It's hard to believe these things when you've been raised in a relatively secular/agnostic family. But it's my mother's story which may sound a bit cliche'y that makes me want to consider it as a possibility:
>mother's mother in her deathbed moments before bidding farewell to this world with two of her daughters standing beside her (my mother and aunt)
>as she draws her last breath, my mother feels a very warm and comforting presence embrace her
>since then she assured herself that souls most definitely exist
When I suggested her that It could've possibly been the endocrine system reacting to herself being in shock and disbelief she added, that the sensation was unique, never felt before and since.
Perhaps that was a soul or at least some sort of an energy leaving her body?
Feel free to share some of your stories.
>>17580120
Endocrine does not make you warm. Have you ever been near someone and you can feel there aura its warmer then there body heat. When a person dies that energy in there aura pretty much explodes out of them and there soul is free to leave the body
>>17580120
No, there's no evidence to support the existence of souls. Current science shows that consciousness is part of the brain, so when the brain dies, so does the consciouness or "soul."
Spirit dips into matter in order to aquire soul.
>>17580299
This means absolutely nothing, even in context.
>>17580346
He asked if souls existed.
>>17580299
What the fuck does this even mean?
>>17580289
If you were to experience a
>very warm and comforting presence embrace
you, how'd you explain it?
>>17580120
Idk but the lady in the pic is pulling off a pretty good Michael Jackson
>>17580397
Chalk it up to my imagination, most likely, but that's probably because I don't believe in ghosts or the afterlife. I can say "God/spooks/ayy lmaos did it" if that makes you feel better.
>>17580383
Well, he's right you know. Just check the difference between spirit and soul, mate
>>17580444
What the fuck are you talking about?
>>17580289
First, current science is filled with politics just as much as every other field. Second, consciousness is a complete mystery and science hasn't solved anything. Current science is just that, current.. what we know today, as of now.
>>17580289
How has current science shown us that?
>>17580120
Its even debatable as a Christian. Our God the Most High will send his Son to gather up the dead in Him and resurrect them and then return (the dead in Christ that were resurrected and the living that were caught up will return also) after the great tribulation to rule on earth for a thousand years. Then establish the Holy City on earth forever with a great road leading to it from all corners of the world.
Perhaps a belief in a soul is an idol as some fear.
>>17580120
You will know some day!
>>17580708
Oh boy, here we go.
>>17580120
i spoke with a woman who said that when her husband passed, that very moment the tv in the hospital changed channel.
someone else said that at the time of death of a loved one they saw stacks of paper shoot across the room.
someone else i know had a near death experience and said that she saw that same flood of white light, which is a brain/nervous system reaction, but also spoke of that 'feeling unlike any other'
myself, i've seen objects move on their own, timed electrical problems with my own behaviors (turn you back, the cable cuts off> repeats...)
coworkers from different locations said the same typical stuff: light issues at night, cold rooms, footsteps in the dark, strange noises.
those encounters repeat enough for them to be a pattern, not limited to something like sound vibrations, or the brain misperceiving light/sound (which can happen).
it's real stuff.
the science argument doesn't work, because the scientific community doesn't explore that subject in depth (you figure most of the world already believes in an afterlife, and it's not exactly a pressing subject), and it requires knowledge of the brain that we still don't have, with psychology being a newer science.
>>17580236
Their. There is never an excuse for bad grammar.
ayy lmao
>>17580799
> psychology
> science
>>17580489
>science is filled with politics
I'm sure pseudoscientists never have an agenda, like, say, selling a bunch of copies of that book about the "SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN" healing powers of the specially attuned quartz crystals that only they know how to do (Thoth taught it to them through astral projection)
Souls exist. Here you can see what could be the souls of executed kurds exit their bodies as bright orbs of light.
>>17582955
Yeah, and that's why you see one EVERY time a person dies. Oh, wait, you don't.
>>17582964
You dont see a ghost of every dead person either but that doesnt negate their existence
>>17582990
When you can demonstrate it reliably and with more than just anecdotal evidence, I'll be more inclined to listen to you.
>>17580289
>No, there's no evidence to support the existence of souls.
What about NDEs, OBEs, after-death communications, past life memories, shared death experiences, and remote viewing?
>>17583446
Let me rephrase that. "There is no *scientific* evidence to support the existence of souls."
>Inb4 hurr, you can't prove they DON'T exist
>Inb4 scientists have an agenda to cover up the supernatural
>>17583486
It cant be measured by the scientific methods we currently have and is somewhat limited to our present day understanding of metaphysics but that does not negate its existence.
>>17583502
Lack of disproof does not equal proof.
>My friend's cousin saw a warblefloofer in the woods the other day. It can't be detected scientifically or caught on film, but you can't prove it doesn't exist!
>>17580289
cause soul resides in the heart, brain is just a tool
>>17583502
>We can't detect it with the thing we use to figure out how the universe works
>But we somehow still know for a fact that it definitely exists
Toppest of keks.
>>17583536
The heart just pumps blood, dumbass, unless you're talking about it in the " I feel it in my heart" sense, in which case, no, that's the brain.
>>17583502
I see you ignored the greentext, good job.
