Philosophy Shows You Have an Immortal Soul (Aquinas 101)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 มิ.ย. 2024
- 🎥, Keep the Aquinas 101 cameras rolling! Donate $5 today: go.thomisticinstitute.org/don...
The soul makes the heart not only to be, but to beat. Soul makes the eyes not only to be, but to see.
The soul is the organizational pattern of all parts, and all the parts of all the parts of our bodies. Once upon a time, it was common for people to speak of their souls with a sense that the soul is of great value, perhaps even immortal. But it seems that we've lost touch with our souls-so let us retrieve the ancient understanding.
The Immortality of the Soul (Aquinas 101) - Fr. James Brent, O.P.
For readings, podcasts, and more videos like this, go to www.Aquinas101.com. While you’re there, be sure to sign up for one of our free video courses on Aquinas. And don’t forget to like and share with your friends, because it matters what you think!
Subscribe to our channel here:
th-cam.com/users/TheThomisti...
--
Aquinas 101 is a project of the Thomistic Institute that seeks to promote Catholic truth through short, engaging video lessons. You can browse earlier videos at your own pace or enroll in one of our Aquinas 101 email courses on St. Thomas Aquinas and his masterwork, the Summa Theologiae. In these courses, you'll learn from expert scientists, philosophers, and theologians-including Dominican friars from the Province of St. Joseph.
Enroll in Aquinas 101 to receive the latest videos, readings, and podcasts in your email inbox each Tuesday morning.
Sign up here: aquinas101.thomisticinstitute...
Help us film Aquinas 101!
Donate here: go.thomisticinstitute.org/don...
Want to represent the Thomistic Institute on your campus? Check out our online store!
Explore here: go.thomisticinstitute.org/sto...
Stay connected on social media:
/ thomisticinstitute
/ thomisticinstitute
/ thomisticinst
Visit us at: thomisticinstitute.org/
#Aquinas101 #ThomisticInstitute #ThomasAquinas #Catholic
Thank you, Father! I'm not Catholic but you're helping me pass my Medieval philosophy class!
Come home!
Come Home!
You're most welcome in The Arms of The Catholic Church!
@@annepauline5241 which is to say the body of Christ
You’re not Catholic... yet...
I always loved monks and the Middle Ages as a Protestant. Now I can appreciate Aquinas even more as I now am a Catholic. I thank God for that almost every day. May God bless and guide you.
Now I know that spirit is the rational soul and we have different spirit with the angels because our soul is in the body it has a form! Thanks Father more of this simple enlightening explanation! More Power Godspeed! K
That was not rational.
Enlightening? That was one huge load of doubletalk. 🙄
Learned something new today. The difference of the soul and spirit in us and how we are different from animals and plant souls. I think not taking care of my soul may be one of the reasons why my body is in pain.
Thank you Fr Brent for that clear and concise explanation.
This is why Aristotle says a dead person's hand is a hand only by a kind of analogy
All this is a gif to me, God all bless you and your excellent Work, you teach so clear Father.
It's our pleasure!
It’s a gif to you, but it’s like a whole TH-cam video to me. There must be something off with your computer. Haha
@@claymcdermott718 right friend, hahaha, "Errare humanum est" thank you for your help, I'm not a native speaker, therefore I did my best effort. But I got the gift from you and also the TI. God Bless you.
@@ThomisticInstitute
Your wrong, read my post and Debunk.
Wow...I struggled explaining what a soul is to my 6 year old daughter today. Thanks for this !!!
Our pleasure! Thanks for watching, and may the Lord bless you!
Don't explain such an abstract and subtle concept to a 6 yr old
@@electrical_cord Aesop's fables prove that you can give great wisdom to a child while doing the same to the adult without boring either. ☦️
@@chocolateneko9912 Can confirm. I read those all the time growing up.
@@electrical_cord I love Aesop's fables, the fox and the goose one is really good. "never trust flatterers"
Thank God for Saints Dominic and Thomas Aquinas and all the Dominicans who through their study and contemplation of the Divine truth are able to reach out to the laity so we can also able to understand and to know more about our Triune God so we can love more and glorify God.
St. Thomas Aquinas, Pray for us!
@@ThomisticInstitute For this Lent, I should be binge watching Thomistic Institute YT videos instead of Netflix and other secular entertainment.
@@L1011MD11 Amen. [Alleluia].
@lary Snw There’s a difference between the dead and saints.
Yet none of this is taught or thought of in the original traditions of Jesus and the apostles.
Great videos! May God continue to bless the Thomistic Institute. Now is up to us to pass them on.
The relationship between body and soul can even explain sickness as a consequence of disordered soul activity, since it’s the one that controls the body
yeah thats if you completely ignore science.
@@chriscarty2308 edgy
@@chriscarty2308 Ah, St. Science. A true scientist sees the magnitude of what he DOESN'T know.
@@YSLRD Exactly what religion has never been able to do...
@@chriscarty2308 diferent topics
Open your mind bro!
So lovely to watch these videos,thanks for this wonderful one ,so easily explained almost to keep up with !. Comforting too,in thinking about a loved one who has died.R.i.p.
I thought I had a proper understanding of our "soul' now my head is spinning 🤯
Outstanding! In every sense!
Soul is that part of us that seeks truth, beauty and goodness.
No other creatures have this ability
To my way of thinking.
