[See here for introductory comments.]
I theorized
that the soul is composed of at least three major components that I referred to
generally as Afferent System, Efferent System, and Processing & Memory [see here]. This entry is about the Processing
& Memory component of the soul.
The Processing &
Memory of the Soul: The "Soul as
Brain"
An important
foundational principle of my theory of the soul is that the soul is complex
[see here]. In a very real way, the
human brain is the most complex thing in the physical universe. When I refer to the processing and memory
component of the soul with the phrase "Soul as Brain," I am not
suggesting that we have two brains.
Rather, I am emphasizing the complex operations that occur in the soul,
and I suggest that they are at least
as complex as the operations that occur in the human physical brain. The importance of this feature of the soul is
a required element (in my view) in order to understand and explain how the
brain and soul work together in observable phenomena, from something as simple
as "what happens to the soul when you sleep?" to "How can
hemi-neglect be explained if consciousness resides in the soul?" In this entry, I just want to introduce this
general concept, but we will have to explore this concept much deeper in the
future.
First,
when I use the term "processing" to describe a feature of the soul, I
mean that the inputs and outputs in the soul are manipulated in a variety of
ways. This is analogous to what happens
in the nervous system. Sensory signals
in the periphery are processed in the central nervous system so that some
inputs are enhanced and other inputs are diminished. For example, the nervous system uses a
processing technique called "surround inhibition" to enhance the
sensation of edges in a manner analogous to the "increase contrast"
function in photo editing software.
There are also recurrent networks where the output of a neuron feeds
back on itself and produces the quality of persistence. Some inputs are combined together to create a
new output with properties distinct from any of the inputs. Memories are combined with current
inputs. I could go on, but the point is
that all of these processing methods should be considered available to the soul
as well. In fact, we should expect that
the soul, being spiritual in nature, should have even more unique processing
capabilities than the human brain, or any other physical system.
I will
give a "simple" example of the type of processing that occurs in the
soul and how we experience it. We have already established that consciousness - the real awareness of what is happening right now - is part of the soul.
As a starting point, we could imagine that the soul senses every synapse
in the brain and combines that information to produce a unified awareness of
the present moment. The problem is that
we know, by experience, that we are not conscious of every sensory input into
our brain. In fact, we are only
conscious of a subset of things going on in and around us. But we also know, by experience, that we can
change our conscious focus at will and seemingly instantly. For example, I may be deep in thought about
some task I have for the day while I am driving in to work. Most of my conscious perception is absorbed
by the task I am thinking about. But if
the car in front of me suddenly slams on their brakes, my conscious focus is
suddenly ripped away from the tasks of the day and into the moment at
hand. How can that happen? How can attention be switched to a completely
different set of inputs? This example
compels us to propose that our soul reads the sensory inputs from a variety of
places in the brain, but processes them in a manner that creates a conscious
perception of a small subset of those inputs and, further, the soul must have
some means of instantly switching from one set of inputs to another (a "channel
switching function" if you will). This
is just one of many examples that we will need to explore as we address the
experimental results of studying normal and pathological brain function.
Thus,
although we don't have a means of dissecting the soul to determine its
composition, we do have our experiences as soul-driven human beings, and this
allows us to make some inferences about the composition of the soul. We will have to rely on this approach again
and again in developing our theory of the soul.
It's not the ideal approach, but we are limited to measurements made in
and about the physical world. Despite
this limitation, I think there is a lot we can reasonably infer about the
working of the soul.
The other
"half" of this third component of the soul is
"memory." I probably should
have split processing and memory into two different components, but they are
strongly connected and there is at least some sense in which memory is just one
type of processing, although a rather unique type (for example, internal
persistence is a basic form of memory).
Also, I figured that the idea of the soul having "memory" was
a fairly unique insight, but, as usual, "there is nothing new under the
sun." I found that the idea is
definitely not new and even Augustine discussed the idea extensively. Of course Augustine didn't have all of the
anatomical and physiological evidence for memory in the brain, so he figured
that the soul was the repository of all memory.
It is important for me to clarify this point up front: I am not at all suggesting that all of
our memory resides in the soul and not in the brain. In fact, it is clear from medicine and
neuroscience that the physical brain stores our memories, and they are stored
in a physical manner within the neurons, and those memories can be triggered by
a variety of very physical means. So,
when I suggest that the soul has a memory, I am suggesting the soul's memory is
a "second memory" if you will.
Importantly, there is no reason, as far as I can tell, to think that the
memory that resides in the soul is exactly the same as the memory that resides
in the physical brain. In fact, the
content of the soul's memory could be (and I think probably is) quite
different.
Why do I
propose that both the brain and the soul have memory? First, memory is certainly necessary for
making moral decisions, which is what the soul does, and it seems a bit inefficient
if the soul has to keep accessing the brain's memory in order to make moral
decisions. But the more important
consideration is this: memory seems to
me to be absolutely necessary for the continuity of the "self", at
least as that continuity is expressed in Christian belief. The soul persists beyond death. The fleshly memory that resides in the brain
does not. The brain obviously decays
after death and whatever physical memory was stored in the brain's neurons is
lost as the body decays. It is clear,
based on my reading of scripture, that human beings know at least something of
their past after they die. When Jesus gave illustrations of people in
their afterlife, His illustrations always implied that people could remember
something of their former life on earth.
Also, it just makes logical sense:
if we are the same "self" after we die, then something of ourselves has to persist
after death. That is the soul (in my
opinion). But if the soul has no memory,
or imprint of our nature and experiences, then it hardly seems that we would
really continue to be the same self. I
know that there is a whole body of philosophy regarding the continuity of self
even in our physical life (e.g. from baby to adult). I would not say that memory is the sole
component that guarantees the continuity of self, but, to me, it is a critical
component. As a result, I include a
"soul memory" in my theory of the soul.
Finally,
for now, with respect to "soul memory", we have to use the term
"memory" loosely. When we
think of our own physical memories, we are generally thinking of something akin
to a "videotaping" of our life that is stored in our brains. That storage can be faulty and it fades over
time, but we can still "play it back" to remember past events. A key thing about physical memory is that it
is all about the past and the passage of time.
The soul, being fundamentally spiritual in nature, isn't tied to the
passage of time in the same way and I'm not sure the "past" has the
same meaning. Therefore, the soul's
memory must be different, as it is more about maintaining who we are, what we
are like, and how we have changed. It's
not necessarily the same as "storage of past events." The soul's memory is more about what kind of
a person we are.
At the end
of the book of Revelation, it says that God "will wipe every tear from
their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the
old order of things has passed away."
[Rev 21:4] I take this to mean
that, among other things, our memories of the past will be wiped clean. But we are still "us" and so
something of our character has to remain.
I know the whole concept is a topic of longstanding debate. I suppose you could say that God wipes away
all of the bad memories and leaves only the good memories, but that seems
difficult to reconcile. Sometimes our
good and bad memories are mixed. Also,
for me personally, at the top of most of my best memories are memories that I
have shared with my wife over our years of being married. Yet we will not be married in heaven, so it
seems like there would be a twinge of sadness there. Will we remember that we were married? I don't know - it seems that we would not
have that kind of memory of our past - I mean even now I can't remember most of
my past and certainly not the first five years or so of my life. But I still know who I am and what kind of
person I am. Regardless, I still can't
help but think there will be some small twinkle when my wife and I pass by each
other in heaven!
So, that
is a basic overview of the three mains parts of the soul as I see them: Afferent System, Efferent System, and
Processing & Memory. I think it is
now time to go back to my "Explanatory Features List" and start
showing how my theory of the soul fits (or doesn't fit!) into these features.
