does man have a soul?

does man have a soul?…//It’s Not Just About Abortion: Without Kennedy, Birth Control Could Be Next | Alternet
June 29th, 2018

These dreadful developments should also from a sideline be seen to challenge conventional secular humanism whose view of man is so narrow that it has stalled the passage beyond religion and allowed these to fester in imaginary versions of christian doctrine and tradition rife on the religious right.
Take the example of soul: a narrow materialist view negates the idea and at once a religious perspective halts in its passage to a post-religious secularism. What is the status of the issue of soul? It is a metaphysical question, but it is so on each side. We are in the end forced to a kind of agnosticism on the subject, but with varying degrees of belief or non-belief based on the facts of religious history. Let us consider this: man creates his soul as he works through existence. The idea of fundamentalist christians that abortion is murder is simply nonsense: the immensity of potential organisms latent reproductive processes has nothing to do with soul. The egg/sperm conjoined do not create a soul. That is surely nonsense. To think therefore that contraception/abortion somehow murder souls is a gross distortion and a failure to see the relation of material nature and the spiritual. The reality is probably that the human organism like spooky physics has relation to a non-temporal dimension: that is what confuses the issue, but it is not thus a question of soul. Life does not bestow knowledge as such of the questions of ‘soul’. The reality may be worse than we imagine: only a few have real souls and these are created in life. The sufis have said so, and we have noted many times that certain sufis actually have a technique to inject a soul seed in man, a hyperdimensional ‘object’ that grows from within the human body like a chrysalis: this legacy is mostly rumor, and its reality uncertain even to the sufi/islamic public, but many have considered the issue of soul in terms of the various ‘bodies’ (astral, etc…). Such an entity is actually ‘material’ but in another mode of materiality. This tradition may have existed in ancient egypt and passed into early christianity and then was lost. It may explain the confused and incomprehending mutation of christian doctrine into salvaitonist mythology as theologians who didn’t understand anything began to make it up. At the other extreme we the buddhist perspective (a confusing variant of the hindu) of reincarnational and/or ‘anatta’ (no soul) doctrines.
The reincarnational view is not really a soul question but, as noted, the mysterious space/time anatomy of man which seems to impinge on a timeless aspect, the never born never died dimension of the organism pointed to by yogis. But this is probably not the same as ‘soul’. We must consider kant and his warnings to be wary of metaphysical judgments…After many millennia we have never in public produced a sound view of these things. And that includes the kind of errant nonsense spouted by bible belt (and much traditional) christianity. The idea that every egg and sperm once conjoined produce a soul is a complete set of errors. Any other view is a travesty of the reality of nature in connection to a larger dimension of the organisms of animals and the potential individuality of man. In any case a ‘soul’ entity that entered a body that aborted its fetus would simply react like someone who missed a bus: get the next one.
We must in any case be critical of secular humanism who equal extreme leaves the whole set of questions in an opposite limbo and the sheer stupidity of much religious thinking contracts to the kind of false theology visible on the religious right.
We are left with three broad suspicions that linger as hypotheses in a complexity that defies easy analysis: conception is not soul formation, man has a space/time framework that impinges on a kind of spooky physics that generates what looks like reincarnation, ‘spiritual action’ generates its own seed soul (and temporal material action is potentially perfectly good at this) but we don’t know precisely what this is, and finally there is an additional explicit ‘soul formation’ of the sufi type that involves what they call completed man. The latter is a kind of luxury in a context where man has a ‘sort of soul’ based on his action over time, and in successive lives, if any.
Man as homo sapiens probably acquired a soul in some sense at the dawn of speciation, connected with mind, language, art/creativity, and a proto-religious sense of the ‘spiritual’, a sort of temporary ‘chevrolet’ soul and package deal for smart apes that allows him to traverse history and solidify this gift of nature, and this is not the same as the ‘complete man’ process, nor does require belief in god or allegiance to religion. Here the religions may be right that man can fritter away this grub stack, and in the words of gurdjieff, perish like a dirty dog. So, everyman comes to have a ‘sort of soul’, at least for a while, as his future is contingent on his life and values as he moves to complete this process.
Here christian theology has totally muddled the whole question and even attempted to create a theological monopoly of its nonsense.
Source: It’s Not Just About Abortion: Without Kennedy, Birth Control Could Be Next | Alternet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s