The following message is a new twist (I hope it is) on the old debate on the existence of God or the Afterlife.    Since most religions require a spirit or soul to survive death, a way to prove the inexistence of such an entity is to take all its' attributed characteristics and prove them to be purely physical and biological in nature.    Among the many characteristics attributed to the Human soul (according to christian, judaic and islamic religions) are the following:    Thought, Reasoning, Emotions, Personality, Animator of the being, and so on.     However all (ALL!) of the above charactersitics of the Soul are perfectly explainable in RATIONAL Scientific terms. Namely Biochemistry, and Biology. All thought processes are Biochemical and physiological in nature. this has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The simple fact you can permanently alter the human mind of a precise indvidual in many directions is a illustration of the fact. The fact that the mind is Biochemical is also easily seen in such diseases as Alzheimers and Schizophrenia. The so called animator of life (Oxford Dictionary) aspect of the sould has been revoked ever since the beginning of physiology. _meta_bolism is perfectly understood as being the true animator .     Descartes, wisely (given the social climate of the day) chose to push the actual location of the soul into a little know organ. The pineal gland. It has since been proven as being the center for such things as temperature control and other lesser known controls. Yet in todays light the soul has nowhere to go. It is dead. The soul is the Flat-Earth of the Brain.     Today's religious and philosophically enclined theologians will probably push the soul into the realms of the unattainable world. A obvious and logical choice. The last resort. Just as God has been pushed from beyond the far hills, to the depths of oceans to the end of the universe, so has the soul gone from the heart to the blood, to the brain, and the pineal gland. Now it has nowhere to go. It does not exist. Another addition to the list of unproven _object_s that have to be believed in.     Finally if there is no soul, why do we need anything else including... .... GOD? Is this line of reasoning faulty, if so please respond. Marc Cormier