Très bon message. Mon père, je vous en remercie. J'ai réellement tout à apprendre sur ces explications dites catholiques, mais de ce que j'entends, cela me paraît très beau, très juste, et aussi très bon. Je viens de m'abonner à cette chaîne.
Merci encore.
Thank you!
This is a good video, good introduction.
Great review!!!!!
This is hugely relevant when we think about how the human mind is different and superiort to A.I.
Oooohh this is interesting. This explains why we're able to try to comprehend & describe things like the 4th dimension or non-Euclidean geometry, even though we can never experience / sense them!
This is going to sound like dumb question but of our senses and perceptions are all related to organs then after death are we just completely deaf and blind until the resurrection? Will we be floating around in quiet nothingness without having senses. Or would we be able to perceive the spiritual world around us via spiritual senses? And if the angels are pure spirit without any bodies how are they able to watch over us and such? Are they deaf and blind too?
That's not a dumb question. It's a very perceptive one.
At death, the human person suffers the separation of body and soul. With the loss of the body, one loses the normal functioning of those powers that are seated in and circumscribed by bodily organs--that's everything except for intellect and will. So, in one sense, yes, after death we are deaf and blind.
But in another we are not. Since intellect and will perdure, we can still think and choose which affords a vision and hearing of a sort. We still know and love what God gives us to know and love based upon our experience of life prior to death and our anticipation of things to come.
In general, this shouldn't disturb us too terribly since God can neither be seen or heard and yet he can be known and loved. These powers are infinitely more substantial and constitutive of us as human persons.
As for the angels, God gives them to know and love what pertains to their contemplation and ministration. So, they know us to that extent that they need to know us for the execution of God's purpose. They can also exercise influence in time and space according to said knowledge. So, here again, we needn't worry about sense deprivation. They are able to watch over us in a far thicker way than by mere eyes and ears.
@@ThomisticInstitute What a comforting answer, thankyou
@@ThomisticInstitute Jesus can be heard....He is God
Rebirth. As soon as you die.
@@abcdidgh879 You die moment by moment. You are also re-born moment by moment.
Thank you so much
Norm_____________________e
I died and came back before brain death n experienced many things with animals n ppl n no one had to open their mouths to speak n it was a continuous joy increase by flash seconds being greater n greater n I believe I have more authority to speak a out the soul than many others who are faithful to Christ
well. thanks for the presentation. "
Our pleasure!
The Subject of the Immortal Soul - A Bible Examination - worth a view
Thank you Father
Thanks for watching! May the Lord bless you.
Beautiful to know
This is fantastic. Brilliant mind
I’m not catholic, but it was a joy to watch you work, Father
I think it is the notion of information that is very near to this kind of definition of the soul. Information is in DNA (organizing the body) and in such thought processes as knowing and loving. But what is information? Even scientists and contmporary philosophers cannot agree on it but they still use it as a natural basic notion. I think that it is quite similar to the notion of soul - being an essential organizing factor of the material world and still seemingly being somehow independent of it or "above" it. This latter problem is connected to the one of whether mathematics is something exixting in a "Platonian" world of ideals (an idea Roger Penrose supports, among others) or just a practical artifact of material processes of this world.
Paul said "Beware lest any man spoil you through the PHILOSOPHY and vain deceit., after the tradition of Men" ( Col 2:7)
Learning about God through reason and study is good though.
Ask yourself this question: Why were we given the Bible? Why were we given this magnificent book full of insights and teachings, so often beyond just salvation history?
And then ask: Why were we given Reason?
I think the answer is that God wants us to know Him. The study of Sacred Scripture is one way, but the Bible makes it clear many times that God can be known through reason as well.
We thus apply both for this divine enterprise, which we hope will please the Father.
Peace be with you, brother.
@@alonsoACR God gave us indeed the power of reasoning! Paul told the Romans to "serve God with your power of reason" Rom 12:1. This means that blind obedience is not the same as enlightened worship. However the bible also warns against "False reasonings" ( Jas 1:22. 2 Cor 10:5). Reasoning on the scriptures is different to interpreting them with philosophy, which became the norm within the hellenist world of greek philosophy that the majority of the 'church fathers' were schooled in. Mostly, they grew up and studied in this environment and after conversion to 'christianity' made the error of trying to combine and even explain the NT through philosophy. If you just read their essays and letters this should become obvious to any 'reasonable' student! Paul also advised us "Not to go beyond the things written" ( 1 Cor 4:5) Which sadly many theologians did. Footnote; The greek concept of LOGOS was NOT the same as the 'Word' of the apostle John! The greeks believed that LOGOS was 'universal reason' whereas John was merely using the title as one of his descriptions of a PERSON, namely the Son of God, whom he also called the 'true vine', the lamb of God' 'The door' & the 'way'. This misconception contributed greatly to assuming that since 'reason' has been the Father's possession eternally, thus the 'Word' must be God himself, yet an honest look at John chapter 1 show us that John himself, after verse 1, explained WHO the word really was at verse 14 "The Word became flesh and we had a view of his glory, the glory of an... ONLY BEGOTTEN SON FROM A FATHER". So plain and resonable! So then the ' Word is not 'God himself' for as verse 18 shows "No one HAS SEEN GOD at any time!. Yet John and his fellow apostles DID 'see' Jesus' with their on eyes!. This is correct resoning! NOT philosophy and interlectual reasoning but accepting truth as inspired truths are revaled to us.
