What Happened to the Soul?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 кві 2014
- In the latest event in our series on spirituality in the 21st century, psychiatrist and writer Iain McGilchrist considers the status of the soul. Once considered the most important part, indeed the whole purpose, of a human life - has science has now rendered the idea of the soul irretrievably redundant? If so, what have we lost?
For more information about the event go to the RSA event page www.thersa.org/events/audio-an...
Listen to the podcast of the full event including audience Q&A: www.thersa.org/__data/assets/f...
Follow the RSA on Twitter: / thersaorg
Like the RSA on Facebook: / thersaorg
Our events are made possible with the support of our Fellowship. Support us by donating or applying to become a Fellow.
Donate: www.thersa.org/support-the-rsa
Become a Fellow: www.thersa.org/fellowship/apply
It may take more time, but I believe he will go down as the most important intellectual of our time.
Good God he covered the intellectual waterfront. His first degree was English, he switched into medicine and is very spiritual. A panoply of intellectual pursuit from which to be well-placed to this fascinating topic. He shift so seamlessly from neurosciemtific studies to the dao.. Love him and his work.
67
@@thambisettyramakrishna6680 24
He's not asking us to believe anything on insufficient evidence, he's suggesting we don't close ourselves off from different aspects of experience. I really liked it. BTW here is a great quote from Goethe which illustrates the point about finding things in their opposites: The moment is eternity.
Brilliant. This may be the most profound thing I've seen on youtube. It's so rare that religious concepts can be approached without criticism or denial from the non-religious. Or such concepts be analyzed in a secular manner by the religious.
This was something truly unique. McGilchrist addresses a concept that people have found apathy by utility in. Connects it to depth and meaning, as well as epigenetics, and the problem of people who are too happy living shorter lives. Just brilliant in scope and speculation, Looking for the beauty of a soul, rather than the objectification of one.
Wonderful. I am grateful for Dr McGilchrist's in depth processing of philosophy, science and art that resonates and enriches and informs my deeply held but less articulated intuitions and convictions. This is balm in a turbulent time, a huge relief that there are great minds among us who hold that to play, engage, and allow ourselves to be awed by and venture into mystery and uncertainty without expectation or need for answers is very the ground of wisdom.
This is absolutely stellar! I get why there will be 'unsatisfied' responses, but to those who would write an unsatisfied remark I would like to suggest: Listen to his words, not as posing true statements about the world, but as trying to guide the lister to realize a series of partially connected topics for further questioning: He is specifically trying to not be too precise - as his central talking point is that the concept of the soul is inherently diffuse. Posing questions fruitfully is a valuable effort.
Me like :)
Yes. He surfs the ambiguity of Life beautifully. Being open to all possibilities is a great place from which growth can occur.
I find he asks as many questions as he answers. I listen several times then potter off to do some serious reflection. He creates the possibilities and invites the effort by the listener.... one of my very favourite intellectuals.
I like what C S Lewis said, which is, "You don't have a soul, you are a soul." Which makes sense to me. :)
Yes there is only one, obscured and deformed by mind and conditioning.
Quite right, Maggie. I think Lewis was spot on, and thank you for reminding us. I love philosophical speculation, but in the end that’s all it can be, untestable imaginative speculation. It’s rather like the Zen comment on the eye seeing itself. To know anything about this business of the soul we require information from elsewhere, such as divine revelation.
The first chapters of Genesis provides that: God created a material body of the elements of the Earth and breathed into it the spirit (which I interpret as the life force, and there is scriptural support for that) and the man BECAME a living soul which is an inseparable whole. We don’t contain a soul - that is a Gnostic concept which leads to a distain of the material body - but rather we ARE souls. And God said, “it is very good.” There is no disembodied existence. Our hope, as Christians, is the resurrection which is the recreation or reanimation of a living soul, but one with the original immortal properties, or at least nearly so.
Glad to hear I’m not alone in this view though very much in the minority, but which I believe to be the idea taught by scripture. As I’m sure you may be aware, such ideas are considered heterodox by mainstream orthodox Christianity. But I view them rather as heretical in attempting to combine Greek philosophy with the message of the Kingdom. I hate to say it, but this project of theirs has produced a monster completely antithetical to the Good News on so many levels.