>>17583539
Thats not how I put it though. I simply said we are limited by our current understanding of metaphysics. You cannot disprove it any more than I can prove it. Plus the weight of human testimonial and similar accounts from different cultures spearated by time and continents adds credence to its existence. A smart man would realise that "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy" instead of dismissing it out of hand due to it not fitting into the current physics model. Its like being agnostic is the sensible choice because you cannot know for certain, but smugfag skeptics will never concede that. Because we have all the answers for everything ever today, humanity has reached its zenith of understanding and there is nothing left to learn.
Faggot.
>>17583566
So, "I have no evidence to base my conclusions on, but I choose to believe it anyway."
>>17583486
>Let me rephrase that. "There is no *scientific* evidence to support the existence of souls."
All those things have been studied scientifically. I think what you really mean is "There's no scientific evidence to support the existence of souls that doesn't also call materialism into question, and since materialism must necessarily be true, any evidence against it doesn't count."
>>17583593
Im more of the mind that you cannot know for certain.
>>17583600
So, you're saying science has an agenda to cover it up, then? Congratulations, you've only made your job harder, you'd now have to provide evidence of a cover-up in addition to the evidence to support your original argument.
>>17583618
>So, you're saying science has an agenda to cover it up, then?
I never said that.
Of course souls exist, I always knew that. only people who usually disagree are some brainwashed atheist-pseudomaterialist fags. Materialism is good, but Real Materialism, not primitive bullshit commie pseudo-materialism.
>>17580289
Consciousness being a part of the brain does not imply it "goes down" with the brain. That's like saying water being a part of the glass it is in will suddenly disappear if you drop the glass and it shatters. The water doesn't shatter, too. It just transforms into something less glass-like.
>>17580299
He is saying that the body is in the spirit and not the other way around. The spirit uses the body to acquire "soul." I would assume this anon is expressing that the soul is not a "thing" or a part of our identity from beginning to end, but rather something cultivated and created through living, or in Anon'd case, through "Spirit." Anon thinks Spirit through the body (not in it) creates "Soul." Spirit is like life force, soul is the expression of that force, body is the medium of action.
Or not idk
>>17580383
>>17580346
>>17580289
>Current science shows that consciousness is part of the brain
Which part?
I'm really hoping that this is a troll thread, you can't be that "paranormally" stupid
>>17580120
When my grandfather died the family recalls it feeling as though the air got sucked out of the room. I think it was at night and it woke everyone up. My aunt was in another city and immediately felt the intuition that he died in that moment.
>>17580120
read about qualia and how scientists believe it's a complex pyramid of neurons in the brain, once we get this part down we can literally directly change the neurons order and create a reality in your brain, we could control happiness, we would become gods.
>>17580289
Scientists can't explain consciousness without empty arguments, like "it's just an illusion".
They do have an unverifiable belief that all brains were created by random natural selection.
If we pretend they're correct (NP-hard problem to prove), we can conclude it's unlikely for brains, produced by random natural selection, to experience an illusion of consciousness, unless all functionally equivalent mechanisms also experience consciousness.
Realizing this forces scientists to take a stance in the unsolved philosophical problem named "The chinese room".
Scientists are forced to believe "the room" is experiencing consciousness, be it illusionary or not.
This opens a can of ... opportunities... to answer really hard questions, like "what happens when you die".
For scientists there are equivalences and the same goes for the room. The "room" in this philosophical problem expands as a consequence, resting on reasoning based on equivalence until it involves all logical events in the entire universe through all time.
The scientist must conclude that illusions of consciousness constantly branches from the brain. Of course, if you involve an observer, there are even more innumerable branches of events that are experiencing consciousness. If you, for fun, put a restricting that all events in a branch must physically be caused by one and another in a chain, you will still find you counting on an innumerable amount, since all particles does influence each and another in some way in this universe.
So, even if the scientist is right and that's all we care to know, things are looking great.
However, the scientist still didn't explain consciousness, or the illusion of it.
Knowing this, things are much more mystical and you should take care.
>>17583983
There's a question around NDEs that I find interesting. If everything is because of evolution, why would evolution lead to something like an NDE? Why would nature, in its "blind, pitiless indifference", give a shit if you have a good experience when you die? Moreover, why would it cause the experiences to often be so great that the person doesn't want to go back, and when they do, they completely lose their fear of death? If anything, you'd think it would be the opposite: Unpleasant experiences that stimulate a person to fight, and when they come back, they're more wary of death than ever.
>>17585609
DONT bother thinking to hard the world is full of three types of people the craziest wiling to believe anything no matter what and those that literally get triggered at the thought of anything challenging what the mainstream have told them and then the guys in the middle who understand in a world where leading scientist are trying to sell you Kaitlin Jenner as a real women and people who believe in things like creationism the truth is still and may never be that clear.
>>17586568
>leading scientist are trying to sell you Kaitlin Jenner as a real women
I don't think that's so ridiculous. If you believe what people say about past lives, we've all changed sexes numerous times. I wouldn't be surprised if sometimes people start to miss their past life as the opposite sex and it manifests as transgenderism. I'm a guy, and I don't consider myself transgender, but I wouldn't be surprised to discover I'd been a woman in a recent past life, based on several of my current personality traits.
