Can the word “soul” carry significant meaning outside of a traditional religious context? I think so.

[RadishRose]

Can the word “soul” carry significant meaning outside of a traditional religious context?​

Sure thing.
There's soul food, soul music, soul sister, soul mate, etc.

 

[MarkD]

So soul as essence isn’t even its sole meaning.

 

[Supernatural]

First let me turn up some cards: I come from a big family that stopped going to church soon after I started elementary school and before I got to high school I had thought to myself I’m an atheist. Of course for many Christians that’s exactly what I am but I didn’t struggle to get away from religion and harbor no resentment against it. I’m especially agnostic about “God” but deeply believe there is something more within than than the part that puts words together and works to make ends meet. I think there is something real, dynamic and important that gave rise to God belief. I just don’t think it was a being anything like a person. I think rather that it is something that arises naturally in consciousness much as our sense of having a self it a soul does. So what I’m wondering is if other people unmoored from traditional religious practice have come to think of “soul” as a meaningful concept.

To give an idea of what that might be I call on Wendel Berry and a passage from his wonderful book Jayber Crow:

“
And so I came along in time to know the end of the age of steamboating. I would learn later that there had been other ages of the river that I had arrived too late to know but that I could read about and learn to imagine. There was at first the age when no people were here, and I have sometimes felt at night that absence grow present in my mind, that long silence in which no human name was spoken or given, and the nameless river made no sound of any human tongue. And then there was the Indian age when names were called that have never been spoken in the present language of Port William. Then came the short ages of us white people, the ages of the dugout, the flatboat, the keelboat, the log raft, the steamboat. And I have lived on now into the age of the diesel towboat and recreational boating and water skiing. And yet it is hard to look at the river in its calm, just after daylight or just before dark, and believe that history has happened to it. The river, the river itself, leaves marks but bears none. It is only the water flowing in the path that other water has worn.

Or is that other water really “other”, or is it the same water always running, flowing always toward the gathering of all waters, and always rising and returning again, and again flowing? I knew this river first when I was a little boy, and I know it now when I am an old man once again living beside it … and almost seventy years! … and always when i have watched it I have been entranced and mystified. What is it? Is it the worn trough of itself that is a feature of the land and is marked on maps, or is it the water flowing? Or is it the land itself that over time is shaped by the flowing water, and it caught by no map?

The surface of the quieted river as I thought in those old days at Squire’s Landing, as I think now, is like a window looking into another world that is like this one except that it is quiet. Its quietness makes it seem perfect. The ripples are like the slats of a blind or a shutter through which we we see imperfectly what is perfect. Though that other world can be seen only momentarily, it looks everlasting. As the ripples become more agitated, the window darkens and the other world is hidden. As I did not know then but know now, the surface of the water is like a living soul, which is easy to disturb, is often disturbed, but, growing calm, shows what it was, is, and will be.”

I do think there is something essential to everyone of us which can be thought of as authentic. For me that is “soul”. I don’t think souls are any more eternal than raindrops which return by rivers to the sea to fall again and again as rain. But while what it is that is authentic for me restricts how I can be and and do, it is discovering and making our way accordingly that gives life meaning. Or so I think.

To me, the soul is the essence of the person, who they were in short their energy personality. If you look at it from the scientific side, we're composed of energy. On the other side many non-religious subjects refer to the "soul" as having lost it. EG, dead vampires in literature have a belief that they're now soulless which depending on the authors results in various representations of monsters.

I could go on and on as being writer myself, I did research. Then growing up I had three religions and finally diving into the paranormal overs decades, due to personal experiences, I believe that the soul contains who we were at any given time. Yes, that brings my neutral belief that each of us have lived many a lifetime. I don't like at it from a religious point of view but in the context of the complicated universe we all live in.

However, currently I can be stuck in my Angelic stories, as well as studying Wicca. A race who took the soul very seriously and the afterlife remains to this day, the Egyptians. I know a wee bit of history but I've only skimmed the subject, but what I've found was fascinating!

Whenever, I research something, lately this is my first port of call
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul

 

[MarkD]

I appreciate the good things religion has done for us, and can respect people who believe.

As do I. I even wonder if God belief and religious experience more generally didn’t have a formative role in our becoming as we are both culturally and psychologically. That is why I have no sympathy for the reactionary atheism that insists religion is holding us back. It might be true that we no longer require religious immersion to live fulfilling and meaningful lives. But perhaps our agnostic perspective is dependent on humanity having transitioned through such a stage.

As someone who was raised with religious belief (though not beyond early childhood and not very thoroughly) I also question whether it isn’t beneficial in child rearing; we didn’t raise our stepson in any religion and we were pretty openly dismissive of it when it would came up. While he has a great head for science and math and works as an engineer religion has become hugely important for him to the point of having become a monk in a very wooey (from our POV) and offbeat group. Maybe we were wrong to ignore it as parents. So it seems to me now.

However I am agnostic and don't believe in any of the supernatural parts of religion. My concept of the soul falls into that category. I do use the word but don't mean to imply a real belief.

Yeah I have no use for the ‘supernatural’ category and suspect it is an empty set, but only in an empirical sense. In terms of effects in peoples lives it is real enough and, as I say, would we have become fully human without it? I have my doubts. But to my sensibility that the sacred can be grounded in the natural world by way of our consciousness (which retains plenty of mystery) is good news. That blood sacrifices are no longer made is good news; and if we can set aside belief in reality bending miracles without abandoning reverence for the sacred that is also good news.

But I have to make the caveat that I only know what I can know with the dispositional beliefs which I hold. I do not embrace ant traditional wisdom tradition so I can’t know what I would know if I did. I’m okay with that but I think it is only fitting to keep that in mind. No one can hold every world view and from the outside we don’t really know what we’re missing from the inside. It would be presumptuous to declare that those we don’t know are just mistaken and cannot provide a meaningful human experience or potentially even a superior one. Humility is worth working for.

