Life And Death: The Soul
Review
Mr. DeZilva
Important to Note
 For most of this unit, Mind and Soul are used almost synonymously. Some
Philosophers address the difference, but this is very rare.
 For Plato, he says that reason (thought, mental awareness) is used
alongside emotion and appetite to help govern the Soul. For Aristotle, the
Soul was substance – something innate in a living thing.
 For Descartes, the mind and the soul are more or less the same thing - even
referred to it at times as a rational soul. The Mind and the Soul were so
closely linked together he never really differentiated the two.
 For most Materialist and Monist, the Soul refers to a more emotional that is
a result of our experiences and reactions. The Mind refers to a process of
the brain.
 Because interpretations varied early on in philosophical texts, the
distinction between the two were not always made clear. However, while
the Mind and the Soul may or may not be the same thing in some cases,
they are always linked in some way shape or form.
Important to Note
The Difference between Monism , Dualism and Materialism
 Dualism and Monism are the two perspectives on the human
person in regards to the Mind-Body
 Monist believe that existence is based upon one category of
being (the person is made up entirely of the mind or the
person is made up entirely of the body)
 Dualist believe that the existence of a person based upon both
the body, as well as the mind
 Materialism is a type of monism (all that exist in life is matter)
 Idealism is a type of monism (all that exist in life is mind, spirit)
 Substance or Cartesian Dualism is a type of dualism (The body
and mind both exist, but importance is placed on the mind)
Past Questions
 Evaluate the claim that there can be no disembodied
existence after death.
 To what extent is belief in an afterlife necessary for
resolving problems raised by the existence of evil?
 Resurrection is more likely to be true than reincarnation.’
Discuss
 Evaluate the claim that the soul is distinct from the body.
 ‘The concept of embodied existence after death is
incoherent.’ Discuss
 Critically compare Aristotle’s and Richard Dawkins’ view on
the Body Soul Identity
The Mind Body Problem
 Before we can fully understand any concepts about Life
after Death, we must first understand the complexities of
the Soul. To first understand the Soul, we must understand
the relationship between the Mind and the Body. The best
way to address this is known as the Mind Body Problem
 *Keep a look out for things throughout this Powerpoint
that note MBP, as it may be relevant to not only discuss
the MBP, but use it as a critique/evaluation.
What is the Mind-Body Problem?
 Humans are characterised by the body (physical) and the mind
(consciousness)
 These are the fundamental properties
 Body = mass of matter; has shape, size, mass and spatial positions
 Physical properties (such as height) are fact; it is independent of a
person’s conception.
 Mind = intentionality – thinking about something;
 Seen usually as immaterial
MBP Continued
 Australian Philosopher David Chalmers said that the
minds are in a non-observable universe, but the
bodies are still controlled by the minds external to the
simulation (similar to The Matrix).
 Canadian Philosopher Arthur Custance hinted at
Dualism, an approach to the Mind Body Problem,
when he said: “My body is my soul’s proper home.
My soul is my body’s proper master” –A Custance
Immortality of the Soul 
Arguments in Favour
 Dualism
 Plato
 Descartes
What is Dualism?
 In regards to Life after Death, Dualism refers to the
belief that the soul is a distinct and immortal entity
within the body, which can survive the death of the
body and ascend to the afterlife.
 The view that the mind and body function separately,
without interchange
 Opposite of a dualist would be a
Monist (belief in the mind and body
forming one single entity)
MBP
Plato on the Distinction between
Body and Soul
Plato made a distinction between the soul and the body (Dualism)
 The Soul





Has the ability to know the truth
Can understand the Forms as they really are (through reason)
Capable of certain knowledge
Unchanging and immortal
Exists after death, as well as pre-existed before birth
 The Body




Can only learn through physical sense experience
Can gain knowledge, but it is inferior compared to reason
In a constant process of change
Cannot be the object of certain knowledge
Plato continued
 Plato makes his distinction between the body and soul
comes from his dialogue Phaedo, in which he recounts
the final few hours before Socrates’ death
 The dialogue focuses on Socrates having a discussion with
his friends on why there is nothing to fear from death
 The most important thing about a person is their innate,
mental life.
