Deep Sight:

And what purpose does the biological construct serve? Itself, or a being called YOU?

I wouldn't presume a purpose, rather I will talk about its effect. And its YOU

Mr_Anony:
There is something fundamentally different between a brain and a CPU which is subjective thought. I don't think that that can be explained by looking a the chemical/physical mechanism that correlates to thought.

I didn't get what you meant by subjective thought

Kay 17:

I wouldn't presume a purpose, rather I will talk about its effect. And its YOU

Alas.....here we go again.

Kay 17:

I didn't get what you meant by subjective thought

By subjective thoughts I mean how three people can come upon the same information, their brains go through the same process to interpret it and yet these three people have three different meanings of it.

Three different CPUs presented with the same information will result in three instances of the exact same outcome. Get what I mean now?

davidylan:

Daft again. If the soul was the man then the entire new testament is a complete waste of time. Why bother with a gospel of salvation when the man ceases to exist after death?

" Then the Lord God formed a man[a] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being." - Gen 2:7

Let us go right back to where it all started.

God made MAN from the dust of the earth , this was his BODY void of life and in a state of 'death'. Then GOD breathed into MAN the breath of life and MAN became a SOUL.

No one is arguing about the existence of a SOUL because MAN is a SOUL in completeness, the bone of contention is what happens when a MAN dies.

We cannot jump the gun and ignore Gen 2:7 , because that is where it all started. There is not one iota of truth to this nonsense about MAN dying and his soul flying off to some bogus place, when a MAN dies, his spirit returns back to GOD and the MAN dies 100% , he can only ever be raised by Christ at the resurrection.

To suggest that People live on after death , defies both the resurrection and supports the devils LIE, that MAN shall not surely die.

"You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman." - Genesis 3:4

Mr_Anony:
Alas.....here we go again.


By subjective thoughts I mean how three people can come upon the same information, their brains go through the same process to interpret it and yet these three people have three different meanings of it.

Three different CPUs presented with the same information will result in three instances of the exact same outcome. Get what I mean now?

Wrong. My friend's pc will provide errors if you try to render 1080p pictures, while mine will render it in a smaller resolution while another will produce clear results. Trololo.



Consciousness and self. Down to the atom, we are all biologically different- no two people have the same fingerprints.




Even if I am wrong (which I am not)how does this prove the soul?



Typical Anony and Deepsight- you cant explain X, therefore the soul.


Make a gaddem positive argument for the soul;
-the soul exists because this is the evidence/this is its function etc............

Deep Sight:

Let me even add that the very term "Central Processing Unit", is indicative of the fact that something is being processed for someone.

Lol, not according to mazaje et al....They want to make us believe that if you upgrade its hardware and processing speed up to a certain point, the CPU will magically develop it's own operating system and carry out computations by itself and for itself all without conscious human input. In fact, certain CPUs will go on to consciously willfully and purposefully interact and even to fall in love with other CPUs. What is weird is that they believe this nonsense to be "scientific fact"

Logicboy03:


Wrong. My friend's pc will provide errors if you try to render 1080p pictures, while mine will render it in a smaller resolution while another will produce clear results. Trololo.



Consciousness and self. Down to the atom, we are all biologically different- no two people have the same fingerprints.




Even if I am wrong (which I am not)how does this prove the soul?



Typical Anony and Deepsight- you cant explain X, therefore the soul.


Make a gaddem positive argument for the soul;
-the soul exists because this is the evidence/this is its function etc............

I hope you are not being serious here because the above is just stupid.

Mr_Anony:
I hope you are not being serious here because the above is just stupid.

Is that your subjective opinion?

Mr_Anony: And how is your definition of thought - non-physical thing that comes from a brain - not equally nothing?

I have a brain, with out it I can not even think, it controls generates and controls my thoughts, how is that nothing. . .OK now go and head and make some positive arguments for the soul. . .How does the soul make me think or reason. . .Explain to me how the immaterial soul control my material brain and lead me to think. . .Why does the immaterial soul need a material brain?. . .