The Spirit/Ruach/ Nephesh makes our heart beat. Genesis 2:7
“You shall surely not die”
As St Paul said on his Epistles I qoute Vain is our Faith if there’s no resurrection of the dead, to rephrase it Vain is our Faith if the soul spirit is not immortal! K
Thank you father!! I love aquinas!!
One question though; I can’t seem to escape the platonic/cartesian dualism view of the mind-body. If the soul is the form of the body, when the soul is no longer, the body is no longer just as a triangle is no longer when its angles do not add up to 180 degrees. Then when we die, and our soul goes to heaven, that means our body is separated from the soul, then why is there still a body to be buried? If one were to take away the form or the essential property of the body, shouldn’t the body no longer be? Is the body then an accident or the non-essential element of the soul? Just as the color, shape and taste of the unleavened bread is the accidental properties of the Eucharist?
Its easy for me to picture the soul leaving the body and leaving the body behind in a dualistic sense, its not so easy for me to imagine the soul leaving the body in a hylomorphic sense. I guess what im trying to say is that i cant quite see a distinction between thomistic hylomorphism and cartesian/platonic dualism
It is true that St. Thomas and the Scholastics reject the Platonic/Cartesian dualism that sees the soul as completely separable from the body. However, we must make a distinction between substantial form and accidental forms. When the rational soul - which is the substantial form of the human person - departs the body at death, it does not follow that the whole composite being ceases to exist instantaneously. The human being is a unity of body and soul, not just a "ghost in the machine" as the dualists would have it. Rather, the corpse retains the lower powers of the vegetative and sensitive souls, and the shape and organic unity imposed by the rational soul. It is in this sense that the body can be said to "remain" for a time, even while being bereft of its ultimate formal perfection.
We must think of this not as a separation of two distinct substances, but as a change in the internal principles of the one hylomorphic composite. The soul does not simply "leave behind" the body as a discarded accident, but withdraws the higher operations that informed the lower powers.
before St.Thomas Aquinas, what did we believe about the soul?
Before Aquinas "we" didn't exist;)
I'm not a Catholic, but super fascinating.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this answers my question as to why, as it pertains to The Argument From Motion, a human can sit in a chair and decide to get up but a book can't (I know that the change argument doesn't pertain to the accidental series of causes of getting up, but I'm referring to the snap shots of changes that could be viewed at each point in the event)?
I'm new to this, but I think even starting to understand formal causes can change the way a person sees the entire world.
A book cannot make decisions because it has no brain to make them with. This a complete tempest in a teapot about souls based on exactly zero evidence and just nonsense that people made up. People that knew nothing about brains or biochemistry.
As a Catholic I’d like to point out that this reasoning is very flawed. In this case Aquinas started his reasoning with a bias and assumed that a soul already exists. That assumption negated all validity of everything that came after.
What does thomistic institute think about the NDE phenomena? Is it one more confirmation that we have immortal souls?
Thank you father I need this because I grew up with a concept of soul that didn't identify at all with consciousness or mind. It caused me great confusion when I heard all of these ideas about consciousness or the weirdest of them all cosmic consciousness.
don't worry, to a rational person, this doesn't make sense.
@@D3nchanterCosmic consciousness and to speak of consciousness as something separate is indeed non-sensical.
I've been studying about Buddhism and Hinduism and I see this as a strong sign of the incompleteness of their philosophy. They've perceived the same things as us, but they interpreted it wrong.
I have a book to recommend, if you're interested. It connects these Dharmic ideas and conclusions and makes it patent. I forget the name though so tell me if you want it before I dig it up.
@@alonsoACRcould you tell me the title of this book? I came in to spirituality though the teaching of the east. I found my way to Catholicism but I have found myself wondering about the difference of my understandings.
So soul = life I dig it ! I want to see this guy and all the major religious 'leaders' at a debate table.... + Adam Miceli (look him up, very interesting)
Souls equal stuff made up by humans. Life does not need souls.
The “spiritual operations of the soul” as described here seem to line up with what a number of eastern religions call “awareness”. Texts like “Tantra Illuminated” by Christopher D Wallis outline a model that looks incredible similar to the thomistic model of body, emotion, intellect, mind, will, and heart. The overlap between these two suggests to me that, being independently developed in different places, these models are likely to be decent approximations of the truth.
Father, could you please tell me if the souls of people with malformed bodies are also malformed? People who are born deaf, without limbs, and stuff like that? If so, how is that just, and if not, why are their bodies not "normal"?
If a person is born missing a limb or blind, do they have a soul which matches that condition? Or if one has an amputation or goes blind is the soul damaged in the same way?
A defect in matter doesn't say anything about the form of life an organism is. A defect in matter simply prevents the form of a particular creature from being fully implemented in the matter in informs.
2:50 question: If the soul “forms” or “informs” the matter, does a parasite or worm inside a body (say) get “absorbed” in a human soul or is it distinct from the human “matter” that informs the human “soul” - you see where I’m going with this; do Individual cells have a “soul” (RBC can survive for up to 120 days outside the body)? - If the “life breath” (or life principle) distinguishes the soul, how is it localized with individuality (sense of “I”)?
The human rational soul is the substantial form of the body, giving it the principles of life and imbuing matter with humanity. However, other living things within the body, like parasites, have their own intrinsic principles of life and organization. While contained within a human, they remain distinct substantial forms. Individual cells do not possess souls in the strict sense. Their "life" derives from their organization within the unified structure of an embodied soul. The soul is the source of an organism's interiority and subjectivity - its "haecceity" or principle of this-ness. It individuates prime matter into a singular, self-aware whole.
