Soul Denial
The dualistic
nature of humans has always been a topic of interest. Historically, the predominant view amongst organized religions,
and practitioners of those religions, was that human beings had two parts; a
physical body which exists here in this world, and a soul; a non-physical
entity which inhabits the body and provides the basis for the mind. It is typically imagined that while the body
is mortal, imperfect, and changing, the soul is eternal, perfect, and
unchanging. However, if it is assumed
that the soul provides the basis for the mind, as well as the personality of a
person, this concept of a perfect and unchanging soul immediately comes under
fire. True, there may be continuity of
the mind which creates the illusion of unchangingness, but it is undeniable
that personality can change (provided one accepts the existence of personality,
or a sense of one's self). Furthermore,
advances in brain research suggest that functions (or malfunctions) of the
brain can be linked to personality, thoughts, and behavior. Combine this with the knowledge and
understanding of the reasons why some people choose to believe in a soul, and
the more logical conclusion to the question of ontological dualism becomes
clearer. The existence of a soul is unlikely
and unnecessary. The mind and body are
not wholly separate entities; the mind is a function of the brain, which is
simply a part of the body.
First, it is
necessary to explore why a belief in a soul is so prevalent, if the soul does
not actually exist. The belief in a
soul is a fundamental part of most religions (primarily the Judeo-Christian
religions), and the belief in several of these religions goes back to before
recorded history.
The development of
religious beliefs comes from the desire to explain what cannot be explained by
physical means. A person may feel hot,
and understand it is because they are standing under the sun, which is hot. However, there was, for primitive man, no
way to know why the sun was hot, or
even what the sun was, other then the big, bright, hot thing in the sky. Because of the curious nature of man, the
need to know why was a nagging question.
Since no physical method of explanation could be derived, stories were
made up to explain the phenomena.
Perhaps the sun was a great angry creature, which was blanketed by
animal pelts ever night, but managed to escape each day. Perhaps it was a chariot, driven across the
sky every day, as the Greeks imagined.
However, modern science has revealed to us the true nature of the
sun. It is a star, made up of gaseous
material, and to modern man is no more mystical or magical then a rock or a
tree. We now understand that the sun
disappears each night and returns each day because of rotations of the earth.
Even more
troublesome to primitive man was the concept of death. With death comes the end of life, but for
many, the concept of the nothingness which follows the end of physical life is
a cold and terrifying thought. The
creation of the concept of a soul and an afterlife was the solution to this
fear. Based on what an individual
imagines life after death to be like, death might even become something to look
forward to. The Heaven's Gate Cult are
a modern day example of the anticipation of afterlife. In 1996, these people felt that the
Hale-Bopp comet had come to take them away from the physical earth, and off to
a distant planet in a sort of afterlife realm.
To hurry along the process, they committed mass suicide.
The Heaven's Gate
Cult is of course an extreme example, but the principle remains the same
throughout religions. When one believes
in a heaven, the thought of death is not so terrible, because the soul moves on
to a state of bliss and happiness. Many
who believe in reincarnation feel that each life lived is just another chance
for the soul to learn lessons, in a progression towards a completely whole and
fulfilled soul, which will then live in bliss.
The ultimate ending
or afterlife for the soul varies between religions and personal beliefs. However, the impact such beliefs have on the
physical life is basically the same; to take emphasis away from the physical
life, and instead place it on the afterlife.
After all, even those who do not believe in a soul recognize the
impermanence of the physical body, that undeniable fact that it will one day
die and rot. What, then, could be wrong
with placing emphasis on the life after death; that unending soul which will
never die? There are several problems
with this.
The belief in a
soul takes emphasis from the physical life, and places it on the life after
death, be it heaven, nirvana, or reincarnation. However, this can be a very dangerous way to live life. If one lives the physical life in
depravation of physical pleasures, they may very well earn the respect of those
who view this as admirable piety. Yet,
what is the true value of physical human life if the afterlife is more
important? If life after death is more
enjoyable then the physical life, there is no reason to hang around this world;
the Heaven's Gate Cult had the right idea.
It may be proposed that a longer life on earth wrought with trials and
hardships brings a greater reward in the afterlife. This theory is often used in conjunction with the emphasis on
afterlife as a tool for the repression of the weaker. When the poverty stricken citizenry are told by the elitists that
the poor and meek of the physical world will receive their rewards in the
afterlife, they are far more likely to accept their lower place in the ladder
of social stratification which is rampant in the world. By sedating the underclass with stories of
the "promised land," the rich and powerful can hold on to their
wealth, and enjoy the pleasures of the physical life while their fellow men
starve, dreaming of heaven and eternal bliss.
