An interesting end to an otherwise crappy day – talking with Ilya about existence of soul. My position:
1. If you take two physically and temporally identical entities (hypothetically of course), if one is pinched, only one will feel it. Thus, something differetiates the two. We call this soul.
2. An individual is comprised of two parts – those that we can measure and model, and those that we can. To a philosopher the two are: a) body/mind and b) soul.
3. The soul and mind do not necessarily influence each other. Or, if influence is exerted, it goes one way – we can sense the soul’s existence.
If 1, 2, and 3 are true, then, theoretically, it is possible to have a world where all behavior can be predicted, yet there will still be things we can not measure. To take that a step further, every individual can be reduced to a logical machine, which means that it is theoretically possible to create a society that does not have disagreements.
Now all of this is NOT necessarily so. I am just saying that that is one way things could exist.
Benefit of such a position: there are no good/bad people.
The cons: people lose their uniqueness. But not really, as uniqueness is defined as those things that made a person. This I need to think about a little more…
Ilya’s position if I understood correctly: soul and mind necessarily influence each other. Yet complete understanding of the soul would mean that it doesn’t exist, because soul is directly related to God, who, if God becomes predicatable, then God can not exist. Thus, if God exitsts, souls exist. If souls exist, then minds can never be fully modeled/understood because they are influenced by the soul. If minds can never be mathematically modeled, then no matter how rational people are, there will always be disagreements. I disagree!