My Personal Definition of the Mind, and the Soul

Using a computer as an analogy for the nervous system, the brain is all manner of computing hardware, the mind is all the software running on it, and the soul is just a fraction of that software. Most of the software running in the mind deals with decision making, behaviorism, personality, creativity, etc. What I would refer to as the soul though, is the interpretation of ones self that no one could understand other than them self. As the way one thinks may drastically change, and ones personality may change, and on the outside may be a completely different person, their soul still contains all that is them. It isn't so much just a memory, but all memories condensed into one image of the self. One musn't recall on all memories to conjure up this image, it's embedded there always emboldening the self. However, it is just a part of the mind, which is but a product of the body. When the body ceases to function, the mind ceases to exist, and along with it, the soul. What I've found is rather ironic, and poetic though is that the soul when looked at in this way, is actually the only part of a person that will disappear entirely. The mind of a man may go on with his words, and the body of a man will live on in all manner of biological form, but the soul was only known to him, and only ever will have been.

Views: 31

Comment by Terri~ on May 30, 2009 at 12:20pm
I just don't like the word "soul", anymore than I like the word "faith". They are both unprovable. "Self" would be a better description. *shrug*
Comment by CJoe on May 30, 2009 at 5:46pm
I agree with Neal... and "Ninja"... no one will ever know us fully. Sometimes, it's difficult to even know ourselves, and it's presumptuous to think you can guess what someone was about based on clues or evidence left behind, or by looking at someone's actions. Sometimes we do things out of character; sometimes our character changes and evolves over time. We are not static or knowable.

Part of the reason I think this is because I'm an artist and I get really frustrated with the art community because they're always making assumptions about art and the artist. I think they're rarely correct and arrogant to claim they are. When I took art history, I was really annoyed that their "educated guesses" were presented as fact. We don't know much about civilizations past, and we don't even know much about civilizations, other than our own, now.

I think it's very beneficial to try to understand other people and other cultures, but we should never assume we know either fully. Oh, the beautiful mystery of life! :)
Comment by Atheist Ninja on May 30, 2009 at 7:26pm
I think that most people when they think of their soul, regardless of whether it lives on after the body or not, think of it as their consciousness, usually separate from, but inhabiting the body. I also imagine they believe it defines them as an individual, regardless of others, and memories. It's this understanding that I used to shape a definition of something similar that I can agree with. It is my personal definition, so I wouldn't use the term soul in this manner and expect others to understand what I mean. I suppose what I was really doing is trying to pinpoint the actual existing mechanism that others would attribute to the soul.
Comment by Atheist Ninja on May 30, 2009 at 9:51pm
Agreed Michel, I hope my comments haven't made me appear to mean otherwise.


You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service