One problem which
many people have when the existence of the soul is denied is that they cannot
understand how morality can exist without the soul, or, for that matter, why it
should exist. They wonder what is the value
of human life, if not the soul, which they see as the essence of life. Yet, if anything, the value of human life is
increased when the existence of a soul is denied. If there were a continuation of existence beyond physical life,
then the end of that physical life would not be so terrible. Having nothing but physical life makes life
a precious commodity. Years become
valuable currency to be spent carefully, for they are in limited quantity, and
when they are gone, there is nothing to follow. Many philosophers and religions describe the physical body as
something to be despised or ashamed of, because when compared with the soul,
the physical body is ugly and imperfect.
Yet, in the absence of a soul, the physical body is all we have, and
thus is something truly beautiful, to be revered and appreciated. There is encouragement to take care of this
human body, not because it is a temporary household for a soul, but because it
is wholly and completely us.
Morality, or a
sense of "goodness" and a desire to do what is "right," can
indeed exist independently of the concept of a soul. Morality is not a set thing; it differs from culture to culture,
and person to person. To some, it is
moral to turn in a family member who has broken the law, because one has an
obligation to society to uphold what is "right". To others, the betrayal of a friend or loved
one is terribly immoral, even if they are in violation of society's laws. With so many different ideas of what is
right or wrong, there can never be a universal morality. Yet, a basic moral code can be defined in
the context of humans as only physical beings, lacking souls. This moral code is compatible with the reverence for life which comes from the
denial of the soul. Though there are
exceptions, it might be said that the closest thing to a universal moral law is
that killing others for no reason is wrong.
Nearly every person in every culture agrees with this principle, so it
might be used as an example of morality.
If one denies the existence of the soul, and therefore understands the
value of the physical human life, the taking of another person's life for no reason
would indeed be considered the height of immorality; the theft of the most
precious possession a human has. Thus,
morality can certainly coexist with the denial of the existence of a soul.
What evidence is
there for the existence of a soul as the source of the mind? Of course there is not solid, undeniable
proof for or against the existence of a soul, but there is certainly more to
suggest that the mind is simply a function of the brain, which is part of the
physical body. Personality, or the way
someone acts in certain situations, has been subjected to all sorts of
classifications. A person might have a
generally aggressive personality, or a more passive personality. They may be prone to frequent bouts of rage,
or to intense anxiety in stressful situations.
However, a person generally does not undergo drastic changes in
personality on an average basis in a lifetime.
Yet, some extraordinary factor or event may cause their personality to
change. The most effective and
immediate way to incite this change is by altering the brain.
A person under the
influence of brain-altering drugs or alcohol very quickly becomes a different
person. They do not function or behave
as they normally would, and a normally quiet and passive person might easily become
prone to violence and aggression. Any
change to the brain, in fact, can cause a change in personality. In the early to mid-twentieth century,
lobotomies were a common way to deal with the "mentally insane". An aggressive patient had part of the frontal
lobe scarred or removed, and became extremely passive, unable to be aroused to
anger by anything. Modern computer
scans of the brain also seem to demonstrate that abnormalities in function in
certain areas of the brain are linked to abnormal or criminal behavior. Though this does not prove undeniably that a
soul does not exist, it does demonstrate the close link between the physical
brain and the more abstract personality, which was commonly thought to be a
faculty of the soul.
With the increase of
investigation into the true nature of the mind, and its close links to the
brain, it is hard to imagine why the belief in a soul is still so
prevalent. There is no evidence at all
to suggest that the soul, a force which cannot be seen or sensed, measured or
gauged, or in any way observed, exists at all.
There is but one justification for believing in its existence;
faith. Hundreds of years of tradition
and a lifetime of hearing that it exists has taught many people to believe in
the existence of a soul. Yet, faith in
traditionally held views in the face of better and more likely answers seems
foolish. A person born today who was
shown both sides of the issue, the evidence for and against the existence of a
soul, and left to decide for himself which made more sense, would almost
certainly deny the existence of a soul.
Perhaps the myth of the soul brings comfort to the thought of death for
soul-believers, but for me, I can think of nothing more comforting then knowing
that what I am doing, here and now, and at no time and nowhere else, is the
most important thing to me. The
happiness of a good life here and now is it's own reward.