Rage Against the Dying of the Light

Just like many other questions that we ask ourselves almost on daily basis, this question has also been disturbing me for quite some time. There`s got to be an explanation that is logical and that does not depend on `Faith`. In my view, the word faith is a simple admittance towards failure of knowing. We have to `believe` what we cannot logically explain, and thus we have to have `faith` to move onward, without getting bogged down in complex logical excursions, that may or may not result in any conclusion. Hence an easy way out. But what if we do want to take those excursions and feel our way through and adopt an attitude that relates more to knowing, rather than believing. Is this going to put us in some sort of a category? I would hate to be labelled... and would prefer myself to belong to open minded school of thought.

WHAT ANCIENT PHILOSOPHERS THOUGHT?
I read through the dialogues of Socrates (Actually Plato, since to this day critics argue that Plato`s writings of Socrates` dialoges are deeply imbued with his own philosophies). Anyway, it was interesting to see how Socrates described a Soul ( I wish I could remember the book that contains this dialogue, but the best way to get to Plato`s books, is to go to www.gutenberg.org, where you can find an immense collection of literature). To describe Socrates` concept of a soul, the work `incarnation` would be appropriate. According to him the Souls were created by gods and they rest in a repository. Each time a human is born, a soul is breathed into the body and that soul remains with that body for the duration of the body`s life and after separation (death), it goes back to that repository and the process goes on. I am not sure if the same soul goes back into another body, or each soul has a unique identity and gathers an account of good or evil during its short span of entrapment in the body. Hence the concept of eternal happiness and eternal pain for a soul based on its deeds during the `human` life span.

This concept itself raises a lot of questions in my mind, and therefore, not fully satisfied with the concept. I then moved on to Aristotle. Now, Aristotle was Plato`s student, and it may seem that the student may have been influenced by his teacher`s doctrines, yet I found his narrative quite interesting. He, in his book `De Anima` argues on different concepts that, of course, can be understood in the context of the time during which Aristotle lived (384 - 322 BC)... and those relate with interesting observations such as the relationship of a soul with motion. It was an interesting definition. That which moves and is moved, a description initiated by Democritus, but included by Aristotle to move the argument forward. He then adds the complexity of proportions and parts that form as a whole and thus the concept of `Harmony` to achieve the `form`, a term that he used right in the beginning of his book.

Interesting but complex, at least for me....

MY DEFINITION:
So what is a soul then? I will be addressing the question on the basis of science, as science is common to understanding of all. Moerover, science is logical while theology is founded on faith... belief of the unknown!

From what little I know of human body, it is a very complex state-of-the-art machine that has evolved over millions of years. The first vertibrae known to science existed some 300 million years ago. It is a long enough time for a body, be it a human or an animal, to acquire adequate knowledge by its core particals (genes)and evolve into forms and shapes that exist today. Why so many forms and shapes of living things exist today and what determined the direction each specie took? I do believe that environment, circumstances, events, and many other factors affect the evolution process, and an infinitsimal occurance can trigger a chane that can result in changes that can be significant over a period of time. A simple and interesting example is of those fish that were found in a cave, that did not have any eyes.

One other characteristic that differentiates our kind from other living things, is our cognitive abilities. Brain is found in very many animals but it is only humans that enjoy this ability. Not too long ago, about 40,000 years ago, we did have another human specie known as Neanderthals that walked this earth besides Homo Sapiens. Before them, extinct specie of Homo Erectus, Homo Heidelbergensis and many others also walked this earth... so humans too has had different species, just like any other animals, plants, and insects. It is also deduced that more than 90% species were wiped out almost 200 million years ago, dinosaurs are the most well known. Hence, I would equate humans as part of the over all life form that exists on this planet and that has too gone through various phases of extinction and evolution and has brought us to what we are today. Was it a part of an `Intelligent Design`? I don`t know. However, I do give a lot of weight on how Socrates attempted to address it. According to him (and it may not be exactly what he or Plato said) if we rewind the evolution process till the very first particle that resulted in the initiation of life on this earth or for that matter, in this known universe, we have to accept the fact that that particle did not come out of `Nothing`, since it is scientifically impossible to create something out of nothing. Therefore, there has to exist an entity (God) who does not have a beginning or the end, and is responsible for creating the particle that evolved into this Universe, and by all measures this universe is HUGE! beyond our perception, and so on... so, yes there is such a power. But in what form he exists, is very difficult to comprehend. That being said, the chain reaction that did get initiated at some point somewhere out there, eventually resulted in the existance of this earth and then ourselves. But looking back at how this earth has evolved and transformed over a period of more than two billion years, and how life initiated and evolved into what it is today, it would not, in my mind, be difficult to understand what we are. It is a journey that is still going on and will continue for as long as... well, eternity..

When I said that we know, at least, what we are, is a safe statement based on the knowledge that we have today. Our human body is a marvel, and that`s for sure. But then, if we had 300 million years of age each and all this time we could spend in learning and developing, I think it would not be difficult to imagine what we can become. So here we are... with this beautiful body and of course the all powerful human mind. Our genes carry 300 million years worth of knowledge and it has rendered us with this system that is profoundly wonderous.

