Souls

[Sondrigal]

Souls are not tangible so if per say a certain someone did sell their soul to a certain Devil would they still have a soul? I guess I am also asking if our souls are limited. If not, did someone, not metioning anyone's name, trick the devil because he has no limit to how much soul he can have. If Metanet decides that souls are unlimited then I am offering mine (say the next part in a Chinese accent) for one dollar! If there is any law pertaining to soul selling please post it.

[Tunco]

What's a soul?

The spiritual principle embodied in human beings, all rational and spiritual beings, or the universe.

If you sell your soul, people can buy it up to 80$. It's something that you can't feel, or see, it's just symbolic to do that.
It means that you had 'naff with your life.

[SkyPanda]

If there is any law pertaining to soul selling please post it.

There is an international governing body on the matter, created and run by the USA.

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

This is definitely an issue that has been examined by prominent scientists, particularly in NASA. I happen to be a research associate to one of the foremost authorities on Heavenly entities, a subject which includes angels as well as souls (we've had a number of recorded interviews with angels, and my classified clearance is going to be raised so that I'm allowed to view some of it). It's commonly accepted that the world market price for a human soul averages about US$7,600, a number that has sadly only seen decline since it was initially established at around US$89,000 (adjusted for inflation) in the early 1920's. There are larger open markets for souls in countries which have a greater score on what is called a National Depravity Index, developed by the NSA in the 70's, which is basically an indication of how generally evil a country is. It's not surprising that countries in which Christianity is a minority have a greater NDI, especially those areas that are in or near deserts (the accepted explanation is that these areas are more similar to Hell). On a tangent, Kim Jong-il II has been identified by a handful of studies in 2002 to be the most likely embodiment of the devil on Earth today. This is why all armed forces deployed in North Korea are given Holy Bibles and crucifixes. Fact. But anyway, there are actually many more of these markets than people are aware, where people who have elected to be buyers of souls on the devil's behalf, and they purchase souls -- oftentimes stolen -- to resell (mostly to collectors and hobbyists) or trade to other merchants. There is even a rather sophisticated underground economy in the Philippines, where dealing in souls is illegal but organized well enough to evade investigation.
To answer your question about the limitation of a soul, there's actually an entire department in my building that's researching that question (among other things). I've only ever been down to chat with a friend of mine who works there, but he's shown me some chimpanzees that they've managed to infuse with some souls that were confiscated in black market sales and have been turned over to research institutions for research purposes (NASA has near-perfected the soul infusion process in the 50's). While giving a chimp multiple souls seems to be impossible, we have been able to start taking portions of it without killing the host, although these portions are typically short-lived and are easily recognized as a piece of a larger picture. The original soul takes time to regenerate, much like a human needs time to regrow missing limbs. Much of the matter is documented in peer-reviewed papers on very high-level theoretical physics, most popularly quantum mechanics. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology has an entire graduate physics department dedicated to the study of supernatural phenomena, which works closely with the highly reputable Oral Roberts University.

Obviously the first step in selling your soul, should you want to, is finding a buyer who is able to actually get it from you. There are several pieces of equipment that this depends on that are very expensive, but they can often be converted from discarded MRI machines at hospitals, which is a regular enough event that there are many in circulation. I, myself, have collected five discarded but functional MRI machines from local hospitals; it's merely about knowing where to look. Do note that this is illegal in the US, of course, so I'm not condoning any of this.
Next, consider that selling only a piece of your soul is something like selling one of your limbs. You'll take a bit of time to fully recover, during which time your prayers will be noticeably less effective than usual and you will experience a decreased will to resist temptations for drug use, premarital sex, and, in a bit over half of cases, homosexual urges. Also, you may find that you agree more with certain political ideals commonly held by the Democratic party (no one really knows why).
If you're thinking about selling your whole soul (don't!), then the process will very likely involve the removal of the pineal gland, which is located at the base of the brain just above the hippocampus-callosum. It is the organ which stores the soul, and it has never been established that it has any other purpose. This will involve some surgery, but the amount you will receive for your soul will likely cover all medical expenses. At least, that's how it's commonly done for Americans, whose souls typically have higher market value.

