Yesterday a phrase came up in a discussion I was having with a group of people online. The group's interest is in science and medicine, the discussion was regarding the idea of a soul that exists as a separate entity from the physical aspects of the body and brain. Are science and the concept of a soul completely at odds? During a discussion where names like "dualist" were thrown like knifes and my lame jokes regarding Doc Holliday fell on deaf ears, a phrase was thrown out by one of the commentors, "Actions of the Soul". This phrase set my mind turning.
I am completely incapable of passing up such a lovely phrase. Although I do not prescribe to a particular religion, I do think of myself as spiritual. In my mind, spirit being that capacity for a person or people to transcend their circumstances. The question that comes to my mind is: what are the factors that cause a person to be built or broken by hardship, for a people to submit or rise up when confronted with tyranny, for an individual to ignore or help someone in need. I guess (simplistically) these are the things that I would consider to be actions of the soul.
Our biology, evolution, history, culture and religion combined all inform these actions. But to understand them completely from the perspective of science is like understanding a Goya painting based on it’s molecular structure. That is not to say science shouldn’t try… But at this point, in those spiritual decisions, science is not the best guide (for me). Or perhaps, more accurately science is only one of the stars to navigate by.
I guess the more obvious parallel is ethics. While science can inform ethics on possible consequences, to explore ethics is not the pursuit of science.
There, that is about as clear as mud. But at least it won’t be knocking around in my brain any longer.