[ExI] The Soul

Will Steinberg steinberg.will at gmail.com
Mon Apr 27 14:02:16 UTC 2020

John--just because most things we know about are soulish does not mean that
everything is.  I don't think the CMBR is necessarily soulish.  It also
comes in degrees.  A single atom bopping about is soulish on the atom level
but not on a higher level of abstraction, as compared to a molecule.

Again, I think souls are 'leaky' and I don't think things quite 'have'
souls.  If it were black and white, sure, your argument against mine might
hold weight.  But for example it's like saying "everything has mass or
energy"--doesn't mean they are all the same and that the concept is
invalid.  The contrast is within degrees of the descriptor term itself.

On your brain idea: would you still discount the fact that that foreign
part had less influence than the closer parts?  I also make no mention of
distance, as it is relative.

However, you say "sometimes", that distant part (let's say nodally distant
to distinguish from metric distance) is used for the computation, well I am
comparing that to parts that are *always* used for the computation.  Like I
said, leaky and ill-defined, and I have had numerous disagreements with
those who believe in heaven/hell or transmigration of the soul because I
haven't found a satisfactorily rational way that there could possibly be
some kind of lossless translation of soul from 'being' to 'being'--whatever
the hell they are.

Let's not even use the word 'soul'--is 'system' a better word?  Clearly an
atom has something different about it than a mess of subatomic particles
reeling to and fro.  And similarly a solar system different from the
detritus of a supernova.

On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 9:22 AM William Flynn Wallace via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> So then, 'everybody has a house' is equivalent to 'nobody has a house'.
> ??   bill w
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 4:47 AM John Clark via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 4:46 PM Will Steinberg via extropy-chat <
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>>> *> In my opinion, I define the soul and the mind differently, and I am
>>> not sure if they are the same.The mind: we all know what this means, I
>>> think.  An organized, conscious thing.*
>> And you thought that with your mind.
>>> *> **The soul: this one is tougher.  Let me see if I can devise some
>>> 'axioms of the soul':*
>>> *1. Presence: It must exist*
>>> *1 --> 2. Permanence: It must exist for non-trivial periods of time*
>> The same is true for mind, and for anything of practical importance.
>>> *> 3. Integration: Its parts must be part of a clearly defined system
>>> with boundaries.  *
>> That is also true for mind, and mind  is what a brain does, so the amount
>> of integration is determined by the number of connections between the parts
>> of the brain and the amount of time it takes for a signal to travel from
>> one part of the brain to another. And that's where this "we're all part of
>> one mind" stuff falls apart.
>> *> 2 + 3 --> 4. Closeness: given a permanence period A to B, the
>>> probability that the parts of the system are integrated in the same manner
>>> at B as they were at A must be much higher than the probability that they
>>> are integrated with foreign parts at B.*
>> I think you're saying distant parts must have less influence than nearby
>> parts, but that is not always true for computers or for biological brains.
>> Sometimes the information a part needs to complete a calculation is on the
>> other side of the brain; this slows things down but can't always be avoided
>> because you can't always predict what information you'll need to complete a
>> calculation before you've finished the calculation.
>> > *By this definition, an atom is a soul.  *
>> Then it's a bad definition. Meaning needs contrast, everything having a
>> soul is equivalent to nothing having a soul.
>> *> If telekinesis exists ...*
>> it would have been proven to everybody's satisfaction centuries if not
>> millennia ago.
>> John K Clark
>> _______________________________________________
>> extropy-chat mailing list
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20200427/cf90d19b/attachment.htm>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list