As C.S. Lewis also said (and I paraphrase,) “yes, Christianity is a myth, but the true one.” In that then the subjective and objective are once again unified and the false dilemmas created by the unaided rational mind fade away.
@@Thomas_Geist I'm not sure what it is that can separate us from eternity, other than our own thinking, which is limited by our experiences within time, but ultimately, according to Einstein, eternity is the only reality. This I think, we must all be a part of before and after our lives here on earth. I think Jesus was trying to make people understand this.
If you believe in the scriptures and that at the end of time the weighing of souls, then there would have to be a disembodied soul to weigh, and to be granted, (or not), an embodied life again. That's my particular slant on it.
I must be honest though, it's so long ago since I watched this video that I can't remember what they were saying.
@@maggieadams8600 Disembodied soul to weigh? Like with an ectoplasmic scale? I believe it’s the heart that gets weighed. I like the Egyptians, but not that much. Merry Christmas.
The energy comes from God and is combined with the body to create a living Soul. Read Genesis 1 2 3. You'll get it
brilliant very very happy to hear this truth from just a humble and wise man
@Editors RSA : Please do not eliminate the pauses in speech. They contain so much more than what is conveyed by words.
I urge everybody to real Iain's book, The Master and his Emissary. It is an undeniably an intellectual tour de force!
Listening to the audiobook of that now!~
I just discovered this amazing scientist. What an awesome addition to my studies into metaphysics 🌞🌞🌞🙏🌞🌞🌞
Fantastic educator!
My, how far we've fallen farther into darkness since this!!
God breathed into man, and man became a living soul.
Superb!
What ever be the soul, what ever be its goal, how ever it takes its toll... whatever it knows... the soul is the way we go in the flow of all that is...it is this!
We clearly can't concentrate for more than 10 seconds unless the image viewpoint is changed.
Excellent presentation...only thing missing is the proof of soul which I have got and am revealing to the masses all the practical and theoretical knowledge on the subject of human soul it's structure and it's function.
Wonderful
What did happen to the soul? When we farm octopi for our consumption because we've decimated the natural world's supplies of them; after watching My Octopus Teacher, should burp out loud after eating them, as an outward sign of satisfaction?
A mention of Peirce. Wonderful. Would he was honored with his two fellow creators of our age -- Wittgenstein and Nietzsche.
Im so glad he can enunciate British English so well.
I love how he has to reinstate elementary, primordial and perennial truths ... to an assembly of the intellectually backwards and immature: most moderns and especially scientists as much as religionists. "Reason not with him, that will deny the principal truths!" (Pythagoras)
Just a "heads up" I tried to watch your latest upload "the Fountain" and it has already been blocked for copyright infringement.
We are not people with souls. We are souls having a human experience. This human existance provides the solid resistance the soul needs to develop. Just like a butterfly needs to work its way out of a cacoon.
Thank you for verbalizing that, you are correct, in my estimation.
The idea of the soul is a useful projection, projection by reflection into our mental map of the inner-outer cosmos. But it's not a literal entity beyond it's archetypal nature as a phenomenon of psychic reality.
True enough but what portion of our psyche is literal? Not ego. Perhaps personality, identity, self … what are any of these? Whatever consciousness may be it gives rise to much which doesn’t require our deliberate consent let alone invention. Why not a “soul” if only as an abstraction to refer to something we suppose is essential or most centrally true about us even though we can’t readily or simply produce what that is. We make choices as we go but maybe the thought that there are for us choices which are more correct, more authentic. And we can get it wrong.
Dammit! Clicked on title and thought it was a video on Motown Records...
What do we see in other that we seek within ourselves? What came first the question or the answer?
14:00 seems like the seperation that most people use when talking about mind and body
It makes for a good metaphor.
A metaphor for what, exactly? and how would oneknow?
Amen.
Talking of oneself is always done in the third person. When I say "I," who precisely is saying this?
10:00 yes, but when will the suffering of a breakup end? Seems like a morbid philosophy, seeing as breakups are one of the most contributing factors in male suicide, here in norway at least.
Soul = Consciousness
Is it me, or does it feel like the recording has been chopped up somehow?
Found the whole lecture: ua-cam.com/video/-ryt_dCHt5o/v-deo.html
The soul is the whole person energised by life.
Roah and nafas is Arabic for soul and breath روح و نفس
In my opinion not all human bodies are in possession of a soul because they lack the disposition to grow one.
