proof from logic alone of the immortal nature of the human soul
(05-12-2012, 11:43 PM)yablabo Wrote:
(05-12-2012, 09:43 PM)per_passionem_eius Wrote:
(05-12-2012, 09:04 PM)yablabo Wrote: This is some of the strangest philosophy that I've ever seen, I think.  Are people here equating the number four to a substantial form which would inform primal matter??  The number four is an accident of quantity.  Unity is substantial, quantity of unity is accidental.  So, how again is four a substantial form?

Also, I am really interested now, what IS the certain evidence found in nature that man's soul is immortal?

-- Nicole

Nicole, would you say that rather than requiring divine revelation for belief in the immortal human soul, what's really needed first is belief in God? I think so.

Here is what I am trying to get across:

It is plain that corporal death does not kill the spiritual soul in man.  However, to say that the fact that corporal death does not extinguish the soul of man is the same as saying it can be proved by natural reason with certainty that man has an immortal soul is false.  To know that the soul of man is not killed at some point after corporal death would take a first-hand observation or second-hand information from a credible witness to say that natural reason can prove this with certainty.

Also, I think it can be argued from His Divine Majesty's own words that it is not by necessity that God keeps the human soul in existence after corporal death: "And fear ye not them that kill the body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell." [Matthew 10:28]

I have never claimed that it cannot be posited as conjecture nor put forth as probable that the spiritual soul of man lives on after his bodily death, it merely cannot be demonstrated by natural reason ALONE with certainty.  It takes revelation from the One who knows it.

This whole discussion has really been a demonstration in poor formation of one's epistemology or criteriology (i.e. major logic).

-- Nicole

All of that makes sense to me. The bolded part is especially interesting.

What little formation I have in logic is from reading 2 books on Introduction to Philosophy, and this book 'College Apologetics', which is said to have been written for people who don't have philosophy formation. I appreciate your patience with me. I understand that learning logic is a long process even with a teacher, and perhaps not really practical for a middle-aged person without a teacher. What do you think, Nicole?

Messages In This Thread
Re: proof from logic alone of the immortal nature of the human soul - by per_passionem_eius - 05-13-2012, 03:12 PM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)