Intergalactic Summit

The existence of it is established in multiple Scriptural writings and debates that have taken place over hundreds of years. While this might shock you, this edict is operating from a standpoint where the existence of a soul is considered common understanding. It is not something that is in doubt to any Amarr, and is not something that the edict has to be concerned about proving. If you don't believe in that, then fine, but it also then means that this edict shouldn't be of any concern to you either. What you are doing is trying to essentially dismiss a finding on planetary flight mechanics by saying, "But wait, you need to prove that gravity exists!" We already know that souls exist. We have evidence that is considered valid under Amarrian discourse. This is not a debate about the existence of souls.

If you don't agree with Amarrian discourse and theology, well then we're at an impasse and there's no real point in arguing because your disagreement is with the entire system, not individual rulings.

And the Theology Council is not just 'a bunch of people'. It is the supreme theological body of Amarr, and it has been debating this issue internally for years among Amarr's highest ranking priests and philosophers, people with decades of experience and certified by numerous institutions. Evidence was brought forward, discussed, and confirmed or refuted. They even already mentioned two pieces of evidence that were used--of Empress Jamyl's second body and Lord Heir Aritcio's full-body cloning. This ruling was not pulled out of a hat. The only thing off about it is its timing.

I think I know where you are coming from here. Though I think that it is inherently limiting to put much faith in the idea of the TEBS having any direct contact with the soul as a mechanical operation. We can't really speak about the soul 'moving' with the body like some invisible aura. Souls are part of the spiritual, not the physical, so they can't really be viewed with the same perceptions of time and space. Rather, the essential information that makes up a person's identity, a perfect digital blueprint of their neural map, does transfer, and ergo, as determined by the TC, the soul must still have some connection because the person remains the same person in essence. Essentially, from a non-theistic perspective, the TC is taking a position on the philosophical debate over whether an exact copy of a person is the same person, and saying that "yes, they are." What the ruling is establishing is that the copy of a person still maintains an essential link to the soul, and that if they did not maintain that link then they would be an entirely different person, or rather a non-person, a machine. It is more of a philosophical ruling than a physical one: the soul remains regardless of any break in physical continuation, and therefore the person is fundamentally the same person.

As someone who found it difficult to view copies as the same person, in that I believed that upon cloning you die and are replaced by someone exactly like you but fundamentally not you, this edict is something that has been very difficulty for me to come to terms with. I would like to believe it.

So can any theologist working on discussions pertaining to the soul. It is a philosophical study. It is about discovering the meaning behind something. As far as any Amarr is concerned, the soul is proven. There are thousands of debates, historical events, natural discoveries, and Scriptural passages that have all been brought forward and cited. No one just up and went 'aha, there is a soul!' at random and was taken at his word. We look at evidence and find meaning from that evidence. But for someone to accept the evidence they have to accept the basis on which that evidence is being judged.

Again, it's about the system. A person who studies philosophy or psychology is going to have a different perspective of the human consciousness than someone that studies biology. The biology can certainly inform the debate, it provides an accounting of the physical processes of human existence, but what we define as human personality or purpose comes from debate about what those processes mean.

Science is the how, theology/philosophy are the why. The existence of the soul is proven in Amarr not because there's some scientific law somewhere that can be cited, but because we can look at the full extent of creation and human history and from that evidence posit "there must be one." Science in Amarr is about discovering the ways that God's will is enacted. Science is the thing that makes you go, "Well the sefrim may never have been a literal magical being descended from the sky," while theology is the thing that makes you understand that, "people, things, or events acted in their capacity and thus embodied the essence of the sefrim to carry forth God's will".

Incorrect on many points:
1) Data is constantly checked and updated against the prime preventing errors
2) Instability in our biological predecessor is not cloning related
3) True immortality is worth any so-called soul damage (assuming for this argument a soul does exist)

Which merely reinforces my point that you cannot make an analogy between it and reproducable scientific matters.

"God said it, I believe it, that settles it" may satisfy your philosophy (although it does not satisfy mine), but in matters of scientific study God needs to submit to peer review like everyone else.

Being a pod pilot is not Heretical, pod pilots have existed for years before cloning was perfected. What you are saying is Heresy but I figured you would not change when Khanid died.

Besides that, wouldn't Theology Coucil members' peers be other Theology Council members?

They probably do review each other's work, I'd think?

Voluval tattoos.

This atheist/theist debate is tired, boring, and utterly pointless. Almost no one has said anything that wasn't said thousands of years ago.

You are not going to succeed in using a logical proof to disprove the divine. We are not going to succeed in using a logical proof to prove the divine. We are talking about things that are by their very nature out of the reach of logic.

If you are not interested in discussing how the TC council ruling fits into Amarrian theology, and would prefer to waste everyone's time so that you can make a spectacle of your disbelief in the basic underlying principles of Amarrian metaphysics, then I suggest you make your own thread rather than continue to make fools of yourself here.

If I haven't sent you something in 24h, I've been distracted and could use a reminder. I'll see if I can't get you at least somewhere to start.