NationStates Jolt Archive

Do animals have souls? My cat (Spitifre) was put to sleep (euthanized) Friday and the vet said she would go to heaven. What do you all believe? Animals are innocent and cannot sin, so I believe if they have souls, they can go to heaven.

Silly question.

Everyone knows that all dogs go to heaven.

There is no heaven. Not even for cats.

There is no heaven. Not even for cats.

On the contrary, there is heaven. But only for cats.

no

animals dont have souls.

no

animals dont have souls.

Humans are animals, ergo, humans have no souls. What is your argument, really?

Do animals have souls? My cat (Spitifre) was put to sleep (euthanized) Friday and the vet said she would go to heaven. What do you all believe? Animals are innocent and cannot sin, so I believe if they have souls, they can go to heaven.
my condolences on the loss of your cat.

Humans are animals, ergo, humans have no souls. What is your argument, really?
thats my argument.

it does not depend on whether or not humans are animals or whether or not they go to heaven.

Only if they believe in Jesus. *nod*

;)

PS: Sorry about your cat. :(

Does your vet have a doctorate of theology?

Do you believe it is going to heaven? What about the animals that you eat?

Only in that "heaven" is your memory, where Spitfire will live on happily.

My condolences. Our Katie died last summer and we still feel her loss.

Do animals have souls? My cat (Spitifre) was put to sleep (euthanized) Friday and the vet said she would go to heaven. What do you all believe? Animals are innocent and cannot sin, so I believe if they have souls, they can go to heaven.

Sorry for your loss, I remember when my cat Sara died. I still think about her sometimes.

I believe cats do go to a better place in the afterlife. For me, it would be Summerlands, for other Heaven, etc.

Eh, I believe that all animals go to heaven.

Eh, I believe that all animals go to heaven.

Where else would the heavenly souls get the dodgy meat for their Friday night kebabs?

Eh, I believe that all animals go to heaven.

So heaven is full of spiders?

Does your vet have a doctorate of theology?

Do you believe it is going to heaven? What about the animals that you eat?

You don't need a doctorate of theology to talk about theological things, elitist.

Also, I don't want to go to heaven if animals go, animals are smelly.

I'm sorry about your cat, but the best you can know is she's not in pain, she had a good life, and that you did the very best you could by her.

So heaven is full of spiders?

Ah, but what of bacteria?

Does your vet have a doctorate of theology?

Do you believe it is going to heaven? What about the animals that you eat?
If she had a soul, then yes. If animals have souls, those can go to heaven. I am not sure if they do (have souls).

You don't need a doctorate of theology to talk about theological things, elitist.

I just want to make sure this guy can back-up his opinion, because he is pretending this is veterinarians' field of expertise when it is clearly not.

If she had a soul, then yes. If animals have souls, those can go to heaven. I am not sure if they do (have souls).

What is a soul? Is it the same as a conscience? Is it the same as conscientiousness?

If she had a soul, then yes. If animals have souls, those can go to heaven. I am not sure if they do (have souls).

Supposing they have souls, are we not treating them rather rudely?

What is a soul? Is it the same as a conscience? Is it the same as conscientiousness?

If it were, then infants do not start-out with it.

If it were, then infants do not start-out with it.

How is that? Are they not conscious? Do we lose our soul at night? Is conscience something society teaches you? If conscience is the soul, then do sociopaths not have one?

Do animals have souls? My cat (Spitifre) was put to sleep (euthanized) Friday and the vet said she would go to heaven. What do you all believe? Animals are innocent and cannot sin, so I believe if they have souls, they can go to heaven.

Animals are not innocent. At least they do sometimes not that innocent deeds.

When I was a kid, my dog ate the steaks my mother was preparing for us. We didn't see that dog for 2 days.

That same dog was a kind of adventurer. Sometimes he ran away for a few weeks and had some trip in the woods. When he returned my parents were always mad at him. They didn't hit him or something, but they made clear that they didn't like his adventure behaviour. One day, he returned from another trip, we saw him crossing before our house, he went to the back and suddenly started to cripple. There was nothing wrong with him, he was out on compassion, thinking, that he could get away with his last adventure.

How is that? Are they not conscious? Do we lose our soul at night? Is conscience something society teaches you? If conscience is the soul, then do sociopaths not have one?

Babies are not self-aware. TPE is referring to sapience, not sentience/consciousness.

