I think Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas did a pretty good job of proving that we do indeed have immortal souls. Dogs don't gaze at the stars, they focus on the only things that matter to them. Food, fighting, and fucking. Men are different. We think. We ponder. We wonder and question, and learn. A dog can't conceive of anything except hunger and other basic instinctive things along those lines. We, on the other hand, can have internet discussions about the meaning of life, and what happens afterward. If we can question about this, and death frightens us (one might be resigned to die, but nobody positively wants to die, unless they are so worn down by suffering that they see it as a lesser evil) then I think it is clear that there is, in fact, an afterlife. If God, or Evolution, or Aliens, or whatever force one postulates created life, gave dogs the necessary things for their existence, it is logical to assume that we have the necessary things for ours too, and that, in our case, it is necessary to be able to contemplate these things. Living things seem not to have fundamental hopes and desires that are impossible to fulfill. Dogs, for example, don't want diamonds, and are not sad that they don't have the necessary anatomy or intelligence to mine them. Humans are saddened at the thought of death, of being parted from their family and friends, and of the cessation of their existence. Ergo, there probably is an afterlife, because while humans and dogs share similar physical attributes, they most certainly do not share similar mental attributes. The difference is so striking, and humans are so unique in this regard, that it is clear to me there is some reason for this, and that the human soul does not simply cease to exist when the heart stops powering the brain. This conviction has been constant throughout human history, so far as we know.