Not me but you

really?. . .

The bolded is precisely what the question is about. How come the same "repeatable" experiment with the same stimulus results in multiple varied meanings? If it was purely scientific, the same process should only be able to end in the same result shouldn't it?

You said I should provide scientific evidence to show that thoughts are chemical reactions in the brain which I did . .The process is the same for every body with a normal functioning brain. . .Again, how does my soul control my brain?. . .If I think of the word mazaje. . .How does the soul initiate the thought?. . .Can you explain it to me the way I explained how the brain does it?. . .Pls explain the stages involved and how the soul initiate thoughts and controls the brain. . .

Who is the "you" that is controlling thoughts?

The brain. . .But lets agree that I have a soul. . .How does my soul control my thoughts, what are the process involved?. . .If the soul is immaterial and controls my thoughts then why do material drugs affect it?. . .

Without self awareness, there is no "you" there is only an "it".

OK, How can I know that my soul is the me, you said the soul is the immaterial person, so what positive evidence can you show me that there is an immaterial person in me. . .What exactly does this immaterial person make me do and what can it do on its own so that I will know that it exist on its own regardless of other things. . .

Your brain creates thoughts? care to tell us how a physical brain creates non-physical thought?

I have already done that. . .I am now waiting for you to make a positive case for the soul and explain to me how its creates or initiates thoughts. . .Why does it even require a brain and why does brain damage affect something that is immaterial?. . .Why do material drugs affect something that is immaterial?. . .How does the soul creates thoughts, how does it control the brain?. . .How does the immaterial affect the material?. . .

This isn't much different from saying that the soul exists through a physical body

What evidence is there to show that the soul exist in the first place?. . .How do you know that you have a soul?. . .How can I know that I have one. . .What differentiates the soul from the brain. . .What is the function of the soul in the body?. . .

How come a physical brain according to you controls non-physical thought? why the double standard?

I have already told you that thoughts are not non physical because you can not think about non physical things. . .What is the function of the soul in the human body. .What does it do?. . .And how can it be shown that it is the soul that does it?. . .

Deep Sight:

Well if you, as usual, completely ignore the points I made about the proprietary nature of your description of your brain, and the several other simple and short points I made, I guess there is nothing more I can say, Sir logicboy, R.E.R. Do think on it though. You make the brain a self-centred independent being by itself with its own motivations. Do think on it.

Enough has been said to show you the fallacies in your line of thinking.

OK, lets agree with you that I have a soul. . ..What is the function of the soul in the human body. .What does it do?. . .How can it be shown that it is the soul that does it?. . .

Mr_Anony:
Alas.....here we go again.


By subjective thoughts I mean how three people can come upon the same information, their brains go through the same process to interpret it and yet these three people have three different meanings of it.

Three different CPUs presented with the same information will result in three instances of the exact same outcome. Get what I mean now?

Key word: LIKE. To stress the importance

mazaje:

OK, lets agree with you that I have a soul. . ..What is the function of the soul in the human body. .What does it do?. . .How can it be shown that it is the soul that does it?. . .

Let us not fall into error. You do not have a soul. You are the soul. (In saying this, as we are at such an elementary stage of conditional consensus only, I will for now make no distinction between soul and spirit).

You are in fact that soul, not that you have one. This is why you exercise control over your brain. This is why you take decisions such as deciding to stand up now and take a few steps towards the door. This is a decision that you make, and which is processed through, and implemented by your brain. It is not a decision that the brain just by itself conjures for its own purposes to satisfy itself. This is the only way to sensibly regard your proprietary control of your brain. Because it shows that your brain is a tool, an organ, which enables you to apprehend and process physical reality.

As such, your question is upside down. The soul is not serving a function for the body. The body is serving functions for you - the soul. The body is enabling you to live, dwell in, apprehend and process the physical realm.

Simple.

Deep Sight:

Let us not fall into error. You do not have a soul. You are the soul. (In saying this, as we are at such an elementary stage of conditional consensus only, I will for now make no distinction between soul and spirit).

