- This page discusses the soul in the general sense of the core essence of a being. For the music genre, see soul music; for the chief city of South Korea see Seoul.
The soul according to many religious and philosophical traditions, is the ethereal substance — spirit (compare Hebrew ruach or nefesh) — particular to a unique living being. Such traditions often consider the soul both immortal and innately aware of its immortal nature, as well as the true basis for sentience in each living being.
The concept of the soul has strong links with notions of an afterlife, but opinions may vary wildly even within a given religion as to what happens to the soul after death. Many within these religions and philosophies see the soul as immaterial, while others consider it possibly material.
- Note: This article uses the word "soul" in the common form, and deals largely with varied concepts from which the concept originates, and to which it relates. The use of the word soul often does not explicitly correspond to usage associated with any particular view or belief, including usage in Western and Eastern religious texts and in the writings of Plato or Aristotle.
The current English word "soul" may have originated from Old English sawol, documented in 970 AD, which has possible etymological links with a Germanic root from which we also get the word "sea" (ancient Germanic conceptions involved the souls of the unborn and of the dead "living" under water).
Ancient Greeks sometimes referred to the soul as psyche (as in modern English psychology). Aristotle's works in Latin translation used the word anima (as in animated), which also means "breath". In the New Testament, the original word may sometimes better translate as "life", as in :
- "For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" (Matthew 16:26)
If you exchange the word "soul" for "life" in the sentence above, the statement may seem less profound.
The Latin root of the related word spirit, like anima, also expresses the idea of "breath".
The various origins and usages demonstrate not only that what people call "soul" today has varied in meaning during history, but that the word and concept themselves have changed in their implications.
The Ancient Greeks used the same word for 'alive' as for 'ensouled'. So the earliest surviving Western philosophical view might suggest that the soul makes living things alive.
Socrates and Plato
Plato, drawing on the words of his teacher Socrates, considers the soul as the essence of a person, as that which decides how we act.
He considered this essence as an incorporeal occupant of our being. The Platonic soul comprises three parts:
- the reason (mind or logos)
- the appetite (body or passion)
- spirit (emotion or pathos).
Each of these has a function in a balanced and peaceful soul.
The reason equates to the mind. It corresponds to the charioteer directing the balanced horses of appetite and spirit. It allows for logic to prevail and for the optimisation of balance.
The appetite drives humankind to seek out its basic bodily needs. Yet when the passion controls us, master passion drives us to hedonism in all forms. This is the basal and most feral state.
The spirit comprises our emotional motive, that which drives us to acts of bravery and glory. If left unchecked it will lead to hubris -- the most fatal of all flaws in the Greek view.
Aristotle, following Plato, defined the soul as the core essence of a being, but argued against it having a separate existence. For instance, if a knife had a soul, the act of cutting would be that soul, because 'cutting' is the essence of what it is to be a knife. Unlike Plato and the religious traditions, Aristotle did not consider the soul as some kind of separate, ghostly occupant of the body (just as we cannot separate the activity of cutting from the knife). As the soul, in Aristotle's view, is an activity of the body it cannot be immortal (when a knife is destroyed, the cutting stops). More precisely, the soul is the "first activity" of a living body. This is a state, or a potential for actual, or 'second', activity. "The axe has an edge for cutting" was, for Aristotle, analogous to "humans have bodies for rational activity," and the potential for rational activity thus constituted the essence of a human soul. Aristotle used his concept of the soul in many of his works; the Nicomachean Ethics provides a good place to start to gain more understanding of his views.
Aristotle's view appears to have some similarity to the Buddhist 'no soul' view (see below). For both there is certainly no 'separable immortal essence'. It may simply become a matter of definition, as most Buddhists would agree, surely, that one can use a knife for cutting. They might, perhaps, stress the impermanence of the knife's cutting ability, and Aristotle would probably agree with that.
According to Buddhist teaching, all things are impermanent, in a constant state of flux, all is transient, and no abiding state exists. This applies to humanity as much as to anything else in the cosmos; thus, there is no unchanging and abiding self. Our sense of "I" or "me" is simply a sense belonging to the ever-changing entity that (conventionally speaking) is us, our body, and mind. This expresses in essence the Buddhist principle of anatta (Pāli; Sanskrit: anātman).