 The soul was the real part of the person
 The soul is temporarily attached to a physical body
 A Dualist perspective as he separates the body and soul and
treats them as two separate things.
Plato continued
 Three arguments for Life After Death in Phaedo (as a
result of a dialogue that Socrates is having)
1) The Argument from generation out of Opposites
 Death is the opposite of life, and life the opposite of
death; “the soul of the dead must exist in some place
from which they are reborn” - Socrates
2) The Argument from Recollection
 We know what we know as a result of once
experiencing it or recollecting the information
3) The Argument from Simplicity
 The soul is indestructible (can’t be destroyed by
death) because it is immaterial, invisible and already in
its most simplistic form
Plato continued
 In terms of The Soul and Identity, Plato discussed
something called the Tripartite Theory of the Soul 
Reason (Thought), Emotion (Spirit), Appetite (Desire)
 The soul was a guiding force that helped the body
and the mind to work together, and the only way it
could do this was with a governance of the tripartite
 This is important because it potentially addresses
philosophical problems with what the soul is and what
composes or makes up a person (identity)
MBP
Criticisms of Plato
 Plato’s view does not look at the person as a unified whole,
 The only way we can accept Plato’s views of the afterlife is to
accept his world of Forms
 The cycle of opposites is not supported by experience
 We can think of many things not brought to life by their
opposites i.e Black does not bring about white.
 We understand when something is hot because we understand
coolness, but this doesn’t necessitate any cycle.
 Therefore, life can be the opposite of death, but doesn’t need to
mean that life must be brought about by death.
Other concepts of Body and Soul
Distinction: Rene Descartes
 Developed Substance Dualism or Cartesian Dualism
 Felt that he could prove that he himself existed (as a
thinking self – “I think therefore I am”) and considered
himself primarily a “thinking thing”
 Basic knowledge of the self is independent of the body, and
thus, the immortal soul is the source of conscious life.
 A Substance Dualist would say that the Mind and Body are
separate (Mind Body problem)
 Substance  Something that does not require any other
creature to exist, and can exist on its own with only God’s
concurrence
MBP
Descartes continued
 Descartes would’ve mostly subscribed to a specific
branch of dualism called Interactionism
 The body is spatial with no conscious, while the mind is
non-spatial and is conscious.
 The body affects the mind and vice versa – they can
interact (i.e. drug use)
 Originally, Descartes felt that the pineal gland was the
“seat of the soul”; where all of our thoughts were formed
MBP
Criticisms of Descartes
 Hume – The mind is fragile and it is more than likely to be
destroyed at death and not survive
 Descartes would affirm to life after death through the
immortality of the soul (Mind is infallible, body is spatial)
 However, are we actually the same person again even after
death. This is a challenge that Hick would face with his Replica
Theory, as well.
 Aquinas – the soul is so connected to the body, that only an
embodied existence can occur with the 2nd coming
Immortality of the Soul 
Arguments Against
 Materialism
 Aristotle
 Dawkins
What is Materialism?
 A materialist in this case would refer to the view that
the physical universe (matter) is all that exists
 Furthermore, it is the belief that no part of a person is
non-physical; therefore, there is no soul.
 Materialists feel that we cannot survive death – there
is no continuity between this life and what lies
beyond.
 Consciousness is no more than electro-chemical
events within the brain
MBP
Aristotle on the Distinction between
Body and Soul
 Felt that the body and the soul were inseparable
 Gave an example of a Wax tablet with an inscription on
it (see picture bottom corner)
 The soul = Substance, which means essence or an
absolute real thing
 The physical body = continuous change, but the soul
remains consistent to give identity.
