The idea that you don’t have a soul is absurd.
what’s your take on the concept of a soul? is it a person’s true nature, or what the world has molded them to be?
I reject the idea that it has to be one or the other. Your body and your personality and thoughts are very clearly the result of a long evolutionary process, with your genetics and your environment playing big roles (consider a cozy home vs. growing up in a hostile place). This long process has molded you in particular ways, and it’s produced “you” out of various pre-existing materials.
Do you, then, not have a soul? Can you ask what your soul is like, or whether it is untrue to its nature if it is molded? Can you ask what your soul should be like, to see whether it’s true to its nature?
Sure you can. In fact, philosophy and religion have spent a long time doing this, without giving a satisfying answer. (That’s not surprising, since they’re both focused on a set of very strange questions.)
But that’s not an argument that there’s no such thing as a soul, or that the soul is the same as the body (or “materialistic reductionism”), or that that the soul is not molded by experiences (or “idealism”). (It is also not an argument that empiricists are wrong, or that we know nothing about “souls.”)