Buddhists hold that the delusion of a permanent, abiding self is one of the main root causes for human conflict on the emotional, social and political levels. They add that understanding of anatta (or "not-self") provides an accurate description of the human condition, and that this understanding allows "us" to go beyond "our" mundane desires. Nirvana is solely recognized as being distinct. Buddhists can speak in conventional terms of the soul or of self as a matter of convenience, but only under the conviction that ultimately "we" are changing entities. At death, the body and mind disintegrate; if the disintegrating mind contains any remaining traces of karma, it will cause the continuity of the consciousness to bounce back an arising mind to an awaiting being, that is, a fetus developing the ability to harbor consciousness. Thus, in Buddhist teaching, a being that is born is neither entirely different nor exactly the same as it was prior to rebirth.
However, scholars such as Shirō Matsumoto have argued that a curious development occurred in Mahayana Buddhist philosophy, stemming from the Cittamatra and Vijnanavada schools in India: although this school of thought denies the permanent personal selfhood, it affirms concepts such as Buddha-nature, Tathagatagarbha, Rigpa, or "original nature". Matsumoto argues that these concepts constitute a non- or trans-personal self, and almost equate in meaning to the Hindu concept of Atman, although they differ in that Buddha-nature does not incarnate. One should note the polarity in Tibetan Buddhism between shes-pa (the principle of consciousness) and rig-pa (pure consciousness equal to Buddha-nature). The concept of a person as a tulku provides even more controversy. A tulku has, due to heroic austerities and esoteric training, achieved the goal of transferring personal identity from one rebirth to the next (for instance, Tibetans consider the Dalai Lama a tulku). The mechanics behind this work as follows: although Buddha-nature does not incarnate, the individual self comprises skandhas or components that undergo rebirth. For an ordinary person, skandhas cohere in a way that dissolves upon the person's death. So elements of the transformed personality re-incarnate, but they lose the unity that constitutes personal selfhood for a specific person. In the case of tulkus, however, they supposedly achieve a "crystallization" of skandhas in such a manner that the skandhas do not "disentangle" upon the tulku's death; rather, a voluntary reincarnation occurs. In this new birth, the tulku possesses a continuity of personal identity rooted in the fact that the consciousness or shes-pa (which equates to a type of skandha called vijnana) has not dissolved after death, but has sufficient durability to survive in repeated births. The compatiblility of these concepts with Buddhist orthodoxy remains in dispute.
Many modern Buddhists, particularly in Western countries, reject the concept of rebirth or reincarnation as incompatible with the concept of anatta. They take the view that if there is no abiding self and no soul then nothing remains to be reborn. Stephen Batchelor, notably, discusses this issue in his book Buddhism Without Beliefs. However, the question arises: if a self does not exist, who thinks/lives now? Buddhists hold the view that thought itself thinks: if you remove the thought, there's no thinker (self) to be found. A detailed introduction to this and to other basic buddhist teachings appears in What the Buddha taught by the Buddhist monk Walpola Rahula.
Most Christians regard the soul as the immortal essence of a human, and that after death, God either rewards or punishes the soul. Different Christian groups dispute heatedly whether this reward/punishment depends upon doing good deeds, or merely upon believing in God and in Jesus.
Many Christian scholars hold, as Aristotle did, that "to attain any assured knowledge of the soul is one of the most difficult things in the world". Augustine, one of the most influential early Christian thinkers, described the soul as "a special substance, endowed with reason, adapted to rule the body". Philosopher Anthony Quinton said the soul is a "series of mental states connected by continuity of character and memory, [and] is the essential constituent of personality. The soul, therefore, is not only logically distinct from any particular human body with which it is associated; it is also what a person is". Richard Swinburne, a Christian philosopher of religion at Oxford University, wrote that "it is a frequent criticism of substance dualism that dualists cannot say what souls are.... Souls are immaterial subjects of mental properties. They have sensations and thoughts, desires and beliefs and perform intentional actions. Souls are essential parts of human beings..."
The origin of the soul has provided a sometimes vexing question in Christianity; the major theories put forward include creationism, traducianism and pre-existence.
Other Christian beliefs differ:
- A few Christian groups do not believe in the soul, and hold that people cease to exist, both mind and body, at death; they claim however that God will recreate the minds and bodies of believers in Jesus at some future time, the "end of the world."
- Another minority of Christians believe in the soul, but don't regard it as inherently immortal. This minority also believes the life of Christ brings immortality, but only to believers.
- Medieval Christian thinkers often assigned to the soul attributes such as thought and imagination as well as faith and love: this suggests that the boundaries between "soul" and "mind" can vary in different interpretations.