 The soul included the matter and the structure of the
body
Aristotle continued…
 Aristotle differed from Plato in the sense that the soul
could be explained in purely natural terms
 “The soul is […] the principle of animal life
 There are different souls, and depending on the user of
the soul there are different degrees of a soul
 In De Anima Aristotle describes that a living thing’s
soul is its capacity to engage in the activities that are
characteristics of living things of its natural kind (i.e.
Growth, intellect, perception, movement)
Aristotle continued…
 Therefore  Anything that nourishes itself, that
grows, decays, moves about (on its own, not just
when moved by something else), perceives, or thinks
is alive. And the capacities of a thing in virtue of
which it does these things constitute its soul.
The soul is what is causally responsible for the animate
behaviour (the life activities) of a living thing.
Aristotle continued
 “. . . the soul does not exist without a body and yet is
not itself a kind of body. For it is not a body, but
something which belongs to a body, and for this
reason exists in a body, and in a body of such-andsuch a kind”
 The soul is not separable from the body
Dawkins on the Distinction between
Body and Soul
 As a Materialist and an evolutionary biologist, Richard
Dawkins felt that no part of a person is non-physical
 In The Selfish Gene, he wrote:
 Humans are no more than survival machines
 Humans are the vehicles of genes, looking to replicate
themselves in order to survive into the next generation
 “Survival machines – robot vehicles, blindly
programmed to preserve the selfish molecules known
as genes.”
Dawkins continued
 Dawkins directly rejects the ideas proposed by Descartes and Plato
 Claims that we are just bytes of information and that there is nothing
supernatural about us (River out of Eden)
 Feels that there is overwhelming empirical evidence for his
perspective, compared to that of Plato and Descartes
 The Soul is an illusion caused by ignorance, superstition and irrational
perception.
 “The consciousness is mistaken as a soul”
 For Dawkins, the soul represents in a justification for evil and
suffering; however, he feels that the “soul” exists because it results
from the inability for humans to accept that evil and suffering have no
purpose.
Dawkins continued…
Soul One and Soul Two
To explain his rejection of the soul, Dawkins breaks down the soul
into two different types of conceptual understandings.
- Soul One: the first and oldest meaning of the soul
 What applies for Dawkins here are Dictionary definitions such
as “the principle of life in man or animals” or “The spiritual
part of man regarded as surviving after death”
- Soul Two refers to the “intellectual or spiritual power; a high
development of the mental faculties”
 Dawkins feels that this definition of the soul, alongside
science, can have some validity
 “An awakening of the imagination comparable to learning
that the universe is made up of billions of galaxies” – Steven
Pinker (Someone that Dawkins would definitely agree with
here)
Dawkins continued
 Soul One: the traditional view of a principle of life, a
real separate thing that is spiritual and contains
personality (i.e. the dualistic/Platonic view) → this is
what Dawkins is rejecting
 Soul Two: there might be a place for talking about the
soul in a metaphorical/symbolic way (i.e. high
development of mental, intellectual faculties) →
there is room as long as we are clear that this does
not refer to a separate thing (i.e. avoid dualism at all
costs when it comes to Dawkins!)
Dawkins Continued
 Dawkins feels that consciousness is something that
science will eventually be able to explain in full
 Dawkins argues that we are incredibly lucky accidents
and therefore should live life to the full rather than
relying on the false comfort that we could survive the
death of our body.
 • At death, we leave behind genes and memes, though
the genes will quickly be dispersed. DNA survival brings
about the body and individual consciousness creates
culture. This is the soul.
Hick on the Distinction between
Body and Soul
 Hick rejects traditional dualism, adopts a concept of soft
materialism, but does not deny Life After Death.
 The Soul is the name for the moral, spiritual self, but still
refers to the person as a whole
 Based on the idea that the whole of this earthly life is a
vale of soul making – a testing ground for people in which
they develop moral character.
