I agree that HopeFox is onto something there: most people think great works of art, or unique features of the natural world have value, but that has nothing to do with having a soul...it has to do with irredicubility.An atom-by-atom duplicate oft the Mona Lisa wouldl, not be the Mona Lisa, it would be a great work of science...
Well, it has nothing to do with what you think of as a ‘soul’.
Personally, I’m not that taken with the local tendency to demand that any problematic word be tabooed. But I think that it might have been worthwhile to make that demand of HopeFox when she first used the word ‘soul’.
Given my own background, I immediately attached a connotation of immortality upon seeing the word. And for that reason, I was puzzled at the conflation of moral worth with possession of a soul. Because my intuition tells me I should be more respectful of something that I might seriously damage than of someone that can survive anything I might do to it.
I agree that HopeFox is onto something there: most people think great works of art, or unique features of the natural world have value, but that has nothing to do with having a soul...it has to do with irredicubility.An atom-by-atom duplicate oft the Mona Lisa wouldl, not be the Mona Lisa, it would be a great work of science...
Well, it has nothing to do with what you think of as a ‘soul’.
Personally, I’m not that taken with the local tendency to demand that any problematic word be tabooed. But I think that it might have been worthwhile to make that demand of HopeFox when she first used the word ‘soul’.
Given my own background, I immediately attached a connotation of immortality upon seeing the word. And for that reason, I was puzzled at the conflation of moral worth with possession of a soul. Because my intuition tells me I should be more respectful of something that I might seriously damage than of someone that can survive anything I might do to it.