- Jehovah's Witnesses hold beliefs that equate the soul with the person rather than with a spirit or a force which leaves the body at or after death. (Gen.2:7; Ezek.18:4, KJV)
- The soul sleep theory states that the soul goes to "sleep" at the time of death, and stays in this quiescent state until the last judgment.
- The "absent from the body, present with the Lord" theory states that the soul at the point of death, immediately becomes present at the end of time, without experiencing any time passing between.
- The "purgatory" theory states the soul, if imperfect, spends a period of time purging or cleansing before becoming ready for the end of time.
- The present Catechism of the Catholic Church defines the soul as "the innermost aspect of man, that which is of greatest value in him, that by which he is most especially in God's image: 'soul' signifies the spiritual principle in man."
Objections to immortal soul teaching
The idea of heaven (as viewed from a traditional Christian point of view) stands far removed from what Christ taught. He viewed heaven, not as a place where all righteous mankind (within a spiritual context) would reside, but as the capital city of God's kingdom. An Old Testament quotation (which adds nothing directly to the discussion of souls) states: "The heavens are my throne, and the earth is my footstool." (Isaiah 66:1)
Persons who had lived a "good life" were not to go to Heaven, but reside on Earth. "The righteous themselves will possess the earth, and they will reside forever upon it." (Psalm 37:29)
"Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth."—Matthew 5:5
"Evildoers themselves will be cut off, but those hoping in Jehovah are the ones that will possess the earth."—Psalm 37:9
"The upright are the ones that will reside in the earth, and the blameless are the ones that will be left over in it. As regards the wicked, they will be cut off from the very earth; and as for the treacherous, they will be torn away from it."—Proverbs 2:21, 22
So, the question arises for most Christians, "If I lead a 'good life', why do I die, and what happens to me after I die?" The Bible says that sin causes death. It also states that when you die nothing remains of you.
Romans 5:12 tells us: "Through one man [Adam, mankind's forefather] sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned [by inheriting imperfection, that is, sinful tendencies]." "You [will] return to the ground, for out of it you were taken. For dust you are and to dust you will return." (Genesis 3:19)
Simply stated, the Bible teaches that death forms the opposite of life. In Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10, we read: "The living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all, neither do they anymore have wages, because the remembrance of them has been forgotten. All that your hand finds to do, do with your very power, for there is no work nor devising nor knowledge nor wisdom in Sheol, the place to which you are going."
"Do not put your trust in nobles, nor in the son of earthling man, to whom no salvation belongs. His spirit goes out, he goes back to his ground; in that day his thoughts do perish."-Psalm 146:3, 4
"The soul that is sinning - it itself will die," the Bible emphatically states. (Ezekiel 18:4, 20; Acts 3:23; Revelation 16:3)
Some of the Biblical passages above appear to support the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, as opposed to the doctrine of the immortality of the soul. Nowhere in the Biblical writings does the term "immortal" appear together with the term "soul". The Bible supports the theory that the soul equates to the person, and that the soul dies, but that God will resurrect the soul again on the last day. The resurrected person will not reside in heaven, but on the earth.
Those who believing in an immortal the soul which cannot die and which goes to either heaven or hell at death, if they wish for Biblical correctness would also have to accept that the soul in heaven or hell would have no knowledge of its past or present condition, as according to the teaching of the Bible, the thoughts and consciousness of the individual perishes at death. Psalm 146:3, 4
The concept of the immortality of the soul entered into Christian teaching via converts who brought the teachings of their former religions into Christianity.
In favor of a concious non-material entity ("soul") that survives bodily death
Some traditional Christians argue that the Bible teaches the survival of a conscious self after death. They interpret this as an intermediate state, before the deceased unite with their Resurrection bodies and restore the psychosomatic unity that existed from conception and which death disrupts. These Christians point out:
- Rachel's death in Genesis 35:18 equates with her soul (Hebrew nephesh) departing. And when Elijah prays in 1 Kings 17:21 for the return of a widow's boy to life, he entreats, "O LORD my God, I pray you, let this child's nephesh come into him again". So death meant that something called nephesh (or "soul") became separated from the body, and life could return when this soul returned.
- Jesus told the repentant thief on the cross, "I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise" (Luke 23:43). Interpretation: that very day, the thief will in a conscious way have fellowship with Christ in paradise despite the apparent destruction of his body.