 Relates to the Problem of Evil
 Develops the Replica Theory
 The soul is capable of everlasting life with God
 There is a physical rebirth in which the body is replicated by
God – Hick believes it is the exact same person
Other concepts of Body and Soul
Distinction: Behaviourism
 Behaviourism is the concept that all mental events are just
referring to a complex pattern of behaviour (similar to that of
Dawkins); Mental terminology means something physical
 Linked largely to Gilbert Ryle who felt that the soul is a
collective noun for “personality”.
 Developed the Ghost in the Machine concept The Ghost is
the mind and the machine is the body. This was a response to
Descartes’ description of the mind-body distinction.
 Ryle did not feel that the mind existed and that it only existed
as a result of a categorical mistake
 “Searching for the University” example
Other concepts of Body and Soul
Distinction: Identity Theories
 Identity Theory refers to the language used to describe
something about the self
 It states that the mind and the brain refer to the same
object, but they have different meanings. This is important
to note because many scholars attribute the mind to the
activity of the brain (even Descartes did to some extent)
 For example
 “I have a pain” and “I have such and such a neural process”
don’t mean the same thing, but are identical when evaluating
the identity of pain
If Given a question such as…
Critically compare Aristotle’s and Richard Dawkins’ view on
the Body Soul Identity
- Discuss Aristotle’s perspective of the soul in relationship to
the body. Explain what he thought the soul was and why it
was important. Express how he was a materialist in regards
to the soul.
- Discuss Dawkins and his theory of Two Souls. Further discuss
his interpretation of materialism and how he denies the idea
of a soul and even of an afterlife. Discuss his concept of
Survival Machines.
- Support either of the positions or even find similarities
between the two. Perhaps even focus on each’s definition of
a “soul” and what it is (or is not). Critically compare the two
accounts, but remember to stay focused on the topic of the
Body/Soul Identity.
Questions surrounding the nature of
Disembodied Existence
Embodied Existence vs. Disembodied Existence
Disembodied Existence refers to life after death without a
physical form. It alludes to survival after death without bodies.
Examples include Plato and Descartes
Embodied Existence refers to the soul/mind and body being one.
If the body dies, the soul dies with it, but there is still potential
for Life after death in physical form.
 Examples include Resurrection and Reincarnation
 Dawkins and Aristotle would be examples of Materialist that
did not believe in any life after death
When questioned on Disembodied
Existence…
 Swinburne: We can imagine a situation where we
could exist without a body, and if we can imagine it,
then it is a coherent concept.
 Further support to Swinburne here would be that we
say we have bodies, as opposed to we are bodies
(Dawkins might say we are bodies, however)
 To some, it seems as if the consciousness and the
body, although linked, are distinct from one another
 Therefore, it could make sense to suggest that the
consciousness might be able to exist on its own, without
the body, once the body has died.
Disembodied existence continued…
 Locke gave the example of the Prince and Cobbler
 This example focuses on personal identity
 If the soul of the prince transferred into that of a shoemaker, would it still be “The Prince”?
 Provides a problem for Materialist because the body is
distinct from “The Person”
 The Person is a thinking, intelligent being and can exist
in a spiritual world.
Disembodied existence continued
 HH Price deems that LAD is conceivable via
disembodied existence
 He compares it to that of a dream – not bound by time
or space, but a world made up of mental images that we
have had and can have
 People could potentially have mental images after death
that resembled physical sensation and felt as though
they had identities – this would be enough to qualify as
a “life” after death
 This image/dream-world for Price would be a result of
the experiences we have had, and may be pleasant or
unpleasant
Disembodied existence continued
 Evidence of a Disembodied Existence may be
provided by Dr. Raymond Moody, the founder of
Near Death Experience studies.
 Medical studies suggests that NDE is reported by
between 8%-12% of patients who have been
resuscitated after suffering cardiac arrest.
 There are a collection of common characteristics that
NDE witnesses have
Other Perspectives: Reincarnation
 A concept of constant embodied existence, also known as rebirth
 The individual continues to live after death in some sort of bodily
form
 Being reborn into this world after death into a new physical body
Hindus would believe that each person has an essential self, this is
known as the atman. This self is eternal and seeks unity with God.
