Asklemmy

43945 readers

638 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

Atheists/agnostics of Lemmy, do you believe in the existence of souls? (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago by azmalent@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

148 comments fedilink hide all child comments

If you do, then what exactly defines a soul in your view?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] juliebean@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago (7 children)

if someone can give me a good definition of what they think a soul is or does, maybe i'll have a response, but quite often, i find the concept less false, and more just ill-defined.

[–] ruck_feddit@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

I believe in anything that can be proven scientifically to actually exist. Show me evidence, not anecdotal stories which further an idea of "just believe me."

[–] Kissaki@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A part of humans regarded as immaterial, immortal, separable from the body at death, capable of moral judgment, and susceptible to happiness or misery in a future state.

[–] juliebean@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

considering many non-humans seem perfectly capable of making moral judgements, and feeling happiness or misery (all actions which appear to be explicable by purely material means), a 'soul' seems unnecessary to explain such things in humans. and it seems the very height of anthropocentrism to say that humans are immortal (despite all evidence to the contrary) while everything else just dies. why would just humans have these souls instead of, say, dolphins, or wild boars, or rattlesnakes, or coastal redwoods?