New Moon
discussion
Do you think the vampires in these books have souls?
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Sierra
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Sep 13, 2011 08:37PM
Well,I've never really heard anyone else's opinion on this and I wanted to know:Do you think vampires have souls? If so,great,because I do too. If not,why?
reply
|
flag
Yes, I am with you and Carlisle on this. I believe the have souls because they can choose the life they lead and are not some animals acting on instinct. Even though most vampires in the series choose not to make a moral change to their lifestyle.
Well,in saying this,do you believe the Vultori or VIctoria,James, and Laurent have souls also? Or is it just the Cullens?
For this series, specifically? I'd say so. But then, this is the tame, 'fluffy' vampire series where sure, maybe bad things happen sometimes, but everything works out nice and neat in the end. If it were a bit more realistic, I'd think not. They'd be the soulless stereotypical monsters. But yeah, given that the Cullens chose to refrain from murder for moral reasons, I'd say so.
Do you happen to like this series,though? Do you wish she introduced them as mean,soulless,monsters?
yes because they are all whimps
Well, I did rate the series as pretty high. I rate on readability though, not necessarily on how realistic it is.(a realistic vampire book, lol) I'm not into horror and the whole soulless monsters of the typical vampire book. Which is why I was hesitant to even read Twilight in the first place.
But, yes, I did like the fluffy Meyer version.
May be...but kinda different!!!
I think that anything that was born a human must have a soul, I don't think turning vampire would somehow make your soul nonexistant
No, but I don't believe in the principle of a soul.They certainly possess intelligence and conscience, though.
Leah wrote: "yes because they are all whimps"I don't see how them not having souls make them wimps..
Kristen wrote: "Well, I did rate the series as pretty high. I rate on readability though, not necessarily on how realistic it is.(a realistic vampire book, lol) I'm not into horror and the whole soulless monsters..."
Well,it's good that you like it.
I don't see how they could not have souls. Don't animals that act on instinct have souls? Like the deer, bears, and chickens? Or fish? Any animal, including humans, would probably have a soul regardless of their "evil content". Maybe the question these vampires should ask themselves is where will that soul go when they ultimately perish, if they believed in that. Then what if you have an atheist vampire? The questions can be never ending :)
True that, the question if vampires do possess a soul or not, is not as important as the question what they themselves do believe in.The more interesting question to me is, not knowing where the rest of the Cullens stand on the question of a soul, if Edward is motivated by fear for his immortal soul alone, doesn't that make him a worse person than the rest of them, for acting out of a purely selfish reason and not because he feels it to be the right thing to do?
Liz wrote: "I don't see how they could not have souls. Don't animals that act on instinct have souls? Like the deer, bears, and chickens? Or fish? Any animal, including humans, would probably have a soul re..."Yes,but animals kill other animals. There's a difference,vampires kill humans. Some animals may kill humans but that's only for self defense. Vampires,well,the kill for blood.
Gerd wrote: "True that, the question if vampires do possess a soul or not, is not as important as the question what they themselves do believe in.The more interesting question to me is, not knowing where th..."
H doesn't believe he has a soul,because 1:He doesn't have a heartbeat,but is still living. 2:He can't die,technically. 3:He's killed people before. Brutally. But I may be wrong,I just wanted to know what you guys thought.
Liz wrote: "I don't see how they could not have souls. Don't animals that act on instinct have souls? Like the deer, bears, and chickens? Or fish? Any animal, including humans, would probably have a soul re..."Oh, good point. People(myself included) often mix up the idea of a soul with a spirit. A soul is basically just personality - which anything living has. The spirit is the part that is really in question. It's the part that sets us apart from the animals.
Well people kill other people quite brutally, and they have a soul. Vampires, in truest essence of the form, kill for animals and not for sport - although some do obviously. Animals kill for food and self defense. In my opinion, a vampire is just another version of an animal. A human is an animal. A lion is an animal. And a fox is an animal. That's just how I look at it.
