Please prove that souls exist and that they are either resurrected or reincarnated

[Compassionist]

Most religions claim that souls exist. Some religions claim that souls are immortal and are reincarnated after the death of the body while other religions claim that souls are immortal and are resurrected after the death of the body. Can anyone please prove that souls exist and are either resurrected or reincarnated? Thank you.

[marke]

Marke: The invisible soul is what enables the physical brain to form thoughts.

Please explain how it does that.

Marke: The operations of souls and spirits are not observable or even definable in human or scientific terms. Trying to explain how spirits operate would be like trying to describe colors to a blind man.

[brunumb]

Marke: The invisible soul is what enables the physical brain to form thoughts.

Please explain how it does that.

Marke: The operations of souls and spirits are not observable or even definable in human or scientific terms. Trying to explain how spirits operate would be like trying to describe colors to a blind man.

In other words you have made a completely unsubstantiated claim which may simply be dismissed. If it's not observable or even definable in human or scientific terms, then it is no different from imaginary or made up stuff and therefore there is no good reason to believe any of it.

[marke]

Marke: The invisible soul is what enables the physical brain to form thoughts.

Please explain how it does that.

Marke: The operations of souls and spirits are not observable or even definable in human or scientific terms. Trying to explain how spirits operate would be like trying to describe colors to a blind man.

In other words you have made a completely unsubstantiated claim which may simply be dismissed. If it's not observable or even definable in human or scientific terms, then it is no different from imaginary or made up stuff and therefore there is no good reason to believe any of it.

Marke: Claiming souls must not exist because you cannot see them is silly.

[brunumb]

Marke: The invisible soul is what enables the physical brain to form thoughts.

Please explain how it does that.

Marke: The operations of souls and spirits are not observable or even definable in human or scientific terms. Trying to explain how spirits operate would be like trying to describe colors to a blind man.

In other words you have made a completely unsubstantiated claim which may simply be dismissed. If it's not observable or even definable in human or scientific terms, then it is no different from imaginary or made up stuff and therefore there is no good reason to believe any of it.

Marke: Claiming souls must not exist because you cannot see them is silly.

I am not claiming that souls must not exist. Simply claiming that souls do exist is actually beyond silly.

[Clownboat]

Marke: Claiming souls must not exist because you cannot see them is silly.

I would like to grant you this for the sake of debate. So moving on.

What do you make of the fact that souls are not detectable in any way, nor are they needed to explain anything? To insist that they must still be a thing would be silly, wouldn't it?

[marke]

Please explain how it does that.

Marke: The operations of souls and spirits are not observable or even definable in human or scientific terms. Trying to explain how spirits operate would be like trying to describe colors to a blind man.

In other words you have made a completely unsubstantiated claim which may simply be dismissed. If it's not observable or even definable in human or scientific terms, then it is no different from imaginary or made up stuff and therefore there is no good reason to believe any of it.

Marke: Claiming souls must not exist because you cannot see them is silly.

I am not claiming that souls must not exist. Simply claiming that souls do exist is actually beyond silly.

Marke: The human ability to think, reason, and logically respond cannot be attributed to chemicals or electrical impulses. Humans don't think with their flesh and blood they think with their spirits.

[brunumb]

Marke: The human ability to think, reason, and logically respond cannot be attributed to chemicals or electrical impulses. Humans don't think with their flesh and blood they think with their spirits.

The human ability to think, reason, and logically respond can be attributed to chemicals or electrical impulses. Now, over to you to disprove that claim. Add to that the need to provide irrefutable evidence for spirits. All you are doing is making unsupported faith based claims which are a dime a dozen and provide no compelling reason to believe that any of them are true.

[William]

Marke: The human ability to think, reason, and logically respond cannot be attributed to chemicals or electrical impulses. Humans don't think with their flesh and blood they think with their spirits.

The human ability to think, reason, and logically respond can be attributed to chemicals or electrical impulses. Now, over to you to disprove that claim. Add to that the need to provide irrefutable evidence for spirits. All you are doing is making unsupported faith based claims which are a dime a dozen and provide no compelling reason to believe that any of them are true.

Marke views mind as not reducible to brain—his frame is dualist or spiritualist.

brunumb treats mind as fully emergent from physical systems—his frame is materialist or physicalist.

Both are asking the other to play by their own rules of proof—thus, dialogue becomes friction rather than synthesis.