You are in fact that soul, not that you have one. This is why you exercise control over your brain. This is why you take decisions such as deciding to stand up now and take a few steps towards the door. This is a decision that you make, and which is processed through, and implemented by your brain. It is not a decision that the brain just by itself conjures for its own purposes to satisfy itself. This is the only way to sensibly regard your proprietary control of your brain. Because it shows that your brain is a tool, an organ, which enables you to apprehend and process physical reality.

As such, your question is upside down. The soul is not serving a function for the body. The body is serving functions for you - the soul. The body is enabling you to live, dwell in, apprehend and process the physical realm.

Simple.

Very well said.

Kay 17:

Key word: LIKE. To stress the importance

Sorry you've lost me.

mazaje:

You said I should provide scientific evidence to show that thoughts are chemical reactions in the brain which I did . .The process is the same for every body with a normal functioning brain. . .Again, how does my soul control my brain?. . .If I think of the word mazaje. . .How does the soul initiate the thought?. . .Can you explain it to me the way I explained how the brain does it?. . .Pls explain the stages involved and how the soul initiate thoughts and controls the brain. . .



The brain. . .But lets agree that I have a soul. . .How does my soul control my thoughts, what are the process involved?. . .If the soul is immaterial and controls my thoughts then why do material drugs affect it?. . .

Now since you have asked these questions I will just give my view. I straightaway confess that in this view I am influenced by several writings which have found resonance with me, and I think, with reason.

Man is at core, a non physical being. This fact is very evident if only you will stop for a moment and consider your life and existence. Everything that makes sense to you as a being is non-physical. Your thoughts are non-physical. You have admitted as much in an old discussion with me. What exactly are thoughts? You say they are chemical reactions. If indeed they are merely chemical reactions, then they should have only a chemical result: i.e: X chemical interacts with Y chemical and you have XY chemical, period. Mere chemical reactions cannot give rise to living concepts, ideas and notions[/b] which is what your thoughts are, not to speak about living notions and ideas such as those that dominate human minds - love and hatred, family and community, ambition and achievement, career and success, government and law, economy and commerce, not to speak of higher ideas within the human mind such as spirituality and philosophy, et al.

It takes alot of blind faith, even radical fanaticism, for a human being to believe that these living ideas which govern his existence are just a bunch of chemicals randomly and purposelessly moving around with their own motivations. Surely that is unreasonable. What motivates them? For what? For why?

The only sensible conclusion is that man is indeed a being by himself, and these physical processes are tools by which he apprehends and processes physical reality.

Now you talked about how this works. I don't know if you have ever stood close to a dead body before. A dead body of someone you were close to. I have. When my father passed away in 1995 I went with my elder siblings to the morgue to see his corpse.

My brother, sometimes there are things that words and arguments cannot explain. You only need to be in that situation for one second to recognize that the piece of matter you are looking at is not the human being that you knew. I know I am waxing intuitive here, but that is the reality: it is a dead piece of matter: complete with all the parts that made it but, but the life is not there. That life, that living being, that is what the person was. That is what we refer to as the soul.

Now the very fact that the soul was there, and then at death is not there, is enough simple reason to see that something has departed from that body. This is so simple that I don't know why it has to be debated.

Now in terms of how the soul is "attached" to the body; I am not God: I do not know, and perhaps I can never know. However there are writings that suggest that the soul's very fine non-physical threads find attachment and rest at the base of the cerebellum, where the cerebellum attaches to the frontal brain. I do not know and cannot know if this is the case: but all that remains evident is that at death, there is life which departs the physical body. Also if you view a corpse you will more properly understand that it is just a tool - like a cloak, some sort of spacesuit - an intricately designed one for that matter, that a living being was dwelling in. No more no less. That living being is what is called the soul.

Now it is the impressions from that living being that are processed by and through the brain for apprehension in the physical world.