So now that we have this beautiful body and a great mind, where did this soul come from?

Here is how I would like to put it.

Man through the ages has been addressing these questions, among others. However, the thinkers of those times, such as the likes of Socrates and Aristotles based on their reasoning on the acquired knowledge of that time. Would it not be nice if we could wake those people up today, give them all the knowledge about human body, that we have today, and then ask them once again, what is a soul? I am pretty sure the conclusions are going to be pretty different from what they percieved in their own times.

So what do we know about human body that people in those days did not know. They did not know about the DNA (Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is a nucleic acid —usually in the form of a double helix— that contains the genetic instructions specifying the biological development of all cellular forms of life, and most viruses. Source: Wikipedia.org). They did not understand the composition of human brain and its cell structure that comprise of Neurons (conducting cells of the nervous system. A typical neuron consists of a cell body, containing the nucleus and the surrounding cytoplasm (perikaryon); several short radiating processes (dendrites); and one long process (the axon), which terminates in twiglike branches (telodendrons) and may have branches (collaterals) projecting along its course. Source: http://cancerweb.ncl.ac.uk/cgi-bin/omd?query=neurons&action=Search+OMD)

In my view, this kind of knowledge can make a significant impact on the resoning that philosophers apply to the definition of terms such as the topic of this discussion, Soul.

Going back to the arguments that Socrates and Aristotle put forth, I would discount the one that was put forth by Socrates (or Plato), and would consider what Aristotle was defining a soul to be, that is, `that which moves and is moved`. So a motion is something that is determining the difference between life and death? That means something that can `move` itself is `alive`? Very much so. Moreover, they are inseparable, `that` which moves the body and thus is moved by the body, because of its motion. Hence, motion is a determining factor. So how does this motion come to be?

Lets again jump forward to our reference to the knowledge that we have today. We know that our genes carry the information that was used in the development of our human body. What is this `knowledge`? Well, can I say that this is that knowledge that has been accumulated over millions of years that we have existed? This means that our body holds the secret of the right `combination` that produces `Life`. The word combination may be a loose term, but it is a collection of right ingredients with right proportions, that forms the `Life`. Is this what Aristotle was referring to when he used the word `Harmony` for all these parts to form the whole? Maybe. But it makes sense to me. It is like getting the right chemical formula that produces the desired result.

So what actually happens when this secret formula starts working, that translates into life?

What happens when you turn the ignition on in a car. It comes to LIFE! That means, by providing the vehicle with electric current and thereby causing a chain of reactions, the vehicle starts to move. In the same token, human body during its formation stages, reaches a certain point (the right combination) where it is able to generate electric pulses that starts activating its organs such as heart, which then initiates a separate chain of reaction to produce development of organs such as the nervous system, etc. I may have gotten the sequence wrong, but what I mean to say that a logical process of development follows to a critical point and then onwards to form the final product, a life form. That critical point, or critical mass, is the point where Life or Soul is `activated` into that body. Be it a human, or an animal, all follow the same rule. It is the genetic knowledge that determines the rest of the composition of the life form. If there is anything wrong with either the formula or the genetic knowledge, the result is in the form of a dead birth, or a disformed birth. (Genes encode the information necessary for synthesizing the amino-acid sequences in proteins, which in turn play a large role in determining the final phenotype, or physical appearance. Source www.wikipedia.org).

So, what is a Soul then? Is it not just the mere `current` that runs in our body? What happens when this current gets shut off? Our heart stops, that starves our brain of oxygen, and eventually causes death. How do we jump start the body when it fails? by giving it `Electric Shock`. If that `Critical Mass` remains in place, the body continues to function since it is able to generate just the right amount of electrical activity through out the body....

If this is the definition of our Soul, then what happens to all that has been said and is being said about a Soul. Is it just a concept that is put forth by different people in different ways, even to this day? This also explains the different paths that Socrates and Aristotle took with their own logics and perceptions....

If life is simply a result of a critical mass composition, then everything else in life is determined by the choices our cognitive mind makes....I`ll leave the rest for the reader to ponder on.

So I see this is an old chowk heritage. People writing about philosophy quote every one except the the true doyen of eastern philosophy viz the poets. They Lack understanding and depth of our urdu hindi and other mother tongue languages. Some expositions are so misguided that they talk of development of eastern philosophy under the `guise` of ``critique``.:
Hum mushriqi phalsaphyuoN ki bat hi kuch aur hoti hai ,
Jub Phalasapha hum par wA hoti hai to Ghazal hoti hai.