🖤
this mater has been discussed extensively in Russia and I also think that people should educate themselves spiritually.
I can't help but think, that our soul,
Is life and death in one. The energy that's there when alive, and the energy that leaves us when we die. The higher force within. Maybe, are sub consious and are consciousness , either way it get you thinking.
In the Electric Universe every life form is a Z pinch in a Birkeland Current.
savior
Are we discussing a living Soul - or an Everlasting Soul? Seems to me a critically important clarification, if this conversation is to make any constructive sense. (PS. Our Gods are created from within our own minds)
How about the Soul as a product of our living experience?
YHWH is not within our own mind, but within ALL, thank you kindly. :)
I'm sorry but the editing here is terrible. We don't have a chance to listen along with the presenters thoughts at intended pace, with room for reflection and natural breath between ideas, but instead have to put up with a very artificial presentation because of all the cuts. It really diminishes an otherwise valuable talk.
Why was it felt necessary to edit down from the original length? -seems indeed another crime of the left-brain!
The soul is the most important thing.
I just wonder, if a human is nothing more than a collection of chemical and electrical reactions, what is right or wrong about stopping said reactions?
Danny Heijnen Sam Harris? All he's even shown me is that one does not need to be religious to be a bigot.
Have you heard what he's said about Muslims? Or Christians, for that matter? Sam isn't even well-respected among atheists.
Glad you asked. Speaking as a bundle of chemical reactions, I see my fellow-reactions being led to thrive more or less as a result of other bundle's actions towards them. From introspection, it's more conducive to thriving to be treated kindly, than unkindly. How would you rather be treated, yourself?
By 'bigot', many people seem to mean no more than 'someone who (dares) disagree with me.'
I feel today that bigotry is not really a wrong opinion, it is more not showing empathy
Seems to me that this concept "soul" is the deux ex machina of those who are driven to make sense and encapsulate that which is still unknown and to be connected with the current bodies of knowledge of the collective consciousness. It can be useful to have a concept that can serve as the "x" we use to refer to that which still to be discriminated. Nevertheless, we should keep at bay to never fully associate the abstraction with a real event (that is not the brain connections to form the concept of "soul") without concrete evidence. And we should not take just the hint that something might linger somewhere that we can't yet touch upon to make the concept more than that particular drive.
Brought here by Jordan Peterson
Me too
And if you ask me, you've come to a more brilliant 'address'.
Leave Peterson behind.
Both very bright minds!
Anyone know if a transcript is available?
Click on the 3 dots above the Subscribe button, that will give you an option to open the transcript. I copy them off to notepad when I want to search a reference. Its not really the easiest reading format.
Thank you!
23:29 and you CUT? aum
Insurpassable.
Soul isn't this, soul isn't that... I mean, no matter how many philosophical quotes that sound nice but are more poetic than definistic (?)... I simply see no meaning in talking about souls if it's supposed to be that amount of nebulousness about it.
I see this whole thing in a simpler way. Can the application of the word soul in those cases be substituted or even removed while the result stays the same or even better? Then it is placebo or at least a real thing.
Yes, the quotes he brings up are beautiful and inspiring at times, but I still fail to see why I should use souls in my work or in normal occasions. So for me, this ended up being a lot of words said with no suggestion of application given, and nothing of interest was transfered between his mind and mine.
I cringe at your comment because I remember myself being as shallow as you seem to be. While still a non-theist and down-to-earth, I can now appreciate the beauty of the intangible, whether there is a physical reality behind it or not.
I can even see poetry in numbers and Mathematics and the beauty in well structured lines of code.
When we lose or lack the capacity to feel that dimension, we are not complete. I'm happy to have regained my soul.
I feel like substance dualism is dying bit by bit
Dying? Dead like last year's roadkill.
nope. Scientific panpsychism revived it
Amazing absolutely Superfluous understanding. Like running around the edge of a pool. You have no understanding with the waters like. There are no atheists on a sinking ship and like the thief on the cross said Lord remember me when you enter into your kingdom. In Christ Jesus name. Carry on.
Egos Misconception of what soul is. Due to mistranslation or misunderstanding of Jewish text. IAm of EL is God. Elohim (plural) are those things EL created in image of EL. Bible means something very different understanding this. This man speaks of the spirit and mind brain mechanism.
Jordan Peterson brought me here.
