Mastermason.com Forums Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Forum Lounge (off-topic & lighter discussions) > General Discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Is Immortality possible if man has no soul?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedIs Immortality possible if man has no soul?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Message
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Topic: Is Immortality possible if man has no soul?
    Posted: August/11/2016 at 12:28pm
If man, in fact, does not possess a soul - is immortality still possible? Does something else substitute for a soul? Mind? Life force? Metabolism?
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
coach View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: October/23/2005
Location: Tampa Bay
Status: Offline
Points: 1285
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/11/2016 at 12:54pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

If man, in fact, does not possess a soul - is immortality still possible? Does something else substitute for a soul? Mind? Life force? Metabolism?


First define "soul" and then prove without a shadow of a doubt that a man has one.
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

Books I Wrote | My FB Wall
Back to Top
Sec'yBob View Drop Down
Quarryman
Quarryman
Avatar

Joined: April/23/2015
Location: Missouri
Status: Offline
Points: 253
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/11/2016 at 4:16pm
Many have said that "soul"

Is charity, selflessness, polite, courteous, well mannered, takes care of himself [grooming/dress]

has exposure to books, music, philosophy, respects women, children, animals, has good character above reproach, well spoken etc, and believes in a supreme being.

Soul is your make up, your ID as it were.  You soul is what makes you tick.

If you have these qualities, when you die, you will be remembered by those you touched.  Is that immortality?

I'm asking.................


Raised 2001
PM Crestwood-Anchor #443
PM Meramec #313
DDGM Dist. 24
Lodge Education Officer
Missouri Lodge of Research
O.E.S. Chapter 129
Back to Top
droche View Drop Down
Quarryman
Quarryman
Avatar

Joined: March/03/2008
Location: Worcester, Mass
Status: Offline
Points: 2185
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/11/2016 at 7:57pm
You asked does something else substitute for a soul- mind, life force, metabolism... If these are substitutes for a soul, then does that not mean that these too are essentially the soul, so it would be merely a question of semantics? If not, I would have to ask, like Coach, what is your definition of "soul"?
Back to Top
coach View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: October/23/2005
Location: Tampa Bay
Status: Offline
Points: 1285
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/12/2016 at 6:30am
Originally posted by droche droche wrote:

You asked does something else substitute for a soul- mind, life force, metabolism... If these are substitutes for a soul, then does that not mean that these too are essentially the soul, so it would be merely a question of semantics? If not, I would have to ask, like Coach, what is your definition of "soul"?

Yep. He cannot get to where he wants to go until he defines where he is now. Without an offered definition, the entire conversation becomes an exercise of Baconian "Idol's of the Marketplace" dribble.
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

Books I Wrote | My FB Wall
Back to Top
pointwithinacircle View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: January/12/2014
Location: Crisfield, MD
Status: Offline
Points: 24
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/12/2016 at 8:32am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

First define "soul" and then prove without a shadow of a doubt that a man has one.
LOL - Coach, you should know that a man can prove anything if he is allowed to write the definitions.   :-)


Edited by pointwithinacircle - August/12/2016 at 8:34am
Words are symbols which point toward concepts arranged in patterns to communicate meaning.
Back to Top
coach View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: October/23/2005
Location: Tampa Bay
Status: Offline
Points: 1285
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/12/2016 at 8:40am
Originally posted by pointwithinacircle pointwithinacircle wrote:



Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

First define "soul" and then prove without a shadow of a doubt that a man has one.
LOL - Coach, you should know that a man can prove anything if he is allowed to write the definitions.   :-)


Yep. It also allows those who read the definition to approach the topic within a specified structure to guide discourse and suitable scrutiny accordingly. Sans a suitable definition as guide and measure, unstructured conjecture shall rule.
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

Books I Wrote | My FB Wall
Back to Top
pointwithinacircle View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: January/12/2014
Location: Crisfield, MD
Status: Offline
Points: 24
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/12/2016 at 8:45am
Personally, I define Spirit as the active force, the force that chooses, does, and creates.  I define soul as the passive force that receives, responds, and is formed.  Using my definition, I don't how it would be possible for any living thing to exist without both a spirit and a soul.
Words are symbols which point toward concepts arranged in patterns to communicate meaning.
Back to Top
Adept? View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August/30/2013
Location: Maine
Status: Offline
Points: 740
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/12/2016 at 11:03am
Originally posted by Coach Coach wrote:

the entire conversation becomes an exercise of Baconian "Idol's of the Marketplace" dribble.


