Scientists Found That The Soul Doesn’t Die
Some people think that scientists do not believe in the existence of the soul Sand considers it as an irrational belief or mere blind faith. Following are some excerpts from the writing of some famous scientists and psychologists which show that many world-famous scientists believed and believe in the existence of the soul and its rebirth.
Sir Francis Walshed, Neurologist
Says in his article titled: "Thoughts upon the Equation of mind with Brain" In Brain-A Journal of Neurology, March 1983.
From sheer psychological and philosophical necessity, traditional commonsense philosophy from the earliest Greeks to Aquinas accepted the existence in man of an essential immaterial element setting him above the merely animal. This element they called psyche, entelechy. anima or soul.
It has also to be recognized that for the soul's functioning as an essential element in the hylomorphic human person, it needs sense data, of which the brain is the collecting, integrating, and distributing mechanism, Yet it would be quite childish to identify the Instrument with its user, even though the user be dependent upon the instrument for operating.. We shall have to accept the ancient concept of the soul again; as an immaterial, non-corporeal part of the human person, and yet an integral part of his nature, not just some concomitant aspect of man, but something without which he is not a human person.
There is a sense in which the present is an age of which a character is its failure to understand the status of its own obstructions, and this, perhaps, is the inevitable fruit of the divorce of natural science from metaphysics, to have achieved which was the empty triumph of the nineteenth century. For me, the chill physico-mathematical concept of the human mind is a muddy vesture of decay in which I am not willing to be enfolded. It is unworthy of the dignity of Man. And if anyone says that this is not a scientific attitude I am unmoved by the irrelevance, for, outside its proper field of discourse, the word "science" does not intimidate me. The man was not made for science, but science by man, who remains more and greater than his creations.
Max Planck, World Famous Physicist
Says in his article Where science going?
There is a point, one single point in the immeasurable world of mind and matter, where science and therefore, every casual method of research is inapplicable, not only on practical grounds but also on logical grounds and will always remain not applicable. This point is the Individual ego, It small point in the universal realm of being: but in itself it is a whole world, embracing our emotional life, our will, and our thought. This realm of the ego is at once the source of our deepest suffering and at the same time of our highest happiness. Over this realm, no outer power of fate can ever have sway. There can never be any real opposition between religion and science: for the one is the complement of the other. Every serious and reflective person realizes, I think that the religious element in his nature must be recognized and cultivated for all the powers of the human soul are act together In perfect balance and harmony And indeed it was not by any accident that the greatest thinkers of all ages were also deeply religious souls, even though they make no public show of their religious feeling..... Every advance in knowledge brings us face to face with the mystery of our own
Erwin Schredinger (1887-1961)
World-famous Physicist who won Noble Prize (1933)
Writes in 'What is life', published by Cambridge University Press:
(1) My body functions as a pure mechanism according to the Laws of Nature. (2) Yet I know, by Incontrovertible direct experience, that I am directing its motions, of which I foresee the effects, that may be fateful and all-important, In which case I feel and take full responsibility for them
The only possible inference from these two facts is, I think, that I-I in the widest meaning of the word, that is to say, every conscious mind that has ever said or felt "T" - am the person, if any, who controls the "motion of the atoms according to the Laws of Nature.
If you analyze (this "1") closely you will, I think, find that it is just a little bit more than a collection of single data (experiences and memories), namely the canvas (or ground-stuff) upon which they are collected
You may come to a distant country, lose sight of all your friends... acquire new (ones)... Less and less important will become the fact that, while living your new life, you still recollect the old one... Yet there has been no intermediate break, no death. And even if a skilled hypnotist succeeded in blotting out entirely all your earlier reminiscences, you would not find that he had killed you. In no case is there a loss of personal existence to deplore. Nor will there ever be.
Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
The greatest scientist says in "The world as I see It'.
It is enough for me to contemplate the mystery of conscious life, perpetuating itself through all eternity to reflect upon the marvelous structure of the universe, which we can dimly perceive and to try humbly to comprehend even an infinitesimal part of the intelligence manifested in nature......
The most beautiful and most profound emotion we can experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead. To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their primitive forms this knowledge, this feeling is at the center of true religiousness.
I maintain that cosmic religioás feeling is the strongest and noblest incitement to scientific research. A contemporary has said not unjustly, that in this age of ours, the serious scientific workers are the only profoundly religious people.
Alexis Carrel (1873-1944)
Says in 'Man the Unknown
The soul is the aspect of ourselves that is specific to our nature and distinguishes man from all other animals. We are not capable of defining this familiar and profoundly mysterious entity. What is thought, that strange being, which lives in the depths of ourselves without consuming a measurable quantity of chemical energy? Is it related to the known forms of energy? Could it be a constituent of our universe, ignored by the physicists, but infinitely more important than light?
The mind is hidden within the living matter completely neglected by physiologists and economists, almost unnoticed by physicians. And yet it is the most colossal power of this world. Should it be considered as an immaterial being, located outside space and time, outside the dimensions of the cosmic universe, and inserting itself by an unknown procedure into our brain, which would be the Indispensable condition of its manifestations and the determining agent of its characteristics?
