The people who thought it would be about two weeks seemed to have it right. The body of the person who was Terri Schiavo has finally stopped metabolizing. How many more weeks will it be before we stop talking about it?

There are lots of comments over at Free Republic about "bless her soul," and "she's with God now," and the like.

While my heart goes out to the long-suffering family, whose hearts are surely now fully (if only figuratively) broken, at the risk of being (more than) a little iconoclastic, as long-time readers know, I'm not fully down with this soul thing. Perhaps those who are can enlighten me.

At what precise instant did the soul pass from her body, and was transported to God's sitting room?

Was it when she stopped breathing? When her heart stopped beating? When the phosphor trace on her EEG (assuming that she was on one) stopped wiggling? Even now (or at least a few minutes after the end of these activities) she could have been resuscitated with CPR and defibrillator, and resumed these activities, at least briefly, particularly if rehydrated. Had someone done so, would the soul have had to rush back from heaven, to take up residence in the body again, in case there was still one more legal appeal to play out? Or was the body a lost cause, and the soul would know it? But if the latter then why wait for the conventional functional shutdowns that we arbitrarily use to declare legal death? Why not vamoose once it was clear that all the appeals were exhausted, and the organs were failing, regardless of the respiratory and cardiac state?

The relatives said that Terri has been communicating with them, and they with her, but was that wishful thinking? Did they see a spark in her eyes that they imagined was her, words in her vocalizations that they, in their grief, fantasized as expressions of love and human desires? If so, and those who said that she was truly in a "persistent vegetative state," uncomprehending of self or anything else, are right, then is it possible that her soul actually left when her cortex collapsed, years ago, and that since then they've only been feeding an empty shell in the form of a human being?

I ask these questions for two reasons. First, because I'm genuinely curious, not about souls per se, because I don't believe in them, but about how those who do justify their beliefs, and how they think about them. Second, because I do think that this bears on a more practical issue to those of us who do want to live as long as possible--at what point should someone be allowed to go into cryonic suspension? While the issues of soul dispositions and locations shouldn't enter into legal discussions, it's inevitable that they will, and I'd like to know how the arguments in court might go.

I pity you.
And will pray for you.
for your soul.

Well, if it makes you feel good to pray for my soul, fine, but I've no need for your pity, so you can spare it for someone in worse straits. What I'd really like are some answers to my questions.

I'd think that someone so concerned for my soul would be interested in at least attempting to persuade me through reason (since that's the way I generally work) that I have one, but if you think that prayer will be more effective, then knock yourself out.

Well, although I do believe there's a significant probability that the soul -- or a reasonable facsimile -- exists, it's not the kind of thing I'd try to convince a reasonable skeptic of, becuase it's a belief based on premises that are highly speculative. I don't find the idea of an Original Architect entirely unresonable, given the oddities of the Universe; and if there wasn't one, I think there's a good likelihood we'll become/create one eventually (as per Tipler), and if/when that happens It will be able to harvest "souls" from any place in the time stream. (There are very smart people who steadfastly maintain that time is nothing more than an artifact of our limited perceptual abilities...I embrace this concept since it validates my hopes and preconceptions. :-) To get back to your original question, IF a soul-analog does exist, then I believe it's inextricably bound up with cognition, so that once cognition "leaves" the body, then the soul has as well. The brain may not BE the soul, but it's certainly where the soul hangs out in Humans. Where would the soul go if someone is cryogencially frozen? Perhaps Soul V.1 would be harvested at original death, and when the body was revived Soul V.2 would start running. Perhaps they could be merged later, or perhaps they'd stay independent entities..."soul" brothers. Not something I'd worry about in any case. If the methodology for the existence of souls is (or will be) in place, then I suspect the operating system is smart enough to keep track of and resolve such issues.

As one who believes in a soul, I will attempt to answer your questions according to my beliefs. However, I’d like to address your final comments on the above post first.

You said: “I ask these questions for two reasons. First, because I'm genuinely curious, not about souls per se, because I don't believe in them, but about how those who do justify their beliefs, and how they think about them.”

Fair enough – I also recognize that there is no way, through reason, that I’ll be able to convince you. You touched on it in prior posts – religion and science are very similar in many regards, the primary being that they both are a matter of believing in certain principles. Science relies heavily on the observable, while religion relies heavily on the unobservable (a generalization to be sure, but as such it is also generally useful). A belief in souls can not be proven scientifically (at least not through current means and methods – in the future, who knows what could happen), so it’s pointless to try. That being said, my answers rely on matters of faith and therefore may not be satisfying in your view.

Now, on to your questions:

“At what precise instant did the soul pass from her body, and was transported to God's sitting room?”

