If your heart starts at day 18, and your gentials develope at 3-4 months, and you must have a thinking brain around then too... Then when does your soul begin? Or are you a human blueprint until you actually are birthed?
Although the motion proposed here is quite vague, I am against it simply because of the fact that
there is no scientific evidence to proof the existence of this thing we like to call "soul".
What is the "soul" anyways? The answer may seem fairly obvious, but there's no denying that the
moment i ask you to describe it you'll struggle. Its even more complicated, if you try to describe
the nature of a "soul" in context of science.
For instance, we all know that our brains make us who we are. They determine our personalities, the
way we see the world and form the basis of the mind. Read one book on neuroscience and you will
learn that the idea of such a soul is unnecessary.
Most importantly, the proposition has the burden to explaining how the soul relates to the brain.
When i die are my memories transferred to this "soul"? What about those who in a comma? Or what
about those who are dying slowly? What's happening to their souls?
Therefore, I think we can agree that this motion can be easily dismissed because one of the key
words in it is fantasy. It relies on the existence of a soul, something that no one can argue for
with objective evidence.