How is that? Are they not conscious? Do we lose our soul at night? Is conscience something society teaches you? If conscience is the soul, then do sociopaths not have one?
i think it means that conscience or consciousness isnt the same thing as soul

Animals are not innocent. At least they do sometimes not that innocent deeds.

When I was a kid, my dog ate the steaks my mother was preparing for us. We didn't see that dog for 2 days.

That same dog was a kind of adventurer. Sometimes he ran away for a few weeks and had some trip in the woods. When he returned my parents were always mad at him. They didn't hit him or something, but they made clear that they didn't like his adventure behaviour. One day, he returned from another trip, we saw him crossing before our house, he went to the back and suddenly started to cripple. There was nothing wrong with him, he was out on compassion, thinking, that he could get away with his last adventure.
lol

that was a smart dog!

How is that? Are they not conscious? Do we lose our soul at night? Is conscience something society teaches you? If conscience is the soul, then do sociopaths not have one?

I find the concept of a soul serves (me) no purpose.

But speaking hypothetically, infants are as conscious as many animals. And sociopaths just have retarded moral development, not being any different than fully capable two-year-olds (as in they consider themselves the center of everything and find it impossible to empathize with others).

Animals are not innocent. At least they do sometimes not that innocent deeds.



animals are innocent in that they have no knowledge of good and evil. they only know what works and what doesnt.

Also, I don't want to go to heaven if animals go, animals are smelly.

So are people.

But that's just the bodies. If souls existed, they would be independent of the body. No bodies, no genitals, no anuses, no sweat glands, no bodily functions, no smells in heaven from any animals be they human or not.

Babies are not self-aware. TPE is referring to sapience, not sentience/consciousness.
Surely.
I find the concept of a soul serves (me) no purpose.
What about thinking about it?

But speaking hypothetically, infants are as conscious as many animals. And sociopaths just have retarded moral development, not being any different than fully capable two-year-olds (as in they consider themselves the center of everything and find it impossible to empathize with others).
Tell me more about this moral development thing.

Babies are not self-aware. TPE is referring to sapience, not sentience/consciousness.

Yes, and infants are allowed an inordinate amount of rights for their state.

So are people.

But that's just the bodies. If souls existed, they would be independent of the body. No bodies, no genitals, no anuses, no sweat glands, no bodily functions, no smells in heaven from any animals be they human or not.

What is the soul made out of? What purpose does it serve? If you didn't have one, what would happen?

So are people.

But that's just the bodies. If souls existed, they would be independent of the body. No bodies, no genitals, no anuses, no sweat glands, no bodily functions, no smells in heaven from any animals be they human or not.
if your (disembodied) cat went to heaven, what would it DO there? would it still be your pet (slave)? would it adore god all day as (disembodied) people supposedly do?

I find the concept of a soul serves (me) no purpose.

But speaking hypothetically, infants are as conscious as many animals. And sociopaths just have retarded moral development, not being any different than fully capable two-year-olds (as in they consider themselves the center of everything and find it impossible to empathize with others).

No, I don't consider myself the center of everything, at least, not in the way you seem to imply. I find myself superior to others because I recognise the plain truth that everyone and everything is insignificant. You're conflating sociopathy and narcissism. The two do overlap a great deal, but my ego is limited by my recognition that while nothing outside myself is of subjective intrinsic value, the population outside my head is nonetheless useful for obtaining personal goals.

No, I don't consider myself the center of everything, at least, not in the way you seem to imply. I find myself superior to others because I recognise the plain truth that everyone and everything is insignificant. You're conflating sociopathy and narcissism. The two do overlap a great deal, but my ego is limited by my recognition that while nothing outside myself is of subjective intrinsic value, the population outside my head is nonetheless useful for obtaining personal goals.
you consider yourself a sociopath?

you consider yourself a sociopath?

I have been diagnosed as such, yes.

EDIT: Specifically, the anti-social personality disorder variant. The term "sociopath" is loaded, and represents many distinct disorders. It's also often confused with psychopath, something I am not.

Scienciftic, a soul doesn't exist. You cannot prove or verify it.

I am wondering why people still believe in souls. Due the science of genetics, psychology, neurology and others we found far better explanations for issues which were once related with the soul.

lol

that was a smart dog!

He was ugly as hell, but indeed a smart animal. :)

you consider yourself a sociopath?