Sierra wrote: "He doesn't believe he has a soul,because 1:He doesn't have a heartbeat,but is still living. 2:He can't die,technically. 3:He's killed people before. Brutally. But I may be wrong,I just wanted to know what you guys thought. ..."
But he believes premarital sex to be a sin, which can only matter if you believe in having a soul - and I think to recall that he does tell Bella that he's worried about further damaging his soul should they consummate their love before marriage.
There are lots of different ways to approach this question:1. If you're talking specifically about the Twilight Books, then Meyers doesn't spend a lot of time discussing souls except in Edward's case. So it depends on whether or not you think being a good person means you have a soul. The vampires in the Twilight universe are mostly evil, so if that logic follows, then vampires do not have souls and the Cullens have either adapted and have managed to be good despite the lack of souls or are the exceptions and have retained their souls for some reason.
2. This could be even more subjective. If you believe that souls go to heaven or hell when you die, then vampires do not have souls unless you live in the Buffy 'verse (discussed further below). If, however, you believe that souls are earned in life (and even the afterlife) through good deeds, then the Cullens would have souls.
3. I personally ascribe to the Buffy vampire-soul-theory, which is that no vampires have souls unless there are extenuating circumstances (as in the cases of Spike and Angel). That does not mean that vampires cannot be good, or at least less evil; here I will reference Spike in seasons 4-6 of Buffy. Spike learns to be less evil because he loves Buffy. You could also argue that the demon inhabiting Spike's body was never as evil as other vampires to begin with (but that's another discussion).
So, to answer your question personally, I would say that vampires in Twilight, even the Cullens, do not have souls. That is because I think that a person can be good or bad based on their actions, not based on an invisible ghost that inhabits our bodies.
How can you have a soul if you're dead?? In this series, it may be possible; but really...?? The Cullens have a moral dilemma with killing for the heck of it... Even Anne Rices' vamps ate... they tried to be a little choosy but the thirst always wins. Unless you're a cullen..humpf
That's your belief.
I ABSOLUTELY believe that they have souls. Your soul is LIFE. From the day that life is breathed into your little fetus body until the day your last breath leaves your body, you have a soul. I believe in Heaven and Hell/Afterlife, so it is my opinion that even though a vampire's BODY is dead, his soul is not. Your body and soul are two SEPARATE entities. Your body is physical while your soul ventures into the spiritual realm. Just M.O. :)
So you're saying even if they went into Hell,they have a soul?
How could you without?What should they torture if you didn't have a soul?
And what to sell the devil, a kidney?
Sierra wrote: "So you're saying even if they went into Hell,they have a soul?"Mhm, I believe so. Because, in my opinion, a soul cannot just *disappear* or *die.* A physical, mortal body can die, but not a soul. :)
Yes,but these vampires believe they're not welcome into Heaven or Hell. In my opinion,I do think they have souls,but either way has a good argument.
Gerd wrote: "And what to sell the devil, a kidney?"LOL!!!
I think all living things have a soul. The soul is "us"in the truest sense and are bodies are just the carrying cases and housing for them.In the end it is all the same,it is what happens after dead is where the difference may lie. Do we go t heaven or to hell? As of yet,no one has come back and told me anything and yet I believe that there is a heaven and hell. Living life makes it a sure thing. All we have to do is check out some on the place on this great planet of ours to see how other are "living".
In my mumble opinion I think it is more about good an bad. We all know even if we don't want to acknowledge it that that these to things go hand in hand, we can not have one without the other. Also that good people sometimes do bad things and bad people do sometimes do good things. So I guess it is in the intent of the person actions that we must judge (YES we all judge, make judement call etc. other wise how do you make a decision about another actions)were their intention lies.
LOL excuse the ramblings of a woman who is up at 4am and sleep is playing hide and seek ..
Yes,but technically they're un-dead. So they're not really living. They've already died and then like,un-died.
Sierra wrote: "Liz wrote: "I don't see how they could not have souls. Don't animals that act on instinct have souls? Like the deer, bears, and chickens? Or fish? Any animal, including humans, would probably ha..."They kill humans to eat. Remember, not all lore has vampires that are able to live off of animals. There's one book I read where living off a non-human animal is like living off of bread and water and nothing else. It eventually makes the vampires very weak, the it kills them.