Localization occurs through the soul's relationship to the entire material complex it informs, especially the brain/nervous system through which it exercises powers. So while the soul gives substantial existence to the body as a whole, it does not absorb all lower forms of life within. And cells alone do not equate to the hylomorphic union of soul and body that constitutes a person with inherent dignity. The soul's localization and individuation of prime matter is what makes each of us a unique "I".
@@alphazero5614
Souls are imaginary. They are claimed to be many different things, mostly contradictory. Because they are evidence and fact free nonsense.
Silly question alert - What do friars usually wear under your habit? God bless you.
A soul or spirit of a person after death continues to contain their identity, memories, personality, etc? It is still them?
This is really cool. :)
Is being the form of the body an essential property of the soul? If so, does it become something else, besides a soul, when it's separated from the body?
it is still a soul but desires re-union with the body which happens on the Last Day
Is soul the source of the 'heart beat'? Soul leaving the body means heartbeat ceases?
Does the discovery of the DNA and the mechanisms of biochemistry and development biology somehow undermine this classical notion of the soul as the form of the body? Also, supposedly the higher functions of the soul - the rational part - could be related to the brain and the neo-frontal cortex. Do this new knowledge undermine or require a reconceptualization of the idea of the soul if we are to resist or avoid biological reductionism? Thank you
origin of beeing self consciousness is a real threat to materialism. neurological structure of organisms looks like complicated networks which process enviromental data and act accordingly. but there is no reason or for self consciousness. sure there is a correlation but yeah.
like we know all the events happening inside a neuron while humans activly thinking. but it is just corrolated always developing patterns of electrolytes across membranes really. self sensation and experience is biggest mystery of our time for sure.
@@ertegi64366es we don’t fully understand it. I don’t see any reason to believe there’s anything more than a material brain, however; or if there is, it’s merely an emergent property of a human mind.
The video offers a perspective on the concept of the soul largely grounded in the Aristotelian and Thomistic understanding of the soul as the form or principle of life of a living thing. This understanding is deeply embedded in the metaphysical and philosophical tradition of the Western world, particularly in the Catholic tradition.
1. **Dualism vs. Holistic Views of the Soul**: One critique of this viewpoint might come from the perspective of Cartesian dualism, where the soul and body are seen as fundamentally distinct entities, with the soul being the locus of thought and consciousness. This contrasts with the Thomistic view presented in the transcript, which speaks of a more holistic integration of soul and body, where the soul is not just our consciousness or thought life, but the very form of our bodies. From a dualist perspective, the video's insistence on the soul as the formative and animating principle of the body might seem to unduly reduce the soul to merely a physical or biological function.
2. **Materialist Viewpoints**: The video might also be critiqued from a materialist viewpoint, which denies the existence of non-physical substances such as souls. From this perspective, the discussion of souls as formative and animating principles might seem to be metaphysical speculation without empirical evidence. Materialists might argue that all of the functions attributed to the soul can be more parsimoniously explained by physical processes, such as the functioning of the nervous system and the brain.
3. **Eastern Philosophical Perspectives**: The video's perspective might also be critiqued from the viewpoint of Eastern philosophies, such as Buddhism, which posits a doctrine of 'anatman' or 'no-self', denying the existence of a permanent, unchanging soul or self. From this perspective, the video's assertion of the existence and importance of a soul might seem to be a form of clinging to a concept of selfhood that is ultimately illusory.
4. **Differences in Understanding of "Life Beyond Death"**: The video's discussion of life beyond death from a Thomistic perspective, where the soul is believed to survive death and continue its existence in a spiritual form, might be critiqued from the perspective of other religious or philosophical traditions with different understandings of life after death. For example, from the perspective of reincarnation as understood in Hinduism and Buddhism, the idea of a soul surviving death in a spiritual form might seem to be a partial or limited understanding of the ongoing cycle of birth, death, and rebirth.
5. **Rational Soul and Animals**: The video's discussion of humans as possessing a 'rational soul' or 'spirit' that distinguishes them from other living things might be critiqued from the viewpoint of more recent understandings of animal cognition. Increasing evidence of complex cognitive abilities in animals might challenge the traditional Aristotelian and Thomistic distinction between 'animal souls' and 'rational souls'.
While the video presents a comprehensive and nuanced view of the soul from a Thomistic perspective, it leaves room for critique and discussion from various philosophical and religious viewpoints. The question of the nature of the soul is a deeply complex and multifaceted one, with a rich history of debate and divergence across different intellectual traditions.
The question of the nature is due to it being made up claims based on no evidence at all. Its largely due to people knowing exactly nothing about how brains work and even less about biochemistry. Discussing things based on zero evidence and complete ignorance tends to engender complex nonsense. Without verifiable evidence for anything about souls, not even that they exist, its a tempest in a teapot.
Rational souls is an oxymoron for without verifiable evidence, the belief in any kind of soul is irrational.
That was fun.
* Soul Made Simple *
I am a soul, a point of light/energy, incorporeal, bodiless, endless, genderless, nameless
The soul resides in the middle of the forehead (the third eye)
The main faculties of the soul are - Mind, Intellect, Subconscious Mind (Memories, habits, impressions)
The combination of these faculties determines the soul's (our) Personality
The Original qualities (virtues) of the soul are - Purity, Peace, Love, Humility, Happiness...
Its enemy, the vices - Ego, Lust, Attachment, Anger, Greed...
