Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Bombadil 
if it makes you feel better, perhaps "not identical" is a better word.
|
Yes, I feel much better now.
Quote:
Some forms of dualism would maintain that it is *integrated* with the body. C Stephen Evans had an article on that, but I can't find it on the web anymore (except for at Apollos ws, but you have to be a member to read it). That is is never spearate that way.
But, they key notion for the dualist is that of *logically separate.* Even if they never became disintergrated, they could still be distinct substances since properties could be true of one but not the other.
|
Fair enough, I follow. I'm just not convinced that we can call both "substances" in the same sense.
Quote:
Last, you seem to imply that abstracta do not exist except if they are instantiated in concreta. I'd have to disagree seeing that "redness" is a concept in the mind of God, and it has existence apart from being instantiated in concreta.
|
Not at all, my mistake for coming across this way. I'm merely acknowledging that we can't see the "redness" without red light. It is always there, created by God, and therefore it must be be a concept in the mind of God. In a weakly similar way, we (presently) do not experience the soul except as it is integrated with the body. Of course, absent our body we still will still be self-aware (judging from the limited information we have from scripture), but I think we have support for the idea that we will also feel "out of our element". A fundamental expression of our essence is missing. That's all I meant from the weak analogy that the red object will not appear red, even though it is.
But I'm afraid I've gone far enough in speculating. I dare not go futher. I'll try to read up on it as I can.