"Spirit " can be ensouled. As man can be ensouled. One is physical and one is metaphysical.
In seperation one has an affinity for physical/ephemeral/and mortality. [and an aversion to the other]
One has an affinity for for the metaphysical/etherical/immortality. [and an aversion to the other]
I believe even the single celled omeba is constructed of molecules and elements, which have a conscious [ness] aversion or affinity to others of the same plane, and a morphing, if you will into a new substance. Similar to but different from the former on the evolutionary ladder. Two but not two.
Experiences can also be mis-believed because the observing/listening to the explanation/storyformula/diagram has no direct knowledge of what is being related too.
as i said before i have experienced it first hand, you dismiss this "fact of truth" if you wish, but it will not influence me and and what
I know from the experience.
some have eyes to see and ears to hear and,
some don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rybot  Drifter I will try and clarify in regards to this trinity/triune of stability.
"Spirit" can be either:
1) physical( energy/energetic ) ergo fermions, bosons and any aggregate accumulation thereof and;
2) metaphysical( intent ) ergo abstract conceptuality of mind ergo limited free will abilities of choice.
When "spirit" is both then we have a biological/soul, to varying degrees of complexity, with *woman* being the most complex biological, known to humans.
Man comes in at close second.
The most simple biological/soul is probably a bacteria.
Some may even say that a virus is the most simple biological, however, a virus has either RNA or DNA, never both ergo it appears to be a "twilight organism" ( R.B. Fuller ), being between a animate biological/soul and inanimate mineral.
I hope this helps make *clear* that spirit and soul are not some mystical 'thing' that have no easily rational and logical definition that a 10 year old cannot begin to grasp scientifically.
"Science is the putting in order the facts of our experiences"( somebody via Fuller )
All knowledge is based in experience, whether direct experience or as comunicated by someone elses experience.
This is not to say that our experiences can be mispercieved, i.e. what we believe to be the facts are not neccesarily the facts, in all cases.
Rybo |