Not all sociopaths are criminals. Most of them are not. Many people in the top-level of some hierarchy are often sociopaths.

What is the soul made out of? What purpose does it serve? If you didn't have one, what would happen?

Don't ask me. I'm not the one who believes in them. I was merely pointing out the conventional wisdom that the soul isn't the body thus there should be no smells in heaven. If they were the same thing, then the soul would most likely die with the body.

I have been diagnosed as such, yes.

EDIT: Specifically, the anti-social personality disorder variant. The term "sociopath" is loaded, and represents many distinct disorders. It's also often confused with psychopath, something I am not.
aye

sociopath tends to connote that you have been discovered to be one by virtue of some terrible, probably criminal, behavior.

so we wont use that word when referring to you.

What about thinking about it?

It is an unresolvable intellectual subject, so it naturally serves me well in wasting my time. Better than actually working like I should be. :p

Tell me more about this moral development thing.

First-off, it is psychology, which is disputably bullshit in some areas. Putting that aside, I was referencing Erik Erikson's theory of moral development: According to him, many humans are stuck at a certain level, unable to understand how any human can do something wicked and not know it is wrong--in other words, they are at a level that sees things fairly universally, and cannot comprehend different consciences feel bad about different things.

Theoretically, sociopaths are retarded on this scale: While some retards are stuck at the intelligence of a two-year-old, sociopaths are stuck at the moral development of a two-year-old, before guilt and empathy form.

Are you familiar with the book or the film: A Clockwork Orange?

It is an unresolvable intellectual subject, so it naturally serves me well in wasting my time. Better than actually working like I should be. :p
Well, then, useful.

First-off, it is psychology, which is disputably bullshit in some areas. Which areas?

Putting that aside, I was referencing Erik Erikson's theory of moral development; according to him, many humans are stuck at a certain level, unable to understand how a human can do something wicked and not know it is wrong--in other words, they are at a level that sees things fairly universally, and cannot comprehend different consciences feel bad about different things. Theoretically, sociopaths are retarded: While some retards are stuck at the intelligence of a two-year-old, sociopaths are stuck at the moral development of a two-year-old, before guilt and empathy form.
I don't think Erkison thought this through very well.

Are you familiar with the book or the film: A Clockwork Orange?
Yes.

I have been diagnosed as such, yes.

EDIT: Specifically, the anti-social personality disorder variant. The term "sociopath" is loaded, and represents many distinct disorders. It's also often confused with psychopath, something I am not.

Yeah, what you have is "a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood."

Is psychopath even a proper term for anything (anymore)?

When referring to A Clockwork Orange as a bar for measuring sociopathy, it's worth remembering that not all sociopaths are violent. I am not physically aggressive. I am emotionally manipulative, cruel and remorseless. Yet I have never attacked someone. My reasons for this are not the same as I'd imagine a neurotypical person would provide ("I won't attack, because that'd be wrong") - my reasons run along the line of "I won't attack, because there's a chance I'd be hurt".

Sociopaths have the potential to be violent, because violence isn't something we consider anymore abhorrent than smoking a cigarette. Every moral choice is of equal value to me; my actions are dictated by potential negative consequences for myself, not by a moral code.

Which areas?

I consider a lot of what Freud says to be nonsense, and while Erkison makes some good points, I think there are a few holes in his theories.

I don't think Erkison thought this through very well.

Not all accurate in my mind, though it does seem like the majority think everyone understand "wrong" the same way they do.

Yes.

Then you know they largely dealt with the idea that morality is a function of maturity. The main character is clearly sociopathic, but in the book (somewhat unrealistically) he reforms when he reaches manhood.

Yeah, what you have is "a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood."

Is psychopath even a proper term for anything (anymore)?

I'm not sure, really. After my initial diagnosis, I naturally stopped attending psychiatrists voluntarily. My sources of information on the subject are likely as limited as yours are.

I don't really believe in the conventional fluffy-clouds-and-harps version of heaven, but if it existed, I see no reason why other animals couldn't be there.

When referring to A Clockwork Orange as a bar for measuring sociopathy, it's worth remembering that not all sociopaths are violent. I am not physically aggressive. I am emotionally manipulative, cruel and remorseless. Yet I have never attacked someone. My reasons for this are not the same as I'd imagine a neurotypical person would provide ("I won't attack, because that'd be wrong") - my reasons run along the line of "I won't attack, because there's a chance I'd be hurt".

