2006-06-12 10:24:13 · 8 answers · asked by tyh_yu 3 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
to nate..._ evidence of soul? at least one please.
2006-06-12 12:15:38 · update #1
Who says living creatures can't evolve a soul?
2006-06-12 10:28:46 · answer #1 · answered by Kenny ♣ 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The better question is, why would someone care about a question involving a drastically flawed theory? It is so flawed it has been changed many many times over the years by those who wish to keep it alive. There is no evidense to support a theory, except that our genes relate to other species.
2006-06-12 18:21:43 · answer #2 · answered by Nate 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Thank you for science and evolution theories that are open to change as new evidence is presented, its better than believing that the earth is flat and supernatural beings running around....
2006-06-12 19:00:46 · answer #3 · answered by Its not me Its u 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not necessarily - but the answer to you question probably depends on your definition of "soul".
2006-06-12 17:32:52 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
"soul" is non-essential to the description of natural selection.
It doesn't exclude it being-there per se.
2006-06-12 21:13:48 · answer #5 · answered by -.- 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It, accept only itself, but if you can nail a Soul to it, be my guest.
2006-06-12 17:46:58 · answer #6 · answered by Oleg B 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
(sigh) I imagine it does. I'd really prefer that their were heaven, or reincarnation - not just when we're gone, we're gone.
2006-06-12 17:28:54 · answer #7 · answered by Terri C. 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
not really
2006-06-12 17:33:44 · answer #8 · answered by paras 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