How certain are you of an afterlife?

[Till]

I believe this is the afterlife.

 

[Grisu]

99%. I don't think I'm 100% sure about anything, really.

same for me, except the other way around: 1%

I believe this is the afterlife.

we must have really sinned like there's no tomorrow in our previous life then

 

[Riffraff]

voted for 1 % but I'm quite a bit more certain than that actually. The thing is, that I somehow don't trust myself enough (yet), to dismiss the opinions of the billions of people that believe in it, completely.

 

[Homie]

Voted 100%. But like the other poster said, how certain I am that I'll end up in heaven is a different question.

 

[C~G]

Does not exist. We will be broken down by chemicals and we will in turn become a new set of chemicals.

Isn't a "soul" merely an intricate set of neurological impulses?

Yes it is.
And I applaud to these statements.

 

[Mirc]

Voted 100%. I still have a question mark, but I am almost certain that it exists. I will try to do my best to end up in the good part!

 

[Adamb0mb]

I like the spread of the poll options done here. well done.

 

[Perfection]

I like the spread of the poll options done here. well done.

I don't. There needs to be an intermediary between 1% and 0% (and converely between 99% and 100%)

Something like "infitisimally small" or the like. Ranges would work too.

 

[stratos_v2]

Perhaps not, but there's not a shred of evidence that states that there is any cognative functionality outside the brain's meat.

Nor is there any evidence that there isn't.

Indeed the fact that damage can cause functionality problems leads one to suspect that it's this that truely holds what is you. Alzhiemers patients lose memories because of increasing brain damage, that seems supportive of a physical discription of conciousness.

Physical conciousness is the scientificly reasonable explination.

granted, but i wouldn't call that conclusive.
don't have the time right now to think about it though.

The most useful explination and the best explnation.

The most usefull in what way?
I don't really see how proving that we don't have a soul is useful.

and the best explenation is highly subjective, if only for the fact that for me it isn't.

 

[Lotus49]

Personal belief: 100%

Logical/scientific certainty: 0% (unable to be physically obtained)

Seems like a paradox at first glance, but actually not quite. It's all about faith.

...and THAT, is the ONLY way to go walking into the valley of the shadow of death, baby.

Jesus had said to his disciple Thomas, who came to believe after touching the resurrected Christ: "You believe because you have seen me. Blessed are those who believe without seeing me" (John 20:29)

 

[Adamb0mb]

I don't. There needs to be an intermediary between 1% and 0% (and converely between 99% and 100%)

Something like "infitisimally small" or the like. Ranges would work too.

Thats why I liked it, I read it as

0: not at all
1: infitisimally small
25: leaning against
50: fifty-fifty
75: leaning towards
99: pretty damn sure
100: sure

EDIT: and the OP even made options between the above available

 

[Kan' Sharuminar]

I believe this is the afterlife.

No mate, that's just the drunken haze.

I don't know if there's an afterlife or not, and I don't expend any thought on it. I voted 50% then, because I'm fine either way.

 

[Truronian]

I have no idea whether it exists or not but its potential existance affects me in no way, so I went for 1%.

Even if it does exist, there is no reason to think its gonna be any better than this place.

 

[The Last Conformist]

I have no idea whether it exists or not but its potential existance affects me in no way, so I went for 1%.

Even if it does exist, there is no reason to think its gonna be any better than this place.

I hear it involves kissing Hank's butt.

 

[Mark1031]

Something like "infitisimally small" or the like. Ranges would work too.

I purposely did not do this. It is silly to apply such logical formalism to this. If you are as certain of this as of the fact that you won’t spontaneously burst into flame in the next 10 seconds then it is 100% or 0% certainty. We don’t need to constantly acknowledge there is an infinitely small possibility of everything.

 

[Ayatollah So]

It depends. What's the line at?

That's my answer too. I mean, my death is not the end of the world. It's just the end of me. So, there's something to look forward to ... but you'd have to stretch what people mean by "afterlife" really far, to call it an afterlife. Although, for better and for worse, the world will always bear the traces of everyone who's been here.

 

[warpus]

I don't know.. There is no evidence at all to support an afterlife, but it could be possible..

so I voted 5%

 

[The Last Conformist]

I purposely did not do this. It is silly to apply such logical formalism to this. If you are as certain of this as of the fact that you won’t spontaneously burst into flame in the next 10 seconds then it is 100% or 0% certainty. We don’t need to constantly acknowledge there is an infinitely small possibility of everything.

So, in order not to be silly, we should misrepresent our views?

 

[Tenochtitlan]

Absolutely no such thing.

 

[Tank_Guy#3]

I am 100% certant that there is NO after life.

The exact thought I had upon reading the thread title