Sure It's Rhoooul Analysis

The conclusion drawn by Keith Hess in “Sure It’s Aliiiive, but Does It have a Sooooul?” is that we are non-physical beings. He best proves this point when saying that the Monster recreated its self to have a better body, much like our bodies do every day with the breakdown, repair and creation of new cells. In the third section of this paper, I argue that the author is correct and that we as humans or monsters are non-physical beings.
Summary
The conclusion drawn at the end of this article is that both humans and monsters are non-physical beings. In the article it is stated that all human beings were made in Gods’ image, and the monster was made in ours. The author goes on to debate whether or not we are physical, non-physical or both. From there he goes off into the different views of being physical, non-physical or both.
Physicalism is the first view explored by the author. This is a theory in philosophy that essentially states that humans are complex material objects containing no immaterial parts or aspects. This is just a general definition of physicalism, as there are several different types with each being just slightly different from the last. One of these previously mentioned views
A nonphysical, the soul, is in its most true and simple form, and is much less apt to “break” or be destroyed. Whereas physical, visible things consisting of many parts are susceptible to forms of break down and mutilation such as decay and corruption. Due to the visibility of the physical being or body it is subject to go through decomposition, whereas the soul is invisible, and never has to go through such a physical process. Invisible things are durable things, and this allows the soul to outlast the body and not go through the same physical processes. The philosophical soul is thought to take on a form–like configuration, allowing it to be immortal and survive the death of the