Pets & Animals >
Animal Rights & Issues
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedDo animals have souls?
Results so far:
| Yes | 85% | 78 votes | Total: 92 votes | |
| No | 15% | 14 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesThis would seem to be a no-brainer, but the issue of what is a soul has been a very egocentric one for human beings. There are two main points to consider. The first is that human beings do not actually know what a soul is, how it operates, or where it resides, either in ourselves or anywhere else. Is the soul the immortal part of us that gives us life, that animates us? If so, then does it leave us when we die and become inanimate? Since ancient times, that has been the train of thought for most philosophers. But why would this be a strictly human condition, or gift, or attribute?
The second point is that it is hubristic to think we can know the mind of God. If there is a God - which is a subject for another debate - then we believe that God created everything, the Universe and its contents. If human beings declare that only human beings have souls, we place ourselves at the top of God's creative masterworks. I do not see that. I do not see that human beings are God's greatest work; perhaps God isn't finished yet. I also do not see that a cat or a dog or a dolphin or a Rhesus Monkey should be denied its soul because of our colossal egos.
What differentiates another animal from a human? There are many things, of course, but we define those differences. When it comes to feelings of attachment, dare I say love, or protection, or rage, or memory, any pet owner can tell you that he or she has seen these things in their pets. If anyone has seen the video of the African lion who tackles his human friend in a playful, happy embrace after an absence of years, it is hard not to see a soul at work there - remembering, caring, animated.
Ah, you might say, instinct. Animals act on instinct. True - as do humans. Humans are driven by the same basic instincts of survival that drive other animals, namely, to find food and to procreate. Men constantly compare themselves with each other, strutting or embellishing in order to be the most attractive to the females they seek, and many men seek more than one female in order to ensure that their DNA spreads farther into the human population. Women constantly preen and compete for male attention, and shift allegiances in order to maintain some strength in a colony where men are often peripheral and sometimes threatening. None of us goes out consciously and says, Gee, I have to spread my DNA today. Or gee, I have to prove I've got a harder head than that big buck over there. We just do it - or we shy away from doing it if it runs contrary to our moral code, which is a learned behavior. Meanwhile, the species continues. On its instinct. The differences between us and "lower" primates or other creatures on "God's earth" shrink to nothing. And if we are instinctive at least part of the time, who is to say that animals are not soulful part of the time?
One final note: If you have ever watched a cat calculate the distance from where it is standing to where it wants to be, and then makes the leap, you realize that an animal thinks, plots, remembers. And when you watch it miss the mark you realize it can make mistakes. That is the true arena of the soul.
Learn more about this author, Roy Blokker.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
Is it really possible to consider if animals have a soul? There really is no definitive argument that humans have a soul. Sure, in terms of spirit, there is motion in various creatures. Even a loaded term like creature, a created being, helps to influence an argument. Can you really base an argument on semantics when they are derived from beliefs of a created soul? Unless, full omniscience is credited to a single designer of modern language, in which case there is only one supreme master of language on this planet, wordplay should have no bearing.
However, if the supreme cultural being wants animals to have souls, it can will them into existence. Otherwise, a debate would have to be based on reason alone. What reasons exist for animals to have souls? They can be with you in eternity as a faithful companion. How cute. Yes, the universe is designed and held together by cute fluff. That is exactly how the natural world appears when you are alone in the wild. It is so cuddly and fair.
Perhaps, it is the revered soul that marks creatures fit or unfit for killing. The cute souled creatures obviously cannot be murdered. If the various animals consumed today had a soul, it is fueling my mind to write this article... They seem to have no opinion. The soul must have already left, but it forgot all of the valuable energy and matter that created the nutrients in my stomach. Odd, this would suggest that the soul is not substantial.
It is very risky ground to use the soul as a factor in life and death. What if someone discovered that humans don't have one either? We really don't want to put that out there. The already soulless wretched humans among us might find that ethics were indeed optional. What is it that constitutes that elusive soul? It seems to be an agreement that it must be created. It seems debatable that it can be lost. Let's focus on creation. Where does the soul come from?
Some would argue that God created the soul. On top of this, they might wonder what exactly makes humans unique. Surely, humans would not receive this gift alone. In fact, humans might not even be the end of the line. This, of course, assumes humans are the epoch of the current soul continuum. What would possibly make humans stand out?
It isn't like they have risen quickly above all other creatures to dominate the planet. They don't have the most elaborate and diverse mental facilities of all creatures in the known universe. If nothing else, they definitely can't harness or grasp the core principles of the universe to serve their thoughts and will. Oh wait... they can? Looks like I don't have an argument then. They seem to be at a demi-god state to me if I'm any other creature. I would definitely assume they had some favor that I lacked. I might even worship them hoping that they were benevolent enough to share this soul.
Clearly, if there is a God who hands out souls, humans got a heftier helping to say the least. Still, this relies on the acceptance that the soul is not substantial. In other words, none of the DNA or structure of humans contains or allows these abilities. Is the DNA just a vessel created to house the soul? In that case, all animals have some capacity for the soul to ooze in. Primates are lucky enough to get most of it... the others just have half souls floating in their essence apparently.
Of course, there is no real way of knowing which parts are needed for it to function. These could be just dead souls with large chunks missing. They are like the stillbirths of the soul realm. The physical appearance of these other creatures is merely a reflection of their creation without a total soul. Why bother, especially in the modern age of science, to attribute any of this to a non-mystical reasoning.
If we did, it might seem reasonable that the soul is a concept that is there to comfort you. It makes you believe that something more will come. It makes you feel less grief when loved ones die. It makes it acceptable to kill some things while embracing others. Even if animals do have one... I would bet they are going to be fairly upset when they find out that they still don't get into heaven. So, don't worry they aren't going to be up there to judge you for killing them anyway.
At the very best case, they only have parts of a soul. Perhaps, you could combine a few together. At no point, as the title suggests, do animals have multiple souls. They might be able to collectively have a soul. Ultimately, this would require a single will. That will is likely directed toward being subservient and edible to higher creatures.
Learn more about this author, Joseph Wigton.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
