Tristero thinks he has refuted my denial of the existence of souls by citing Otis Redding's soul, but I reject his refutation! He has done it by the sneaky tactic of a strategic redefinition of "soul", away from 'magic essence of personal identity independent of the material substrate of the brain' to 'smokin” hot passionate musicality', and I must call shenanigans. Shenanigans, I say!
I could be refuted, however, if Redding's soul were to possess my body and set me to crooning "These arms of mine" down the hallway right now.
Actually, there are many moments when it would be useful to be possessed by Otis Redding. He never does.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
An Atheist's View On Abortionby Juno Walker
On the drive home from work tonight I was behind a pickup truck that had a rather large white sign with red letters that read: "ABORTION KILLS CHILDREN" taped to the inside of his back window. In addition, he had a bumper sticker with a picture of a…
Here's a very useful document that I got from August Berkshire (you can also get this in pdf form from Minnesota Atheists): 34 Unconvincing Arguments for God. I guess he forgot to include all the convincing arguments for gods, but I'm sure some wandering delusional troll will try to provide some.…
It's bad enough everyone is using this "New Atheists" label: various critics keep inventing new ones. Some letter writer to the Independent has decided to call us "Naive Atheists" because we are unaware of the implications of atheism.
However, let's forget about the unfortunate history of atheism…
Egnor, the smug creationist neurosurgeon, is babbling again, but this time, it's on a subject that he might be expected to have some credibility: the brain (he has one, and operates on them) and the mind (this might be a problem for him). It's an interesting example of the religious pathology that'…