I don't generally have a problem with philosophy, but this reeks too much of trying to take advantage of the massive biases imposed on most of humanity by religion. I'm also not in principle opposed to the idea of a soul or whatever, as long as the argument involves some actual evidence or a falsifiable hypothesis that can be tested.
Accepting the soul as something that isn't provable experimentally is a dangerous thing. It can be used to justify everything, from everyone's different ideas of what a "soul" is, to pretty much everything else. If evidence is not required, anything can exist.
I don't generally have a problem with philosophy, but this reeks too much of trying to take advantage of the massive biases imposed on most of humanity by religion. I'm also not in principle opposed to the idea of a soul or whatever, as long as the argument involves some actual evidence or a falsifiable hypothesis that can be tested.
Accepting the soul as something that isn't provable experimentally is a dangerous thing. It can be used to justify everything, from everyone's different ideas of what a "soul" is, to pretty much everything else. If evidence is not required, anything can exist.