Duncan MacDougall did a study in 1901 to see if the human body loses weight when it dies and the soul leaves. Of his 6 test subjects, one was found to lose 21.3 grams upon death.
For obvious reasons (tiny sample size and only 1 of 6 subjects satisfying the hypothesis), this experiment was highly criticized by the scientific community. But at the same time it has garnered a lot of interest from people curious on the matter.
Have there been further scientific studies on this? What are your thoughts on the soul possibly having weight to it?
The Soul and the 21 Grams Experiment
Moderator: Moderators
- Tcg
- Savant
- Posts: 8494
- Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
- Location: Third Stone
- Has thanked: 2147 times
- Been thanked: 2295 times
Re: The Soul and the 21 Grams Experiment
Post #2It seems to me that people will jump at just about any reason to support their hope that there is some kind of life after death.jgh7 wrote: But at the same time it has garnered a lot of interest from people curious on the matter.
I seem to remember there were, but I can't provide references. If my memory is correct, they showed that there was no reason to consider the original finding valid.Have there been further scientific studies on this?
Anything that is nonmaterial, as I think most would describe the soul to be, would be outside of the realm of science and therefore wouldn't be detectible in any way including measures of weight.What are your thoughts on the soul possibly having weight to it?
- DrNoGods
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2716
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:18 pm
- Location: Nevada
- Has thanked: 593 times
- Been thanked: 1642 times
Re: The Soul and the 21 Grams Experiment
Post #3[Replying to post 1 by jgh7]
I found this article which has a pretty good description of the 21 grams experiment and conclusions:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ia ... soul-weigh
At the end he mentions that other have tried to repeat the experiment, and provides a few references (though not from the names he lists as having repeated the experiments).
But I would agree with Tcg's comments. People who believe there is a soul get all excited about experiments like this whose dubious results can be twisted into a story they want to hear. And there are always charlatans who will capitalize on that just as with the many current day evangelists who seem more interested in filling up the offering plate and taking their share than anything else.
Have there been further scientific studies on this? What are your thoughts on the soul possibly having weight to it?
I found this article which has a pretty good description of the 21 grams experiment and conclusions:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ia ... soul-weigh
At the end he mentions that other have tried to repeat the experiment, and provides a few references (though not from the names he lists as having repeated the experiments).
But I would agree with Tcg's comments. People who believe there is a soul get all excited about experiments like this whose dubious results can be twisted into a story they want to hear. And there are always charlatans who will capitalize on that just as with the many current day evangelists who seem more interested in filling up the offering plate and taking their share than anything else.
In human affairs the sources of success are ever to be found in the fountains of quick resolve and swift stroke; and it seems to be a law, inflexible and inexorable, that he who will not risk cannot win.
John Paul Jones, 1779
The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain
John Paul Jones, 1779
The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain
- bluethread
- Savant
- Posts: 9129
- Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 1:10 pm
Re: The Soul and the 21 Grams Experiment
Post #4Those who believe that there is no soul also get excited about experiments like this whose dubious results can be twisted into a story they want to hear. There are also always charlatans who will capitalize on that just as with many critics, who seem more interested in selling column space or racking up clicks and generating advertising dollars, than anything else. Moral turpitude is not limited to people who believe in things that have not been scientifically verified. It can also be seen in those who hold that nothing should be believed that is not scientifically verified.DrNoGods wrote: People who believe there is a soul get all excited about experiments like this whose dubious results can be twisted into a story they want to hear. And there are always charlatans who will capitalize on that just as with the many current day evangelists who seem more interested in filling up the offering plate and taking their share than anything else.
- William
- Savant
- Posts: 14131
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
- Location: Te Waipounamu
- Has thanked: 910 times
- Been thanked: 1641 times
- Contact:
Re: The Soul and the 21 Grams Experiment
Post #5[Replying to post 4 by bluethread]
Why would we assume that a soul should weigh anything?
Can we take a scoop of consciousness and weigh that?
Why would we assume that a soul should weigh anything?
Can we take a scoop of consciousness and weigh that?
- DrNoGods
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2716
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:18 pm
- Location: Nevada
- Has thanked: 593 times
- Been thanked: 1642 times
Re: The Soul and the 21 Grams Experiment
Post #6[Replying to post 4 by bluethread]
I would agree that people and organizations of all stripes can be guilty of trickery and other means to maximize their income. But I'm not sure I would call this, or the requirement of scientific verification as a basis of belief, moral turpitude. That term is usually reserved for behavior that is gravely outside of societal norms, and belief, or lack of belief, in the supernatural, gods and devils, souls, etc. doesn't seem to fall into that category.