I find that most people don't realize how much funding our government affords to research programs for the supernatural. Most people only ever talk about selling their souls as a joke. I mean, honestly, that's probably a good thing, even if we still haven't located Heaven or measured the potential of beings without souls of making it to an emotionally favorable afterlife. Most people don't even think that science and religion have anything to do with one another, but it's obvious to see that anything clearly true can be examined by science, and that this is exactly what happens. (Fun Fact: Hell is significantly easier to identify than Heaven. In most studies that examine the origin of transcendent items and holy relics, Hell seems to simply want to be found whereas association with Heaven is a far more tedious process that almost always produces inconclusive results.)

Obviously, I wouldn't recommend selling all or even part of your soul to anyone. At the very least, save it for a desperate time, like if you need bail money or something. It's just a good investment to keep around.
And remember that you'll get more money if your soul is in good condition. The best ways to keep up the integrity (and therefore market value) of your soul is to regularly attend church, beat up faggotts, and to avoid learning anything at all costs.

[Tunco]

There is no reason that things like people seeing ghosts cannot be explained in terms of matter and energy. Instead of looking for an explanation within the framework of our understanding of the universe, people who believe in "spirituality" will simply stop looking for an explanation and apply the label "spiritual." The first thing you will need to do to prove your definition to me is to define the word "spiritual" in a coherent way, and explain to me why it is a necessary concept to understand the world.

Humans are so selfish and egoist, they think that their little brain can understand how the all universe works, even though they nearly know about it.
Keeps and keeps searching about it, trying to answering questions, so sure that he can understand it, even though they nearly knows about it.
The word 'spritual' or 'spirit', 'soul' call whatever you want, is the fact of an existing life being. Or just matter of being, in short. And keep in mind that there are lot of unexplained things, UFO's, ghosts, god, even though that some people believes them or not.

Second, how can something spiritual be embodied in human beings? Aren't human beings physical? What mechanism could ever possibly connect the soul to the brain?

Third, if souls exist, how come you can't even tell me where they exist? If people can't agree on the question "does X exist?" it usually means it is either a bad question, or X does not exist (obviously, this is a generalization). If people who believe in a soul can't get their story straight, why should I believe any of them?

"Something spritual" is something that you are. Something, which is you.

And if souls exist, we turn to beginning:

What's a soul?

The spiritual principle embodied in human beings, all rational and spiritual beings, or the universe.

Third, if souls exist, how come you can't even tell me where they exist?

What's a soul?

Now tell me, where is the problem?

[otters~1]

Let's all shut up and start bidding.

Incidentally it's demonweek over at mapdraft.

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

There is no reason that things like people seeing ghosts cannot be explained in terms of matter and energy. Instead of looking for an explanation within the framework of our understanding of the universe, people who believe in "spirituality" will simply stop looking for an explanation and apply the label "spiritual." The first thing you will need to do to prove your definition to me is to define the word "spiritual" in a coherent way, and explain to me why it is a necessary concept to understand the world.

Humans are so selfish and egoist, they think that their little brain can understand how the all universe works, even though they nearly know about it.
Keeps and keeps searching about it, trying to answering questions, so sure that he can understand it, even though they nearly knows about it.

This is a fun little tangent. I don't recall that this notion has ever disgraced with its short-sightedness and complete hipocrisy been mentioned in the Debate forum, so I'd like to address it.
The statement you have just made, sir, is that when we say "I don't know" regarding an unexplained phenomenon, we are demonstrating our egotism and claiming we know everything. This is odd to me, because when I say that I don't know the explanation to an unexplained thing, I am admitting that I don't have any knowledge of it, and I feel the opposite of egotistical. Furthermore, when science (or any other rationalizing process than ignores supernatural influence) comes up with an explanation, it always admits that it could be wrong, that there might be a better explanation or in fact none at all.
And then you say that the more humble answer is "it's ghosts," which also confuses me because it carries with it the following implications:

• you know the explanation for an unexplained thing, a thing which baffles all other minds examining it
• you have insight into the supernatural, which is by definition unknowable
• you have identified exactly the entity of all potential supernatural entities that might be responsible, and you know enough about the limitations, methods, and behavioral patterns about all supernatural entities such that you have narrowed it down to the entity you think is responsible
• your explanation is the one correct explanation, and no scientific discovery will ever be able to explain it better than you have; your explanation is ultimate and uncontestable

I just... it really seems to me that you've got it backwards.