- Jesus' account of the rich man and Lazarus, both still conscious at the same time as the rich man's brothers lived on. This scenario preceded Jesus taking the souls of Paradise with Him to heaven, therefore Lazarus remains in Paradise. The rich man stood in another compartment of Sheol where he could see Lazarus but never cross over.
- Matthew 10:28: Jesus says, "And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell." Here, the soul (Greek psychē) appears as something distinct from the body and something which survives the death of the body.
- Phil. 1:21-23, depicting the believer to "depart and to be with Christ", where the aorist infinitive (to depart) links via a single article to a present infinitive (to be with Christ). This linkage shows that the departure and being with Christ occur at the same moment. And since Christ dwells in Heaven, Paul anticipated going to Heaven at death.
- Revelation 6:9-10 portrays the souls (Greek psychas) of martyred saints as conscious and as asking God how long He will refrain from smiting the wicked on Earth. Once more, these saints consciously exist with God in heaven at the same time as evil people exist on the earth.
Christian Gnosticism: Valentinus
In early years of Christianity, the Gnostic Christian Valentinus of Valentinius (circa 100 - circa 153) proposed a version of spiritual psychology that accorded with numerous other "perennial wisdom" doctrines. He conceived the human being as a triple entity, consisting of body (soma, hyle), soul (psyche) and spirit (pneuma). This equates exactly to the division one finds in St. Peter’s Epistle to Thessalonians I, but enriched: Valentinus considered that all humans possess semi-dormant "spiritual seed" (sperme pneumatike) which, in spiritually developed Christians, can unite with spirit, equated with Angel Christ. Evidently his spiritual seed corresponds precisely to shes-pa in Tibetan Buddhism, jiva in Vedanta, ruh in Hermetic Sufism or soul-spark in other traditions, and Angel Christ to Higher Self in modern transpersonal psychologies, Atman in Vedanta or Buddha nature in Mahayana Buddhism. In Valentinus’ opinion, spiritual seed, the ray from Angel Christ, returns to its source. This is true resurrection (as Valentinus himself wrote in The Gospel of Truth: "People who say they will first die and then arise are mistaken. If they do not receive resurrection while they are alive, once they have died they will receive nothing."). In Valentinus’ vision of life human bodies go to dust, soul-sparks or spiritual seeds unite (in realised Gnostics) with their Higher Selves/Angel Christ and the soul proper, carrier of psychological functions and personalities (emotions, memory, rational faculties, imagination,...) will survive - but will not go to Pleroma or Fullness (the source of all where resurrected seeds that have realised their beings as Angels Christ return to). The souls stay in "the places that are in the middle", the worlds of Psyche. In time, after numerous purifications, the souls receive "spiritual flesh", i.e. a resurrection body. This division appears rather puzzling, but not dissimilar to Kabbalah, where neshamah goes to the source and ruach is, undestructed and indestructible, but unredeemed, relegated to a lower world. Similarly, according to Valentinus, complete resurrection occurs only after the end of Time (in the Christian worldview), when transfigured souls who have acquired spiritual flesh finally re-unite with the perfect, individual Angel Christ, residing in the Pleroma. Valentinus sees this as final salvation.
Many non-denominational Christians, and indeed many people who ostensibly subscribe to denominations having clear-cut dogma on the concept of soul, take an "à la carte" approach to the belief, that is, they judge each issue on what they see as its merits and juxtapose different beliefs from different branches of Christianity, from other religions, and from their understanding of science.
See also Christian eschatology.
In Hinduism, the Sanskrit word most closely corresponding to soul is "Atman", which can mean soul or even God. It is seen as the portion of Brahman within us. Hinduism contains many variant beliefs on the origin, purpose, and fate of the soul. For example, advaita or non-dualistic conception of the soul accords it union with Brahman, the absolute uncreated (roughly, the Godhead), in eventuality or in pre-existing fact. Dvaita or dualistic concepts reject this, instead identifying the soul as a different and incompatible substance.
According to the Qur'an of Islam (15:29), the creation of man involves Allah "breathing" a soul into him. This intangible part of an individual's existence is "pure" at birth and has the potential of growing and achieving nearness to God if the person leads a righteous life. At death the person's soul transitions to an eternal afterlife of bliss, peace and unending spiritual growth (Qur’an 66:8, 39:20). This transition can be pleasant (Heaven) or unpleasant (Hell) depending on the degree to which a person has developed or destroyed his or her soul during life (Qur’an 91:7-10).
