Soul n’ Brain

I am particularly perturbed by experts who proclaim that there is no need for a soul to explain the psychological aspects of life. They feel that because they can concretely point to a neurological process, the whole human mind can be explained exclusively on biological terms. This is a very superficial perspective.

The biological brain is merely a very complex vessel to receive the spiritual influx of a soul. Of course, tweaking any vessel will affect its capacity to hold. Just try passing a pin through a plastic cup containing water and see what happens.

So too, tweaking the biological brain will affect its capacity to grasp, carry and convey the influx of the soul. That does not mean that biological life is soulless. It just means that the precise and complex vehicle to convey the soul has been compromised. A brain damaged person is by no means a soul damaged person.

I remember reading an account of a neuroscientists who boasted that there's really nothing meaningful to an out of body experience because he induced one by tinkering with a certain nerve. Reading this account, I wondered at the amount of bias this scientist brought to his work. Why didn't it occur to him that he discovered a way to expel the soul from the body? Don't worry; a week later, the same magazine featured another scientific personality who was making a case for near death experiences.  LOL!

But, my point is that it should occur to thought leaders in the neuroscientific world that just because you tinkered with the radio does not mean that you tinkered with the broadcast. The brain is like a radio picking up the broadcast of the soul (which is not in physically defined space).

Actually, a computer would be a better analogy than a radio. The wireless internet flow can be compared to the soul and the electrical juice to the biological food. Diminishing or enhancing a computer’s functioning has no impact on the wireless stream of information flowing from the internet, only to the computer’s capacity to process and convey it. Imagine a computer technician boldly declaring that there's no such a thing as internet because he can fiddle with a few wires and internet capacity is suddenly turned off. Furthermore, he concludes that the internet is really something generated from within the computer itself. It has no external source! I He’d be declared an instant laughingstock!

However, this is equivalent to what neuroscientists do when they suggest subtly or more openly that a human has no soul just because they successfully tinkered with the organ which receives flow of the soul, processes it and then conveys it. How sad!

Studying the soul itself is really outside the scope of the field of neuroscience. They shouldn't be the one's purporting to inform the public on such matters. That would be like an lawyer posing as a physician. They’re two separate fields. It just doesn't work!

I cannot say for sure who is qualified to responsibly share such notions with the wider public, in a way that makes it across religious and cultural lines. However, honest silence is better than misinformation. Also, there's a body of responsible research done on large pools of people who had near death experiences and underwent past life regression. I am sure that much information about the human soul can be gleaned from there in a way that can be accepted across the wider sweep of religious and cultural boundaries.

                         ----o----------------《■》---------------o----