[yungerkid]

Humans are so selfish and egoist, they think that their little brain can understand how the all universe works, even though they nearly know about it.

First of all, we are not using our own brains much for this process. We are coming to truth on its terms; we are using reasoning and observation to determine the way things work. Can you think of a better way to approach truth? We have observed that truth follows a pattern; we use that pattern to discover what we don't yet know. We are not using our own brains in the sense that we are merely observing what happens, and using logic to state what will happen. Logic, certainly, is impersonal. Don't tell me different syllogisms follow different rules. Logic is a formal structure, and is always consistent over the things it governs. You were saying that the spiritual realm lies outside of logic, but how do you know that it does? And if you can't prove it, then you have just decided it for yourself. And in so doing, you have assumed that things can be decided (outside of logic) by a mere human brain. Not only is that a logical fallacy (assuming the conclusion), it is contradictory with your above quoted statement. In conclusion, nothing can be decided outside of logic. And observation is certainly the most reasonably reliable resource we currently have to determine what is going on around us. Neither force comes from within us, and as such we most certainly do have the ability to understand how all the universe works.

[Tunco]

Humans are so selfish and egoist, they think that their little brain can understand how the all universe works, even though they nearly know about it.

First of all, we are not using our own brains much for this process. We are coming to truth on its terms; we are using reasoning and observation to determine the way things work. Can you think of a better way to approach truth? We have observed that truth follows a pattern; we use that pattern to discover what we don't yet know. We are not using our own brains in the sense that we are merely observing what happens, and using logic to state what will happen. Logic, certainly, is impersonal.

We are not using our own brains much for this process? And you are right, best way to approach truth and determine the way things work is reasoning and observation. I didn't said anything about that. My point by saying that is we observe and reason to explain how things happens, but can we be sure %100 about it? There can be something we missed? Yes, there is. We are not that clever. If you are, good luck with that sir.

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

What am I, invisible?

My point by saying that is we observe and reason to explain how things happens, but can we be sure %100 about it? There can be something we missed? Yes, there is. We are not that clever. If you are, good luck with that sir.

Of course we can't be 100% certain, and there is never any presumption in a scientific process that anyone can.
The answer from "spiritualism" is the one that deserves the criticism you're giving science.

[yungerkid]

We are not using our own brains much for this process? And you are right, best way to approach truth and determine the way things work is reasoning and observation. I didn't said anything about that. My point by saying that is we observe and reason to explain how things happens, but can we be sure %100 about it? There can be something we missed? Yes, there is. We are not that clever. If you are, good luck with that sir.

No, we are not. Do you exercise your brain by merely looking at things? Erm. Well, you sure can't determine something with certainty just by deciding it, or much less "feeling" it. But we can use logic and observation to a high probability of being correct. I'd take that probability over the probability that my emotions will guide me in the correct direction when it comes to objective, absolute, impersonal truth. Cleverness has little to do with this; we call it common sense for a reason. Again, emotions will not guide you to a more certain outcome.

[Atilla]

I exercise my brain merely by looking at things! The visual cortex, anyway.

[SkyPanda]

...and the visual cortex is connected to the, other squishy bits. And the other squishy bits are connected to the, further squishy bits. And none of them are connected to a, soouuuuul.

[Tunco]

We are not using our own brains much for this process? And you are right, best way to approach truth and determine the way things work is reasoning and observation. I didn't said anything about that. My point by saying that is we observe and reason to explain how things happens, but can we be sure %100 about it? There can be something we missed? Yes, there is. We are not that clever. If you are, good luck with that sir.

No, we are not. Do you exercise your brain by merely looking at things? Erm. Well, you sure can't determine something with certainty just by deciding it, or much less "feeling" it. But we can use logic and observation to a high probability of being correct. I'd take that probability over the probability that my emotions will guide me in the correct direction when it comes to objective, absolute, impersonal truth. Cleverness has little to do with this; we call it common sense for a reason. Again, emotions will not guide you to a more certain outcome.

Uhhh, yungerkid, I'm pretty sure the brain is the thing that makes logic and observation happen.