A body without a soul is a corpse.
ok, does this mean if i lose my leg in a car accident, my soul has been injured? if not, what's wrong with that statement.
After bodily death, the soul continues to live [eternally?] on this higher plane simply by continuing to know and to love?
This philosophy of Soul is based in what? Does Scripture inform us of these points? Why does pagan Greek philosophy become a lens for our understanding of the True God?
Any takers?
How does DNA fit into this explanation?
Thanks.
Do non-human souls (such as grass in the example) continue to exist after death as well?
St. Thomas would argue that they do not since they lack an operation that transcends their bodily organs.
Thanks! Something to ponder next time I’m mowing the lawn!
@@ThomisticInstitute Hay This was a great video!
im just wondering, So is the same true for animals(like dogs or cats)? would that mean that our evolutionary ancestors also didnt have immortal souls and there for didn't get into heaven? does that mean a soul can change over time?
@@slumbertrap6506 Great questions! In St. Thomas's understanding, a soul is just what makes a thing to be alive. So plants have souls (vegetative souls) and animals have souls (sensory souls) and men have souls (rational soul). The soul corresponds with the life form, so it does not change or evolve. St. Thomas would teach that plants and animals do not go to heaven. You might also find this video helpful: th-cam.com/video/wQFmEw7-Iz8/w-d-xo.html
Isn't the separate soul in need of an essence? Is it possible that the human essence is meant to be the conjunction of a living human body with a unique essence of an individual human soul, an essence that is unique and not shared like the human essence is shared, but like the angels who don't share essence?
If separated human souls don't have an essence, what does set the limits to their being and what differentiates one soul from the other?
Could it be that the human essence is collective, in a sense, like the divine essence? In what way? In the way that is a relational essence that can only materialize and be shared by "relational substances."
Isn't the human essence-that is, humanity-, after all, both male and female, and doesn't it materialize into separate complementary substances called to exist in a generative relationship of love?
Isn't this kind of in the way that the divine essence can only be shared by relational individuations that cannot but exist in unity of substance?
I have a question about the spirituality of the human soul.
In the video, you say that abstract knowledge of universals, such as triangle, cannot be the working of an organ.
Suppose an accomplished mathematician is driving his car and
he is involved in an auto accident resulting in a serious and
permanent brain injury.
After this injury, he no longer has the abstract knowledge of
triangle that he had before the injury, but he is still alive. Doesn't that mean that
an organ, in this case the brain, is (or was) responsible for
the mathematician's abstract knowledge of triangle?
Good question
Or is it possible the bodily organ is necessary for having the knowledge, but not sufficient? For example, my car cannot run without working spark plugs - if you destroyed them, my car would not operate. But does it follow that so long as I have working spark plugs, my car will run?
The brain is the medium, consciousness itself is the spiritual, incorporeal soul element. In such a case, while the mathematician himself may not be able to apprehend a mathematical universal, it doesn’t change the fact that the universal exists, and it’s the existence of the universal that’s the proof. Math is discovered, it’s metaphysical and it’s infinite. How, in a naturalist worldview, could finite matter and energy generate metaphysical infinity? it’s rather abstract, but a compelling argument after consideration
As my own body decays, the Resurrection of the Flesh is a dogma I have increasing difficulty with. To begin with, what body? And do we get our bodies back just because He got His?
Taking her cue from Aristotle, Shakespeare's Last Pagan, Cleopatra, says "I am fire and air/My other elements I commit to base nature". That doesn't sound bad to me.
I'm no Hindu/Buddhist. I think that immortality without an intact ego is BS. I mean, what's the point? But why would I want my mutable flesh?
Wikipedia:
"In many religious and philosophical traditions, there is a belief of "an immaterial aspect or essence of a living being", generally applied to humans, called the soul. In lay terms the soul is the spiritual essence of a person, which includes our identity, personality, and memories that is believed to be able to survive our physical death."
I am afraid your personal identity does not survive the death of the body regardless of what people may believe."
My idea of a soul is the energy field that contracts into galaxies, clouds and living organisms and then expands into formless space. The so called individual is an energetic pattern that forms briefly as a body and then dissipates.
I'm not sure if knowing is possible without organs. I probably wouldn't be able to calculate the area of a triangle if I got lobotomized or if I was born with anencephaly
The idea is that the soul uses the body and its senses/ experiences in order to know. The soul needs the body to know. The body needs the soul to make sense of its experiences. So you are right. If we can't experience the world around us, then we can not "know".
The fundamental truth would still exist even if everybody on Earth was unaware of it.
The part that I can't seem to get past is the "Proof by universal knowledge". How do we understand this is not the work of corporeal organs? A skeptic would be inclined to say that this knowledge isn't so different from other types of knowledge and you might even be mistaken in believing something to be universal.
What would you say to someone who argues that knowledge is emergent from cognitive systems such as memory, imagination, etc.?
I would say cognitive faculties such as memory and imagination are certainly instrumental means by which human persons come to know various states of affairs, however, to locate knowledge itself within such material and emergent systems would be to fall prey to a one-sided empiricism. We must distinguish between the efficient causes of knowledge and its formal and final causes.
The intellect is not passively shaped by the data of sense experience alone, but rather possesses an active, immaterial nature whereby it can abstract universal and necessary concepts from particular sense data. Basically, the human mind is not merely the sum of its cognitive parts, but possesses an irreducible noetic dimension. Its final cause (telos) is nothing less than intellect of the beatific vision.