LOL!
"It is humanity that creates god, and men think that god has made them in his image, because they make him in theirs."
Back to Top
BroScubaSteve View Drop Down
Quarryman
Quarryman


Joined: February/25/2013
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 381
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/12/2016 at 2:38pm
Socrates, is that you?
Initiated 4-22-13
Passed 5-29-13
Raised 6-27-13

Junior Deacon
F&AM GLNJ
32°AASR NMJ, Southern Valley of NJ
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/13/2016 at 9:51am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

If man, in fact, does not possess a soul - is immortality still possible? Does something else substitute for a soul? Mind? Life force? Metabolism?


First define "soul" and then prove without a shadow of a doubt that a man has one.


Hi Coach,

Thanks for that question, because it is the definitive problem which philosophers and theologians have struggled with since time immemorial, i.e. how to define the soul.

But for me to ask for a definition of the soul would require another entirely new thread, so instead of digressing I will stay focused and reiterate the question - what if there is no soul is immortality possible?

P.S. For five hundred years the Great Medieval Debates have produced reams of scrolls and an ocean of iron gall ink debating and arguing over the definition of the soul.
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/13/2016 at 10:04am
Originally posted by pointwithinacircle pointwithinacircle wrote:

Personally, I define Spirit as the active force, the force that chooses, does, and creates.  I define soul as the passive force that receives, responds, and is formed.  Using my definition, I don't how it would be possible for any living thing to exist without both a spirit and a soul.


Hi Pointwithinacircle,

Excellent reasoning. Good for you. BUT! - it has been stated before and refuted.

For example: The Trichotomic view of humanity has people consisting of a body (soma); soul (psyche), and spirit (pneuma). Yet it has been noted how both 'spirit' and 'soul' are used so interchangeably throughout the Holy Book of Law, scholars have reduced the philosophical/theological view of humanity to only: Body & Soul [a dichotomic view of man]. And this dichotomy (body & soul without spirit) is the accepted condition of mankind.
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/13/2016 at 10:19am
Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

Socrates, is that you?


Hi BroScubaSteve,

Actually, yes-it-is.

Socrates in his work The Apology (30a-b) considered the soul to be the psyche and at his trial recommended all his fellow Athenians to perfect all matters of the psyche since all bodily functions/purposes were totally dependent on its perfection.

Socrates said that even after death the psyche/soul existed and was able to think. Socrates believed that as our bodies die and decay, the psyche/soul is continually reborn in other people's bodies, and Socrates student, Plato, also believed in this. Plato also considered the psyche to be the utter essence of a person.

Yet Aristotle totally disbelieved in the immortality of the soul found in the third chapter of his third book: De Anima (On The Soul).

So this is the immortal soul of Socrates living in the web.
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/13/2016 at 10:21am
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Originally posted by Coach Coach wrote:

the entire conversation becomes an exercise of Baconian "Idol's of the Marketplace" dribble.


LOL!


Glad I grew up in the Roman Catholic faith because us Catholics do not believe in idols.
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/13/2016 at 10:25am
Originally posted by droche droche wrote:

You asked does something else substitute for a soul- mind, life force, metabolism... If these are substitutes for a soul, then does that not mean that these too are essentially the soul, so it would be merely a question of semantics? If not, I would have to ask, like Coach, what is your definition of "soul"?


Hi droche,

If something is substituted, then there is an exchange of something different, not equal.

So if the soul is substituted, then there is no soul. An ersatzsoul is not a soul, but something else.
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/13/2016 at 11:07am
Originally posted by pointwithinacircle pointwithinacircle wrote:



Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

First define "soul" and then prove without a shadow of a doubt that a man has one.
LOL - Coach, you should know that a man can prove anything if he is allowed to write the definitions.   :-)



Yes, and that is a fallacy in logic called "Begging the Question" [petition principii]: assuming the truth of a statement a priori without proof.

I intentionally did not provide a definition.
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
coach View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: October/23/2005
Location: Tampa Bay
Status: Offline
Points: 1285
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/13/2016 at 12:35pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Originally posted by Coach Coach wrote:

the entire conversation becomes an exercise of Baconian "Idol's of the Marketplace" dribble.


LOL!


