MP, he lost me on the "soul" part. The dualism is antiquated today. Abstract thoughts are often misleading assumptions. I think that "heart" is often subject to interpretation. I don't think that this "heart" exists beyond the brain. "Heart" is an abstract that is questionable because it means different things to people. Some take "heart" in warfare. Some take "heart" in competition. "Heart" for many is based on a religious conviction which I don't share.


The human body is not necessarily a masterpiece of creation. Evolution has changed the functions of the human body over time but improvements have not been made altogether.
Medical science is truly wonderful in that it sometimes can address these deficiencies.

I think the most important part of philosophy is "ethics" because it questions how as a species we will live together.

His views elude me on the assumption that the mind and the brain are separate.
Of course, his supposition that there is an out-of-body mind is conjecture and not supportable by what we know of science today.

We can equally presuppose that aliens are out to help us or that a sky-god will or won't throw a thunderbolt in our direction.

Hanging on to antiquated messages from the past to soothe humans from the inevitable death they will have doesn't seem particularly either useful or helpful. Death is part of life and the realization of it helps us appreciate life so much more than being lulled to sleep by the notion of an afterlife or heaven. The more sinister elements of this is when you consider the fundamentalist view of religion in which you will be rewarded by insane behavior in the "hereafter".

Oh that's just the "Fundies" you say. Well they are being enabled by the concepts of
religion that have no basis in science or reality.