Memory and imagination are indispensable means for reasoning about empirical matters, but on their own they are insufficient to explain phenomena like self-awareness, free will, or our capacity for necessary and universal judgments, which are beyond the contingent and particular. One must therefore posit an intellectual principle that is simply not emergent from or reducible to material processes and structures.
TLDR; he would risk committing the fallacy of composition by conflating knowledge with its conditions without adequately distinguishing formal from efficient causality.
The ending of this kinda freaked me out lol. Can someone point me to what the “resurrection of the body” means and what Catholics say happens to the soul right upon death?
What about time? Humans perceive time as the succession of events. When you die, you cannot see, hear, touch or smell..so (logically) there could be no perception of time. Is this correct? As for perceiving non-material spirits-why would you be able to do this without senses?
If a body is dysfunctional, as in the case of an epileptic or mentally ill or terminally ill person, and the soul is the form of the body, does that mean his soul is defective?
It's a little confusing. Isn't the ability to know something of all triangles also altered by a head injury? I think this explanation is close, but there's something missing and I don't know what it is.
Thank you! Could you provide some reliable literature on these "aspects" of the human person, which are: body, soul, and spirit? How does this compare to the Greek distinction of soma, psyche and pneuma. How this idea developed until today. I really need to understand where psychology can be placed in this pattern (as modern science). Please, please help me.
Justyna, take a look at the next two videos (Body and Soul, Powers of the Soul - A Closer Look), which drop today and Wednesday. They should answer most of your questions. If not, follow up!
@lary Snw Can you clarify what you mean when you say that “body and soul are one in the same”?
‘One and the same’ usually refers to different names for the same thing: Clark Kent and Superman are one and the same person, numerically identical. They are not two persons, but one person considered under two aspects - his personal name and his superhero persona, or alter ego. 3+3 is one and the same with 1+5 - considered in terms of the resultant quantity, both are identically equal to 6. You can consider a sum also as a path of aggregation, or way of arriving at a quantity, in which case they are not one and the same - it is a different thing for you to bring three apples to the picnic and I bring three, than it is for you to bring one and I bring five.
‘One and the same’ usually does not refer to distinct parts of a whole, as constitutive components, as if I could say that the brain and the pancreas are one and the same because they are both organs of the human body. They are organs supporting one and the same life, but it does not make them identical, or absolutely and simply the same, as if it would be of little consequence for the doctor, by mistake, to remove your brain instead of your pancreas.
In what sense are body and soul one and the same? Are they inseparable, like the two sides of a coin? Are you saying that they are co-constitutive of man, either as parts to a whole, or as semi-wholistic in their own right but essentially and inseparably united? Something else?
You say that we are a soul, not that we have a soul. Would you say the same for any part of a whole, like the pancreas - not that you have a pancreas, or that together with other organs and systems it constitutes you, but that you are a pancreas? Would you say of a U.S. quarter-dollar that it is a heads or is a tails, not in the way it lands after a flip but in its very essence, considered in itself?
What distinction, then, are you willing to make between body and soul? If I am a soul, not a body-soul composite, then is my body extraneous to what I am? Is the body an illusion or apparition of the soul? If they are identical, or two names for one and the same thing, is the “dust of the earth” the same as the “breath” which comes from God and goes into the nostrils? Is the body the same as the thing which comes from outside the body and goes into it? Is a corpse, instead of a body without a soul, rather a dead body and therefore a dead soul?
When Jesus says in Matthew 10:28, “do not be afraid of those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell,” is he telling us to not be afraid of something, and to be afraid of that very thing, as if I were to point to a bear and say “do not be afraid of that bear; instead, be afraid of that bear”? Is he saying that the thing which man has no power over (soul), and the thing which man has power over (body), are in fact identical? He is saying exactly what he seems to be saying: body and soul, though joined into one composite thing called a human person, are not strictly identical, even though they coordinate in and constitute one and the same individual man. Bodies are destroyed every day by the direct action of man, and this causes death, which is the separation of soul from body - and this is an unnatural state. But the soul is not destroyed.
When it is said in Ezekiel that the “soul who sins … will die,” this is consistent with the view than man is a composition of body and soul. The soul is more primary in man, or has more dignity, because it is the image of God and not the ‘dust of the earth’ in him (the dust is not evil, but it is lower than the image of God). In other words, what Ezekiel is saying is that people will die, and he’s doing it in a way that we do all the time: he’s referring to a complex thing, having body and soul, according to what is most dignified in that thing and most constitutive of it (the soul) - man’s soul is most properly where the sin is said to reside, and without the soul man would be like the beasts, incapable of sin. Ezekiel is not intending here to indicate something about the soul as such - is it tangential to his purpose. Jesus, on the other hand, says explicitly that man cannot kill the soul. If Jesus is not saying this, he is contradicting himself and speaking like a crazy person. Ezekiel can be read as saying nothing about the soul itself being annihilated, without requiring that Ezekiel be contradicting himself or speaking nonsense.
It’s true that the soul is not invincible, or (like God) incapable of being destroyed. Rather, it cannot be destroyed by man, whereas the body can. God can destroy the soul because the soul is created, by God, which means that it received its existence from Him, who sustains it in being and remains absolutely sovereign over it.
@lary Snw The sense of Genesis 2:7 is that man became a living being from God - God gives man his life. And what makes man alive? His soul, so that without the soul he becomes a corpse, or the body of a man, but he is not a man. The question of the immortality of that soul is, in a way, separate - for example, I could concede that the soul dies with the man, or the man dies because the soul dies. In other words, my view is more about the distinction between body and soul, and their relation, not about the immortality of the soul.
