Life vs. Existence: The Difference a Soul Makes

“The human soul has still greater need of the ideal than of the real. It is by the real that we exist; it is by the ideal that we live.” -Victor Hugo

From a very young age, some humans are taught that they “are a soul”, that their bodies cannot live without a soul and that it is not their bodies which experience the world around them, it is their immortal living soul that experiences the world. In other words, their life depends on them protecting and nurturing their soul that is them. In most cases, these humans are living what is commonly referred to as a “spiritual life”, one that transcends mere existence because they have a firsthand connection to their soul essentially. This connection empowers these individuals to move beyond the physical world at a much faster rate than those who do not begin their “life” from this perspective.

Then there are some humans who are taught that they “have a soul” which is a different perspective again. These humans may have a dim awareness of their soul and/or the concept of “the soul” but may or may not be attached to it in any meaningful way because their survival does not depend on the acknowledgement/nurturing of this entity to their knowledge. For, the purpose of the post, I am going to generalize by saying that these humans typically live in the physical world and live a primarily “physical life” as opposed to a spiritual life because they have a secondhand connection to their soul.

And then there are some humans who were either never introduced to the concept of the soul during their childhood and/or are told that “the soul does not exist”, therefore, cannot easily move beyond the physical world or live a spiritual life because their existence and survival is completely disconnected from this concept/entity. If these individuals do manage to gain awareness of this concept, it can often be difficult for them to move beyond the physical world because they have a secondhand or even thirdhand connection to their soul, figuratively speaking.

Since we have not been able to reach any firm conclusions about the soul using empirical methods, “the soul” has become a very contentious topic over time, therefore, is even less likely to be acknowledged or spoken of in the physical realm nowadays. The "soul", by itself, takes no form you see, therefore, cannot (yet) be measured in a way that could confirm its existence. However, like I have stated before, appearances can be deceiving. Just because we cannot see something doesn’t mean that it isn’t there. For example, if I were to say that “I am hungry”, I wouldn’t be able to present you with any empirical evidence to confirm that this hunger was taking place in my body but that wouldn’t change the fact that that hunger existed within me. Similarly, just because you see someone in the physical realm who may appear to be living an artificial existence does not mean that they are not living and experiencing life from a very soulful perspective ("I am a soul").

Until I was connected to a soul and sincerely adopted the ideal that “I am a soul”, I wasn’t living my life, I was merely existing. I was stuck in the physical (artificial) realm because I could not transcend my existence on earth in the same way that others could. I couldn’t live a “spiritual life” because I couldn’t access that realm from my perspective of the world. All I could do was exist. Moreover, I didn’t have a “free will” until I had made a firsthand soul connection which unfortunately, is not something that I can prove very easily with factual evidence. I can however, express myself in ways that I was formerly unable to, which at least, allows me to explain the levels of internal deprivation that may cause an unfree will to exist in the first place.

Aristotle believed that the soul was the formal cause of all living things. In other words, the soul is the light within us that is our essence. And though this was an archetypal ideal, it at least gave humans a standard by which to measure their “existence”, or rather, their quality of being on earth. There was a goal, and that goal was to live in the nonphysical (nonmaterial) world (sometimes referred to as the “intelligible” realm) essentially and philosophy was a viable path to get there according to many philosophers. Unfortunately, however, this ancient philosophical wisdom eventually became tied up with religion in ways that could be manipulated by those who stood to benefit from the soulful truths that would no longer be easily accessible to the physical world and the “lost souls” who were unfortunate enough to exist in this “lower” realm and the moral enslavement taking place there.

So, what are we to make of these reflections? Well, if the soul is what makes the difference between life and mere existence, wouldn’t it be unjust to deny someone this soulful connection? And if we could somehow scientifically prove the existence of the soul, wouldn’t it become unlawful to distort this connection even by conventional standards?

Since I am not a scientist myself, I am somewhat stuck in the realm of speculation unfortunately. However, in this case, factual evidence would not help to validate the point that I am trying to make anyway because the point that I am trying to make is purely speculative. So if you are someone who does not have respect for speculative science, you will likely not be interested in the following question I have posed in three different ways and its moral significance:

1. If the soul gives humans a sense of purpose that enhances their existence on earth, why would we ever want to prevent someone from gaining the perspective that they are a soul even if modern science can prove that it is no more than an ideal?

2. Why would we ever want to trap someone in a mere existence on earth if we know a more fulfilling realm awaits them?

3. Why, would we ever want to prevent someone from living in the beautiful formless realm that we have been fortunate enough to access ourselves?

Sincerely,

Heather