Edited and numbered for convienience by 6§w§
FWIW, I am trying to make fundamental arguments. It’s very difficult to come up with a cite for the idea that there is or isn’t a soul or self. The cite I did use earlier is from what I would consider a religious text and, as such, is pretty shaky. I really only offered it as a demonstration that I did not come up with the idea that there is no self and that it has some history.
I tried to find a cite about knowing and all I could come up with was something attributed to Alan Watts:
Somehow, that doesn’t feel like a cite either, but it moves things in the right direction:
Re #1— What constitutes a deeper thought or a deeper emotion? Another way of asking the same question might be, What makes one part of the self more inward than another?
This is anecdotal, but I remember being at a party where many of my friends, including my girlfriend, were tripping on acid and smoking pot. I had to work the next day, so I just had a few beers. I ended up leaving because, for example, my girlfriend asked me to put my hand in the beer cooler all the way to the bottom.
“Can’t you *feeeeel * that?” She asked, as though I should be experiencing Samadhi.
Of course, I could not.
The point is that everyone seemed intensely turned-on by the smallest things. Bread inspired a deep conversation. Did LSD make bread and ice water deep subjects? Should I have expected my friends to have a new sense of inner connectedness with ice water the morning after?
In another thread, it was suggested that certain biblical phrases and other literature could elicit spiritual responses. If I read the 23rd psalm and feel nothing, would that be a deep inner apathy? I have said facetiously that I cannot plumb the depths of my apathy regarding Brittney Spears. Is my innermost self boring or bored?
I sometimes draw cartoons. They are silly, dull, bland and poorly drawn. But at times they seem full of verve and élan to me. More often than not, I throw them away when I’m done. Am I throwing away some important link to my inner self? Should I expect anyone else to recognize them as such?
I apologize for so much anecdotal testimony, but it seems unavoidable when talking about something as subjective as the self.
Re #2— Making a distinction between innermost self and soul is like differentiating between the tall, pink, mother-of-pearl horned unicorn and the small, blue, ivory horned unicorn.
Or, it’s like saying that a pink hatted, tattooed, leprechaun shouldn’t properly be called a leprechaun. Does it really make any difference if someone claims their innermost self left their body or that their innermost self will go to heaven when they die?
As to where it arises, ‘it’ arises in the imagination. I do not mean that pejoratively; the imagination plays a crucial role in the day-to-day lives of every single functional, living human being.
I’m somewhat confused by your use of the term, authentic. I think I get it, but maybe you could clarify for me. I’m feeling more than a little out of my depth.
Re #3— Let me try to sidestep your question by asking a different one: Have you ever had the experience where some deeply held belief fades or changes completely? Or, something that just doesn’t feel right is exposed as prejudice or bigotry?
(I am not trying to be insulting or provocative — though I am wearing a rather low-cut t shirt today. I have no reason to accuse anyone of either prejudice or bigotry.)
Can racism, sexism or any other -ism be said to be a deep spiritual belief? If one changes does that constitute a corruption of the soul?
I know those aren’t deep penetrating questions and I’m not well founded in academic citations or formal philosophic arguments. I am trying to take the conversation seriously though, and despite my clumsy GD skillz, I am not simply trying to raise hackles.