Glad I grew up in the Roman Catholic faith because us Catholics do not believe in idols.

I grew up in the RC faith too and although we do not believe in idols, we do believe that they do exist. Hence the reference, and it is valid.
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

Books I Wrote | My FB Wall
Back to Top
Adept? View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August/30/2013
Location: Maine
Status: Offline
Points: 740
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/13/2016 at 2:54pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Glad I grew up in the Roman Catholic faith because us Catholics do not believe in idols.

Really...?  

Idol worship (depending on which definition you use) would fit catholicism perfectly in my opinion.  What with all their saints (some prayed to in place of god or jesus) and the "virgin" mary (almost explicitly prayed to before god or jesus) hence the term "hail mary"  Catholicism, at the very least, borders on what could very easily be viewed as poly-theism.  The very thing which it set out to exterminate.  Ironic eh?  LOLWink


Edited by Adept? - August/13/2016 at 2:55pm
"It is humanity that creates god, and men think that god has made them in his image, because they make him in theirs."
Back to Top
droche View Drop Down
Quarryman
Quarryman
Avatar

Joined: March/03/2008
Location: Worcester, Mass
Status: Offline
Points: 2185
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/14/2016 at 10:33am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by droche droche wrote:

You asked does something else substitute for a soul- mind, life force, metabolism... If these are substitutes for a soul, then does that not mean that these too are essentially the soul, so it would be merely a question of semantics? If not, I would have to ask, like Coach, what is your definition of "soul"?


Hi droche,

If something is substituted, then there is an exchange of something different, not equal.



So if the soul is substituted, then there is no soul. An ersatzsoul is not a soul, but something else.


Then it is all the more important in order to answer your question to have an even more precise definition of "soul." Since you have pointed out that humans have been mulling this for thousands of years, it seems impossible to arrive at even a broad definition and thus impossible to answer your question.

Back to Top
coach View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: October/23/2005
Location: Tampa Bay
Status: Offline
Points: 1285
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/14/2016 at 1:39pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

... Does something else substitute for a soul?

There is no substitute; it's either there, or it is not.
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

Books I Wrote | My FB Wall
Back to Top
droche View Drop Down
Quarryman
Quarryman
Avatar

Joined: March/03/2008
Location: Worcester, Mass
Status: Offline
Points: 2185
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/14/2016 at 3:47pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by droche droche wrote:

You asked does something else substitute for a soul- mind, life force, metabolism... If these are substitutes for a soul, then does that not mean that these too are essentially the soul, so it would be merely a question of semantics? If not, I would have to ask, like Coach, what is your definition of "soul"?


Hi droche,

If something is substituted, then there is an exchange of something different, not equal.

So if the soul is substituted, then there is no soul. An ersatzsoul is not a soul, but something else.


Well I said "essentially" to cover any insignificant differences. I would say regardless what you call it, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck... you know the rest. No matter, you are defining the parameters, let's say, of this discussion, so I would say then that if you insist that there is a difference, then we must have an even more precise definition of "soul." Since you have pointed out that humans have been disagreeing for thousands of years over an even broad definition of the word, I would say that without a fairly precise definition, it's going to be impossible to answer your question under the parameters you put on it.

Admin, please delete my first reply to this post, two posts above. At first it didn't take, so I wrote this post. Thanks.

Edited by droche - August/14/2016 at 3:57pm
Back to Top
droche View Drop Down
Quarryman
Quarryman
Avatar

Joined: March/03/2008
Location: Worcester, Mass
Status: Offline
Points: 2185
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/14/2016 at 3:51pm
Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

Socrates, is that you?


No, I'm over here, six feet under the hemlock tree.
Back to Top
BroScubaSteve View Drop Down
Quarryman
Quarryman


Joined: February/25/2013
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 381
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/15/2016 at 10:06am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

Socrates, is that you?


Hi BroScubaSteve,

Actually, yes-it-is.

Socrates in his work The Apology (30a-b) considered the soul to be the psyche and at his trial recommended all his fellow Athenians to perfect all matters of the psyche since all bodily functions/purposes were totally dependent on its perfection.

Socrates said that even after death the psyche/soul existed and was able to think. Socrates believed that as our bodies die and decay, the psyche/soul is continually reborn in other people's bodies, and Socrates student, Plato, also believed in this. Plato also considered the psyche to be the utter essence of a person.