Sociopaths have the potential to be violent, because violence isn't something we consider anymore abhorrent than smoking a cigarette. Every moral choice is of equal value to me; my actions are dictated by potential negative consequences for myself, not by a moral code.

Yeah, I know, I met a guy like you at MEPS. He professed and a strong desire to try killing someone, but fully was aware of the consequences. Like he said: "I don't care about people, but I am not crazy." Some psychologists use the term "pseudopsychopathic" to describe those who are not violent, but lack consciences. Such individuals tend to be successful and intelligent.

The violence in ACO is more representative of out-of-control youths than it is of sociopathic tendencies.

The question is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of reincarnation. My Church, the Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879 (death to the heretics of the Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912), provides what I think is the most convincing answer on this difficult question.

There's a four step chain. You have to work hard in the first three stages to earn a soul, and if you succeed, you get into the fourth stage and have the chance of getting to heaven

First you start off as some shitty bacterium
Then you get to be an animal
Thirdly you are reincarnated as a Muslim (animalistic tendencies, not quite human, still lacking in a soul, which is why they are almost universally ebil)
And then fourthly you get to be a real person. If you've done particularly well in the first three stages you are rewarded by our Lord with being born a white man. The heaven/hell issue is resolved in this life.

Incidentally, sins for all four lives can be remissed if you donate sufficient money to the Church in the fourth (God lacks currency, since the expanding universe has placed increasing demands on the heavenly treasury, and Chancellor Moses has advised financial prudence and a slowdown in the printing of money to avoid further inflation.)

Hope that clears things up.

So are people.

But that's just the bodies. If souls existed, they would be independent of the body. No bodies, no genitals, no anuses, no sweat glands, no bodily functions, no smells in heaven from any animals be they human or not.

What a crappy heaven. No wonder no one wants to go there.

The question is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of reincarnation. My Church, the Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879 (death to the heretics of the Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912), provides what I think is the most convincing answer on this difficult question.

There's a four step chain. You have to work hard in the first three stages to earn a soul, and if you succeed, you get into the fourth stage and have the chance of getting to heaven

First you start off as some shitty bacterium
Then you get to be an animal
Thirdly you are reincarnated as a Muslim (animalistic tendencies, not quite human, still lacking in a soul, which is why they are almost universally ebil)
And then fourthly you get to be a real person. If you've done particularly well in the first three stages you are rewarded by our Lord with being born a white man. The heaven/hell issue is resolved in this life.

Incidentally, sins for all four lives can be remissed if you donate sufficient money to the Church in the fourth (God lacks currency, since the expanding universe has placed increasing demands on the heavenly treasury, and Chancellor Moses has advised financial prudence and a slowdown in the printing of money to avoid further inflation.)

Hope that clears things up.

Trolling Grade - E-

Must try harder, see me after class.

Yeah, I know, I met a guy like you at MEPS. He professed and a strong desire to try killing someone, but fully was aware of the consequences. Like he said: "I don't care about people, but I am not crazy." Some psychologists use the term "pseudopsychopathic" to describe those who are not violent, but lack consciences. Such individuals tend to be successful and intelligent.

The violence in ACO is more representative of out-of-control youths than it is of sociopathic tendencies.

While I have experienced strong urges to kill people before, especially when my inhibitions are lowered, it's overidden by a stronger instinct of self-preservation.

Only one person has experienced the full force of my sociopathy, and for that I was caught (and talked my way out of it rather deftly, the police even sympathised with me), and only this person has truly feared me. By the time he'd expressed that fear, though, he was already massively off my radar and of no further use or interest to me, so I quite genuinely told him he had nothing to fear.

The thing that amused me about that whole episode was that even after expressing his fear of me, he still remarked that he occasionally missed my company. Empathic people are bizarre sometimes.

While I have experienced strong urges to kill people before, especially when my inhibitions are lowered, it's overidden by a stronger instinct of self-preservation.

The desire not to go to prison?

Only one person has experienced the full force of my sociopathy, and for that I was caught (and talked my way out of it rather deftly, the police even sympathised with me), and only this person has truly feared me. By the time he'd expressed that fear, though, he was already massively off my radar and of no further use or interest to me, so I quite genuinely told him he had nothing to fear.

The thing that amused me about that whole episode was that even after expressing his fear of me, he still remarked that he occasionally missed my company. Empathic people are bizarre sometimes.

