Philosophy: The Immortality of the Soul and Personal Identity

IntroductionThe Concise Oxford Dictionary defines position as follows Spiritual or in varied part of human organisms, held to survive death. This definition highlights the fact that the concept of action history aft(prenominal) death by means of a gist remains a case of religious assertion. No authority can prove it. In contrast, the highest authority, the Bible, says The soul that is sinningit itself volition die. (Eclessiastes 311)The dust returns to the earth only if as it happened to be and the spirit itself returns to the true God who gave it. In his Commentary, Methodist Methodist theologian Adam Clarke writes concerning this verse Here the wise man makes a most evident distinction between the body and the soul they are not the same they are not some(prenominal) matter. The body, which is matter, returns to dust, its verit up to(p) besides the spirit, which is immaterial, returns to God (123). Similarly, A Catholic Commentary on hallowed Scripture says The soul goes back to God (90). Thus, both commentaries imply that the soul and the spirit are the same.Through the birth of philosophical notion on the love of people having an immortal soul, it could then be assured that through the different theories formed by early philosophers, many people were confused roughly the truth on the matter. Hence, to be able to clearly understand the issue, foster studies were made and were formulated to answer the queries of people regarding a animation soul. In the paragraphs to follow, the conversation of Miller and Weirob shall be examined as to how the two philosophers arePhilosophy The Immortality of the Soul and in- psyche Identity able to clarify the issues of an identical self that continuously thrives sluice later a individuals death.The communication and the ClaimIn John Perrys A Dialogue on Personal Identity and Immortality, on that point is an distinction of a conversation that existed between Miller and Weirob. The latter soulfuln ess signifies the population of a connection between the continuous change surfacets in a persons life that is identified as a personal indistinguish magnate of an individual. According to Miller, the immortality of the soul is the indication that a persons individuation is rather passed on through the historic period of life of the individual.In the conversation though, it has been pointed away by Weirob that the continuity of a persons individualism does not necessarily depend upon the life and death transition of a persons experience. However, Miller continues to point out(a) that the continuity of identity that is referred to as stage a bunch of mental and physical events that are glued together a set of events that are casually interacting within a persons life, occurs in a persons life still once as he is dungeon. The said casual relations are then glued together, hence the identity of the person continues well with the years of his life, from the point of his birth towards the days of his old age. A persons capability of computer memory the rather days of his life helps him identify himself as the same person as he was during the past years compared to who he is at present. Saying this, Miller came up with four major hypotheses almost a persons ability to remember. The said hypotheses are as followsPhilosophy The Immortality of the Soul and Personal Identity. If Something is conceivable, it is potential It is possible that at that place will be someone identical with Gretchen Weirob in Heaven If identity is imaginable then it is possible. Survival is identity with a future personThe fact that on that point has to be a certain connection between the events and the physical experiences that a person passes through life makes the possibility of a life after death experience, or the idea of an immortal soul a possible matter at that. According to Miller, the identity of person could only be tracked d possess through memory. Hence, once an event is remembered by a person then he gains the old personal identity he once had during his earlier or first life. This identity, according to him is someone that exists in heaven. This could be referred to as a complete depiction of the person that is living on earth at present. Hence, this simply means that the person living in todays world at the present metre has an identical person counterpart in heaven, which enables him to remember his past life completely.Weirob however, further argues that even though there exists an immortal soul as other philosophers claim, the said factor of human life soul cannot account for identity unlike how people could do as they live. Hence, reincarnation as a way of branching one persons identity is not at all possible, or someone undoubtedly identical with the person living at present is possible at all.Weirob proves this telephone circuit by pointing out the differences between remembering and seeming to remember. According to her, ther e is a big differencePhilosophy The Immortality of the Soul and Personal Identity between the two activities of the mind. Whereas remembering pertains to the ability of the person to recall the exact things as it all happened to him during an earlier part of his life. However, seeming to remember is to quite know what happened as it happened but not actually knowing the exact events that occurred. To support this claim, Weirob uses an exampleif for a moment a person is hypnotized to remember as if he has talked to Miller, then another person actually talks to him, the result when asked may not be that easy to distinguishThus, a person could be able to remember something if it actually happened to him, however, at some point, some spirit testing and activities also enables a person to remember something that did not even happen. However, remembering in detail would not be that easy to model as hypnotism does. Hence, here enters the idea of being able to patently remember things.By stating the said claims, Weirob was also able to come up with her own hypotheses about the matter Examining the content of what a person is thinking or saying cannot establish whether that person is identical with a person existing at an earlier time (14,21) Really remembering a thought or action is just seeming to remember it plus having in reality thought or done it.Philosophy The Immortality of the Soul and Personal IdentityClearly, Weirob points out that the argument of Miller is plainly proposing thatthe real memory is a combination of sheer memory and identity. However, the circularity of the matter proves otherwise. As clearly discussed by Weirob, endurance is possible for a person not through the plain ability of being able to remember memories but through continuous foundation in life. It may not be through being reincarnated or things as such, but through the ability of the person to make himself be remembered by others even when after he dies through his works eyep atch he is still living.ConclusionThrough the proofs and the dialogue discussed in this paper, it could then be claimed that the beingness of an immortal or immaterial soul is then raised as a questionable theory created by world philosophers. Historians point out that the get wording that man possesses a separate, immortal soul did not protrude with the Bible but with Greek ism. The New Catholic Encyclopedia observes that the antiquated Hebraics did not think of man as being composed of a material body and an immaterial soul. It states about the Hebrews belief When the breath of life entered the first man whom God formed out of the ground, he became a living being (134). Death was not regarded as a detachment of two distinct elements in man, as in Greek philosophy the breath of life departs and man is left a dead being. In each case the word being would be the Hebrew nephesh, often translated soul but, in fact, virtually equated with the person. That same encyclopedia notes t hat Catholic scholars recently have maintained that the New Testament does not teach the immortality of the soul in the Hellenistic GreekPhilosophy The Immortality of the Soul and Personal Identity sense. It concludes The ultimate solution to the problem is to be found not so a lot in philosophical speculation as in the supernatural seat of the Resurrection. Hence, as Weirob and Miller have argued in their conversation, it could be noted that philosophers of both the later and the present era have failed in concluding that there is an immortal soul that continues to thrive after a persons death to continue ones identity. In this regard, it could then be assumed, that as both experts such as Weirob and Miller have argued, there would still be some philosophers who would continue to prove and disprove the matter concerning the existence of a continuum of self-identity after death. However it would be, it would still help if a person tries to search in his own way to be able to find the truth about this theory.BIBLIOGRAPHYCatholic New American Bible. (1970). P. J. Kenedy & Sons, New York.The Protestant Interpreters Bible. (1989). Blackwell Publishing Company.Concise Oxford Dictionary. (1987). Blackwell Publishing Company.Ralph Earle. (1997). Adam Clarkes Commentary. Nelson Reference.John R. Perry. (1978). A Dialogue on Personal Identity and Immortality. Hackett Publishing CompanyDangerous highroad. (July 20, 1990). Time Magazine. Volume 9 Number 5. New York.