Being an immortal "soul" is a possibility

I'll have to be more direct and brief this round; other duties do call to me at the moment.To clarification: Alright. It doesn't effect much. You're still tethering souls to humans so the same problems still exist only now you've added dualism.P1: Not dealing with "why come here?" because you've still not substantiated what "it" is. For instance you said "To us it is both non-being and being." but nothing you actually said has anything to do with a "non-being" element. All of which you attested would be considered on some point at least functionally existing regardless of vantage point. The proposition itself begins to fall apart because of the suggestion of dualism but the lack of suggestion of dualism at the same time; this isn't "being and non-being" it's just simple contradiction. If the souls are us then we are the souls, that's just about it, whether humans are of this universe or not and so forth and so on doesn't really amount to much since by merit there's no real dualism or at least you've not explained the relationship between humans and these souls which you are basically stating as extradimensional beings. That's all fine and good but this gap is not acceptable.P2: There are four claims here but I want to only focus on one: "I think this is bc they are coming from a previous world...and, of course once indoctrinated into this world...you have to follow this worlds rules." This is the same problem as in P1, where the dualism is there but also not there at all; you cannot be indoctrinated into the universe if you are part of it because the rules of the universe dictated your existence and yet you cannot be external to the unvierse and indoctrinated if you knew the rules to begin with and chose to follow them as you state in P1 under your extradimensional model. Again, it's folding in on itself and that's just not working; there's nothing salvagable about the idea particularly because when one brings up sciences and specifically sciences composed mostly of observation rather than deduction like Psychology you have a massive problem trying to approach it as a standard for behavior anyway. Is it explanable? Yes. Is it then therefore verifiable and thus testable? Well, yes, by definition. The contradiction is again too big.P3: This is actually self-defeating. So there's no purpose but there is a purpose? Fundamentally it doesn't matter where social constructs actually come from when talking specifically about this "Immortal Soul" since again, it's existence isn't required, and with concepts like "Live it up!" that only solidifies rather than exercises the idea that it just doesn't matter. It's not necessary. Actually it almost invalides the entire idea of things like "self-awareness" since the entire point of seeking self-awareness is to fundamentally better yourself as a being within context to the universe; this contradicts the notion of throwing away the reasoning and simply being hedonistic. I'll also avoid talking about morality since that's a whole new thing and it's not a simple "good > bad".P4: This has the same issue of false dualism. Multiversial concepts do not require this interdimensional traveling Soul to work so that's just complicating things. Also, I've never played CoD in my life but that's not a problem; the real problem is that you're likening simplistic rules to extremely complex rules and then stating that they are similar and one can be derived from the other but there's a major flaw in that which is that for those rules in those games quite a bit of those rules can be broken however the objective stays the same regardless. What is known as "hacking" for instance "hexcode modification" would be a massive issue; you can change your loadout to reflect being invincible and invoilable at the same time, so you enter the game and you never die, you've changed the rules to deathmatch or team deathmatch, and we call it cheating because it's broken the rules. Universe don't work like this at all; the Laws of the Universe are not actually "Laws" or "Rules" in the same sense, instead they are simply observations that have held steady; they can and very well may change and the word "Law/Rule" in science has a totally different meaning. The main problem is that there's just this massive set of gaps, the first is the Dualism which isn't really there and the second is the Knowledge of Science which is really weak. You're not creating a paradigm but instead just contradicting yourself in an attempt to create a [something].5. Not at all. Also this creates an even greater chasm since if there is a multiverse there's no reason to actually inhabit a body that will die. You could possess a rock or a tree and live for thousands of years and learn far more than say 75. Why would an intelligent being bent on learning vacation in a human's body? There's just so much missing. It needs more development before being released in any form or fashion. Calling it whatever you wish does not fill in these major gaps.