Many unconsciously hold an admiration and fascination for those free of any moral inhibitions--this is why the "anti-hero" is devoured.

Trolling Grade - E-

Must try harder, see me after class.
it made me laugh!

Trolling Grade - E-

Must try harder, see me after class.

I doubt he was trying to appear serious.

Trolling Grade - E-

Must try harder, see me after class.

If that "E" does not stand for "Extremely witty and sexeh" I declare this an outrage.

There are other personality disorders where people have a low conscience.

By instance, people who suffer from an obsessive–compulsive personality disorder (beware it is not like obsessive–compulsive disorder).

They could conduct sometimes rather horrible actions on their children or partners and do not feel guilty about it. By instance, forbidding to see friends or family.

The desire not to go to prison?



Many unconsciously hold an admiration and fascination for those free of any moral inhibitions--this is why the "anti-hero" is devoured.

Yes, fundamentally, the desire not the punished. I dislike being caught, because it complicates things.

A lot of people seem to enjoy my company because I am charming, outgoing, impulsive, funny, intelligent and generally fun to be around. I'm largely free of inhibition and people seem to like that. I can display faux-empathy when required, if it cultivates personal relations, and to most I am a normal, good person. This is the side I think he missed.

If that "E" does not stand for "Extremely witty and sexeh" I declare this an outrage.

Having re-read your post, it does.

However feel free to feel outraged anyway, it's the default position on this forum.

Yes, fundamentally, the desire not the punished. I dislike being caught, because it complicates things.

But you would be a dangerous fellow if you ever entered politics. :eek2:

A lot of people seem to enjoy my company because I am charming, outgoing, impulsive, funny, intelligent and generally fun to be around. I'm largely free of inhibition and people seem to like that. I can display faux-empathy when required, if it cultivates personal relations, and to most I am a normal, good person. This is the side I think he missed.

It depends on what you mean by "good person". To you, good is as good does. To many, however, caring about someone other than yourself is what defines good.

It depends on what you mean by "good person". To you, good is as good does. To many, however, caring about someone other than yourself is what defines good.
In your utopia. In real life appearing good is good enough.

I will care for another if it suits me. I'll give a recent example:

Recently, while at a friend's exhibition opening, she'd drank far too much and ended up on the pavement outside the pub, puking her guts up over her shoes. I joined in with three other friends in getting her water, cleaning her shoes and generally making sure she got home safe. Why? I had no real reason for helping her; I gain no internal benefit from altruism. Instead, I helped her to appear helpful. Others were helping, I was obligated to do so otherwise others would notice that I was not.

It's cliché, but this quote from American Psycho by Bret Easton Elis perfectly explains the motivations I have when projecting as a "good person":

"I want to fit in."

Also, I have little interest in politics. Mass-manipulation is too complicated.

In your utopia. In real life appearing good is good enough.

My "utopia"? I have argued several times on this forum that one's actions count more than one's intentions.

I will care for another if it suits me. I'll give a recent example:

Recently, while at a friend's exhibition opening, she'd drank far too much and ended up on the pavement outside the pub, puking her guts up over her shoes. I joined in with three other friends in getting her water, cleaning her shoes and generally making sure she got home safe. Why? I had no real reason for helping her; I gain no internal benefit from altruism. Instead, I helped her to appear helpful. Others were helping, I was obligated to do so otherwise others would notice that I was not.


I meant "care" as an attitude, not an action.

It's cliché, but this quote from American Psycho by Bret Easton Elis perfectly explains the motivations I have when projecting as a "good person":

"I want to fit in."

Now if you want to use that to define sociopathic....

Also, I have little interest in politics. Mass-manipulation is too complicated.

Stalin is ashamed of your lazy-ass.

My "utopia"? I have argued several times on this forum that one's actions count more than one's intentions.

How would you notice the difference between intentions and actions? So many 'normal' people do good for some hidden agenda. To get sex, to be loved, ....

How would you notice the difference between intentions and actions? So many 'normal' people do good for some hidden agenda. To get sex, to be loved, ....

Nixon will probably be my most common example. Cesare Borgia (my avatar) is also a good one.

Ghandi might have genuinely gave a shit.

Caring isn't an attitude for me, it's an action.

