• If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Finally, you can manage your Google Docs, uploads, and email attachments (plus Dropbox and Slack files) in one convenient place. Claim a free account, and in less than 2 minutes, Dokkio (from the makers of PBworks) can automatically organize your content for you.


Do we have a soul

Page history last edited by Brock Baker 12 years, 3 months ago

Do we have a soul?


Do plants have souls?

Do animals?


Why or Why not?


Can we have good/clean or bad/dirty souls?

Is the soul anything different than our minds?


Knowledge and Understanding

# of correct and relevant references to philosophers/theories

Maximum of five statements

(5 x 3 = 15 marks)


# of insightful critiques and/or assessments of relevant philosophical theories

Maximum of five critiques

(5 x 3 = 15 marks)


# of relevant applications of theories to personal point of view or contemporary issues

Maximum of five applications of ideas

(5 x 3 = 15 marks)


Contributions made are -Exceptionally Clear   5

-Clear                          4 -Approaching Clear    3

-Somewhat Clear        2

-Not clear                    1

Total    ____/15

Total    ____/15

Total    ____/15

Total    ____/5

Comments (2)

Devin B said

at 10:22 pm on Sep 23, 2008

Just something I somewhat disagreed with in class. The discussion began with talking about souls, but soon shifted to what happens after
death, which is still somewhat on topic, but it bugged me when people just shrugged off that the soul doesn't exist and that existance just stops
after death, end of story. The problem with an argument like that is that no one knows exactly what happens after death. Some people assume
that once you're dead, that's that, which somewhat makes sense logically, but I'd like to propose what I think to be an equally logical theory.

Say I give you a piece of paper and tell you to destroy it...is it possible? No matter how much you rip it, it's still that piece of paper, if you hide it
it's still a piece of paper even if it can't be seen and if you're thinking about burning it, nice try because it's simply transfered to carbon dioxide and
ashes, so technically it's still not destroyed. Why can't the mind be the same? (assuming in my theory the mind and the soul are one in the same,
since they're both essentially a person's essence). Some of my fellow peers seemed content with the mind simply vanishing, but if something as
important as the mind can vanish, why is it a piece of paper cannot be destroyed? Heck, my theory even supports Plato's theory. He thought that
the mind (or soul) continued living in another form (transfered like the piece of paper being burned) based on how we lived our lives. I know this is
wordier than I anticipated, but I would like to hear some thoughts on this.

Mitch said

at 10:29 pm on Sep 23, 2008

Holy Moses big guy, I'm not even in your class but stumbled upon this and that's a really cool theory, it makes a lot of sense. However, most people (including yourself) would say there's a difference between the mind and the brain. The brain is a physical thing, the mind is not. The brain would be like the paper, it may decompose but it becomes the soil and thus still exists. But for the mind, you're leaning toward the belief that the mind is more like the soul than the brain. Being an intangible thing, your theory doesn't really prove that it would still exist, because it may never have in the first place. If you could prove that thoughts and the mind (I think conscious is a better word) have some sort of physical substance, matter or energy, then it definitely makes the theory more plausible.

Very interesting though, something to think about.

You don't have permission to comment on this page.