On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is there any definition of "soul" you agree with?
>

Strangely enough there is, the soul is the essential must have part of
consciousness, therefore I think that Information is as close as you can
get to the traditional concept of the soul and still remain within the
scientific method.

Consider the similarities:

The soul is non material and so is information. It's difficult to pin down
a unique physical location for the soul, and the same is true for
information. The soul is the essential, must have, part of consciousness,
exactly the same situation is true for information. The soul is immortal
and so, potentially, is information.

 But there are also important differences.

 A soul is unique but information can be duplicated. The soul is and will
always remain unfathomable, but information is understandable, in fact,
information is the ONLY thing that is understandable. Information
unambiguously exists, I don't think anyone would deny that, but if the soul
exists (as distinct from information) it will never be proven
scientifically.

  John K Clark

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to