In Sufism, Islamic mysticism, elaborate doctrines on the soul have developed, as explained in the article on Sufi psychology.
Jainists believe in a jiva, an immortal essence of a living being analogous to a soul, subject to the illusion of maya and evolving through many incarnations from mineral to vegetable to animal, its accumulated karma determining the form of its next birth.
Jewish views of the soul begin with the book of Genesis, in which verse 2:7 states, "the LORD God formed man from the dust of the earth. He blew into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living being." (New JPS)
The Hebrew Bible offers no systematic definition of a soul; various descriptions of the soul exist in classical rabbinic literature.
Saadia Gaon, in his Emunoth ve-Deoth 6:3, explained classical rabbinic teaching about the soul through the lens of neo-Aristotelian philosophy. He held that the soul comprises that part of a person's mind which constitutes physical desire, emotion, and thought.
Maimonides, in his The Guide to the Perplexed, explained classical rabbinic teaching about the soul through the lens of neo-Aristotelian philosophy, and viewed the soul as a person's developed intellect, which has no substance.
Kabbalah (esoteric Jewish mysticism) saw the soul as having three elements. The Zohar, a classic work of Jewish mysticism, posits that the human soul has three elements, the nefesh, ru'ah, and neshamah. A common way of explaining these three parts follows:
- Nefesh - the lower or animal part of the soul. It links to instincts and bodily cravings. It is found in all humans, and enters the physical body at birth. It is the source of one's physical and psychological nature.
The next two parts of the soul are not implanted at birth, but are slowly created over time; their development depends on the actions and beliefs of the individual. They are said to only fully exist in people awakened spiritually:
- Ruach - the middle soul, or spirit. It contains the moral virtues and the ability to distinguish between good and evil. In modern parlance, it equates to psyche or ego-personality.
- Neshamah - the higher soul, Higher Self or super-soul. This distinguishes man from all other life forms. It relates to the intellect, and allows man to enjoy and benefit from the afterlife. This part of the soul is provided both to Jew and non-Jew alike at birth. It allows one to have some awareness of the existence and presence of God. In the Zohar, after death Nefesh disintegrates, Ruach is sent to a sort of intermediate zone where it is submitted to purification and enters in "temporary paradise", while Neshamah returns to the source, the world of Platonic ideas, where it enjoys "the kiss of the beloved". Supposedly after resurrection, Ruach and Neshamah, soul and spirit re-unite in a permanently transmuted state of being.
The Raaya Meheimna, a Kabbalistic tractate always published with the Zohar, posits two more parts of the human soul, the chayyah and yehidah. Gersom Scholem wrote that these "were considered to represent the sublimest levels of intuitive cognition, and to be within the grasp of only a few chosen individuals":
- Chayyah - The part of the soul that allows one to have an awareness of the divine life force itself.
- Yehidah - the highest plane of the soul, in which one can achieve as full a union with God as is possible.
Extra soul states
Both Rabbinic and kabbalistic works also posit a few additional, non-permanent states to the soul that people can develop on certain occasions. These extra souls, or extra states of the soul, play no part in any afterlife scheme, but are mentioned for completeness.
- Ruach HaKodesh - a state of the soul that makes prophecy possible. Since the age of classical prophecy passed, no one receives the soul of prophecy any longer.
- Neshamah Yeseira - The supplemental soul that a Jew experiences on Shabbat. It makes possible an enhanced spiritual enjoyment of the day. This exists only while one observes Shabbat; it can be lost and gained depending on one's observance.
- Neshamah Kedosha - Provided to Jews at the age of majority (13 for boys, 12 for girls), and related to the study and fulfillment of the Torah commandments. It exists only when one studies and follows Torah; it can be lost and gained depending on one's study and observance.
For more detail on Jewish beliefs about the soul see Jewish eschatology.
Other religious beliefs and views
In Egyptian Mythology, a person possessed six souls, three of the body and three of the mind. They had the names Chet, Ren, Schut, Ka, Ba and Akh.
Some transhumanists believe that it will become possible to perform mind transfer, either from one human body to another, or from a human body to a computer. Operations of this type (along with teleportation), raise philosophical questions related to the concept of the Soul.
Crisscrossing specific religions, the phenomenon of therianthropy and belief in the existence of otherkin also occur. One can perhaps better describe these as phenomena rather than as beliefs, since people of varying religion, ethnicity, or nationality may believe in them. Therianthropy involves the belief that a person or his soul has a spiritual, emotional, or mental connection with an animal. Such a belief may manifest itself in many forms, and many explanations for it often draw on a person's religious beliefs. Otherkin hold similar beliefs: they generally see their souls are entirely non-human, and usually not of this world.