So you say that we don't use our brains in process of observing and reasoning, but we need logic for that, as DemonzLunchBreak has said, but the brain is the thing that makes logic and observation, reasoning happen. That's just proving that yourself -you- are wrong.

[SlappyMcGee]

So you say that we don't use our brains in process of observing and reasoning, but we need logic for that, as DemonzLunchBreak has said, but the brain is the thing that makes logic and observation, reasoning happen. That's just proving that yourself -you- are wrong.

Tunco, whether your points are valid or no, it's God-damn impossible to try and figure out what you're trying to say in almost every post in this topic, and people have pointed that out, and just quoting yourself is not going to suddenly make everything make sense.

On that note, souls exist in about the same way as Jesus and the Flying Spaghetti Monster don't exist. We have considerable proof that there isn't anything tangible there, but No! The soul is above our realm of perception.

[Tunco]

So you say that we don't use our brains in process of observing and reasoning, but we need logic for that, as DemonzLunchBreak has said, but the brain is the thing that makes logic and observation, reasoning happen. That's just proving that yourself -you- are wrong.

Tunco, whether your points are valid or no, it's God-damn impossible to try and figure out what you're trying to say in almost every post in this topic, and people have pointed that out, and just quoting yourself is not going to suddenly make everything make sense.

On that note, souls exist in about the same way as Jesus and the Flying Spaghetti Monster don't exist. We have considerable proof that there isn't anything tangible there, but No! The soul is above our realm of perception.

It's better that I stay out of this discussion.
And a last word; you are god-damn right.

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

I am so confused right now.

[otters]

...and the visual cortex is connected to the, other squishy bits. And the other squishy bits are connected to the, further squishy bits. And none of them are connected to a, soouuuuul.

Technically speaking, if a soul did exist, it would be supernatural; if it were supernatural, we probably wouldn't be able to see it in a CAT scan or that sort of thing. :/

[otters~1]

god-damn

[SkyPanda]

Technically speaking, if a soul did exist, it would be supernatural; if it were supernatural, we probably wouldn't be able to see it in a CAT scan or that sort of thing. :/

If souls exist (which they don't), and if they were indeed supernatural (which they aren't because they don't exist and therefore have no qualities), then they would still need some kind of connection to the human body, physical or not, otherwise they would just fly away. It's science.
;P

[otters]

Technically speaking, if a soul did exist, it would be supernatural; if it were supernatural, we probably wouldn't be able to see it in a CAT scan or that sort of thing. :/

then they would still need some kind of connection to the human body, physical or not

I just realized while rereading this that the only part of your post that's related to mine is the "souls don't exist" part.

"Well, if the soul was there, we wouldn't be able to see it, because it would be invisible, I think."
"No, no, no! It would have to be connected somehow!"

[bobaganuesh_2]

think that the soul is physically connected to anything, but rather the soul is connected to your thoughts, feelings and memories and is really what defines us as people; a bad person is bad because he does bad things that are fueled by memories of childhood abuse, the person is always feeling angry or sad, and they are constantly thinking "I must kill all the vermin".

[lord_day]

a bad person is bad because he does bad things that are fueled by memories of childhood abuse, the person is always feeling angry or sad, and they are constantly thinking "I must kill all the vermin".

Do you have evidence that bad people wish to kill vermin?

[SkyPanda]

I just realized while rereading this that the only part of your post that's related to mine is the "souls don't exist" part.
"

BZZZZZ! wrong. Read the conversation again, from the top.

[yungerkid]

Technically speaking, if a soul did exist, it would be supernatural; if it were supernatural, we probably wouldn't be able to see it in a CAT scan or that sort of thing. :/

then they would still need some kind of connection to the human body, physical or not

Oh really? And if it were a purely mental connection? Can you present evidence that there is not a purely mental part of a human that controls a human physical unit via a connection we can't see? No, you can't. You can say that there isn't evidence for it, but there isn't evidence against it. And why is it doubtful? I'd say it's perfectly plausible. It is not necessary, theoretically, to introduce the concept of a soul we can't see physically, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Occam's Razor covers probabilities. Logic covers absolute truths. I will not say absolutely that souls do not exist, or are even implausible, based on a probability. Then again, I am also not saying that souls do exist.