Yet Aristotle totally disbelieved in the immortality of the soul found in the third chapter of his third book: De Anima (On The Soul).

So this is the immortal soul of Socrates living in the web.
I was commenting on the Socratic method of postings here on Mastermason.com more than his actual philosophies.


Initiated 4-22-13
Passed 5-29-13
Raised 6-27-13

Junior Deacon
F&AM GLNJ
32°AASR NMJ, Southern Valley of NJ
Back to Top
BroScubaSteve View Drop Down
Quarryman
Quarryman


Joined: February/25/2013
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 381
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/15/2016 at 10:08am
oh oh oh!

I do not have a soul, but I do posses a substitute!
Initiated 4-22-13
Passed 5-29-13
Raised 6-27-13

Junior Deacon
F&AM GLNJ
32°AASR NMJ, Southern Valley of NJ
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/16/2016 at 3:56pm
Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

oh oh oh!

I do not have a soul, but I do posses a substitute!

And that substitute being what?
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
BroScubaSteve View Drop Down
Quarryman
Quarryman


Joined: February/25/2013
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 381
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/17/2016 at 8:30am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

oh oh oh!

I do not have a soul, but I do posses a substitute!

And that substitute being what?
It's a joke.

It has nothing to do with a "soul" in freemasonry though so don't read too much into it.

Kind of like when engineers joke with each other. Laymen don't get it unless you're in the profession.






Edited by BroScubaSteve - August/17/2016 at 8:35am
Initiated 4-22-13
Passed 5-29-13
Raised 6-27-13

Junior Deacon
F&AM GLNJ
32°AASR NMJ, Southern Valley of NJ
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/17/2016 at 10:56am
Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:



Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

oh oh oh!

I do not have a soul, but I do posses a substitute!

And that substitute being what?
It's a joke.

It has nothing to do with a "soul" in freemasonry though so don't read too much into it.

Kind of like when engineers joke with each other. Laymen don't get it unless you're in the profession.

That's referred to as an "in-joke". Gotcha!





Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/17/2016 at 10:59am
Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

I was commenting on the Socratic method of postings here on Mastermason.com more than his actual philosophies.


Interesting, since I haven't yet read a Socratic Method of reasoning on any post since I've been participating on these forums. Nor a syllogism.


Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/17/2016 at 11:06am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

I grew up in the RC faith too and although we do not believe in idols, we do believe that they do exist. Hence the reference, and it is valid.


Then the expression has no meaning. Reformation gibberish?
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/17/2016 at 11:22am
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:



Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Glad I grew up in the Roman Catholic faith because us Catholics do not believe in idols.

Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Really...?  


Yes, really. The Catholic Church frowns on idolatry.


Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Idol worship (depending on which definition you use) would fit catholicism perfectly in my opinion.


The opinion of a non-Catholic with obvious biases and a questionable command of comparative religion?


Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

What with all their saints (some prayed to in place of god or jesus)


NOPE, never. No, the saints are not part of the Holy Trinity, therefore no Catholic puts the saints in place of Jesus or God himself. I consider that slanderous.


Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

and the "virgin" mary (almost explicitly prayed to before god or jesus) hence the term "hail mary"


Again, NOPE, Total misinterpretation. The mother of God is rightfully venerated, but Mary is also not part of the Holy Trinity therefore no Catholic puts her before the father, son, or the holy ghost.


Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Catholicism, at the very least, borders on what could very easily be viewed as poly-theism.


Hardly. The triune God is one. The concept of the Trinity was the result of 500 years of Catholic participation in the Great Medieval debates [the theists vs. the atheists] on the attributes of God, and the Trinity is an advanced concept not commonly understood by non-Roman catholics. Catholicism is also accepted as one of the world's monotheistic religions.


Adept2, you may not realize it but you sound exactly how the anti-Masons argue against Freemasonry - the same use of stereotypes, innuendo, bias, misconceptions, and some slander.

Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/17/2016 at 11:25am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

... Does something else substitute for a soul?

There is no substitute; it's either there, or it is not.