Nah, I don't use American Psycho to define sociopathic, but it provides quite a lot of useful quotations that work quite well within the framework of my own thinking. Patrick Bateman's actions aren't sociopathic, but a lot of his internal monologue is. Take this, for example, perhaps my favourite quotation of all time:

"There is an idea of a Patrick Bateman; some kind of abstraction. But there is no real me: only an entity, something illusory. And though I can hide my cold gaze, and you can shake my hand and feel flesh gripping yours and maybe you can even sense our lifestyles are probably comparable... I simply am not there."

The disassociation expressed here is very similar to how I experience reality. I project one person while, internally, I am an entirely different person. My external mask is a non-person, a false illusion I've carefully crafted over years. I often feel detached and aloof from the mere squabbles of humanity, as if I'm some artifical construct (which, in many ways, I am). I feel beyond human.

Caring isn't an attitude for me, it's an action.

Right. You cannot care as an attitude.

Nah, I don't use American Psycho to define sociopathic, but it provides quite a lot of useful quotations that work quite well within the framework of my own thinking. Patrick Bateman's actions aren't sociopathic, but a lot of his internal monologue is. Take this, for example, perhaps my favourite quotation of all time:

"There is an idea of a Patrick Bateman; some kind of abstraction. But there is no real me: only an entity, something illusory. And though I can hide my cold gaze, and you can shake my hand and feel flesh gripping yours and maybe you can even sense our lifestyles are probably comparable... I simply am not there."

I think that is a fine description of sociopathology myself, though the main oddity about Bateman was that he was psychotic.

The disassociation expressed here is very similar to how I experience reality. I project one person while, internally, I am an entirely different person. My external mask is a non-person, a false illusion I've carefully crafted over years. I often feel detached and aloof from the mere squabbles of humanity, as if I'm some artifical construct (which, in many ways, I am). I feel beyond human.

Sociopaths are typically experts at mimicking human emotions, which is why they can generally hide their tendencies from psychologists if they choose to.

The disassociation expressed here is very similar to how I experience reality. I project one person while, internally, I am an entirely different person. My external mask is a non-person, a false illusion I've carefully crafted over years. I often feel detached and aloof from the mere squabbles of humanity, as if I'm some artifical construct (which, in many ways, I am). I feel beyond human.

This doesn't strike me as sociopathic; it just strikes me as a fundamental human condition. We are all stuck within our own heads, after all, and project different personas to different people. I mean, how many people have a work-face, academic-face, sociable-face, etc.? Granted, you may experience it more extremely but that wouldn't surprise me as it seems that the multi-axis scale that determines whether or not one is socially well-adapted functions upon an infinite set of sliders, rather than switches.

Right. You cannot care as an attitude.


I think that is a fine description of sociopathology myself, though the main oddity about Bateman was that he was psychotic.



Sociopaths are typically experts at mimicking human emotions, which is why they can generally hide their tendencies from psychologists if they choose to.

So they have to learn how to be 'good', while we know (almost by birth) what is 'good'?

So they have to learn how to be 'good', while we know (almost by birth) what is 'good'?

I may be wrong, but I think the key is a certain instinctual level of empathy. We are hardwire by nature to be able to emotionally empathize with each other, thus people actually register pain when they see others in pain, etc. It isn't so much a matter of good/not good as it is a matter of emotional awareness/development.

My "utopia"? I have argued several times on this forum that one's actions count more than one's intentions.
good intentions without good actions dont mean much eh?

So they have to learn how to be 'good', while we know (almost by birth) what is 'good'?

They know what is good by society's rules, and what doing things society dislikes will result in.

And we do not know "almost by birth": We refrain from doing bad things in order to avoid punishment. We develop the ability to feel guilt some time after birth (the time varies between persons), and, it is important to note, what makes one person feel guilty can be completely different from what makes another feel so; most of our morality has something to do with how our parents indoctrinated us.

good intentions without good actions dont mean much eh?

Nope.

So they have to learn how to be 'good', while we know (almost by birth) what is 'good'?

Not really. I am unable to empathise with people; I can intellectually understand morality, yet I am unable to process it as a normal person does. I feel only myself, and I am largely emotionally dull. I feel very little beyond boredom, stress and physically induced sensations of pleasure. I do not experience reality in the same way most people do; I lack internal morality, but I can emulate it when it suits me. I know what society calls "good", and I do "good" as defined by society because it grants me the ability to live within that society freely.

