Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Do you think souls exist?

PTSD Marsupials

PTSD Marsupials

Recruit
★★★★
Joined
Sep 16, 2025
Posts
323
Online time
14h 46m
Summary at the bottom.

First of all the concept of a soul is already difficult to define, but in general it's considered to be an abstract thing that's separated from the physical world and is part of what defines a person.

There's no evidence that they DO exist, but there's no evidence that they DON'T either. You could compare this problem to a thought experiment called "Last Thursday", where the premise is that last Thursday the entire universe was created from scratch including your memories, which sounds ludricous but is impossible to disprove. Sure you might remember the universe existing before last Thursday but those memories could be fake because on Thursday EVERYTHING was created.

So is the Last Thursday theory true? Of course not, it's common sense. Any theory that can't be disproven loses all credibility, that's why troll theories like Last Thursday are false.

Thus, on first glance it seems that the idea of "souls" is comparable to the Last Thursday theory since their existence can't be disproven. But there is a big difference: the Last Thursday theory was a thought experiment created specifically to illustrate a point, while "souls" seem to be a concept shared by ALL of humanity. Everyone seems to understand the concept of a soul, which is incredible because we can't even define what a soul is. You could ask a grade schooler if they know what a soul is and they'll say yes, but of course they wouldn't be able to define it. There are lots of things we can't define in words, such as colour, but obviously they exist. Could souls be similar?

SUMMARY:

Souls, while impossible to define and observe properly can be "understood". People universally "know" what a soul in the same way they "know" what colour is. This means that the concept of souls can't be compared to troll theories like "The sky turns purple but only when you aren't looking and if it isn't being recorded" because it has a baseline of being intrinsically understood by the entire human population.
 
It's just your consciousness/life. That's what the word originally meant. The idea that it's something separate from your own body is pretty stupid.
 
it's just so easy to imagine an entity or a mind that has no body

seeing an object react with other objects, there is a clear cause and effect. while when a person interacts the cause and effects of their actions are "hidden" somewhere, i think that's the reason people just assume or are easily convinced that it's somehow different from the physical realm (even though it's just chemicals in your brain)
 
Humans couldn't differentiate between their consciousness and rationality to that of other animals, so they gave it a name. When you make a claim that souls exist, the burden of proof is on you, as something that doesn't exist must be proven, while something that does, mustn't.
 
Humans couldn't differentiate between their consciousness and rationality to that of other animals, so they gave it a name. When you make a claim that souls exist, the burden of proof is on you, as something that doesn't exist must be proven, while something that does, mustn't.
How do you prove something exists? Empirical evidence is the gold standard, although there are other ways. The experience of having a soul is empirical evidence.
 
it's just so easy to imagine an entity or a mind that has no body

seeing an object react with other objects, there is a clear cause and effect. while when a person interacts the cause and effects of their actions are "hidden" somewhere, i think that's the reason people just assume or are easily convinced that it's somehow different from the physical realm (even though it's just chemicals in your brain)
That's a good way to think about souls actually, they're like "origin points" where all of your actions come from. But if souls are just illusions created by neurochemicals, this means your thoughts, emotions and actions have no origin, which is counterintuitive.

Also btw are you saying cause and effect doesn't exist except as a form or reasoning? As in cause and effect literally does not physically exist.
 
Humans couldn't differentiate between their consciousness and rationality to that of other animals, so they gave it a name. When you make a claim that souls exist, the burden of proof is on you, as something that doesn't exist must be proven, while something that does, mustn't.
This is what I was talking about in my post, usually the burden of proof is placed on whoever made the claim. But if EVERY human being consistently makes the same claim as soon as they're old enough to know what the claim is, would it be reasonable to assume everyone's belief is invalid or is caused by an illusion?
 
It's just your consciousness/life. That's what the word originally meant.
Yeah, no matter how you define it that's basically what it is. It is tempting to believe there's something that transcends the physical world.
 
If we breath we have a soul. Every Hebrew word in the Bible for soul or spirit came from breath or wind.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top
×
Sponsored
Stake.us
America's #1 Social Casino
Slots, Poker & More
Join Now →