Coach,

Be very careful of absolute statements! Quite a few elements and concepts can be substituted.
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/17/2016 at 11:28am
Originally posted by pointwithinacircle pointwithinacircle wrote:



Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

First define "soul" and then prove without a shadow of a doubt that a man has one.
LOL - Coach, you should know that a man can prove anything if he is allowed to write the definitions.   :-)



Pointwithinacircle,

You seem to have rediscovered a famous maxim from the American philosopher (from Harvard) W. V. Quine, who stated: "That nearly any statement can be made to fit with the data, so long as one makes the 'requisite compensatory adjustments'. (~1964?)
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
Adept? View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August/30/2013
Location: Maine
Status: Offline
Points: 740
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/17/2016 at 4:17pm
It makes no difference to me how you attempt to rationalize your religion, and your beliefs.  The fact remains that there is no evidence for any of them.  Until such time as there is empirical evidence, I will continue to regard all religions and religious belief, as utter and complete bullcrap
I was not being intentionally "slanderous" but I do regard all religion with contempt.  Catholicism in particular.  I don't think I need explain the vile and evil acts committed by the institution.  They are well documented in both ancient and recent history.

"It is humanity that creates god, and men think that god has made them in his image, because they make him in theirs."
Back to Top
coach View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: October/23/2005
Location: Tampa Bay
Status: Offline
Points: 1285
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/17/2016 at 5:17pm
Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:



Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

oh oh oh!

I do not have a soul, but I do posses a substitute!

And that substitute being what?
It's a joke.

It has nothing to do with a "soul" in freemasonry though so don't read too much into it.

Kind of like when engineers joke with each other. Laymen don't get it unless you're in the profession.

Being a retired engineer, I got it.
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

Books I Wrote | My FB Wall
Back to Top
coach View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: October/23/2005
Location: Tampa Bay
Status: Offline
Points: 1285
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/17/2016 at 5:21pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

I grew up in the RC faith too and although we do not believe in idols, we do believe that they do exist. Hence the reference, and it is valid.


Then the expression has no meaning. Reformation gibberish?

If you want to understand, you best examine your claim in light of the faith itself. Idols do exist. RCs are asked to not worship false idols. However, I can tell you that there are many within the RC faith who worship idols within the RC everyday practices believing them to be not false.
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

Books I Wrote | My FB Wall
Back to Top
coach View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: October/23/2005
Location: Tampa Bay
Status: Offline
Points: 1285
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/17/2016 at 5:29pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:



Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Glad I grew up in the Roman Catholic faith because us Catholics do not believe in idols.

Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Really...?  


Yes, really. The Catholic Church frowns on idolatry.

Yet, it occurs within the faith and does so daily.


Quote
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Idol worship (depending on which definition you use) would fit catholicism perfectly in my opinion.


The opinion of a non-Catholic with obvious biases and a questionable command of comparative religion?

Invalid invalidation.


Quote
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

What with all their saints (some prayed to in place of god or jesus)


NOPE, never. No, the saints are not part of the Holy Trinity, therefore no Catholic puts the saints in place of Jesus or God himself. I consider that slanderous.

So, by calling them saints, and not minor-gods, that invalidates the claim?

Quote
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

and the "virgin" mary (almost explicitly prayed to before god or jesus) hence the term "hail mary"


Again, NOPE, Total misinterpretation. The mother of God is rightfully venerated, but Mary is also not part of the Holy Trinity therefore no Catholic puts her before the father, son, or the holy ghost.

So, praying to an entity outside the HT is okay and not a sign of idolatry?

Quote
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Catholicism, at the very least, borders on what could very easily be viewed as poly-theism.


Hardly. The triune God is one. The concept of the Trinity was the result of 500 years of Catholic participation in the Great Medieval debates [the theists vs. the atheists] on the attributes of God, and the Trinity is an advanced concept not commonly understood by non-Roman catholics. Catholicism is also accepted as one of the world's monotheistic religions.

With a host of saints, not minor-gods, all who one can pray to for whatever their specialty is?
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

Books I Wrote | My FB Wall
Back to Top
coach View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: October/23/2005
Location: Tampa Bay
Status: Offline
Points: 1285
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/17/2016 at 5:35pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

... Does something else substitute for a soul?

There is no substitute; it's either there, or it is not.


Coach,

Be very careful of absolute statements! Quite a few elements and concepts can be substituted.

Take care in your loosely issued warnings.

Although "Quite a few elements and concepts can be substituted", substitutes, by their very nature, are not the real thing. Sure, one can substitute the real thing, and it might do the job of the real thing, but it is not and never will be the real thing.

