Ok, so i'm just going to sidestep some of the more frustrated parts of this thread and get back down to the core, original post.
See, i read your example, and your issue with this concept, and while i can understand your reasoning, i think it ultimately comes down to a difference of perspective on one key issue: order or chaos. On the one side you have the people who see the universe as a big ball of stuff happening for random, albeit perfectly rational and explainable reasons. Bad things happen to good people, good things happen to bad people, and life perpetuates for no grander reason than said perpetuation. Then on the other side you have people who can't accept this idea that the universe just happens for no reason other than because it does. Everything must have a purpose, and a niche in life to fulfill. And as such, life must exist as a stepping stone to grander things.
So, to highlight your example in particular, you say that we can determine exactly where the functioning of a mobile phone begins and ends. That is true. But at the same time, we can also establish when exactly these devices began to exist, we can clearly map out their entire evolution, and we know their stated purpose, the very reason they came to be: They were invented by humans for the purpose of facilitating communication. However, if the first mobile phone was instead suddenly found one day in the middle of the patagonian rainforest, you'd have scientists pouring out of the woodwork trying to determine where these things came from, what they can do, and who created them. This is where your example breaks down. We can only find the notion of the functioning of mobile phones being this bizarre mysterious entity absurd, because we know every detail of the mobile's creation and purpose. We know for a fact that as far as a phone is concerned, we are its god, its creator, and we know what purpose we intended for said device. As i say, if we just encountered them in the wild, they very much would be these strange, mysterious creations, and concern over what exactly they might be capable of or for would be perfectly understandable. It's kind of a childish example, but it's a bit like that Doctor Who episode "the Power of Three", where a bunch of weird black cubes appear all over the world, because it's basically a bunch of aliens leaving their space-age iPads lying around.
But then you get humans, where we can't really know with complete certainty every detail of how we came into being, what our purpose is, or if some unseen external forces had a hand in shaping us. Which means that in our search for explanations, we came across the idea that there is something beyond the bounds of our perception as living creatures, which necessitates belief in the capacity to exist beyond death, which necessitates belief in the soul. So yeah, the belief in souls comes from our own psychological obligation to find higher purpose in our own existence other than simply to perpetuate life. Ultimately, it brings a lot of people much-needed comfort, and can motivate many into acts of benevolence, even if their motivations for doing so may not necessarily be strictly altruistic. So i'm generally inclined to see such faith as a good thing. I do agree that organised religions can often lead to some damaging mentalities, but i think at that point you're getting into the corruptability of human nature, and the inherent flaws in sufficiently monolithic entities like corporations and governments.
Anyway, yeah, sorry if my reply was kinda long, rambly, or doofy, but i just wanted to convey how i personally see the divide in perspective on this kind of issue.
If that's to imply that I'm too simple minded to understand what you're saying, then go for it. It honestly doesn't bother me.