What did you mean when you said that "body and soul are one and the same"? Two names for the same thing?
@lary Snw "One and the same," as in inseparable?
I have heard from a Catholic theologian that psyche means the soul when it turns to the natural world (of the body) - thus, when it is focused "downwards" - and pneuma means the same soul when it turns to the transcendent world of God - thus when it is focused "upwards". Psyche means the natural side, endeavours of the soul, pneuma means the supernatural ones. The basic vocation of human beings - given from God - is that the pneuma (the "upward aspect and activity of the soul") enlighten, penetrate and rule the psyche so that divinity appear in this world through our psyche, in and around us. In short, we must live in prayer and faith.
Is this from a book or TV show?
Face the world with soul. By Sardello
Mens Sano in Corpore Sana! A healthy mind in a healthy body! St Thomas Aquainas
Minds run on the brain, which is part of the body and ill health inherently effects it. That phrase did not come from Aquinas either.
Wikipedia
The phrase comes from Satire X of the Roman poet Juvenal (10.356). It is the first in a list of what is desirable in life:
Can you make a video on the Thomistic understanding of Free Will and perhaps respond to arguments against it?
Here you go: th-cam.com/video/oQ5P0k6Pwb4/w-d-xo.html
@@ThomisticInstitute Father, can you (or have you) done a video about Heaven after the final Judgement? (I really think it would be us walking around with Jesus in a beautiful Kingdom. St. Thomas Aquinas said that in Heaven our bodies can fly as it is subject to the soul, are my thoughts similar to The Infallible Teachings of The Church?)
Also somewhere in Scripture, we're told about "The New Heaven and NEW EARTH".
So, does that mean no eternal happiness for us, but we have to come back to earth?
May The Immaculate Heart be your Refuge!
Can you do one on AGI?
Thank you for the time and dedication put on this videos father, I'd like to ask if we can account celular activity in a human cigot asthe working of the soul? even though its has not develop a proper body yet but its still a group mother cells
How the Lord We'll give us the ability to find soul of our beloved ones, As my recently departed wife after 40 years, as she left so unexpextedly as her nurses and doctors neglected her!
once I depart from this earthly life, will I be able to be with her & see her? What literature text or facts do you have to demonstrate that? 😥
Take Courage, brother!
"I have told you this so that you might have peace in me. In the world you will have trouble, but take courage, I have conquered the world.” - John 16:33
"When the poor man died, he was carried away by angels to the bosom of Abraham." - Luke 16:22 Your guardian angel meets you and leads you home.
"So we are always courageous, although we know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, for we walk by faith, not by sight. Yet we are courageous, and we would rather leave the body and go home to the Lord. Therefore, we aspire to please him, whether we are at home or away. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive recompense, according to what he did in the body, whether good or evil." - 2 Cor 5:6-10 We meet Jesus who we see, recognize and worship with the eyes of faith.
Luke 16:19-31 shows that you are conscious. You think, feel, speak, and remember.
Revelation 4-5 shows that we worship with the angels before the throne of God.
Luke 9:28-36 shows that we will know, recognize, and communicate with the other souls in heaven.
@@jlad225 I shall remain thankful for the passages sited...feel free to provide additional, especially as to where the holy scripture Provide glimpse of hope that received our loved one at the time before departure as well! The Lord's Blessings!
I have a question. Is heaven a physical place? Is it somewhere in another galaxy or something? Cuz I don't see the point of resurrecting the body if it's not a physical place
No, its not a physical place. So you're right there would be no point or sense in a physical resurection to a spiritual realm.
The Bible teaches that only a select number will be resurrected to heaven but they are remade to heavenly life for a purpose, to serve in God's kingdom.
The general resurrection of mankind is to earth
"The righteous will possess the earth, And they will live forever on it." Psalms 37:29
The earth was made for man to live on, it's been God's purpose from the beginning and what he purposes will happen.
It is both. Christ is an example of being both Spiritual and Physical.
When He passed through the wall, the disciples feared that He is a ghost/spirit based on their traditional belief. But He proved them He is not by letting them touch Him, which implies that He is physical.
Philosophy of science and religion is explained in the form of body, soul and the spirit of human body.
trust me, science was nowhere to be found in this video
👉🌞how to teach?
😊🤔👉blood connected to character previous 🕵️
Having a hard time with this one , im trying very hard to believe , its easier some days than others
KOINE Greek: EU-DAIMON-ia = HAPPINESS (or the good "demon" within).
This was so clearly explained....Thank you, Father.....Thanks from the Phils
Wouldn't it be useful to distinguish between soul and spirit where the soul is the unity of body and spirit?
I did nt realise he was a father and thought he was wearing a hoodie until i looked at the comments omg
Great video! Going to see if I can share for a Sunday school class. Will you all do a video analyzing the “Fined Tuned Universe” theory in science?
Can you talk about reincarnation on the Thomistic view?
When you were conceived, did God create your soul on the spot or did your soul come into existence just like your body, from your parents?
Wait, you're saying if a person gets amputated before death their soul will be a stomp for all the rest of time?
I'm not sure if animals can be characterized as wholly irrational.