HENCE...Be very careful of substitute claims and statements for they are but idols and should never be the focus of worship!
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

Books I Wrote | My FB Wall
Back to Top
BroScubaSteve View Drop Down
Quarryman
Quarryman


Joined: February/25/2013
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 381
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/18/2016 at 6:36am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

I was commenting on the Socratic method of postings here on Mastermason.com more than his actual philosophies.


Interesting, since I haven't yet read a Socratic Method of reasoning on any post since I've been participating on these forums. Nor a syllogism.


Socratic dialogue is a formal method by which a small group (5-15 people), guided by a facilitator, finds a precise answer to a universal question (e.g. "What is happiness?", "What is integrity?", "Can conflict be fruitful?", etc.).

Basically, a man walked the streets and started talking to total strangers to ponder life and the world around them to arrive at a truth or common ground that can be accepted.

If this type of dialogue isn't Socratic, then my University better refund me my money.


Edited by BroScubaSteve - August/18/2016 at 6:37am
Initiated 4-22-13
Passed 5-29-13
Raised 6-27-13

Junior Deacon
F&AM GLNJ
32°AASR NMJ, Southern Valley of NJ
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/21/2016 at 6:56am
Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:



Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

I was commenting on the Socratic method of postings here on Mastermason.com more than his actual philosophies.


Interesting, since I haven't yet read a Socratic Method of reasoning on any post since I've been participating on these forums. Nor a syllogism.


<span ="_tgc"="">Socratic dialogue is a formal method by which a
small group (5-15 people), guided by a facilitator, finds a precise
answer to a universal question (e.g. "What is happiness?", "What is
integrity?", "Can conflict be fruitful?", etc.).

Basically, a man walked the streets and started talking to total strangers to ponder life and the world around them to arrive at a truth or common ground that can be accepted.

If this type of dialogue isn't Socratic, then my University better refund me my money.
</span>


Is your university accredited? That is a definition of dialectics or of free association to solve a problem.

The Socratic Method is a teaching method of asking a series of questions which will guide the student to the already known correct answer, a technique of explaining a difficult concept to the uninitiated. Not a method of truth seeking.

If I knew the answer to my own question, yet others were unable to grasp the concept then, like Socrates, I would use the Socratic Method to ask a series of questions to guide you to the correct answer.

And I still haven't seen the Socratic Method used on Masonic Forums.


Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
coach View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: October/23/2005
Location: Tampa Bay
Status: Offline
Points: 1285
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/21/2016 at 7:27am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

I was commenting on the Socratic method of postings here on Mastermason.com more than his actual philosophies.
Interesting, since I haven't yet read a Socratic Method of reasoning on any post since I've been participating on these forums. Nor a syllogism.
<span ="_tgc"="">Socratic dialogue is a formal method by which a small group (5-15 people), guided by a facilitator, finds a precise answer to a universal question (e.g. "What is happiness?", "What is integrity?", "Can conflict be fruitful?", etc.).

Basically, a man walked the streets and started talking to total strangers to ponder life and the world around them to arrive at a truth or common ground that can be accepted.

If this type of dialogue isn't Socratic, then my University better refund me my money.
</span>


Is your university accredited?


If you're not joking: Why would that be important to anyone seeking and obtaining truth authentically, honestly and openly?

If you're joking: HAR!!! HAR!!!
Quote That is a definition of dialectics or of free association to solve a problem.

The Socratic Method is a teaching method of asking a series of questions which will guide the student to the already known correct answer, a technique of explaining a difficult concept to the uninitiated. Not a method of truth seeking.

If I knew the answer to my own question, yet others were unable to grasp the concept then, like Socrates, I would use the Socratic Method to ask a series of questions to guide you to the correct answer.

That's one opinion. Here's another: Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions.

Quote And I still haven't seen the Socratic Method used on Masonic Forums.

Are you blind?
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

Books I Wrote | My FB Wall
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/22/2016 at 6:17am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

I was commenting on the Socratic method of postings here on Mastermason.com more than his actual philosophies.
Interesting, since I haven't yet read a Socratic Method of reasoning on any post since I've been participating on these forums. Nor a syllogism.
<span ="_tgc"="">Socratic dialogue is a formal method by which a small group (5-15 people), guided by a facilitator, finds a precise answer to a universal question (e.g. "What is happiness?", "What is integrity?", "Can conflict be fruitful?", etc.).

Basically, a man walked the streets and started talking to total strangers to ponder life and the world around them to arrive at a truth or common ground that can be accepted.