I've also read, I think it was the same book actually, that most vampires believe their after life is the life they're living now. If you kill them in this after life they are gone for good. There was evidence to suggest otherwise in the book, but it's still an interesting thought.
Molly wrote: "Sierra wrote: "Liz wrote: "I don't see how they could not have souls. Don't animals that act on instinct have souls? Like the deer, bears, and chickens? Or fish? Any animal, including humans, wo..."Yes,but that's a totally different topic. I'm only talking about these books. Every vampire book is different.
Ok, if nothing else points to them having souls is when many of them in books and series such as true blood and the Anita Blake, said to be souless treat others,including humans better than humans treat each other. It doesn't make them noble just says that there is still a connection to what makes a person human. To put a twist on it, I would be more afraid of a sociopath then a vampire anyday. Now they are humans without a soul and even in death they may never have one or the one that is there is so dim and dark that it can scarely be called one.
yea i do think the vampires in this book have soul
Sierra wrote: "Molly wrote: "Sierra wrote: "Liz wrote: "I don't see how they could not have souls. Don't animals that act on instinct have souls? Like the deer, bears, and chickens? Or fish? Any animal, includ..."That still doesn't change my view. Humans are their primary food source, so I don't think it's all that evil for them to eat people. I see it as a kind of vegetarians vs meat eaters thing in the real world. Some people think it's wrong to eat animals so they decided to be vegetarians. Some people see nothing wrong with eating animals so they eat meat. At the end of the day both diets work well enough, but that doesn't mean people who eat meat are evil for doing so. Some people just prefer it.
The soul is a life force .. the total sum of humans without the trapping of the body. Some cultures believe that everything has a life force ecen a rock because at sometime in it creation it was alife. It is safe to assume that even in the ideal of a vampire there is a spark of that life force..
Molly wrote: "Sierra wrote: "Molly wrote: "Sierra wrote: "Liz wrote: "I don't see how they could not have souls. Don't animals that act on instinct have souls? Like the deer, bears, and chickens? Or fish? Any..."Yes,but you see they weren't always "vegetarians". If I recall,I even hear Edward say he's killed people before. A lot of them have. Edward believes he doesn't because he's killed people. It's just all so confusing.
Sierra wrote: "Molly wrote: "Sierra wrote: "Molly wrote: "Sierra wrote: "Liz wrote: "I don't see how they could not have souls. Don't animals that act on instinct have souls? Like the deer, bears, and chickens?..."I know, but I don't think that makes him soulless, at least no more than any normal human is.
Personally, I'm not even entirely sure what a soul is. Every definition I find for it is unclear and kind of self referencing. The closest definition to understandable that I can find basically amounts to a soul being what makes you who you are. Did becoming a vampire make Edward someone he isn't?
Molly wrote: "Sierra wrote: "Molly wrote: "Sierra wrote: "Molly wrote: "Sierra wrote: "Liz wrote: "I don't see how they could not have souls. Don't animals that act on instinct have souls? Like the deer, bears..."Sort of. He was a wayy different person before the whole change,but it was either dying or becoming a so called "monster".
no way....but i think what the author has described ...looks like maybe they have desires!
I absolutely do. Noone can do good things and love if they did not, there are good and bad people...people that kill, does that mean they have no soul????
Carrie wrote: "I absolutely do. Noone can do good things and love if they did not, there are good and bad people...people that kill, does that mean they have no soul????" See that's exactly what I was thinking. But in a weird way,it's very different.
If they didn't have a soul, they'd just be an empty shell.At least, that's what would happen according to the Christian religion.
@That make me wonder about the monsters that are alive sociopath etc. Sometime reality is hell of lot more scarier then fiction.Thus is the soul or lack of the true determination of good and evil in a person and or vampry? Can socipath who has done horriable things be allow into a better after life then a vampry? Is it really that simple ??
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