 

[Alligatorob]

As do I. I even wonder if God belief and religious experience more generally didn’t have a formative role in our becoming as we are both culturally and psychologically.

I am sure it did, we had to find a way to live and do business with strangers. In our long ago past it was mostly to kill them, that made sense a stranger was likely to be in our cave or small village to rape, plunder, or kill. Religion gave us that ability to live peacefully with others, and I believe without it we could not have become civilized. Just one example, religion has other values.

In the case of murder our modern rates are far below what they once were. This article is just one I found quickly on Google, lots more out there. I like what Jared Diamond has to say on the subject.

Humans’ murder rates explained by primate ancestors​

https://arstechnica.com/science/201...mans-murderous-ways-on-our-primate-ancestors/

 

[MarkD]

It goes where you want it to go. There are only two directions.

i think how we think can also only be understood in two ways:

One is either/or where only one of two opposites can be true and the middle must always be excluded.

The other is both/and where between two opposites there are always a spectrum of meanings that are contextually dependent, and where the potential implicit meaning is seemingly inexhaustible.

 

[JustDave]

I don't believe in an eternal soul that goes on doing the living after we die. I'm from the "When you're dead, you're dead full stop" camp. But the word has other uses, and most of us can figure out what people mean when they use the word. I don't object to the word in many situations. But if someone preaches to me that I must save my soul or perish, I tune them out.

 

[fancicoffee13]

i think how we think can also only be understood in two ways:

One is either/or where only one of two opposites can be true and the middle must always be excluded.

The other is both/and where between two opposites there are always a spectrum of meanings that are contextually dependent, and where the potential implicit meaning is seemingly inexhaustible.

Truth is and always always be truth. Not what one makes something out to be truth, but truth is the one and only truth.

 

[JustDave]

Truth is and always always be truth. Not what one makes something out to be truth, but truth is the one and only truth.

What?? There are no alternate truths...?? OK, I was being sarcastic. I tend to think in terms of reality rather than truth, but in a way, they are the same. There is only one reality. It's the thing left over when everything we believe is stripped away.

 

[fancicoffee13]

What?? There are no alternate truths...?? OK, I was being sarcastic. I tend to think in terms of reality rather than truth, but in a way, they are the same. There is only one reality. It's the thing left over when everything we believe is stripped away.

Yes, reality is real for sure. And truth is really truth. I think people are so off track these days, they find it hard to get back on track. And trying to help them get back on track is tiring. I talk and play cards with seniors. In that time spent with them we share some things and I learn where to listen and when to just listen. You know? Sometimes, just leave it be. Maybe drop a pearl of wisdom here and there-something to give them to think about.

 

[David777]

Like much of the Bible, later interpretations by those with agendas changed the vague meanings of what its original Hebrew term "soul" meant. Sorry to those that have misled all their lives with misinterpretations and inerrance non-sense.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul_in_the_Bible

The concept of an immaterial and immortal soul - distinct from the body - did not appear in Judaism before the Babylonian exile, but developed as a result of interaction with Persian and Hellenistic philosophies. Accordingly, the Hebrew word נֶ֫פֶשׁ‎, nephesh, although translated as "soul" in some older English-language Bibles, actually has a meaning closer to "living being". The only Hebrew word traditionally translated "soul" (nephesh) in English-language Bibles refers to a living, breathing conscious body, rather than to an immortal soul. In the New Testament, the Greek word traditionally translated "soul" (ψυχή) "psyche", has substantially the same meaning as the Hebrew, without reference to an immortal soul.

The above noted, in terms of spirit is much more information, especially in the Gospel of John, I can argue it the only likely truly inspired part of the New Testament and reflects actual science physics with respect to the truly amazing molecule of H2O, probably the strongest argument for a fine tuned universe. Water uniquely has hydrogen bonding with polar electrical forces. Not something that just coincidentally was a lucky result of random nature of the immense numbers of ways matter and energy forces might be.

Jhn 3:5-6 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless someone is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. “That which has been born of the flesh is flesh, and that which has been born of the Spirit is spirit. (spirit likely the electromagnetic field of brain oscillations that might also be able exist in non-organic AI's.)

 

[MarkD]

Like much of the Bible, later interpretations by those with agendas changed the vague meanings of what its original Hebrew term "soul" meant. Sorry to those that have misled all their lives with misinterpretations and inerrance non-sense.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul_in_the_Bible

The concept of an immaterial and immortal soul - distinct from the body - did not appear in Judaism before the Babylonian exile, but developed as a result of interaction with Persian and Hellenistic philosophies. Accordingly, the Hebrew word נֶ֫פֶשׁ‎, nephesh, although translated as "soul" in some older English-language Bibles, actually has a meaning closer to "living being". The only Hebrew word traditionally translated "soul" (nephesh) in English-language Bibles refers to a living, breathing conscious body, rather than to an immortal soul. In the New Testament, the Greek word traditionally translated "soul" (ψυχή) "psyche", has substantially the same meaning as the Hebrew, without reference to an immortal soul.

The above noted, in terms of spirit is much more information, especially in the Gospel of John, I can argue it the only likely truly inspired part of the New Testament and reflects actual science physics with respect to the truly amazing molecule of H2O, probably the strongest argument for a fine tuned universe.

Going to have revise my response. I guess I only read your first paragraph before and liked where you seemed to be headed. That you think one verse is truly inspired because it can be interpreted as asserting something science can affirm is a little sad. If it all comes down to logic and facts, why bother with faith at all? What’s that about? If belief is nothing more than agreeing with certain assertions based on persuasive reasons I guess the Holy Spirit can stand down and Jesus has nothing left to do.