Do We Have A Soul Without A Brain?

[Plu]

Hinduism has many options. Some say soul brain is Big Daddy's brain. Acts over long distances. Others say Big Daddy is in you. Some say you yourself are the Big Daddy but under a veil of ignorance created by your own brain. What scenario appeals to you?

The one that is real. But I don't think it involves "big daddy".

[PickelledEggs]

Others say Big Daddy is in you.

:rollin: that sounds provocative

[stromboli]

If "Big Daddy" is ever in me, it means I'm in prison and somebody is holding me down. Probably a couple of guys.

[PickelledEggs]

I learned about stocks from Big Daddy...
[youtube:1qswmccm]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6VNGqN8hwk[/youtube:1qswmccm]

[bennyboy]

The question isn't whether we can have life without a brain.  Bacteria are alive.  Single-celled creatures are alive.  Insects have no brains.  The question was whether we can have a soul without a brain, and since "soul" has never been defined (not in the sense that Christianity uses it), the question is meaningless.  A question that includes a word that has no defined meaning has no answer.  It's like asking what 3 divided by some number is.

The thing I was getting at is-

Is our consciousness our soul?

If it is possible that the brain isn't the only thing keeping us alive, is it also possible that our consciousness is not just in our brain, but throughout our body? (like the rest of our nervous system and the rest of our body tissue)

Maybe what some people call our soul is just our imprinted DNA in all of our cells and not some ghost like thing. I also heard of some instances of people with transplants having memories from the person they got the body part from. If those reports are true maybe our memories and what makes us ourselves (or soul) is just the DNA imprint in our cells and the brain is just part of it.

When Benny shows up he'll go *there* with you.

You're supposed to say it 3 times, in a darkened room with candles and a mirror.

I'm not as woo as you think I am.  The only "woo" thing I think I can be accused of is that my world view centers on direct experience, rather than on any model of it.  This is seen as flakey by those who believe in a physical monism.  However, I haven't discarded the idea that everyone who calls me flakey is a figment of my imagination, so they can just shush while I get down to the more important work of masturbating on a crowded bus.

I personally agree (I think-- I haven't read them) with the others here, in that the "imprint" of memories on non-brain parts is unlikely.  MUCH more likely is that a person receiving a transplant has a psychological reaction to having someone else's body parts contributing to his survival.

The problem with anecdotes is that they aren't all considered, and that they receive a kind of post-effect confirmation bias.  So in the first case, it may be that many hundreds of people THINK they have implanted memories, but only the few who end up being "right" (i.e. coincidentally lucky) end up making it onto Fox News.  

In the second case, people may learn something about the donor, and then falsely remember having thought/said something about the donor before they got the information.  It is known that people can have real-feeling memories implanted by simple suggestion.  For example, if you ask someone to recall a childhood experience that never happened, and then ask them again a year later, they are likely to say, "Oh yeah, I totally remember that."  So the person isn't lying-- they just don't understand that real-feeling memories can be wrong.

[Aupmanyav]

The one that is real. But I don't think it involves "big daddy".

That is my signature. 'Brahma satyam, jagan-mithya; jeevo Brahmaiva na parah' - Brahman (the ultimate constituent of the universe) is truth, a living being is no different from Brahman. Go one step further, not just a living being but all things - 'Sarve khalu idam Brahma'. (Said some 3,000 years ago in Mandukya Upanishad).

[Aupmanyav]

The one that is real. But I don't think it involves "big daddy".

That is my signature. 'Brahma satyam, jagan-mithya; jeevo Brahmaiva na parah' - Brahman (the ultimate constituent of the universe) is truth, a living being is no different from Brahman. Go one step further, not just a living being but all things - 'Sarve khalu idam Brahma'. (Said some 3,000 years ago in Mandukya Upanishad).

Others say Big Daddy is in you.

:rollin: that sounds provocative

Not so. Perhaps wise, at least for a society. Some say that soul is but a part of God in you. Evil deeds put a weight on the soul and it is pained. That is why in Hindi - 'Kyon apni atma ko dukha deta hai!' (Why are you giving pain to your soul or making it sad'. Engage in good deeds, it will please your atma, therefore, the Almighty. Of course, a theist explanation.

[PickelledEggs]

Others say Big Daddy is in you.

:rollin: that sounds provocative

Not so. Perhaps wise, at least for a society. Some say that soul is but a part of God in you. Evil deeds put a weight on the soul and it is pained. That is why in Hindi - 'Kyon apni atma ko dukha deta hai!' (Why are you giving pain to your soul or making it sad'. Engage in good deeds, it will please your atma, therefore, the Almighty. Of course, a theist explanation.[/quote]

I was actually thinking some dirty thoughts   :)

But in all seriousness. I see what you're saying.

[Plu]

That is my signature. 'Brahma satyam, jagan-mithya; jeevo Brahmaiva na parah' - Brahman (the ultimate constituent of the universe) is truth, a living being is no different from Brahman. Go one step further, not just a living being but all things - 'Sarve khalu idam Brahma'. (Said some 3,000 years ago in Mandukya Upanishad).

Yeah, the main problem I have with your claim was the part about labeling it "big daddy", which is trying to personify it, which is nonsensical. The rest of it makes sense.

[Colanth]

Perhaps wise, at least for a society. Some say that soul is but a part of God in you. Evil deeds put a weight on the soul and it is pained. That is why in Hindi - 'Kyon apni atma ko dukha deta hai!' (Why are you giving pain to your soul or making it sad'. Engage in good deeds, it will please your atma, therefore, the Almighty. Of course, a theist explanation.

Some say many foolish things.  That some say them doesn't make them wise sayings.

[Aupmanyav]

Perhaps wise, at least for a society.

Some say many foolish things.  That some say them doesn't make them wise sayings.

You did not pay attention to the last part of my post. It stopped socities from degenerating into anarchy. It is false, but it had its uses at one time.

[Aupmanyav]

Yeah, the main problem I have with your claim was the part about labeling it "big daddy", which is trying to personify it, which is nonsensical. The rest of it makes sense.

Big Daddy is for the believers. For an strong atheist like me, for the moment it is physical energy, which constitutes all things in the universe. OI can change this view if science says something else.

[Colanth]

Perhaps wise, at least for a society.

Some say many foolish things.  That some say them doesn't make them wise sayings.

You did not pay attention to the last part of my post. It stopped socities from degenerating into anarchy. It is false, but it had its uses at one time.

1) Why is anarchy degeneration?

2) Why is saying foolish things wise?

[Plu]

1) Why is anarchy degeneration?

Can you name one way in which anarchy would improve society? Because I really can't come up with anything that isn't absolutely horrifying... I hear people talking about anarchy from time to time, but really I can't see any way it wouldn't end civilization and the human race as we know them.

[bennyboy]

1) Why is anarchy degeneration?

Can you name one way in which anarchy would improve society? Because I really can't come up with anything that isn't absolutely horrifying... I hear people talking about anarchy from time to time, but really I can't see any way it wouldn't end civilization and the human race as we know them.

There's no such thing as anarchy.  As soon as you get 2 people together, one or both of them are going to start making rules.

As soon as you lose the federal government, you'll have gangs of thugs on the highway demanding a toll for passage.  That's a kind of taxation, and that's government.

So I think anarchy is a personal choice to stand up against tyranny-- you are declaring that you do not accept the rules that others have collectively chosen to impose on you.