If this type of dialogue isn't Socratic, then my University better refund me my money.
</span>


Is your university accredited?


If you're not joking: Why would that be important to anyone seeking and obtaining truth authentically, honestly and openly?


Because I matched sarcasm for sarcasm? Because I corrected BroscubaSteve's error and received a false validation?

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

If you're joking: HAR!!! HAR!!!


Yes, I made a funny - YUK!!!! YUK!!!!!


Quote That is a definition of dialectics or of free association to solve a problem.

The Socratic Method is a teaching method of asking a series of questions which will guide the student to the already known correct answer, a technique of explaining a difficult concept to the uninitiated. Not a method of truth seeking.

If I knew the answer to my own question, yet others were unable to grasp the concept then, like Socrates, I would use the Socratic Method to ask a series of questions to guide you to the correct answer.


Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

That's one opinion. Here's another: Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions.


That's a Wikipedia definition! Not an example of your understanding of the Socratic Method. Wikipedia has been refuted as a valid citation by every professional scholar in America's universities. Wikipedia is good for solving barroom arguments or research for grade school book reports, but not for scholarly research nor for intellectual discussion. So stop quoting Wikipedia if you want to be taken seriously as an intellectual! Wikipedia is academic idolatry!

So coach, if you want to impress with an understanding of the Socratic Method, try citing a primary source, like Socrates, and read a good translation from his student (since Socrates wrote noting down).

Quote And I still haven't seen the Socratic Method used on Masonic Forums.

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Are you blind?


Nope, 20/20! And I perfectly see there is no Socratic Method used here since I've been participating on Mastermason forums! And no Freemason yet has demonstrated an understanding of that concept - not even you coach.
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
coach View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: October/23/2005
Location: Tampa Bay
Status: Offline
Points: 1285
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/22/2016 at 9:00am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

The Socratic Method is a teaching method of asking a series of questions which will guide the student to the already known correct answer, a technique of explaining a difficult concept to the uninitiated. Not a method of truth seeking.

If I knew the answer to my own question, yet others were unable to grasp the concept then, like Socrates, I would use the Socratic Method to ask a series of questions to guide you to the correct answer.
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

That's one opinion. Here's another: Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions.


That's a Wikipedia definition!


No kidding. What gave it away?

Quote Not an example of your understanding of the Socratic Method.

Actually, your statement is wrong. It is my understanding of the Socratic method. I bolded the more agreeable parts for greater emphasis and to point out to you my understanding.
Quote Wikipedia has been refuted as a valid citation by every professional scholar in America's universities.

So what! It provides to me the words that express quite clearly my understanding. You appear to be one who would throw a baby out with its bathwater.

Quote Wikipedia is good for solving barroom arguments or research for grade school book reports, but not for scholarly research nor for intellectual discussion.


Is that what we are doing here? scholarly research or intellectual discussion? Based upon your not yet defining what "soul" is after how many days, I can't say that either criteria is being met at this point.

Quote So stop quoting Wikipedia if you want to be taken seriously as an intellectual!


You seriously misunderstand what I want out of this.

Quote Wikipedia is academic idolatry!


But I thought for you as an RC, idolatry is something that you don't believe in?

Nevertheless, your point is moot. What I reposted is an opinion. I share it without reservation. As far as what wiki is good for, man are you barking up the wrong tree.

Quote So coach, if you want to impress with an understanding of the Socratic Method, try citing a primary source, like Socrates, and read a good translation from his student (since Socrates wrote noting down).


Thanks. There are no primary Socratic sources. The man didn't write anything down. Socrates was "supposedly" the teacher of Plato. His stories were likely a Platonic fabrication. But that's another rabbit hole for another day.

BTW - When I truly want to impress, I'll let you know.

Quote
Quote And I still haven't seen the Socratic Method used on Masonic Forums.

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Are you blind?


Nope, 20/20!


As per your offered definition, the question was designed to lead you to an already known answer. It appears from your response that more questions are required.

Quote And I perfectly see...


Man, you sure do have a high opinion of your abilities.

Quote ...there is no Socratic Method used here since I've been participating on Mastermason forums! And no Freemason yet has demonstrated an understanding of that concept - not even you coach.


Once again, your opinion.