Nobody knows. And if anyone tells you that they do know, they’re making stuff up. There is no scriptural reference (Bible, Koran, Torah, Book of Mormon, etc.) that alludes to the exact point at which a soul leaves the body. Can it leave and come back? Well, the New Testament account of Lazarus might seem to suggest that it can, but again, the account never says whether the soul left the body or not. Since there is no absolute written account from the mouth of God giving a ruling on the matter, different religions have interpreted it as they would – there is no consensus. Individual religions may interpret things differently, and there is certainly a possibility that one religion will say that their very specific knowledge on a particular matter has been revealed from God – but generally speaking such specific revelations aren’t accepted by the religious community at large.

You gave a laundry list of questions about states of death and when or if a soul would leave under given conditions. My answer to all of those is identical to what I said above. Religion generally does not specify any of that. Interpretation is strictly on an individual basis.

To further complicate matters there are some religions who believe that the soul stays with the body until everyone is called forth for judgment – usually at some future apocalyptic date. Still others believe that the soul can leave the body at any time (say, during sleep, unconsciousness or religious rapture) and come back without an adverse affects on the body – and in many cases result in very positive effects overall.

I know that in my religion we hold life sacred. However, we’re not hard-liners either. For example, abortion should be avoided if at all possible but there are certain circumstances in which it could be considered (incest, rape, if the health of the mother or fetus is seriously threatened) but in any circumstance the decision should be undertaken with the utmost gravity and should be a last resort – and nearly every condition in which it would be considered is very rare.

The same rules apply to individuals on life support or other critical states. The decision to allow someone to die or to keep them alive should be done on a case by case basis with the help of physicians, family and in some cases support from clergy.

In my religion we see life as individual and decisions regarding life or death should be made on an individual basis based on the specific circumstances at the time. We are very clear, however, that if you should side with preserving life whenever possible.

When speaking of religion generally, there are no absolute answers. Every religion interprets the scriptures or whatever they use as the source of their beliefs, in different ways. The absolute answer is that we don’t know, but our faith that God (in whatever form you believe in him/her – God, Allah, Yahweh, Mother Earth, whatever) as an all-knowing, all-wise creator will eventually have answers that are satisfactory for us should be enough to settle our doubts.

Now, when speaking of religions specifically, there your answers will definitely differ.

Thank you, Jared. That's my sense of it, which is one of the (several) reasons why discussion of souls have no place in a courtroom, particularly when deciding matters of (literally) life and death. Nor are they relevant to a decision as to whether or not cryonics makes sense, except in the context of one's own religion. But the interesting thing about this is that I know of Christian cryonicists, who have no concern about their soul getting "stuck" because they've been frozen. I guess they figure that God will keep it all sorted out.

There is a huge difference of opinion on when a "soul" leaves the body. Mostly because nobody knows. It isn't really talked about too much in the bible (almost as if God really doesn't care about the timing.) Many realistic religious people (I know you probably think that is an oxymoron) think that God is mirroring the hard drive of your mind and upon death that memory can live within the mind of God. I’m not much more then an engineer so I’m not sure if that is right or not but it seems to fit better then other explanations I’ve heard… Wow I start writing and get called to a meeting, come back and Jared wrote a book.
You can check out http://www.donaldsensing.com/2005/03/what-about-terris-schiavos-soul.html for more on this soul searching. :-)

The Apostle Paul does explicitly state in the New Testament that "to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord". So the soul does leave the body at some point to be with God. That doesn't answer your question about brain dead patients. Some hold that life begins and ends with breathing because Adam did not come to life until God breathed into his body.

One argument to persuade through reason is using mathematics and game theory is
Pascal's Wager, where he concluded that it's better to believe in God on the off chance that the Bible is true and God does exist.

Except i think that in Pascal's wager that came off as a loser because you would be insincere. God would know the difference.

"At what precise instant did the soul pass from her body, and was transported to God's sitting room?"

It doesn't. The problem is that most people don't understand that soul and spirit are not the same thing. We don't HAVE souls, we ARE souls. Souls can be either living or dead. Living souls, whether people or animals, have blood flowing and air pumping. Otherwise the meat left over is just a dead soul (as opposed to a rock which has no flesh.)

Spirit on the other hand is like a combination of breath and the spark of life (whatever that is?) That does go back to God (but in the sense that the electricity goes back to the power company when you don't pay your bill.)

Death in the bible is described as the day your thoughts perish. EC 9:5 Glad I could be of help ;)

Huh... funny. Electricity going back to the power company... actually it dosn't go anywhere it just stops moving. Kinda like what happens to people when they die.

Quote: "At what precise instant did the soul pass from her body, and was transported to God's sitting room?"

Well one thing that may help answer that question is after they perform an autopsy and can determine the extent of damage to her brain. When, they do the autopsy they will soak her brain in a formaline solution for 2 weeks which will turn the brain into a hardened acrylic. Then, they can make very thin slices of various parts of the brain that are associated with higher brain function and see the level of nerve damage that has occured. That will be the only way to see if she suffered from permanent nerve damage or if indeed she still had hope of a miracle recovery. With that information in hand we can determine that exact moment when she was essentially dead.