 God (Brahman) manifests himself in the atman of each individual.
Brahman is pure thought
 Once this manifestation is realised, there is no need for the atman to
continue in the cycle of rebirth it has attained its release, this is
known as moksha
 The physical body is nothing more than a vehicle for the atman
**Note: Reincarnation is neither disembodied or embodied. There is a
moment of disembodied existence, but this is only between the
transfer into another body. Careful how you apply this.
Reincarnation continued
 Hindus would have firm belief in the process of rebirth
known as Karma
 Each deliberate action from a person has consequences
 “The Karmic Fruits” attach themselves to the atman and keep
it in the cycle of birth and rebirth, known as Samsara
 The quality of one’s future life is determined by how the
individual acts in their current life
 For example, if someone is poor or disabled, this could be
because they acted morally poor in their past life.
Reincarnation continued
 Buddhist would hold similar ideas, however, they do not think
that the soul exists
 Felt that the sense of the self was an illusion. The wise person
or the awakened one is the one who realises that any sense of
the atman is an illusion.
 Once this is realised, the wise person will reach nirvana –
nothingness.
 However, what is it that is reborn, then, if there is no self?
 Buddhist say that the person is neither the same nor different
 The analogy of the lighted candle which in turn lights another
candle (the two flames are neither the same nor different, but the
energy from one candle begins the flame of the next)
Evaluation of Reincarnation
 Twenty Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation by Ian
Stephenson provide further proof (support) to
reincarnation
 Cases of Reincarnation that Stephenson provides
could be a result of cultural influence, since they
happen in societies and communities that have a
strong belief in reincarnation
 Reincarnation comes into conflict with other religious
beliefs such as Christianity and Islam (Resurrection)
 Is it really the same “person” if not in the same living
thing? This is an issue of identity.
Other Perspectives: Resurrection
 Resurrection is a belief held by Christians that the body, a
spiritual body, will rise again after its death.
 The ‘I’ that lives now will rise again and be identifiable in the
afterlife
 Jesus was crucified on a cross and was buried in a tomb –
however, he resurrected in a physical form (“walking
around”)
 Jesus ascended into Heaven and resurrected. He continued
to live on in a spiritual form
 "See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me,
and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you
see that I have“ – Luke 24
Resurrection continued
 Christians have a firm belief that the soul will be judged by God
after death – this is alluded to in the book of Revelations (Last
book of New Testament)
 The decisions we have made will result in being judged by God
in placed in Heaven or Hell
 This is further emphasised here: “Then they will go away to
eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life”
(Matthew 25:46)
 “It is easier for a rich man to get into Heaven…” (Matthew 19)
Implications from Resurrection…
 The significance of the soul is taken away because of the
necessity of the body’s existence; places questions on the
physical nature of the human body, not soul
 Even though Christians believe in the Body and Soul being
one, this could stem from the Genesis story (as stated by
Keith Ward)  The idea that man was created from
material form but filled with the spirit of God
 The Concept of Heaven and Hell implies particular features
about God (Relate back to his Attributes)
 Heaven means being in God’s presence and timeless
ultimate happiness and potential perfection
 Irenaeus, Augustine, Kant all speak on Life After Death in
regards to there being a reconnection with God – thus,
justifying the evil on earth.
John Hick & Replica Theory
 John Hick’s Replica Theory was a thought experiment.
 It stems from his concept of our lives now being a soulmaking theodicy
 Replica Theory is the theory that an identical recreation of a
person means, in fact, being regarded as the same person
 It can be seen as an extension of resurrection (as opposed to
reincarnation)
 Hick emphasised the idea that the soul needs to continuously
develop – and we can respond to our past actions and
improve on them.
 He believed that the body and the soul are inseparable, this
includes the “new” replica that is created after death. Keep
in mind – God creates this replica as a result of his power.
*However, as Brian Davies suggests, is this replica still the same person, the same
identity. This can be called into question. Also, if a replica can be made, does that
not devalue the current life that one is living?