Edited by coach - August/22/2016 at 9:05am
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

Books I Wrote | My FB Wall
Back to Top
droche View Drop Down
Quarryman
Quarryman
Avatar

Joined: March/03/2008
Location: Worcester, Mass
Status: Offline
Points: 2185
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/22/2016 at 10:24pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Wikipedia is good for solving barroom arguments or research for grade school book reports...

Not in my classes. Although I do not teach grade school per se, I teach special education students in the high school, the vast majority of whom are at an elementary (grade school) level. I do not allow my students to use wikipedia in research.

Anyway, this thread is turning into a p*ssing contest, and I realize I just contributed to it- my apologies- but can we get off it and return to more intellectual and civil discussion?


Edited by droche - August/22/2016 at 10:28pm
Back to Top
coach View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: October/23/2005
Location: Tampa Bay
Status: Offline
Points: 1285
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/23/2016 at 5:14am
Originally posted by droche droche wrote:



Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Wikipedia is good for solving barroom arguments or research for grade school book reports...


Not in my classes. Although I do not teach grade school per se, I teach special education students in the high school, the vast majority of whom are at an elementary (grade school) level. I do not allow my students to use wikipedia in research.

Anyway, this thread is turning into a p*ssing contest, and I realize I just contributed to it- my apologies- but can we get off it and return to more intellectual and civil discussion?


AMEN!
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

Books I Wrote | My FB Wall
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/23/2016 at 5:20am
Originally posted by droche droche wrote:

Anyway, this thread is turning into a p*ssing contest, and I realize I just contributed to it- my apologies- but can we get off it and return to more intellectual and civil discussion?


Yes, I noticed the same thing. In fact, almost every thread has digressed into some sort of 'one up manship' contest.
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
BroScubaSteve View Drop Down
Quarryman
Quarryman


Joined: February/25/2013
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 381
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/23/2016 at 7:21am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by droche droche wrote:

Anyway, this thread is turning into a p*ssing contest, and I realize I just contributed to it- my apologies- but can we get off it and return to more intellectual and civil discussion?


Yes, I noticed the same thing. In fact, almost every thread has digressed into some sort of 'one up manship' contest.
Welcome to the internet.
Initiated 4-22-13
Passed 5-29-13
Raised 6-27-13

Junior Deacon
F&AM GLNJ
32°AASR NMJ, Southern Valley of NJ
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/24/2016 at 8:55am
Originally posted by Sec'yBob Sec'yBob wrote:

Many have said that "soul"

Is charity, selflessness, polite, courteous, well mannered, takes care of himself [grooming/dress]

has exposure to books, music, philosophy, respects women, children, animals, has good character above reproach, well spoken etc, and believes in a supreme being.

Soul is your make up, your ID as it were.  You soul is what makes you tick.



If you have these qualities, when you die, you will be remembered by those you touched.  Is that immortality?

I'm asking.................




Yes, many have summed up the attributes of a soul. And what is more interesting is every religion which acknowledges a 'soul' has a different set of attributes. (Too many to list here).

Now, assuming there is such thing as a soul, is immortality possible without it??
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
coach View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: October/23/2005
Location: Tampa Bay
Status: Offline
Points: 1285
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/24/2016 at 9:00am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

... assuming there is such thing as a soul, is immortality possible without it??

Once you have define what it is, then such a question could be entertained within that offered definition.

However, since you have yet to define "soul", anything put forth is fancy filled unfounded conjecture.
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

Books I Wrote | My FB Wall
Back to Top
droche View Drop Down
Quarryman
Quarryman
Avatar

Joined: March/03/2008
Location: Worcester, Mass
Status: Offline
Points: 2185
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/24/2016 at 9:20am
Grimoire,

Several have asked you several times to provide your definition of "soul" and you have not responded. Is there a reason you are not doing so? I really would like to know what you have to say about it.
Back to Top
GrimoireA3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May/05/2013
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 600
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/31/2016 at 10:56am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Originally posted by Coach Coach wrote:

the entire conversation becomes an exercise of Baconian "Idol's of the Marketplace" dribble.


LOL!


Glad I grew up in the Roman Catholic faith because us Catholics do not believe in idols.

I grew up in the RC faith too and although we do not believe in idols, we do believe that they do exist. Hence the reference, and it is valid.


Yes, the Catholic Church acknowledges the existence of idols and does not believe in them, nor teaches the belief in idols. The reference is obtuse.
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.108 seconds.