[Nani?]

Genetics as a field of science is perhaps one of the single most controversial fields in the modern world today. The possibility of the destruction of mankind through a manufacture super-virus has become nearly cliche with it's use in various movies and games, while genetic alteration is ALREADY a cliche. No field holds greater potential than Genetics, and while this potential may be potential harm as well as potential benefits, it still maintains the potential.

One of the largest aspects of life has been called into question by the field of Genetics: Religion. Mainly, the differentiation of Man from Animal.

The two sides both maintain that they are completely correct, and while Genetics has concluded, in the natural manner of things, that Human beings are superior to animals in many ways, they have not admitted that anything along the lines of a soul exists.

First, a matter of importance for this debate: A question. Namely, what is a soul? For all intents and purposes of this discussion, a Soul is defined as either super-natural or natural trait of mankind that is exclusive to mankind. It is a separate entity from our conscious thought, and generally will include our morales within it. It can be corrupted. When you die, your Soul will pass to some form of an afterlife.

My personal opinion is that a Soul, taken as defined above, does not exist. But a soul, taken as a combination of creativity, higher levels of thinking, and logical reasoning, that, yes, that type of Soul exists within my beliefs.

A discussion about my beliefs would be dull and uninteresting. Please, post your opinions on the existence of a soul, or what you'd define a soul as.

[Betong Åsna]

This is one of the very few areas of science and spirituality on which I am totally unsure. What I do believe is that the soul and the mind are one and the same. What science cannot determine is whether the brain, with all its physical and chemical makeup, is able to make and control a set of thoughts and a 'soul' of a person, if you will, or if this soul is merely something that possesses the human brain and causes its life. In this case, I would see it as a life force that exists beyond the plane of our own lifespan, and the essence of reincarnation and the afterlife.

A realist cynic I may be, but I like to believe the soul is something with its own will.

[Abstract]

there is no clear answer, nor will there ever really be a clear answer to such a question. But regardless of the fact I intend to give at least two of my sense to this thread with my own view of that which is the soul.

As a man of at least moderate religious faith I honestly believe in the idea of the soul, but as an intellectual I have gone to far greater lengths to find a basis for this belief of mine, the following is a bit of what I have concluded. First and foremost, the shear scale and complexity of the workings of human thought, the fact that the chemical signals used by our brain to control movement are controlled by similar signals controlled by more and so on leads one to believe that somewhere along this big line is something far beyond the scope of our current, and rather meager, scientific understanding (hence the 'soul' of which you speak). Building from there it is an easy correlation (at least for me) that this unexplainable thing does indeed exist outside of the normal concepts of life and death, and could very well be a tangible energy that can separate from a dead being for reincarnation or some other such thing.

This being said, the exact nature of this higher level of thinking... at least in the way i described it does not separate us from beasts and animals as the same principle applies to their own thought processes. Except in the scope and complexity of such thoughts... you see animals react to external stimuli along a genetically constructed reaction basis. That is to say they react as the chemical signals logically tell them to and so there is no need for such a 'soul' to function the creature... humans on the other hand make choice and act upon a much more complex set of principles called that makes up our psychological being... could it be that this area studied by psychology is the closest thing we have to the study of the soul? But that is, sadly, the end of the logical inferences that I could find upon the subject matter... further expostulations are welcome on the subject and could spark a new epiphany upon the subject for me. But as it stands now I will have to leave my post with this collection of wanton speculation.

[Josun Tomoro]

I am an unsure person on this matter.

I think to soul is what makes it so each and every human is possible of being their own unique being. IT is what creates our personallitys.

At the same time though, there are times when i think that it does not exist, and that the human brain merely advanced further then any other species to the point of making choices.

Thats about all i have to say on the topic. Im going to see what else happens.

[NODOKALOVER92]

Originally Posted by Josun Tomoro

I think to soul is what makes it so each and every human is possible of being their own unique being. IT is what creates our personallitys.

At the same time though, there are times when i think that it does not exist, and that the human brain merely advanced further then any other species to the point of making choices.

Thats about all i have to say on the topic. Im going to see what else happens.

Before making any considerations on this, I've got to ask what exactly you mean by "making choices". If you take a lion, for example, "should I risk trying to catch a gazelle now that the herd is together or risk waiting till one of them gets sepparated from the rest of the group before attempting capture?" and other questions of the kind, are day-to-day choices they, and all animals, at that, need to make in order to survive.

As for the souls, I'm more inclined to agree on Nani?'s vision, since "creativity, higher levels of thinking, and logical reasoning", unlike "the ability to make choices" are things, as of yet, limited to the human being, and haven't been verified in any animal.

[Abstract]

Since I referenced making choices as well in my expose on the idea of a soul I feel obliged to answer your question about the nature of the choices of which I speak. Yes the choice to hunt the healthy gazelle or the sickly one is a choice even animals can make... however there is no precedent to say that animals can act upon a complex series of external and internal stimuli to create the basis of a complex choice, weighing in morals (an element, often times, of the non corporeal soul of which we now speak) and personal opinions upon a subject far grander then the next meal.

To put it more accurately, though most likely far more bluntly, I would like to draw a comparison. In a wolf pack the leader is chosen by fights for dominance... the victor taking upon control of the pack until such a time that a stronger individual comes along and beats them in a similar fashion. Now while I wish I could reference the democratic system upon which my country is run as the second piece of this analogy the sad truth is in its current state such an institution is rarely better. That being said I will reference the basic nature of a singular, and informed voters experience through such a system owing to the fact that in these isolated cases the nature of the choice I speak of becomes clear. As the voting season nears we listen to adds, read editorials, and are force fed endless streams of political mudslinging... not much unlike a fight for dominance. However, in the minds of a large number (and yes I will admit this is not the most general example but it is the most direct) look beyond the mudslinging, they read platform information, watch the debates, learn all they can about the validity of the promises made by the candidates. And then they take the gathered information, weigh it against their own values, for nothing fits perfectly, and decide on a founded set of principles which candidate most nearly agrees with their own opinions upon how the country should be run.

In this case the choice of which we speak is not some basic fight or flight mechanism designed to flow along a set route of interlocking neural pathways to a predefined decision as the choice you brought to light in your example. It is infact a choice that takes the ideas of higher level thinking, creativity (though in chimps this has been seen and so does not apply in quite the manner you suggest), and logical reasoning to create a singular path of action from which we can move upon for a more distant goal then the next meal.