the functions that make up the mind

I believe that centuries of religion have created this rampant belief in a soul.
I believe that the effects of this are still being felt in the scientific realm.
we see humans as being so much more advanced than other species because of what we view as our mind/soul. because of the existence of this mind/soul, we believe that we have superior reasoning and morals.
I argue that we believe this because of a species-centric view that we view ourselves and the world with.
the only means we have of justifying this unfounded feeling of superiority are biased tests. any tests would be similar to early IQ tests ( eurocentric questions were given to immigrants from a wide range of countries, many of whom could not understand the questions)

so..... as we can not prove this superiority, is it wrong to assume it?

as we can not dutifully prove the existence of our mind/soul, should we not instead view it simply as a complex system of interconnected functions?

should we not cast aside this imagined and arrogant feeling of superiority in favor of better understanding of ourselves and of our relation to the world?

 

I belive we are all highly complex bionic robots. Brain is very complex and contains lot of chemical processes. I dont believe in soul, i think its just made up by people who couldn't explain it. As more the science advances the more there are proofs that there are no such things as souls or god or other utopia things.

 

There have actually been numerous science experiments done to try and weigh a human 'soul.'
Not many people actually know of this so I'll debrief you.

Patients that are basically about to die are placed on a sort of weighing machine, at the point in time where each human died, and unexplainable weight was lost from the human.
The scientists hypothesized that this was the weight of the human soul as it exits the body.
This has been corroborated numerous times.

 

those experiments show correlation between weight loss and dying

this may be due to any number of factors such as experimenter error, volunteer bias.

to prove this you would need double blind studies with randomly assigned subjects. because this is incredibly unethical, your theory can not currently be proven.

quasi experimental designs are nice but not very convincing

 

It's actually not a theory, it has been shown in a few research experiments, but you make valid points as to error and bias. However the experiment itself has happened on more than one occasion, and the occasions do show a weight loss. Still however it's rather interesting to wonder where that loss in weight could be attributed to.

 

Have you looked very far into these studies? Do they weigh the air surrounding the patient before and after they die, calculate how fast this mass is leaving, etc? Because it is very likely an excretion of bodily gases. The fact that this is not even considered just exudes bias, or at the least incredibly poor judgement.

 

They weigh everything, it's not a $20 scale at the supermarket.

 

Great, now could I get a source?

 

Google it. There are plenty of pages.

 

Just because it's something they can't explain right away doesn't automatically constitute it being a "soul". There are countless examples of humans not being able to explain something right off the get go and so they attribute it to something paranormal.

So when we have a complete understanding of every inner working of the human body, then we can call it a soul. Just because I can't disprove it not being a soul doesn't justify the hundreds of millions of possible errors with the experiment.

 

I really hope this is looked into farther soon. I would love to discover what this loss of weight attributes to.

And after further investigation, when a sheep dies, it actually gains weight. My mind is hungry for answers.

 

"THE WEIGHT OF THE SOUU
The Roman satirist asks :
Expende Annibalem : quot libras in duce summo
Invenies ?
No one, so far as we know, has furnished an answer ;
but this may be only because no American investigator
has found an opportunity of weighing the mighty
Carthaginian's ashes. In the meantime, if we are to
believe the newspapers, five physicians of Boston, that
"Omphalos
"
of the intellectual world, have done some
thing more : they have succeeded in determining the
weight of the human soul. The problem is said to have
been solved by the simple plan of weighing a number
of persons immediately before and after death. Our
antivivisectionist friends will, we are sure, be shocked
to hear that the experiment was first tried on dogs,
which were found to weigh exactly the same when
dead as when alive, and therefore, we suppose, must be
held to have no soul. On the other hand, the human
subjects always weighed from half an ounce to an
ounce less in death than they did in life. Argal, accord
ing to the wise men of Boston, we must conclude
that the soul weighs from a thirty-second to a sixteenth
of a pound. We presume the difference in the weight
of souls ?is to be accounted for by the degree to which
they are burdened by sin or whatever other dis
turbing factor has taken its place in advanced philo
sophy ; if this be the case, it would be interesting to
determine whether there is any loss of weight in the
bodies of Christian Scientists for whom sin has no
existence. Possibly, however, the weight of the soul
may be in proportion to that of the body, there being
so many fractions of a centigram of the divinae par
t?cula aera? to each kilo of body weight. The experi
ments of the Boston physicians suggest a number of
interesting problems. If the soul has weight, it must
be made of material stuff; it must have dimensions,
and a more or less definite form. There are, we
believe, clairvoyants who profess to see the
colour of the soul, and to be able in this way
to distinguish the just from the unjust. But the
dimensions of the soul are still, like those of
Justice Shallow, to any thick sight invisible.
Now that the soul has been placed in the balance,
it is to be expected that it will soon be subjected
to the Roentgen rays, which will reveal not only
its dimensions but its habitat. Descartes, as we know,
localized it in the pineal gland, that being in his view
the only part of the brain which was not double. Here
we venture with the greatest deference to hint a doubt
as to the entire accuracy of some remarkable informa
tion which the ever-enterprising Tribune professes to
have obtained from
" one of the best-known doctors in
"
London, holding a high official position." This autho
rity is said to have told our confiding contemporary that
"
the generally-accepted location of the soul by students
" of anatomy is what is known as the " pinel (sic) gland, which is situated near the brain, and was discovered by
"Dr. Philippe Pinel, a French physician (1745-1826), who
"
.gained world-wide fame by his reformation of the old |
" barbarous methods of treating the insane." It is
thoughtfully added that in works on anatomy nothing
is said of any matter leaving this gland on the death of
its possessor. We do not know whether to assign the
credit for this fine specimen of etymological and his
torical lore to the Tribune or to the oracle of which it
sought counsel. We are rather inclined to think that
the pundit must have been pulling our contemporary's
leg, a member which seems to offer a tempting subject
for the experiments of the practical joker. We hope
the American physicians will push their researches to
the point of finding an answer to the question of
Augustus to his soul when on the point of leaving him,
Quae nunc abibis in locaf That is the thing which
most interests mankind. But perhaps it might be well
for them before going further to revolve in their minds
and consider in all its bearings the famous problem with
which Charles the Second puzzled the Royal Society."

the only article relating to this that i was able to find

as you can see it is kind of a satirical examination

i did not search google as it is kinda useless when looking for credible sources

i looked in JSTOR and PSYCinfo

 

Here an article you may like to read, I haven't read them as I don't have time atm. I've seen more but forgot where they were.
http://www.dapla.org/pdf/whs.pdf

 

A. the publish date was 1973
B. the results are well within the margin of error for a study of only 200 patients.

results showed that they weighed 1/3000ths of an ounce less after death.

i also doubt that the instruments used were incredibly accurate