The foregoing is not intended as an argument. This is the simple and commonsensical way that I see human existence based on my walk in this life.

mazaje:

I have a brain, with out it I can not even think, it controls generates and controls my thoughts, how is that nothing. . .OK now go and head and make some positive arguments for the soul. . .How does the soul make me think or reason. . .Explain to me how the immaterial soul control my material brain and lead me to think. . .Why does the immaterial soul need a material brain?. . .

Who is the "I" in this statement that has a brain that it uses to think?

really?. . .

yes really

You said I should provide scientific evidence to show that thoughts are chemical reactions in the brain which I did . .The process is the same for every body with a normal functioning brain. . .Again, how does my soul control my brain?. . .If I think of the word mazaje. . .How does the soul initiate the thought?. . .Can you explain it to me the way I explained how the brain does it?. . .Pls explain the stages involved and how the soul initiate thoughts and controls the brain. . .

If I asked you to tell me how a car goes from owerri to maidugri, telling me how the engine of a car works wouldn't answer my question. I ask you a question of agency and you give me an answer of mechanism and then in turn ask me to give you a an answer of mechanism to aquestion of agency. That is how not to argue. You still have not shown me how the physical process you described ends up in a non-physical "mazaje" thought. In the same way describing in detail how a car engine works does not tell us anything about where it is travelling to. Please try again.

The brain. . .But lets agree that I have a soul. . .How does my soul control my thoughts, what are the process involved?. . .If the soul is immaterial and controls my thoughts then why do material drugs affect it?. . .

The point you are missing is that you are a soul. Your brain does not initiate thought by itself. How do you choose to think something and proceed think it?

OK, How can I know that my soul is the me, you said the soul is the immaterial person, so what positive evidence can you show me that there is an immaterial person in me. . .What exactly does this immaterial person make me do and what can it do on its own so that I will know that it exist on its own regardless of other things. . .

It is because you are a soul that physical matter which is your body is willfully and purposely animated. How do you explain physical matter developing conscious self-aware life capable of making personal choices without an initial external cause compelling it to do so?

I have already done that. . .I am now waiting for you to make a positive case for the soul and explain to me how its creates or initiates thoughts. . .Why does it even require a brain and why does brain damage affect something that is immaterial?. . .Why do material drugs affect something that is immaterial?. . .How does the soul creates thoughts, how does it control the brain?. . .How does the immaterial affect the material?. . .

You have not yet explained how the material affects the immaterial from a completely materialistic standpoint. All you've done is say: "X happens physically therefore Y is happening non-physically". You haven't provided objective proof or any link we can examine and repeat to lead us from X to Y.

What evidence is there to show that the soul exist in the first place?. . .How do you know that you have a soul?. . .How can I know that I have one. . .What differentiates the soul from the brain. . .What is the function of the soul in the body?. . .

I am tired of repeating the same answer to the same question over and over again.

I have already told you that thoughts are not non physical because you can not think about non physical things. . .What is the function of the soul in the human body. .What does it do?. . .And how can it be shown that it is the soul that does it?. . .

This is a silly redefinition of what thoughts are and you know it: There is a difference between what a thought is about and what a thought is. There is a difference between what a thing is doing and what that thing is.

Deep Sight:
It takes alot of blind faith, even radical fanaticism, for a human being to believe that these living ideas which govern his existence are just a bunch of chemicals randomly and purposelessly moving around with their own motivations. Surely that is unreasonable. What motivates them? For what? For why?

On point.

Mr_Anony: How do you explain physical matter developing conscious self-aware life capable of making personal choices without an initial external cause compelling it to do so?

Excellent question! And this very simple question rests at the root of the matter: and on account of this very simple issue, the strict materialist must forever spin about in a conundrum of illogicality that no five year old child would even countenance!

.

Deep Sight:

Let us not fall into error. You do not have a soul. You are the soul. (In saying this, as we are at such an elementary stage of conditional consensus only, I will for now make no distinction between soul and spirit).

