Do humans have a soul?

[bahman]

The rest is just illusion.

What, exactly, is suffering that illusion?

Do you mean what is causing that illusion? If yes then the answer is mind.

[Scott Mayers]

...
So the mind is not the soul, and the [soul] is not the mind. The mind is under our soul.

What do you think bout those thinkings?

Best greetings
Dominik

"Soul" etymologically relates to "sole" (and "sol" in general) and means (or is intended to mean or have meant), "That one thing that collectively holds or combines all that I am of its parts." This is 'consciousness' but emphasizing a place at a point in our space that is presumed to exist Elsewhere. Given that people think of our moral compass (as 'conscience') also lacks mechanical meaning without some universal single truth, this Elsewhere, is the unique place presumed to hold our real "I". "Mind" is treated as the physical non-single set of factors that acts as a medium between here and Elsewhere.

The rational confusion relates to the fact that while we interpret all reality we 'observe' as requiring rules such as "nothing can be in one place at the same time", then where is the point in our physical brain (or bodies) that enables us to sense multiple facts at once? That is, in modern terms, our own consciousness is in a 'superposition' of being AT many different points in space (ie, ...of the brain). Descartes thought the interface of this had to be some unique spot in the physical brain, like how we might think of any number of CPUs controlling all activity in a computer has to be governed by ONE specific CPU at its start,....just exchange any CPU with a single neuron. We seem to be the whole of the sum of multiple points in space, something we treat as irrational to presume of physical nature itself.

So your thinking is what others have thought of normally. We treat the command center of who and what we are as the "soul" place [ie sole place] that encompasses the collective activity of our present experiences, its whole history, and any intrinsic 'value' it represents to us eternally.

Science shows us that the activity of the brain is non-localized (not AT some single point). But more importantly, for every participating point in the brain to consciousness, it does not require having activity at all times. In other words, consciousness is the effect of any and all distinct neurons in the brain to be active at some interval of time. For example, we might be able to cut out some half of the brain and still BE conscious, while ALSO reversing WHICH half we throw away! How can we remain being conscious and dependent upon physical matter in physical space if we can arbitrarily select any distinct part of ourselves and exist in more than one place at once?

This CAN be realized via a quantum physical explanation (or variation of multiple universe theories). ....or we throw out our 'rule' that something cannot be in two places at once (OR that no two things can occupy the same place) as a default rule. The latter option allows you to define 'soul' as just the FACT about this descriptively without concerning yourself as to 'why'.

The only problem with this is that most associate a 'why' to a literal 'God' and that "soul" then means both another unexplained phenomena AND one resolved by an alter-world specifically in a 'God-space'. Since soul evokes emotional meaning, if we want to be realistically neutral to analyze, we cannot use a meaning that lacks observation directly when discussing this with serious rational inquiry. Thus, keep the word if you want, but remember that we can only treat it as the 'unknown' variable about our consciousness, not a 'known' religiously interpreted one.

[RCSaunders]

The rest is just illusion.

What, exactly, is suffering that illusion?

Do you mean what is causing that illusion? If yes then the answer is mind.

No, I do not mean what is causing it. I'm asking what is being deluded, that is, what exactly is suffering from the illusion?

By the way, since you suggested it, if the mind is the cause of illusion are you suffering illusion? How do you know anything you think is not just an illusion?

[bahman]

What, exactly, is suffering that illusion?

Do you mean what is causing that illusion? If yes then the answer is mind.

No, I do not mean what is causing it. I'm asking what is being deluded, that is, what exactly is suffering from the illusion?

What is being deluded? What mind causes which is in fact is what mind experience. What we experiencing doesn't have any essence, therefore it is an illusion. In another word what we experience is caused by mind and it cannot exist without mind.

By the way, since you suggested it, if the mind is the cause of illusion are you suffering illusion?

Yes.

How do you know anything you think is not just an illusion?

Thoughts are illusion, illusion being something without any essence, but they explain reality as it is.

[RCSaunders]

What is being deluded? What mind causes which is in fact is what mind experience. What we experiencing doesn't have any essence, therefore it is an illusion. In another word what we experience is caused by mind and it cannot exist without mind.

The main problem with this everything is an illusion nonsense in all its forms, (from Plato to every form of mysticism), is that before something can be called an illusion, one must have an idea of what isn't an illusion, of what actually is real to compare it to. If everything is illusion it would be impossible to know it.

By the way, since you suggested it, if the mind is the cause of illusion are you suffering illusion?

Yes.

How do you know anything you think is not just an illusion?

Thoughts are illusion, illusion being something without any essence, but they explain reality as it is.

I do know it is not possible to reason with those gullible enough to swallow this mystic nonsense, so I shan't argue with you.

[bahman]

What is being deluded? What mind causes which is in fact is what mind experience. What we experiencing doesn't have any essence, therefore it is an illusion. In another word what we experience is caused by mind and it cannot exist without mind.

The main problem with this everything is an illusion nonsense in all its forms, (from Plato to every form of mysticism), is that before something can be called an illusion, one must have an idea of what isn't an illusion, of what actually is real to compare it to. If everything is illusion it would be impossible to know it.

Mind itself is not illusion. I have an argument for that: Consider a change in a system, A->B. A and B cannot coexist so A has to vanishes before B occurs/is caused. But there is nothing when A vanishes and nothing cannot possibly causes B. Therefore there must be a mind with ability to experience and cause. A and B are different forms which is experienced and caused by mind respectively. A and B vanish so I call them illusion. Mind in another hand doesn't vanish so I don't call it illusion.

By the way, since you suggested it, if the mind is the cause of illusion are you suffering illusion?

Yes.

How do you know anything you think is not just an illusion?

Thoughts are illusion, illusion being something without any essence, but they explain reality as it is.

I do know it is not possible to reason with those gullible enough to swallow this mystic nonsense, so I shan't argue with you.

As you wish.