Re: Dr. Dobson

From: Carol or John Burgeson <burgytwo@juno.com>
Date: Thu Aug 11 2005 - 10:44:31 EDT

>>The thread was about where the soul came into humans. Since we don't
kill things with souls, we therefore must have made a decision about
where the soul is. And that is why I am against people deciding from
science where and when the soul appears.>>

No, the thread was on a much narrower subject -- asking the question "is
there any evidence on the subject?"

You seem to be making the statement that (1) either there is no possible
evidence (which George also said), or (2) people ought not make any
decisions of this nature regardless of the evidences.

I am not sure which claim you are making.

There IS some negative evidence which points to the soul not being
present in a very new embryo (before the possibility of twinning is
gone). Whether (or not) this is persuasive to anyone is an open question,
of course.

My question hoped to elicit some rational argument for the claim that the
soul is infused at the "moment of conception." Dobson (apparently) claims
this position, as do a lot of people. But I cannot find any rationale for
it (the claim).

You say "...I am against people deciding from science where and when the
soul appears."
But this IS, like it or not, a perfectly valid question to ask. You
appear to be claiming that the question ought not even be asked. But it
is being asked.

A related question is "does the soul, as an entity, exist?" I choose to
bypass this one in order to narrow the focus.

Cheers

JB
Received on Thu Aug 11 13:05:55 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Aug 11 2005 - 13:05:55 EDT