You are in fact that soul, not that you have one. This is why you exercise control over your brain. This is why you take decisions such as deciding to stand up now and take a few steps towards the door. This is a decision that you make, and which is processed through, and implemented by your brain.

Control over my brain?. . .How can I control my brain to make my heart beat faster, since I control my brain?. . .How can I control my brain and make it remember lost memories?. . .Why do some drugs that affect my brain make me lose the ability to be able to control my thoughts and follow ONLY what those drugs want me to do?. . .Drugs that affect the brain can be made to give your experiences that you can't control. Why is that so, if there is this immaterial soul that controls everything. . .So far what has been known and empirically verified, is that all thoughts are generated and regulated by the brain. If you can bring your own empirical evidence of the soul controlling, anything then I might take you seriously. . .I don't have time for philosophical platitudes that have no evidence to back them up. . .

It is not a decision that the brain just by itself conjures for its own purposes to satisfy itself. This is the only way to sensibly regard your proprietary control of your brain. Because it shows that your brain is a tool, an organ, which enables you to apprehend and process physical reality.

Firstly, The brain is made up of cells called neurons. These cells have nerve endings called synapses and dendrites. Nerve endings release chemical and electrical stimuli to communicate with each other. This brain communication forms neuro-pathways in the brain and is the basis for how the brain works. This is the basis of how it works and controls everything. . .There are very complex communication between living cells in the brain. . .And it forms the basis for everything. . .If you know anything about how the brain functions you will not be asking upside down questions like the brain thinking for its self. .

As such, your question is upside down. The soul is not serving a function for the body. The body is serving functions for you - the soul. The body is enabling you to live, dwell in, apprehend and process the physical realm.

Simple.

I like how you use abstract language to push things into the realm of the unknown. . .Body serving function for the soul?. . .If you have no evidence to support what you are saying, revert to question begging. . .The people that came up with this hypothesis of yours actually thought the soul lives in the heart and thought the heart controls thoughts, reasoning etc. . .

[quote author=mazaje][/quote]

Lol. Self conscious and motivated neurons and synapses. Enjoy.

Deep Sight:

Now the very fact that the soul was there, and then at death is not there, is enough simple reason to see that something has departed from that body. This is so simple that I don't know why it has to be debated.

The body is made up of billions of living cells. . .when they die off begin to rot away what do you expect?. . .So soul is the countless living cells or what?

mazaje:

The body is made up of billions of living cells. . .when they die off begin to rot away what do you expect?. . .So soul is the countless living cells or what?

Don't worry. You are your cells. They are the ones with motivations and thoughts. Enjoy.

Deep Sight:

Don't worry. You are your cells. They are the ones with motivations and thoughts. Enjoy.

What do you expect when you look at something that is breaking away?. . .You expect it to be intact?. . .Some thing has gone away?. . .LOL!

Oga Deepsight, going by your post, do animals have souls? And is a schizophrenic a soul without a good 'physical apparatus'?

musKeeto: Oga Deepsight, going by your post, do animals have souls?

In my humble view, yes.

Man himself is anyway an animal of a sort, albeit a higher one.

And is a schizophrenic a soul without a good 'physical apparatus'?

Well I would say a damaged physical apparatus: which causes the underlying being to have multi-faceted perceptions of itself.

Deep Sight:

In my humble view, yes.

Man himself is anyway an animal of a sort, albeit a higher one.



Well I would say a damaged physical apparatus: which causes the underlying being to have multi-faceted perceptions of itself.

Well, I won't exactly say 'damaged'...
www.schizophrenia.com/famous.htm

Further questions would be
- at what point is the soul attached?
- why would 'god' or whatever go through the whole process of creating a soul, then a brain? At least, it seems the soul, as per your definition, is immune from physical damage, am I right?

musKeeto:
Well, I won't exactly say 'damaged'...
www.schizophrenia.com/famous.htm

I dont mean "damaged" as in someone has taken an axe and broken the brain. I simply mean its faculties of self-perception are malfunctioning in one way or the other.

Further questions would be
- at what point is the soul attached?