Our mind has a natural tendency to reject the things that do not fit into the frame of scientific or philosophical beliefs of our time. After all, scientists are only men. They are saturated with the prejudices of their environment and their epoch. They willingly believe that facts that cannot be explained by current theories do not exist. At present, scientists.. still look upon telepathy and other metaphysical phenomena as illusions. Evident facts having an unorthodox appearance are suppressed. The inventory of the things which could lead us to a better understanding of human being has been left incomplete. We must, then, go back to a naive observation of ourselves in all our aspects, reject nothing and describe simply what we see.
Thomas H.Huxley (1825-1895) British Biologist And Darwinist
Quoted from 'Evolution and Ethics'
In the doctrine of transmigration, whatever its origin, Brahminical and Buddhist speculation found, ready to hand, the means of constructing a plausible vindication of the ways of the Cosmos to man... This plea of justification is not less plausible than others, and none but very hasty thinkers will reject it on the ground of inherent absurdity. Like the doctrine of evolution itself, that of transmigration has its roots in the world of reality; and It may claim such support as the great argument from analogy is capable of supplying.
He is the person, who advocated Darwin's Evolution theory like a crusader. He says in "Essays upon some Controversial Questions."
Looking at the matter from the most rigidly scientific point of view, the assumption that, amidst the myriads of worlds scattered through endless space, there can be no intelligence, as much greater than man's as he is greater than a blackbeetle's, no being endowed with powers of influencing the course of nature as much greater than his, as he is greater than a shall's seems to me not merely baseless, but impertinent. Without stepping beyond the analogy of that which is known, it is easy to people the cosmos with entities, is ascending scale...
I understand the main tenet of Materialism to be that there is nothing in the universe but matter and force Kraft and Stoff-force and matter are paraded as the Alpha and Omega of existence... Whosoever does not hold It is condemned by the more zealous of the persuasion to the Inferno appointed for fools or hypocrites. But all this I heard disbelieve. There is a third thing in the universe, to wit, consciousness, which I cannot see to be matter or force, or any conceivable modification of either.
The student of nature, who starts from the axiom of the unity of the law of causation, cannot refuse to admit an eternal existence, the admits the conservation of energy, he cannot deny the possibility of energy, if he admits the existence of immaterial phenomena in the form of consciousness, he must admit the possibility, at any rate, of an eternal series of such phenomena.
Heber D. Curtis (1872-1942), Astrophysicist
As reported in Los Angeles Times, dated the 31st December 1926, says:
1 personally find it impossible to regard Handel's Large, Keats's "Ode to a Grecian Um, and the higher ethics as mere by-products of the chemical interaction of a collection of hydrocarbon molecules. With energy-matter, space, and time continuous, with nothing lost or wasted are we ourselves the only manifestation that comes to an end, ceases, annihilated at three score year and ten?
What we crudely call the spirit of man makes new compounds, plays with the low of chemical action guides the forces of the atom, changes the face of the earth, gives life to new forms, and takes it away from millions of animals and plants. Here is a flame that controls its own flaming. a creative spirit that cannot reasonably be less than the continuity it controls. This thing, soul, mind or spirit, cannot well be an exception, In some way, as yet impossible to define it too, must possess continuity
Louis Figuier(1819-1894) French Naturalist And Science-Writer
Says in The 'Tomorrow of Delhi'
Descartes and Leibnitz have demonstrated that the human understanding possesses ideas called innate, that is to say, ideas which we bring with us to our birth. This fact is certain. In our times, the Scotch philosopher Dugald Stwart has put Descartes theory into a more precise form by proving that the only really innate idea, that which has universal existence in the human mind after birth, is the idea or the principle of causality, a principle that makes us say and think that there is no effect without a cause, which is the beginning of reason
Innate, Ideas and the principle of causality are explained very simply by the doctrine of the plurality of existences, they are, indeed, mered, deductions from that doctrine. A man's soul, having already existed. h preserved the trace of the Impressions received during that existence has lost, it is true the recollection of action performed during its former Incarnation, but the abstract facts must remain in the soul in its second incarnation. Natural aptitudes, faculties, vocations, are the traces of Impressions formerly received, of knowledge already acquired, and, being revealed from the cradle, cannot be explained otherwise than by a lie gone by... The soul of the man remains always the same, despite its numerous peregrinations.
Gustal Stromberg, an Astronomer
The following is from a review of his book, titled The Soul of the Universe. The review appeared in the Times of April 29, 1940.
Memory is independent of matter. If it can survive the replacement of (cerebral) matter during life, why should it not survive the dissolution of the brain cells after death? The memory of an individual... Is written in indelible script in space and time-It has become an eternal part of a Cosmos in development.
Dr. Stromberg defines the soul as "the ego of a human being something which gives unity to the mental complex of a man." Though Immaterial, he considers it a real structure, like a life of force. Therefore it cannot be annihilated without violating a law analogous to the purely physical law of conservation of mass and energy. Exactly what experiences the human soul may have after death, the author does not presume to say. He thinks the transmigration of souls entirely possible.
© 2021 mindbodysoulanswered