Symbolically, this type of interaction resembles a failed handshake between two ideomotor systems running different interpretive software: one expects signal from soul, the other from synapse.

But what is the signal and where does it comes from and what is picking the signal up and interpreting it.

1. The Signal
In a materialist frame, the signal is neural activity—electrochemical impulses across synapses.

In a non-materialist or symbolic frame, the signal is meaning, intent, or presence—not easily measurable, but experienced.

Either way, "signal" implies transmission—a sending and a receiving. A pulse that points beyond itself.

As far as can be ascertained the signal = "thought".

The source of the signal - if from the brain tells us that thought derives from the brain and is picked up by a mysterious "something" we loosely refer to as "consciousness'

Thought as Signal
Temporal: It arrives, unfolds, fades—like a wave.

Structured: It has form (language, image, impulse).

Directed: It points, intends, or references.

Received: It is noticed—by something.

Where Does Thought Come From?
If thought is the signal, its origin is crucial:

Emergentist view: Thought comes from brain complexity.

Field view: Thought is modulated from a broader field (morphic field, mindfield, noosphere, etc.).

Symbolic-ideomotor view: Thought is a resonance—like fingers on a planchette, it's moved by both local and non-local convergence of intention, memory, and structure.

In this third view, you don't author thought—you receive and respond to it.
Thought is given, even if it arises within you.

It also implicitly answers the Cartesian puzzle of "I think, therefore I am" with something more like:

“I am moved to thought, therefore I am in resonance.”

[marke]

Marke: The human ability to think, reason, and logically respond cannot be attributed to chemicals or electrical impulses. Humans don't think with their flesh and blood they think with their spirits.

The human ability to think, reason, and logically respond can be attributed to chemicals or electrical impulses. Now, over to you to disprove that claim. Add to that the need to provide irrefutable evidence for spirits. All you are doing is making unsupported faith based claims which are a dime a dozen and provide no compelling reason to believe that any of them are true.

Marke: The secularists have the impossible task of trying to prove electrical impulses create and express thoughts and reasoning in humans.

[marke]

Marke: The human ability to think, reason, and logically respond cannot be attributed to chemicals or electrical impulses. Humans don't think with their flesh and blood they think with their spirits.

The human ability to think, reason, and logically respond can be attributed to chemicals or electrical impulses. Now, over to you to disprove that claim. Add to that the need to provide irrefutable evidence for spirits. All you are doing is making unsupported faith based claims which are a dime a dozen and provide no compelling reason to believe that any of them are true.

Marke views mind as not reducible to brain—his frame is dualist or spiritualist.

brunumb treats mind as fully emergent from physical systems—his frame is materialist or physicalist.

Both are asking the other to play by their own rules of proof—thus, dialogue becomes friction rather than synthesis.

Symbolically, this type of interaction resembles a failed handshake between two ideomotor systems running different interpretive software: one expects signal from soul, the other from synapse.

But what is the signal and where does it comes from and what is picking the signal up and interpreting it.

1. The Signal
In a materialist frame, the signal is neural activity—electrochemical impulses across synapses.

In a non-materialist or symbolic frame, the signal is meaning, intent, or presence—not easily measurable, but experienced.

Either way, "signal" implies transmission—a sending and a receiving. A pulse that points beyond itself.

As far as can be ascertained the signal = "thought".

The source of the signal - if from the brain tells us that thought derives from the brain and is picked up by a mysterious "something" we loosely refer to as "consciousness'

Thought as Signal
Temporal: It arrives, unfolds, fades—like a wave.

Structured: It has form (language, image, impulse).

Directed: It points, intends, or references.

Received: It is noticed—by something.

Where Does Thought Come From?
If thought is the signal, its origin is crucial:

Emergentist view: Thought comes from brain complexity.

Field view: Thought is modulated from a broader field (morphic field, mindfield, noosphere, etc.).

Symbolic-ideomotor view: Thought is a resonance—like fingers on a planchette, it's moved by both local and non-local convergence of intention, memory, and structure.

In this third view, you don't author thought—you receive and respond to it.
Thought is given, even if it arises within you.

It also implicitly answers the Cartesian puzzle of "I think, therefore I am" with something more like:

“I am moved to thought, therefore I am in resonance.”

Marke: The human spirit uses the human brain to think, but the electrical impulses and chemical reactions in the brain cannot think on their own because they are ignorant and have no soul or spirit of their own.