Subnostr

What if the human 'soul' is the predisposition one takes on new encounters in life (based on previous events).

Forcing someone to be less optimistic or good-faith-assuming because you're collectively being complete assholes to them, may well be a contribution to "destroying one's soul". Often a hint of "nature" of someone is revealed quickly, but we have trouble interpreting it correctly.

It makes you wonder how invisible the soul is and how blind many are to the true impact they have on (others') life.

For all the searching humans have done for the 'soul', I truly wonder if it is something this simple yet this fundamentally rooted in human intelligence, both knowledge and experience.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

anonymous 10mo ago

This wasn't actually meant as an attack, but it served as a use case. This is a genuine attempt at understanding and I think this simple statement captures more of human nature and the "(magical) essence" that we like to attribute to the soul.

However, the leads up to this reach back 30+ years. For example, I've wondered for a long while, how much of what we see when looking at a person's face are the factual matters: position of lips, skin, folds, position of eyes. And how much is interpretation of emotion: muscle movement as the laugh or frown is shaped. Simply the change of facial expression betrays hints of 'disgust' or 'surprise'. So if, for example, only 40% is factual, then the rest is (strictly?) bound to interpretation. However, if done correctly, does reveal a lot of what exactly is 'the attitude in an encounter'. Ironically, we sometimes claim to see people's soul in their eyes. I think this definition captures so much of what we want the 'soul' to be or expect it is without any undefined excesses parts.

A simple definition of an intangible concept.