This doesn't strike me as sociopathic; it just strikes me as a fundamental human condition. We are all stuck within our own heads, after all, and project different personas to different people. I mean, how many people have a work-face, academic-face, sociable-face, etc.? Granted, you may experience it more extremely but that wouldn't surprise me as it seems that the multi-axis scale that determines whether or not one is socially well-adapted functions upon an infinite set of sliders, rather than switches.

It's not sociopathic in itself, no. It's certainly a facet of how I cognitively process things.

I may be wrong, but I think the key is a certain instinctual level of empathy. We are hardwire by nature to be able to emotionally empathize with each other, thus people actually register pain when they see others in pain, etc. It isn't so much a matter of good/not good as it is a matter of emotional awareness/development.

I am aware of emotions, and can emulate them to a degree that they are indistinguishable from actual emotions. Occasionally, I am able to intentionally self-deceive myself into half-believing my emotionally manipulative lies if I think it grants extra believability to my outward emotional performance.

Do animals have souls? My cat (Spitifre) was put to sleep (euthanized) Friday and the vet said she would go to heaven. What do you all believe? Animals are innocent and cannot sin, so I believe if they have souls, they can go to heaven.sorry about your cat. :(

You don't need a doctorate of theology to talk about theological things, elitist.

Also, I don't want to go to heaven if animals go, animals are smelly.

I'm sorry about your cat, but the best you can know is she's not in pain, she had a good life, and that you did the very best you could by her.

hmm... interesting question. well, it can be 'obvious' that a soul is non-corporeal, thus the idea of 'smelly' probably won't exist since an animal's smell relies on it's physical form.

do animals go to heaven? one can only guess, but I for one hope so, since heaven, to me, just wouldn't be heaven if it was just people.

Can animals go to heaven?
No, they cannot go to something that doesn't exist.
My cat (Spitifre) was put to sleep (euthanized) Friday.
Sorry :(
*toasts Spitifre*

sorry about your cat. :(



hmm... interesting question. well, it can be 'obvious' that a soul is non-corporeal, thus the idea of 'smelly' probably won't exist since an animal's smell relies on it's physical form.

do animals go to heaven? one can only guess, but I for one hope so, since heaven, to me, just wouldn't be heaven if it was just people.
yeah but if freed of their bodies and thus their dependence on humans, would your pets want to be with you?

So heaven is full of spiders?

If Heaven is full of spiders, I'm going to start a rampage of sinning and blasphemy right now.

Sorry :(
*toasts Spitifre*

That's sick, dude.

*gets butter*

Here's to Spitfire!

And if Heaven doesn't have a place where I can at least see my dogs and thank them (perhaps in a way they can understand my literal thoughts and I can understand theirs back) for their love, loyalty and just plain dogginess, then I'm not sure it's a place worth pining for.

Here's to Spitfire!

And if Heaven doesn't have a place where I can at least see my dogs and thank them (perhaps in a way they can understand my literal thoughts and I can understand theirs back) for their love, loyalty and just plain dogginess, then I'm not sure it's a place worth pining for.

Yes, I can understand that desire, Intangelon. That's one reason I would like to be wrong about there not being a heaven.

And yet ... and yet ... here is a poem ...

The Revenant
I am the dog you put to sleep,
as you like to call the needle of oblivion,
come back to tell you this simple thing:
I never liked you--not one bit.

When I licked your face,
I thought of biting off your nose.
When I watched you toweling yourself dry,
I wanted to leap and unman you with a snap.

I resented the way you moved,
your lack of animal grace,
the way you would sit in a chair to eat,
a napkin on your lap, knife in your hand.

I would have run away,
but I was too weak, a trick you taught me
while I was learning to sit and heel,
and--greatest of insults--shake hands without a hand.

I admit the sight of the leash
would excite me
but only because it meant I was about
to smell things you had never touched.

You do not want to believe this,
but I have no reason to lie.
I hated the car, the rubber toys,
disliked your friends and, worse, your relatives.

The jingling of my tags drove me mad.
You always scratched me in the wrong place.
All I ever wanted from you
was food and fresh water in my metal bowls.

While you slept, I watched you breathe
as the moon rose in the sky.
It took all of my strength
not to raise my head and howl.

