How certain are you of an afterlife?

[CartesianFart]

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.

It strike somewhat similar to what the pre-socratic philosopher Democritus in such a profound way:Some men, not knowing about the dissolution of mortal nature, but acting on knowledge of the suffering in life, afflict the period of life with anxieties and fears, inventing false tales about the period after the end of life. Few men of reason have beat the air with their hands and claim "Zeus considers all things and he knows all and gives and takes away all and is king of all."

Of course with the admixture of Atlas modern chemistry knowledge over this ancient philosopher's "theory of the atoms" on how they part away after they disperse and C~G cheerfulness disposition of easily accepting nothingingness after death is somewhat the same.

 

[C~G]

Whatever that floats my boat. It is just my favourite survival mode that gives me peace of mind and gives comfort in the eye of the storm for me.

That makes this life just worth a lot more for me.
This is it. There are no ifs, no buts, no hallelujahs.

Just you and me, my friend, just you and me.
These places, these people and the moments we share.
Here and now but not forever.

(But I guess this is just my usual metaphysical thinking )

 

[Atlas14]

It strike somewhat similar to what the pre-socratic philosopher Democritus in such a profound way:Some men, not knowing about the dissolution of mortal nature, but acting on knowledge of the suffering in life, afflict the period of life with anxieties and fears, inventing false tales about the period after the end of life. Few men of reason have beat the air with their hands and claim "Zeus considers all things and he knows all and gives and takes away all and is king of all."

Of course with the admixture of Atlas modern chemistry knowledge over this ancient philosopher's "theory of the atoms" on how they part away after they disperse and C~G cheerfulness disposition of easily accepting nothingingness after death is somewhat the same.

I like such ancient philosophic perspectives because they are surprisingly logical. That was a good comparison on your part. Thanks

 

[CartesianFart]

(But I guess this is just my usual metaphysical thinking )

Nah,i wouldn't say that.It is just a noble and sanguine way of thinking before we part our way of this very world.

 

[jimbob27]

100% certain it doesn't exist. When you die, you're dead and that's it. I don't believe in the concept of a soul. The soul is just something invented by peoples imaginations, and when your brain dies, your imagination and therefore your soul die as well.

 

[Perfection]

Nor is there any evidence that there isn't.

Nor is there any evidence that there aren't invisable immaterial unicorns on my shoulder. If there is no evidence for a statement it is correct to dismiss it as fallacious.

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

Works well enough for me.

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

The assumption that there is no soul is useful because it allows us to get at the physiological causes of psychology.

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

I go by the metric evidence and explanitory power. The soul has less explinitory power and less evidence then a material conciousness. What metric do you go by?

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

1% is not infitesimally small.

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.

I took that interpretation, but it appears that folks like TLC to the other interpretation and voted 1%

 

[MamboJoel]

Yep, the only two answer I understand are 99% or 1% (or 99.99999 and 0.00001 if you prefere...). So i voted 1%.

 

[Perfection]

Yep, the only two answer I understand are 99% or 1% (or 99.99999 and 0.00001 if you prefere...). So i voted 1%.

You don't understand how someone can be unsure?

 

[Gabryel Karolin]

1%, would be great, but I haven't seen anything that points to there being any.

It's a nice dream though.

 

[Sidhe]

100% certain it doesn't exist. When you die, you're dead and that's it. I don't believe in the concept of a soul. The soul is just something invented by peoples imaginations, and when your brain dies, your imagination and therefore your soul die as well.

Indeed all lasting religion springs from discomfort about death, it is interweaved in it's very foundation, I'd go so far as to say it's a precursor to almost all modern day faith, most people need the idea of an everlasting life to comfort them in their passage towards death, thus if a soul did not exist, then evolution would find a way to make us percieve it exists, given human nature; IMO there is no possible way this concept could not of come into existence.

Of course that's form a historic point of view, many philosophies have found ways to ascribe meaning to life without the need for a soul, they come from the fear of deaths originating principle by way of religion, but none are so comforting as the thought of life everlasting, I leave it up to you to envisage the evolutionary advantage of assuaging fear of death though

Me I go 25% but then I'm an optimist in these matters

 

[angeleyes]

0%, and i won't regret it when i'm dead

 

[angeleyes]

Question: are there people who believe in an afterlife that isn't split up in a good and a bad part ????

 

[North King]

As to scientific attempts to prove or disprove the afterlife, since God(s) would be presumably infinite and all knowing, the afterlife would not have to be contained in the 4 observable or 11 theoretical dimensions, no? So therefore, scientific attempts to "prove" or "disprove" an afterlife are rather sadly misguided, since we have no way to observe even the realm in which an afterlife would be contained.

On the other hand, one has to consider why we exist, or more so, how. Sure, because the Universe coalesced that way. Why or how did the universe come to exist? The Big Bang, yes. Why did the Big Bang happen? Now you get to the heart of the matter. There are all sorts of scientific theories, but they all break down when it comes to explaining why the set of circumstances that created the Big Bang happened, because to explain what happened to cause it is to work outside of the boundaries of our physical universe, since there was no physical universe then. And since we have no observable material to postulate even what the existence of something out of the universe we know would be like, we cannot presume to be able to observe or predict anything about it.

On your third hand, however, one could simply give the answer that we don't need to reason out what created us--all that matters is that we are here, and that's enough proof for the universe to us.

I have little faith in the idea of an afterlife, since in some respects the idea itself is logically impotent, but one cannot rule out the supernatural realm.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Im certain that the life force that animates me will live on in others after Im gone. Theres always life after death.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Im certain that the life force that animates me will live on in others after Im gone. Theres always life after death.

I was gonna say "vitalism is dead", but then irony of it all snuck up and mugged me in a dark alley.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

I was gonna say "vitalism is dead", but then irony of it all snuck up and mugged me in a dark alley.

Vitalism is dead! Long live Vitalism! (crowd cheers)

 

[Dionysius]

<purged.>

 

[Sidhe]

Im certain that the life force that animates me will live on in others after Im gone. Theres always life after death.

Whilst I applaud your holistic approach to life, and the way in which the existance of someone affects us all on so many levels, I can't help but feel your ducking the issue

 

[warpus]

On the other hand, one has to consider why we exist, or more so, how. Sure, because the Universe coalesced that way. Why or how did the universe come to exist? The Big Bang, yes. Why did the Big Bang happen? Now you get to the heart of the matter. There are all sorts of scientific theories, but they all break down when it comes to explaining why the set of circumstances that created the Big Bang happened, because to explain what happened to cause it is to work outside of the boundaries of our physical universe, since there was no physical universe then. And since we have no observable material to postulate even what the existence of something out of the universe we know would be like, we cannot presume to be able to observe or predict anything about it.

Exactly, but how that's supposed to imply the supernatural and/or an afterlife is beyond me.

It simply implies that there are things out there which we do not understand (yet).

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Whilst I applaud your holistic approach to life, and the way in which the existance of someone affects us all on so many levels, I can't help but feel your ducking the issue

This vessel will break, and the water will return to where it came from. The place where all the waters come from. Other vessels will be filled.

Am I still ducking?