Any way, your views have been, for most part , exquisitely summarised by Fani BadayuN-ni:
ik muammaa hai samajhaane kaa na samajhane kaa
zindagii kahe ko hai Khvaab hai diivaane kaa

zindagii bhii to pashemaa.N hai yahaa.N laake mujhe
Dhuu.NDhatii hai koii hiilaa mere mar jaane kaa

haDDiyaa.N hai.n kaii lipaTii huii za.njiro.n me.n
liye jaate hai.n janaazaa tere diivaane kaa

tum ne dekhaa hai kabhii ghar ko badalate hue rang
aao dekho na tamashaa mere Gum_Khaane kaa

ab ise daar pe lejaa ke sulaa de saaqii
yuu.N behakanaa nahii.n achchhaa tere diivaane kaa

ham ne chhaanii hai.n bahot dair-o-haram kii galiyaa.N
kahii.n paayaa na Thikaanaa tere diivaane kaa

har nafas umr-e-guzashtaa kii hai mayyat ``Fani``
zindagii naam hai mu.D mu.D ke jiye jaane kaa

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

R Gopal,

Good article. The question you ask ``Do we actually possess a soul?`` has been my quest.

You conclusion that ``Our capacity to love may be our best defence`` is a rational answer, and my conclusion as well.

As to ``Religions,`` Founders of religions, or leadership that followed them, has very well exploited this human quest. By controlling thinking, providing simple asnwers with rigrous practices to eliminate independent thinking, these people gained power. Those who best exploited this, given the needs of their times, survived. Those are the religions you see today.

Take care,
/MS

Hi again,
So wonderful talking to you guys!
It`s only a few years back perhaps that I got rid of that feeling, force-fed at convent school, that there was this great eye-in-the sky looking down on me, giving me brownie points for `good`and subtracting several hundreds for being`bad`. Not that that eye kept me from being `bad if I really wanted to. I think, people pretty much do what they want, regardless of whether they think they will be punished or rewarded.
You never hear of the death penalty actually being a deterrant to murder do you?
The point I am trying to make, is that there are no ready-made answers. We, each of us has to try and figure out things on our own. And as one grows older, the answeres too, change...
so what do you think...why are we alive?

Wow! Just... Wow!! Could someone have done a better job of taking away the fear from Death? I think this is something that we can use to give to people who have terminal illnesses. Just to say : ``Hey...when u go there, cud u wait for me?``

``Our capacity to love may be our best defence against death.`` Being a devout believer in the power of love, I say this thought rocks!!!

Once again, this is the same thing as Khalil Gibran puts it : ``Only love and death will change all things.``
How true. Whatever your religion, faith or language, Love is a universal truth.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

short answer to all of your questions: NO

jk...(kinda)...what happens to us when we die...we get recycled via the carbon cycle...what happens to our essence?...what is our essence to begin with but a few neurotransmitters and some gray matter.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

``For me poetry provides answers or at least hints and suggestions..... I look forward to more fascinating discussion. Revathy ``

For me even poetry provides no answer:

Maqsad-e kurb-e zindagi keya hai
maaniy-e saaiee-e Aadmi keya hai

lakhoN sadiyoN ki Umr-e Aalaum meiN
aik lumhay kee aagahee keya hai

keoN haiN khush hum ba qaid-e maut o heyat
hai aisee bhee bebasee keya hai

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Hi,
I`m overwhelmed by the response. This is a subject very dear to my heart and it would be fantastic if everyone who joined the discussion came to the table without prejudice or at least, conscious that we all undergo severe conditioning by society from the moment we are born. Is it possible to look at the world, the universe our own lives and the lives of every human being related or unrelated to us with complete detachment as well as compassion?

As we all must realise, we really don`t know what lies beyond. What is it that we do know? We are told stories, myths, legends, other people`s ideas but what are the facts as you and I have really experienced and understood, outside of religious belief and the need to believe? I have experienced miracles in my life but that does not compel me to jump to conclusions. I have adopted a wait and watch attitude. The world is a vast, beautiful mystery. For me poetry provides answers or at least hints and suggestions..... I look forward to more fascinating discussion. Revathy

Read Frank Becker`s Denial of Death and Escape from Evil. Its a very creative (and influential) theory that sees Death in all aspects of culture.

Umm I meant Ernest Becker..

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0684832402/002-0251950-0096050?v=glance

Gives a whole new meaning to Life.

Here`s one interesting paradox...

Supposing humans could live to a 1000 years. Would we be happier ? Assume that aging has been dealt with.

The answer is No. Because it is IN PRINCIPLE possible to perish, it is much more painful to contemplate an untimely death when the lifespan is ten or more times longer. We`d all be still in the first 10% of our millenial lives and afraid of losing it all in some war or accident. Culture would become impossible.

Death makes culture (and sex) and everything worthwhile possible.

Re:scott#16

Whoa!! Take it easy, will you? I was only referring to voluntary acts of individuals to satsify their religious beliefs. For e.g. a suicide bomber has to be a highly committed individual who is so convinced of his beliefs that he can sacrfice his own life. I was not talking of religious violence, atrocities, rioting etc. which is a totally different issue, since it involves commiting acts against others without necessarily harming yourself. It is very easy to get flared up by religion and riot against the other side, but not too many rioters are willing to give up their own limbs or lives in that process.