Now I am free of the collar,
the yellow raincoat, monogrammed sweater,
the absurdity of your lawn,
and that is all you need to know about this place

except what you already supposed
and are glad it did not happen sooner--

that everyone here can read and write,
the dogs in poetry, the cats and the others in prose.

yeah but if freed of their bodies and thus their dependence on humans, would your pets want to be with you?

Good point. But, really, would any of us want anything to do with others in our lives now. Without our bodies we'd be free from the fog of emotions and hormones. We'd be very different creatures with very different views, wants and needs (if any).

Of coruse they can! But they'll reincarnate, just like everyone else.

My condolences. I remember when we had to put my cat Tippy down. My mum had to sign the paperwork because my dad (who had always threatened to put him down for waking him up several times a night, scratching him etc) was too distraught to do so.

It's a horrible experience and whatever helps you deal with it, you should believe.

Depends on the animal. Sometimes cows go to cow heaven, aka a burger.

Nope they do not.

Reincarnation says that the only animal capable of such a thing is the human animal. That is why being born a human is the only chance of 'salvation'(whatever the hell that means).

The point is: do animals have souls? According to scholastic tradition, animals are supposed to have the spiritus (living breath) and the animus (will), but they lack the anima (conscience), so they cannot go in heaven.

On the contrary, Pope Paul VI said he believed that his own dog was going to go in heaven - he wasn't speaking ex cathedra, though, so that isn't dogma.

Nope they do not.

Reincarnation says that the only animal capable of such a thing is the human animal. That is why being born a human is the only chance of 'salvation'(whatever the hell that means).

And what about former humans who have reincarnated into other animals, like, dunno, pigs?

And what about former humans who have reincarnated into other animals, like, dunno, pigs?

Then they have to wait until they are human again.

Then they have to wait until they are human again.

Oh. Thanks.
The reincarnation thing looks so complicated to me...

Oh. Thanks.
The reincarnation thing looks so complicated to me...

Meh! That's just one set of beliefs though I guess.:D

Meh! That's just one set of beliefs though I guess.:D

Same: though, since I've grown in a mostly catholic country, to me reincarnation it's even stranger than transubstantiation.

Same: though, since I've grown in a mostly catholic country, to me reincarnation it's even stranger than transubstantiation.

Hahahahah. Only one thing comes to mind where that word is conscerned.

'It's a miracle!'

Good point. But, really, would any of us want anything to do with others in our lives now. Without our bodies we'd be free from the fog of emotions and hormones. We'd be very different creatures with very different views, wants and needs (if any).
aye.

should there be a heaven it implies a very different kind of life than the one here on earth.

No, not even humans can.

yeah but if freed of their bodies and thus their dependence on humans, would your pets want to be with you?

I would like to think so.

after all, my crays run up towards me when I enter the room, and run into their hides when others do.

Good point. But, really, would any of us want anything to do with others in our lives now. Without our bodies we'd be free from the fog of emotions and hormones. We'd be very different creatures with very different views, wants and needs (if any).
Would we be free of emotions? Hormones I'll agree with, but emotions?

That's sick, dude.

*gets butter*

Lol, that's not how I meant it.

So heaven is full of spiders?

Spiders. Are. Arachnids. Dirty bastards.

I would like to think so.

after all, my crays run up towards me when I enter the room, and run into their hides when others do.
now really.

if you think about it

arent they just hoping for food? that wouldnt be a consideration in heaven.

now really.

if you think about it

arent they just hoping for food? that wouldnt be a consideration in heaven.

nope, simply because their feeding times are set. so yeah, when it's time for their feeding, they go to their feeding spot (one area of the tank where I always drop their food) and do their little "Yay! Food!" dance.

also the tank has guppies and other stuff they can munch on. so they're not totally dependant on me.

nope, simply because their feeding times are set. so yeah, when it's time for their feeding, they go to their feeding spot (one area of the tank where I always drop their food) and do their little "Yay! Food!" dance.

also the tank has guppies and other stuff they can munch on. so they're not totally dependant on me.
geez junii, i dont even believe that my cat loves me and here you are thinking that your crawfish have some affection for you.

*shaking my head*

geez junii, i dont even believe that my cat loves me and here you are thinking that your crawfish have some affection for you.

*shaking my head*

I never said it was affection. for all I know, they probably just find me as intersting as I find them.

Edit:
http://assets.comics.com/dyn/str_strip/000000000/00000000/0000000/100000/20000/0000/300/120337/120337.full.gif