0
As science states that matter can not be created nor destroyed. What ever you choose to call the "spark" that animates us, and that leaves us when we die, I would call a soul.
That's just one pagan's view however.
Wiki User
∙ 15y ago
Wiki User
∙ 13y agoNo, the "soul" seems to be more of a state of mind than a physical thing, this is an interesting question so you should try and get more answers about it.
No. Science relies on factual evidence and the soul cannot be seen, touched, smelled, heard or tasted. So science cannot determine if the soul exists.
Another answer: It can be, if life is only a perception then who is the perceiver?
You only feel, hear, see, smell, and taste using your brain, and if you cut your brain out but kept it connected you could see your brain. So if all of that is true then who is the one seeing? I guess you could call it a soul...
An Answer:There are no constituents of a soul beyond the intelligence you perceive when you interact with one other than your own or when you reflect on yourself. Science is never going to be able to breach into the land of the dead or into the nature of the soul. It's simply impossible since places and things of a literal spirit nature are not comprised of atoms, strings or foam. It is not another category of mass in space-time, though. If what I am saying sounds paradoxical, that is because it is. The human soul and the world of the dead were created unverifiable in nature. They can not exist otherwise because the intrinsic nature of the two (their very definitions) is that they are not able to be demonstrated with empirical evidence unless you and the recipient of the evidence are both dead or physically separated from your flesh.Your physical body houses it until your flesh dies and then you depart from your body no longer as flesh and spirit but continue to exist as an intelligence of spirit form alone. Your soul is you. Your physical body is you. Think of it as a literal "first person" environment where you (being a soul) relay messages to yourself (housed in flesh) and are relayed messages (from exterior forces and from your own flesh when it is trying to tell you things like "I am hungry", "I am in danger", "This is not healthy", "I am sick", etcetera) when you are alive without there being any delay.
Wiki User
∙ 12y agoThis depends on the definition of proof, we could argue that our entire reality is a lie or illusion and if that were the case then science could not prove anything. however if we take the popular view that what we perceive around us when all our faculties are functioning properly is real then science is the only known reliable method through which reality can be understood hence science is the only way to prove anything
Wiki User
∙ 10y agoYes, we can definitely prove that some general things are true, and we can definitely disprove some specific ideas. The more general the idea, the harder it is to disprove.
Wiki User
∙ 12y ago..
Wiki User
∙ 15y agoNo
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What is the science moment?
When you find your answer or prove yourhypothesis right
What can science not study?
You can apply the Scientific Method to almost any field. One can use a scientific approach to viewing, and even creating art. One can use science to describe, and perhaps improve movement, or even dancing. To some extent one can view thought processes using EEG, FNMR, and PET scans. One can study the basis of religion, or the effects of religion with science. I suppose there are some things that are essentially not provable though. So, a scientist can claim that there is no evidence for GOD, or come up with alternative explanations for near-death-experiences. But, it is essentially impossible to prove or disprove the actual existence of God, or the actual existence of an afterlife. What truly is one's soul? The same might be true with something like extrasensory perception. A scientist might be able to prove an "alternative explanation" for everything a psychic does. So a good magician might be able to do everything that a psychic did, but using magic with a logical explanation. However, it may be difficult to prove that one's alternative explanation is actually the only explanation and the psychic claims are hogwash. It isn't to say that these fields can't be studied with science, but one might never be able to come ups with an absolute proof one way or the other.
Why is dualism rejected by science?
Dualism, in the sense that you are discussing, is the idea that reality as we know it consists of two fundamentally different types of things, material things (matter, energy, space and time) and spiritual things (the soul, God, heaven etc.). Science has been able to observe the former category but not the latter. If we have no scientific observation of the supposed spiritual element of reality, then science must reject it.
What is the relationship between scientific law and observation?
The relationship is, in order to become a scientific law, you have to have many observations by many different people. If you want to prove it is not a theory, you have to observe it.
Is soul a concrete noun?
No, the noun soul is an abstract noun, a soul is not a physical thing. Soul is a word for the spiritual, emotional part of a person (or to some, part of a thing); an abstract concept.
Is there actually a soul?
Millions of people throughout the world do believe there is a soul. Science, however, has yet to prove that a soul exists.
How do you prove science wrong?
I know for one thing, that science can't prove anything. That is essentially one major thing that makes up science today, and has for centuries. But really, If science can't prove anything, Did science just prove that science can't prove anything? Because if it did, then you can prove that science is wrong, because you just proved something!
Can science prove something?
no
What is a nontestable question?
it is a question that science cannot prove such as, "are vampires real", because science cannot prove that supernatural things exist
How can you hear your soul?
In Science you cannot.
What is a non testable question?
it is a question that science cannot prove such as, "are vampires real", because science cannot prove that supernatural things exist
What is experiment in science?
It is a graph, chart, or pictures in a science project to prove that you did the project.
Does science prove theories are wrong by using experiments?
An experiment can prove they are wrong or right ...:)
What does science say about Heaven and Hell?
it does and it doesnt exist can prove and cant not prove so there you have it
Is there a scientific theory on what happens to our soul after death?
None whatsoever. There is no scientific theory that can prove the existence of a soul, though many people believe this to be true.It should be pointed out that there is no scientific evidence to prove a soul does not exist. It is a matter of faith. Belief without proof.
Has science shown that there is no soul?
No, pretty sure a soul is something that can't be proven or disproven if you believe that it's something invisible that can't be detected with science
What is the main idea of forensic science?
the main idea of forensic science is to prove the things