Thanks for the presentation! The "full body amputation" scenario is a great way to conceptualize what disembodiment is like. Interestingly, it only started feeling weird once the head disappeared! Perhaps, the "head" is the actual person, or the spirit is the form of the head...something to ponder about...🤔
Probably cause that where most of your sensory capabilities are. Like if the ears eyes nose and mouth, were say, on your hand, that would now be the center of your experience. As such in that case you’d likely be able to imagine perfectly not having a head, even if that’s still where the brain was, because as far as your experience of the world is concerned, the hand would be where “you” are. If that makes any sense.
What about people who are blind or people born with birth defects like missing limbs? If the soul forms the body.
If we assume that Aquinas' conception of soul is true, these ailments can still be caused by faulty DNA. DNA synthesizes the proteins, in other words the building-blocks, of your body. Without having access to the all resources it needs, a soul might fail to make a body function as it should.
It's the same reason malnutrition causes bodily problems.
Oh you are special... :) I felt thirsty until I found you and all the friars here in YT...
Really appreciate this video.
These videos are like when you realize that salad can taste good
Certainly one of the most striking compliments we've received. Thanks for watching!
thank you for this, helped a lot. :)
We're glad to hear it! Thanks for taking the time to watch and comment. May the Lord bless you!
Re: Knowledge: Isn't knowledge stored in a physical part of the brain? If damage is done to someone's brain, he may forget the formula for finding the area of the triangle. How then is knowledge spiritual?
Good question
Knowledge is stored in the passive intellect, a nonmaterial power. When the brain is damaged, the imagination is impeded and therefore one is unable to consider that which he has previously understood.
"From experience it is clear that he who has already acquired intelligible knowledge through intellectual appearances, is not able actually to consider the knowledge he has unless some phantasm comes to mind. And this is why injury to the organ of imagination impedes a man not only in newly understanding something, but also in considering that which he has previously understood, as is clear in the mad.”
- St. Thomas Aquinas.
I also looked at the brain as hardware, and consciousness as software. Although I'm not religious
Knowledge is just an understanding of truth. The truth is discovered, not created. It exists independantly of humans.
Enlighten me, please? A source said that Aquinas believed that when the body dies, the soul also dies (mortal). This video says that human soul can survive death, therefore it is immortal. Which of these is true?
@lary Snw ok what happens to souls at the resurrection at Great white throne , do the damned get erased from existence
@@donew1thita11yes. They will no longer exist. They will for eternity have no consciousness. We cannot blame God for that. He gave everything He can to warn us of what results of our choices will be.
Though He gave us free will to choose goodness and life or evil and death, He always wish for us to choose goodness and life. That is why He even sent His Son as our example, a pattern of obedience to God. That though we will die, as He ressurected, so shall all who believes in Him or live as how He lived.
Wonderful content! But I’ve always wondered as a result of Thomas’s teaching, are the saints really “there” in heaven? If we really are both soul and body as inextricably linked as Aquinas says we are, does that mean the saints and everyone in heaven and hell aren’t really there until the resurrection of the dead?
Thanks for your question! The separated souls of the saints are not present anywhere locally, because they don't have bodies. But yes, in the resurrection, bodies will be restored, and so will "being there."
Sorry that's not an answer since heaven is no physical place either
@@mauijttewaal Since we experience heaven and hell in our body that body has to BE somewhere so heaven is a physical place.
Small problem. According to Jesus, "No man hath ascended to heaven".
@@eltonron1558 Not true.
Excellent teachings if you can provide this knowledge in different languages like Spanish or Portugues. The Christianity world will be appreciate it very much with substitutes.
Thanks and God bless you
Portuguese subtitles are available if you click settings (gear)
Finally I needed this. I would ask however a point about Animals. If the Principle of the Rational Soul is the Universals (for knowing) then why do Dogs have it Edit:"(I used Dogs as an example but I am not writing that other animals do not do the following.)". Dogs are able to sense similarities between different things compared to a universal because how then can it recognise it's own species and then proceed to reproduction. I hope you can answer.
Thank You.
By the way I am unable to interact with comments so please do it again. Sorry.
@@johnnotrealname8168 So, the type of universal knowledge described is proper to a rational soul which can abstract forms, make judgments thereupon, and reason out the implications. Rationality is associated (for Aristotle and St. Thomas) with immateriality and there immortality. That's the basic argument. As for animal souls, we needn't be shocked that they exhibit behaviors resembling that of man (since the lower creation at its ceiling touches the higher order at its floor, according to Pseudo-Dionysius). St. Thomas, though, would attribute this to the exercise of the estimative sense, which functions in animals as a kind of "reason." Prof. Mark Barker has written very excellently and compelling about this theme if you care to read more.
@@ThomisticInstitute Thank You very much for this explanation. It has cleared up many misconceptions.
I am doing an EPQ (Extended Project Qualification and the topic is Virtues and Films. In it I intend to determine the competency of certain films in showing the Cardinal Virtues. I am using the Summa Theologica and Father Joseph Rickaby S.J. as my two primary resources. The main issues I have is understanding the various allusions to the Passions, Will and nature of the Virtues. Is it okay if you send me any useful links or explanations. Sorry and Thank You once again.
@@johnnotrealname8168 You can start with these videos: 1. On Powers of the Souls - th-cam.com/video/R2_t7nW6MZQ/w-d-xo.html | 2. On Habits - th-cam.com/video/Evisxy9Lrp8/w-d-xo.html | We also have videos coming out in a couple of weeks on beatitude, human action, the fonts of morality, two on passions, one on habits, and one on virtue. Stay tuned!