Some people say the bottom of the cerebellum, but I don't know and perhaps can never know.

- why would 'god' or whatever go through the whole process of creating a soul, then a brain? At least, it seems the soul, as per your definition, is immune from physical damage, am I right?

To bring conscious life to the physical realm which realm exists as a remote gradation from the emanations of God.

Deep Sight:

Let us not fall into error. You do not have a soul. You are the soul. (In saying this, as we are at such an elementary stage of conditional consensus only, I will for now make no distinction between soul and spirit).

You are in fact that soul, not that you have one. This is why you exercise control over your brain. This is why you take decisions such as deciding to stand up now and take a few steps towards the door. This is a decision that you make, and which is processed through, and implemented by your brain. It is not a decision that the brain just by itself conjures for its own purposes to satisfy itself. This is the only way to sensibly regard your proprietary control of your brain. Because it shows that your brain is a tool, an organ, which enables you to apprehend and process physical reality.

As such, your question is upside down. The soul is not serving a function for the body. The body is serving functions for you - the soul. The body is enabling you to live, dwell in, apprehend and process the physical realm.

Simple.

That's less accurate and too simple view of consciousness. I think we rather have a projection of an intricate concept of self, which is an integration of our senses, thoughts, memories, emotions and ideas. "I" is the result of contemplation. The soul seems to stand independently of the vitality of "I". It doesn't explain the importance of memory or of qualia (which is our representation of sensual outputs). An individual without any memory is as well a void!

Deep Sight:

Now since you have asked these questions I will just give my view. I straightaway confess that in this view I am influenced by several writings which have found resonance with me, and I think, with reason.

Man is at core, a non physical being. This fact is very evident if only you will stop for a moment and consider your life and existence. Everything that makes sense to you as a being is non-physical. Your thoughts are non-physical. You have admitted as much in an old discussion with me. What exactly are thoughts? You say they are chemical reactions. If indeed they are merely chemical reactions, then they should have only a chemical result: i.e: X chemical interacts with Y chemical and you have XY chemical, period. Mere chemical reactions cannot give rise to living concepts, ideas and notions[/b] which is what your thoughts are, not to speak about living notions and ideas such as those that dominate human minds - love and hatred, family and community, ambition and achievement, career and success, government and law, economy and commerce, not to speak of higher ideas within the human mind such as spirituality and philosophy, et al.

It takes alot of blind faith, even radical fanaticism, for a human being to believe that these living ideas which govern his existence are just a bunch of chemicals randomly and purposelessly moving around with their own motivations. Surely that is unreasonable. What motivates them? For what? For why?

The only sensible conclusion is that man is indeed a being by himself, and these physical processes are tools by which he apprehends and processes physical reality.

Now you talked about how this works. I don't know if you have ever stood close to a dead body before. A dead body of someone you were close to. I have. When my father passed away in 1995 I went with my elder siblings to the morgue to see his corpse.

My brother, sometimes there are things that words and arguments cannot explain. You only need to be in that situation for one second to recognize that the piece of matter you are looking at is not the human being that you knew. I know I am waxing intuitive here, but that is the reality: it is a dead piece of matter: complete with all the parts that made it but, but the life is not there. That life, that living being, that is what the person was. That is what we refer to as the soul.

Now the very fact that the soul was there, and then at death is not there, is enough simple reason to see that something has departed from that body. This is so simple that I don't know why it has to be debated.

Now in terms of how the soul is "attached" to the body; I am not God: I do not know, and perhaps I can never know. However there are writings that suggest that the soul's very fine non-physical threads find attachment and rest at the base of the cerebellum, where the cerebellum attaches to the frontal brain. I do not know and cannot know if this is the case: but all that remains evident is that at death, there is life which departs the physical body. Also if you view a corpse you will more properly understand that it is just a tool - like a cloak, some sort of spacesuit - an intricately designed one for that matter, that a living being was dwelling in. No more no less. That living being is what is called the soul.

