A problem of Gradualism and the Survival of the Fittest within Evolutionary Theory.

[Roy]

The soul of man is essentially a spirit, but virtually material. The souls of animals and plants are material.

Plants do not possess senses as you say.

Must remember to add 'botany' to cluelessness list.

I wonder how much the soul of a tree weighs? Or a hippo?

[tabibito]

Some doctor back in the early 1900s claimed that the weight of a person who died dropped by about 21 grams at the moment of expiry. However ... the methodology is highly suspect to say the least - and the results haven't been experimentally duplicated. (I did hear tell though that this is consistent across all species ... except for chickens ... chickens gain 21 grams.)

[Roy]

Some doctor back in the early 1900s claimed that the weight of a person who died dropped by about 21 grams at the moment of expiry. However ... the methodology is highly suspect to say the least - and the results haven't been experimentally duplicated. (I did hear tell though that this is consistent across all species ... except for chickens ... chickens gain 21 grams.)

That could be difficult for hummingbirds, jaraguas and Madagascan chameleons, all of which weigh much less than 21g.

[TheLurch]

That could be difficult for hummingbirds, jaraguas and Madagascan chameleons, all of which weigh much less than 21g.

Undoubtedly JM will now explain why there's a weight cutoff for having a soul.

[shunyadragon]

IIRC goobers are peanuts.

In my childhood they had a more graphic meaning of gobs of slimy snot, but nonetheless both are descriptive.

[JohnMartin]

So if I cut a branch off a tree, the soul (being indivisible) remains with the tree, not the branch. If I then encourage that branch to take root and grow into another tree, the new tree has no soul. This is particularly problematic with species such as brambles, ivy and bindweed that take root wherever branches touch ground, since and arcing bramble branch that takes root at both ends can be chopped in half with both ends surviving as equally viable individual plants.

Banana trees and some varieties of tomatoes, melons, oranges and grapes are propagated entirely by cuttings, because they are seedless. Since they are all developed from parts chopped off the body, none of them have souls, unless there is somewhere a single very ancient banana tree that still has a soul.

If I take a sapling and chop off its roots, the soul stays with the sapling. If I then graft the sapling onto the trunk of another tree, the combination of tree plus sapling has two souls. Every additional sapling I graft onto the tree then adds another soul, and I can produce a tree with over 100 souls if I so desire. Note that the souls of this hypothetical tree wouldn't combine into a single large soul, since adding parts does not increase the size of a soul.

Comment on the Soul - The soul is the first act of a physical organic body. For, the physical body is a substance. An act is the form. The soul is the first form (act) of a substance (physical organic body). The first form of a substance is the form of substance. The form of substance is the substantial form. Therefore, the soul is the substantial form of the physical organic body. But a physical organic body is a living body. Therefore, the soul is the substantial form of a living body. Or the first act of a living body, whereby a body lives and acts accordingly from life.

The soul as a substantial form of the body, is included in the body as a (physical essential) part of the body. The soul composes with the body, by metaphysical composition, whereby the soul itself formally grants the matter that it be an organic body. The soul's of plants and animals are material and therefore not subsistent. That is, a material soul does not exist apart from the organic body. A material soul is said to be educed from the potency of matter^**. Therefore wherever there is a part of a plant cut off from the plant, provided there is sufficient organisation in the branch, the former soul remains in the organism from which the dissected part was separated, and a new soul is educed from matter in the part cut off.

A form such as the soul which requires diversity, or organisation of parts, does not equally have itself (the soul) towards the whole and the parts. Therefore the soul is not divided according the division of the quantity of an organic body. So when an organic body is divided, the soul is not divided. The soul has no extension throughout the quantity of the body. The soul of the divided part (cut off branch) is is educed from the potency of matter and is of the same species as the whole organic body (the tree).

When two living bodies are attached to each other, such as through grafting, the soul whereby the part is alive in its state of separation, is reduced into the potency of matter. And the matter, being drawn into the unity of the receiving organism, begins to be informed by the soul of this latter.

^** Eduction is the process whereby the form is brought over from potency to act. The form is caused by a proportionate agent, which supplies for the deficiency of matter from act that the rise of the form to act, and its maintenance in act, is dependent on the potency of the matter. For example an agent acts to cause heat in water. The water has a potency actualised by the fire as a proportionate agent. Similarly, the material soul is educed from matter through an efficient cause.

How does an acorn acquire a soul? Does the acorn obtain its soul before it falls from the parent tree, in which case you have an organism with multiple souls (it can't have a single divided one, since souls are intrinsically indivisible)? Does it obtain its soul after it falls from the tree, in which case you temporarily have a soulless organism? Or does its soul arrive at the exact moment of separation? If the latter, that again leads to wondering what happens if the acorn is on a soulless branch cut off the tree before the acorn falls. And what about the acorn cup? Some acorns fall with their cups still attached, some fall without them. Does the soul appear when the acorn separates from the cup, or the cup from the tree? And how does this work with plants such as bromeliads or spiderworts or mangroves where the child plants sprout and mature before they separate from the parent?

