posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 08:46 AM
These two terms are quiet ambiguious, but i believe they are both trying to define that same thing. Im going to be very general. The idea of the soul
has existed since ancient times, it is surpose to be the element that differs us from other creatues on the earth. It is believe it is the essence of
humanity, it is the thing that gives us self awareness, creativity, empathy, love etc etc etc. It is the unique facet of humanity.
Yet counciousness to me tries to explain the exact same thing. Insted of giving my amauter interpretation i will give the first sentacne to its wiki
Consciousness is a quality of the mind generally regarded to comprise qualities such as subjectivity, self-awareness, sentience, sapience, and the
ability to perceive the relationship between oneself and one's environment
Now as it says "quality of the mind" we could relate that to "enlighenment of the soul".
The distungishing factors between the two terms is simply that the soul is enternal and related to the after life, while counciousness exists only in
reality. The soul is decribed by relgious dogma, while counciousness is accountable to scientific observation.
To me this is a similar situation to the Geocentric model and Copernican model, both are trying to explain something, both can be believed and
applied, yet only one is true. So now are we still using the word "soul" to try to explain counciousness? If so should we not use the correct
term to explain it?