Now it is the impressions from that living being that are processed by and through the brain for apprehension in the physical world.

The foregoing is not intended as an argument. This is the simple and commonsensical way that I see human existence based on my walk in this life.

The mystery of the physical. Spacetime isn't matter nor energy, and neither can it seen or touched or felt. Yet its considered physical.

Deep Sight:

I dont mean "damaged" as in someone has taken an axe and broken the brain. I simply mean its faculties of self-perception are malfunctioning in one way or the other.

Faculties of self perception? Would those play the role of the Soul?

Mr_Anony:
Lol, you are missing something. No one is talking about an immortal soul here. All I have been trying to show you is that the soul is distinct from the body. Isaiah 10:18 makes this clear.

Of course, the living soul is different from the body. Also, the spirit distinct form the living soul, though you lot try to make them same to fool the ignorant.
From Genesis 2:7, body + breath of life (spirit) = living soul (man).
Conversely dead man = {body + breath of life (spirit)} - breath of life (spirit) = body = dead soul. It's why the scriptures comfortably uses nephesh (soul) for dead bodies or corpses (dead souls).

I see you have disowned the "immortal" part of your soul theory - that's progress.

I am quite sure I pointed you to the Greek word Paul used: "pnuema" and it does not mean "mental state".

You are wrong. Greek "pnuema" has also been used to describe "mental disposition/state of mind/mental state" like the Hebrew equivalent "ruach". Clear example below:
Rom 11:8 - "...God gave them a spirit (pnuema) of stupor, eyes so that they could not see and ears so that they could not hear, to this very day". (NIV)
"..'God gave to them a spirit of deep sleep, eyes not to see, and ears not to hear,' -- unto this very day" (Young's)

Surely this does not refer to a sprit being but of a mental state of drowsines - as these other translations of same verse show:

"...To this day God has put them into deep sleep. Their eyes do not see, and their ears do not hear." (Intl Standard Version)
"...God has put them into a deep sleep. To this day he has shut their eyes so they do not see, and closed their ears so they do not hear." (NLT).

This is actually a direct quote from what Isaiah wrote concerning Ephraim, where Hebrew "ruach" is used for "spirit" --

Isaiah 29: 10-13 - "For the LORD has poured over you a spirit (ruach) of deep sleep , He has shut your eyes, the prophets;And He has covered your heads, the seers.The entire vision will be to you like the words of a sealed book, which when they give it to the one who is literate, saying, “Please read this,” he will say, “I cannot, for it is sealed.”12Then the book will be given to the one who is illiterate, saying, “Please read this.” And he will say, “I cannot read.” Then the Lord said,“Because this people draw near with their words And honor Me with their lip service, But they remove their hearts far from Me, And their reverence for Me consists of tradition learned by rote"...

Note that same "ruach" is the Hebrew word used for spirt in 1Ki 10:4, 5 - "And when the queen of Sheba had seen all the wisdom of Solomon, the house that he had built, the food on his table, the seating of his servants, the service of his waiters and their apparel, his cupbearers, and his entryway by which he went up to the house of the Lord, there was no more spirit in her. " meaning she was overwhelmed.

How can a person ask a rhetorical question of something he/she has absolutely no concept of?

Your choice if you want to hinge your soul doctrine on Solomon's question in verse 21, even though such a view contradicts his earlier statements in verses 19 and 20 - no difference in death of man and animal. If anything, his question demands proof from those who say that man has a different spirit that animates him to that of animals. Clearly Solomon understood death (Eccl 9:5,6,10) and that the impersonal life-force (breath or spirit) that animates a living man is same that animates a living animal(Eccl 3).

Eccl 3:18 - 21 (NLT) - "18 I also thought about the human condition—how God proves to people that they are like animals. 19For people and animals share the same fate—both breathe (OR both have the same spirit) and both must die. So people have no real advantage over the animals. How meaningless! 20Both go to the same place—they came from dust and they return to dust. 21For who can prove that the human spirit goes up and the spirit of animals goes down into the earth?"