JM's ideas fall apart completely when applied to botany.

Same answer as above. Any living seeds detached from the main plant body have a soul educed from matter. Any living body has a soul, and the soul is not extended and therefore not divided when the body is divided. A divided body only provides the occassion for a new eduction of soul.

JM

[JohnMartin]

That could be difficult for hummingbirds, jaraguas and Madagascan chameleons, all of which weigh much less than 21g.

The soul is not identified with bodily quantity nor of mass, or weight. The soul is that form of the substance which informs the body to be a living body. Quantity of a body and its associated mass and weight are really distinct from the substance. Primary matter is the cause of individuation of bodies and consequently the root cause of quantity. As such a soul does not cause quantity, nor mass, nor weight. So when a plant, animal, or man dies and the soul as the act of life of the body leaves the body, we should not expect the body weight to change because of the removal of the soul.

JM

[JohnMartin]

Still waiting for any evidence of a soul or that hylomorphism exists.

Also waiting for evidence that John Martin isn't a time traveler from the 14th century.

The soul as the substantial form saves the specificity of the living body, which is diverse from the non-living body. Both the living and non-living bodies have substantial forms as the first act of the body as a substance. The substantial form of a living body is the soul as the first act of the body as a living body. The substantial form (SF) is required to account for the act of life within a body. The doctrine of SF is part of hylomorphism.

An alterative to hylomorphism is the mechanicist understanding of a body. The mechanicist view reduces life down to the efficient causes of chemicals and biological/organic causes without the formal cause of life. The mechanicist view does not properly account for the specific difference between life and non life as that of form and non form. Accordingly the mechanicist view cannot properly account for the diversity of immanent action in living bodies and extrinsic action in non living bodies. Living bodies have action that is automotive (moved from self), immanent with an inward term of the act. For example, nutrition is an immanent act inside the animal, directed towards the nourishment of the animal as the immanent term of the automotive act (from the animal).

Non living bodies have heteromotive (moved by another) action, which is extrinsic and has an extrinsic term to the act. For example, a man moves the pen to write the poem. The motion of the pen is from another, extrinsic to the pen, with an end of the motion of the pen in the poem which is extrinsic to the pen.

The real diversity between living and non-living bodies is only properly accounted for in hylomorphism.

JM

[Tassman]

The soul is not identified with bodily quantity nor of mass, or weight. The soul is that form of the substance which informs the body to be a living body. Quantity of a body and its associated mass and weight are really distinct from the substance. Primary matter is the cause of individuation of bodies and consequently the root cause of quantity. As such a soul does not cause quantity, nor mass, nor weight. So when a plant, animal, or man dies and the soul as the act of life of the body leaves the body, we should not expect the body weight to change because of the removal of the soul. JM

[JohnMartin]

The points of contact as you refer are the powers (can do, can be) within the spiritual soul for vegetative and sensitive life.

JM

[JohnMartin]

The soul as the substantial form saves the specificity of the living body, which is diverse from the non-living body. Both the living and non-living bodies have substantial forms as the first act of the body as a substance. The substantial form of a living body is the soul as the first act of the body as a living body. The substantial form (SF) is required to account for the act of life within a body. The doctrine of SF is part of hylomorphism.

An alterative to hylomorphism is the mechanicist understanding of a body. The mechanicist view reduces life down to the efficient causes of chemicals and biological/organic causes without the formal cause of life. The mechanicist view does not properly account for the specific difference between life and non life as that of form and non form. Accordingly the mechanicist view cannot properly account for the diversity of immanent action in living bodies and extrinsic action in non living bodies. Living bodies have action that is automotive (moved from self), immanent with an inward term of the act. For example, nutrition is an immanent act inside the animal, directed towards the nourishment of the animal as the immanent term of the automotive act (from the animal).

Non living bodies have heteromotive (moved by another) action, which is extrinsic and has an extrinsic term to the act. For example, a man moves the pen to write the poem. The motion of the pen is from another, extrinsic to the pen, with an end of the motion of the pen in the poem which is extrinsic to the pen.

The real diversity between living and non-living bodies is only properly accounted for in hylomorphism.

JM

[Tassman]

[Roy]

Therefore wherever there is a part of a plant cut off from the plant, provided there is sufficient organisation in the branch, the former soul remains in the organism from which the dissected part was separated, and a new soul is educed from matter in the part cut off.

When two living bodies are attached to each other, such as through grafting, the soul whereby the part is alive in its state of separation, is reduced into the potency of matter.

Very pretty. Got any evidence for this flight of imagination? Any way in which it can be verified? Any reason at all to believe it's not just a fantasy invented to cover a gaping hole in your ridiculous theories?

[Roy]

The soul is not identified with bodily quantity nor of mass, or weight.

Then it's not material.

Humpty Dumpty impersonation in 5, 4, 3, ...

[JohnMartin]

Then it's not material.

Humpty Dumpty impersonation in 5, 4, 3, ...

An argument via weblink will not be responded to.

JM