On the other hand, people who take advantage of the misfortune of others, or play to their weaknesses in times of grief, or are simply con artists who go to great extremes to rip people off, exhibit moral turpitude. Such as the people on this list:
http://theevangelists.blogspot.com/2011 ... shame.html
Or the countless other criminals incarcerated all around the globe who have no connection to religious or nonreligious groups. So I completely agree that charlatans are not restricted to any particular category of person as there are many examples from both the religious and nonreligious groups. But I would not agree that the behavior of a law abiding capitalist, or of a scientist who demands verification by experiment and observation before believing, are examples of moral turpitude.
Moral turpitude is not limited to people who believe in things that have not been scientifically verified. It can also be seen in those who hold that nothing should be believed that is not scientifically verified.
I would agree that people and organizations of all stripes can be guilty of trickery and other means to maximize their income. But I'm not sure I would call this, or the requirement of scientific verification as a basis of belief, moral turpitude. That term is usually reserved for behavior that is gravely outside of societal norms, and belief, or lack of belief, in the supernatural, gods and devils, souls, etc. doesn't seem to fall into that category.
On the other hand, people who take advantage of the misfortune of others, or play to their weaknesses in times of grief, or are simply con artists who go to great extremes to rip people off, exhibit moral turpitude. Such as the people on this list:
http://theevangelists.blogspot.com/2011 ... shame.html
Or the countless other criminals incarcerated all around the globe who have no connection to religious or nonreligious groups. So I completely agree that charlatans are not restricted to any particular category of person as there are many examples from both the religious and nonreligious groups. But I would not agree that the behavior of a law abiding capitalist, or of a scientist who demands verification by experiment and observation before believing, are examples of moral turpitude.
In human affairs the sources of success are ever to be found in the fountains of quick resolve and swift stroke; and it seems to be a law, inflexible and inexorable, that he who will not risk cannot win.
John Paul Jones, 1779
The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain
John Paul Jones, 1779
The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain
- DrNoGods
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2716
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:18 pm
- Location: Nevada
- Has thanked: 593 times
- Been thanked: 1642 times
Re: The Soul and the 21 Grams Experiment
Post #7[Replying to post 5 by William]
This was the assumption by the guy who did the experiment (Duncan MacDougall) in 1901 (published in 1907). So he wanted to measure the weight loss upon death as the soul "left the body." But the experiment was so sloppily done that he could not make any valid conclusions from the six bodies he used for the measurements (only one of which showed a loss of weight of about 21 grams).Why would we assume that a soul should weigh anything?
In human affairs the sources of success are ever to be found in the fountains of quick resolve and swift stroke; and it seems to be a law, inflexible and inexorable, that he who will not risk cannot win.
John Paul Jones, 1779
The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain
John Paul Jones, 1779
The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain
-
- Guru
- Posts: 2117
- Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2015 2:41 pm
- Location: St Louis, MO, USA
- Has thanked: 18 times
- Been thanked: 61 times
Re: The Soul and the 21 Grams Experiment
Post #8Bluethread, can you give me a valid reason why I SHOULD accept something as true that cannot be scientifically verified?bluethread wrote:Those who believe that there is no soul also get excited about experiments like this whose dubious results can be twisted into a story they want to hear. There are also always charlatans who will capitalize on that just as with many critics, who seem more interested in selling column space or racking up clicks and generating advertising dollars, than anything else. Moral turpitude is not limited to people who believe in things that have not been scientifically verified. It can also be seen in those who hold that nothing should be believed that is not scientifically verified.DrNoGods wrote: People who believe there is a soul get all excited about experiments like this whose dubious results can be twisted into a story they want to hear. And there are always charlatans who will capitalize on that just as with the many current day evangelists who seem more interested in filling up the offering plate and taking their share than anything else.
-
- Guru
- Posts: 2117
- Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2015 2:41 pm
- Location: St Louis, MO, USA
- Has thanked: 18 times
- Been thanked: 61 times
Re: The Soul and the 21 Grams Experiment
Post #9We shouldn't. We should first show that such a thing is remotely plausible before debating what the characteristics are of the thing.William wrote: [Replying to post 4 by bluethread]
Why would we assume that a soul should weigh anything?
Sure. Molecules (chemicals) and electrons (electrical impulse) do have mass, although we don't have a scale sensitive enough to reach an accurate result.Can we take a scoop of consciousness and weigh that?
- bluethread
- Savant
- Posts: 9129
- Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 1:10 pm
Re: The Soul and the 21 Grams Experiment
Post #10Well, do you accept the existence of things like consciousness and values? Now, can you give me one reason why it is necessary to impune the character of those with whom one disagrees?Kenisaw wrote:
Bluethread, can you give me a valid reason why I SHOULD accept something as true that cannot be scientifically verified?