Another fairly large segment of the population, not necessarily favoring organized religion, simply label themselves as "spiritual" and hold that both humans and all other living creatures have souls. Some further believe the entire universe has a cosmic soul as a spirit or unified consciousness. Such a conception of the soul may link with the idea of an existence before and after the present one, and one could consider such a soul as the spark, or the self, the "I" in existence that feels and lives life.
Some believe souls in some way "echo" to the edges of this universe, or even to multiple universes with compiled multiple possibilities, each presented with a slightly different energy version of itself. The science fiction author Robert Heinlein, for example, has explored such ideas.
Science and the soul
Mainstream science and medicine do not recognize the concept of soul or the idea of a soul entity. Popular presentation of the dominant scientific view of the soul uses the "computer paradigm", which compares the brain to hardware and the mind (mental processes traditionally subsumed under the concept of "soul") to software. The departure of a brain/hardware leaves no place for functioning mind/software.
Some, like the famous French neurologist Jean Pierre Changeaux , deny the appropriateness of the computer paradigm and propose an analogy with the anharmonic oscillator from physics. Needless to say, both notions have dismissed the concept of soul as a self-sustaining entity.
Some investigators have tried to measure the soul, for example by attempting to measure the weight of a person just before and just after death in hopes of determining the weight of a soul. The results of these experiments remained equivocal, especially due to conflicting reports on the findings, and do not rank as good science: see .
Francis Crick's book The Astonishing Hypothesis has the subtitle, "The scientific search for the soul". Crick holds the position that one can learn everything knowable about the human soul by studying the workings of the human brain.
In his book Consilience, E. O. Wilson took note of the fact that sociology has identified belief in a soul as one of the universal human cultural elements. Wilson suggested that biologists need to seriously investigate how human genes predispose people to believe in a soul.
Daniel Dennett has championed the idea that the human survival strategy depends heavily on adoption of the intentional stance, a behavioral strategy that predicts the actions of others based on the expectation that they have a mind like one's own (see theory of mind). Mirror neurons in brain regions such as Broca's area may facilitate this behavioral strategy. The intentional stance, Dennett suggests, has proven so successful that people tend to apply it to all aspects of human experience, thus leading to animism and to other conceptualizations of soul.
A frequently documented phenomenon involves very young children (under the age of five) saying seemingly random phrases, spontaneously , with no readily traceable originating source, for example: "I remember when I died before". The parent-controlled flow of information that reaches the child does not account for the phrase, which most hearers ignore. Some people believe that a child can express past-life memories in this way.
Dr. Ian Stevenson, a prominent member of the scientific community, has spent over 40 years devoted to the study of children who have spoken about concepts seemingly unknown to them. Dr Stevenson maintains a thorough scientific method of interview and observation. In each case, Dr. Stevenson methodically documents the child's statements. Then he identifies the deceased person the child allegedly identifies with, and verifies the facts of the deceased person's life that match the child's memory. He even matches birthmarks and birth defects to wounds and scars on the deceased, verified by medical records. His strict methods systematically rule out all possible "normal" explanations for the child’s memories.
Note that a significant majority of Dr. Stevenson's reported cases of reincarnation originate in Eastern societies, where dominant religions often permit the concept of reincarnation.
Other uses of the term
Popular usage often describes experiences that evoke deep emotions as "touching the soul".
- Ghost (USA, 1990) with Whoopi Goldberg, Patrick Swayze, Demi Moore.
External references and links
- Batchelor, Stephen. Buddhism Without Belief.
- Swinburne (1997). The Evolution of the Soul. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Therianthropy overview
- What Is Man
- ¹Dr. Ian Stevenson: Scientific Evidence for Reincarnation
- Stevenson (1975). Cases of the Reincarnation Type, Volume I: Ten Cases in India. University Press of Virginia
- Stevenson (1974). Twenty Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation. Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia
- Stevenson (1983). Cases of the Reincarnation Type, Volume IV: Twelve Cases in Thailand and Burma. University Press of Virginia
- Stevenson (1997). Reincarnation and Biology : A Contribution to the Etiology of Birthmarks and Birth Defects. Praeger Publishers
- Do Humans Have Souls? - Atheist Foundation of Australia Inc