That said it has no 'consciousness' as such, which makes matters unlikely, it's not aware of the Universe around it, which has always struck me as a quintessential definition of higher life-forms. Bacteria, for example responds more to stimuli that through any coherent thought, so the odds, to my mind, of Bacteria having anything that could be defined as a 'soul' are pretty slim to none.

Huh. Maybe. But stars and rocks don't respond to stimuli like bacteria does. I'd say rocks could have souls, but they break. Would the soul split as well, or would it be a multi-bodied soul? I think rocks should have souls. :\

[iamzack]

Yeah, I'm firmly in the 'we are meat machines' camp (along with the 'we are all the scum on a rock floating around a star' camp).  I've experienced nothing to convince me otherwise.

You fail hypothetical discussion. Go die.

[Daniel P]

I wasn't making fun of him. I really can't understand him.

Well you got a problem and most people understand me.

[blackhole]

Huh. Maybe. But stars and rocks don't respond to stimuli like bacteria does. I'd say rocks could have souls, but they break. Would the soul split as well, or would it be a multi-bodied soul? I think rocks should have souls. :\

OCCAM'S RAZOR

[Flipside]

I think if a Rock had a soul and it broke in two, then it would be two rocks and therefore now have two different souls, after all, there are plenty to go round

Edit: Big text is Big.

[iamzack]

Huh. Maybe. But stars and rocks don't respond to stimuli like bacteria does. I'd say rocks could have souls, but they break. Would the soul split as well, or would it be a multi-bodied soul? I think rocks should have souls. :\

OCCAM'S RAZOR

EVERYTHING IS ALREADY ESTABLISHED AS PURE CONJECTURE