Soul Food, part 2

[ready_fire_aim]

For those of you just tuning in, this is the second part of a really long train of thought on the existence of an ‘immortal soul.’ It will make a lot more sense if you read part one before jumping into this post

Comments

Might want to check facts...

[writersfuel86]

3)“…and at least potential life in inorganic matter.” Granted you used the word “potential” which implies the capability of being but not yet in existence, but this statement has the parallel potential for existence as that of immortality (which is exactly what is being discussed). Neither has been proved and, therefore, in such an attempt to write a factual essay probably shouldn’t be included. Ethereal, transcendental, faith vs. that of fact and non-fiction.

This whole paragraph seems rather convoluted. “It is impossible to draw the line between inorganic matter and the simpler forms of plant life.” Actually, it’s quite simple. The power for inorganic matter to create life, just like that of immortality, has never been proven.
Life: The property or quality that distinguishes living organisms from dead organisms and inanimate matter, manifested in functions such as metabolism, growth, reproduction, and response to stimuli or adaptation to the environment originating from within the organism.
Organic Matter: Of, relating to, or derived from living organisms. Of or designating carbon compounds.
Carbon: Symbol C A naturally abundant nonmetallic element that occurs in many inorganic and in ALL organic compounds, exists freely as graphite and diamond and as a constituent of coal, limestone, and petroleum, and is capable of chemical self-bonding to form an enormous number of chemically, biologically, and commercially important molecules. Atomic number 6; atomic weight 12.011 Carbon has the interesting chemical
property of being able to bond with itself, and a wide variety of other elements.
Inorganic Matter: Of or relating to compounds not containing hydrocarbon groups.

In discussing simple chemistry with philosophy one must realize that ALL life, to present public knowledge, contains carbon. Carbon being the most likely bonding element seems to be the building block of life. In this context, the words organic and life have similar definitions. So, to say that INORGANIC matter and simpler forms of plant LIFE cannot be distinguished is rather false.

Also within the same paragraph you state, “equally impossible to draw the line between plant life and animal life.” This is also quite simple.
Plant: Any of various photosynthetic, eukaryotic, multicultural organisms of the kingdom Plantae characteristically producing embryos, containing chloroplasts, having cellulose cell walls, and lacking the power of locomotion.
Animal: A multi-cellular organism of the kingdom Animalia, differing from plants in certain typical characteristics such as capacity for locomotion, non-photosynthetic metabolism, pronounced response to stimuli, restricted growth, and fixed bodily structure.

And yet later you write, “[It is impossible to draw the line]…between other forms of animal life and what we human beings are pleased to call the highest form. Frankly, this is just a matter of opinion and has no real basis alongside sentences concerning biology and chemistry.

“If the thing which we call "life" is itself the soul, then cows have souls; and, in the very nature of things, we must allow souls to all forms of life…” Had the sentence ended there it would have been a perfectly accurate opinion, but to add on “… and to inorganic matter as well.” changes the sentence to include a whole realm of other beliefs not appropriate for the context. I can’t tell what the point is in this paragraph. Is it about biology, chemistry, and factual findings, or is it about philosophy and a realm of fiction?
http://www.exploratorium.edu/traits/about.html http://www.seps.org/oracle/oracle.archive/Life_Science.Biochem/1998.09/000905125477.16025.html
http://www.dictionary.com