He should do a debate with Sam Harris, hehe.
MORALITY
"Do not enrich yourself upon the misery of another." For example, do not enrich yourself upon the misery of the one billion least intelligent humans who are starving. Otherwise, you will be among the seven billion sinners who refuse to feed them.
@Christine Mills Demonstrate the principles of regenerative agriculture, water catchment restoration, holistic management and permaculture.
The final question, (24.09), sounds like a hifalutin word salad.
I'm agnostic towards the proposition of God or afterlife and i like McGilchrist, but what we have here is a reunion of human biases invoking poetry, spice and everything nice.. as if these things would undo the findings of physics and neuroscience. For anyone wanting a honest in depth view upon this matter of souls, they should visit phantomself.org .
Chopra: you are a spiritual being having a human experience.
Well, I guess I am the only one in the comments who did not like this.😅
I found the speech to be annoyingly unscientific, vague, and new agey. 25 minutes of eloquent, motivated reasoning.
The concept/symbol of a "soul" might be useful to some, yes. But then again it can also be used to justify violence against "soulless" people, or cause suffering for "soulless" animals, etc.
I used to believe in a soul, but I do not anymore. Much like Santa Claus, the soul is a fiction that I do not need in my life.
We do not need to invent concepts to live meaningful lives. A useful lie is still a lie, while dedication to truth has its own value.
If you are still reading, I wish you all the best, and a life full of meaning and happiness😊❤
The fact you have to ask if the soul has a use just shows what nonesense thse Professors talk. lmao
Science doesn't recognise the soul, science only define these 4:
body,brain (not thought),the consciousness, subconscious.
The bible recognises the soul, it states them as one of these 4.
body, soul, spirit, heart (metaphysical).
These are subsequently synonyms.
God made animals with a soul, and humans too. But the spirit and the heart are purely human.
I got a bit lost listening to this. He is a nice chap and means well, but I have a sneaking suspicion that the soul, as he understands it, outlives the body. If that is the case the point of the talk collapses, because (in my honest opinion) this is not the case. If he believes as I do, that it does not outlive the body, then I am willing to give his ideas more time, because, for sure, we do need to single out the uniqueness of individuals subjective experience. So please, is this disguised religion, or not?
A spectacular waste of 25 minutes. We humans are so fascinated by ourselves that some of us can't help mythologising the human condition. Pitiful. The most useful observation in this whole monologue is that "nowadays it's become a kind of embarrassment to talk about the soul". Soul, essence.... it's amazing what a brain injury can do for these things.
Un-satisfying!
Perhaps sticking to the subject matters you understand?...
I think the academic community has lost their minds. I'm out.
Indeed, most have. Thankfully there are some who still retain their mind and soul and are thus complete.
The amount of pseudo-intellectual drivel on display is astounding.
I'd like to think I have pretty nimble ears, but I understood this much better after rewinding and replaying a few sections. He goes through many different understandings of the soul from different perspectives, frequently sidetracking to explain those perspectives. I think he could have set it up a bit more and slowed the delivery down, but this topic does require inclusion of a lot of material that is somewhat contradictory. For anyone interested in studying this subject further, in a very formal intellectual way, he provides a wealth of starting points for going about graduate level research on this subject. If his only goal with this presentation is to reintroduce the academic community to intellectual discussion and research on the soul, he did an excellent job. For the intellectual community to be dismissive of a cross-cultural motif as widespread and deeply rooted as the soul, they would be negligent in their relationship to society as a whole.
notrningwheels
Very much agree, listened to the first half of this while attempting to multitask and missed much.
*****
But spoken with a British accent, so it sounds smart!
Nimble ears may be needed for this video because of the way it has been edited.
Compare the timings with the audio recording (on the RSA site) at:
assets.thersa.org/mp3s/20140331IainMcGilchrist.mp3
In the audio version, the talk itself starts a little over 2 minutes in and continues for about 32 minutes, whereas on UA-cam it starts almost immediately, but is only about 24 minutes long.
It’s shortened partly by the removal of a piece of music (Kryie Le Roy by Taverner), but mostly by the truncation of pauses in speech. So there’s very little time to digest one idea before the next one comes along.
Boring
Guus van der Werf this one feels different.
You know on UA-cam it is possible to decide for yourself what you watch?
Lol, typical amoeba.
Here's one for you: infinity is boring.