Adam Frank confesses:
I am not agnostic because I hope that my soul will ascend to Science Heaven, where I could spend eternity learning more about thermodynamics and quantum information theory … I am not agnostic because I hope souls exist. I doubt they do. I am agnostic about what happens after biological functioning because neither I, nor anyone else, understands consciousness and its fundamental relation to biology, chemistry and physics. There are lots of great ideas for sure. But a theory of consciousness? A theory of subjectivity? Not yet. Not by a long shot.
Sean Carroll differs:
Presumably amino acids and proteins don’t have souls that persist after death. What about viruses or bacteria? Where upon the chain of evolution from our monocellular ancestors to today did organisms stop being described purely as atoms interacting through gravity and electromagnetism, and develop an immaterial immortal soul? There’s no reason to be agnostic about ideas that are dramatically incompatible with everything we know about modern science.
Alva Noë agrees.
(Image by the Superstudio Architectural Group, part of a MoMA Exhibit in 1972)
The Dish 