Why do you believe in the afterlife?

[timtofly]

Could it be thus: There is a will. One has a will to give up life. One has a will to hold on to it. This will and the ability to use it in knowledgable ways seperates us from the animal. Do animals build ships to transport themselves? Humans have risen above their animal instincts to increase their knowledge. Thus this will and the search for knowledge gives us a conscious that differs from that of the animal. Both animal and human have a brain that fires in a similiar fashion, but we know that we are different in the fact that we are more "self-aware" than the animal. Call this a soul, call this a mind, or call this a spirit. We have within us that which seperates us from the animal.

Now this "self-awareness" also begs to ask the question, what is our purpose? Why are we here? Did we have a beginning? Do we have an end? Now being brain dead is two fold. We are unable to use the brain to perform activity. We now have science to track any neurons being fired so others can see if there is any activity going on. Science has taken away the ability for one to "think" for oneself, due to the fact that the physician can with some certaintity "know" that one is "brain dead". This also leads to two states. One of coma, where the body is still functioning, but no self-awareness due to comatosis. The other life support where-in the brain is unable to perform any practical usage and is backed up by artificial means.

Now we know that we "see" no activity due to the science of the machine, but we do not have the knowledge yet to determine if sitting and conversing with a person in a coma, if they are comprehending what is being said. There is still faith in the machine that shows the brain is firing or not to determine such a phenomenon. Thus we do not have 100% gaurantee that Brain Dead is a certaintity, but still a science. Death cannot be pronounced until the doctor relinquishes to the fact that there is no longer "life".

Having said that, I cannot say scientifically there is another realm of reality where the conscious goes in this process. I say nowhere. It is possible in a dream state to see oneself out side the body. I would not say that the conscious leaves and comes back. Is it possible? I would say yes, due to anecdotal evidence. Now we have the choice between belief in science or belief in the anecdotal. But that is all I can offer.

 

[Perfection]

Also there has not been any explanation of what exactly in the material plane constitutes a consciousness, and therefore neither what ends a consciousness- provided that a consciousness does indeed end.
It is easy to imagine the brain itself collapsing and then rotting, but not so easy to explain just what inside it supposedly creates one of the foundations of a world of thought: consciousness itself.

Well, it's difficult to explain the exact nature of the correlation between the physical state of the brain, and the mental state of the mind. But I believe it's clear that there is an extremely strong dependence of mind mental state to brain physical state.

You get a stroke in physical brain area x and mental function y is impaired. You drink and not only is your brain effected, but your mind is too; drunk Perfs has a different personality then sober Perfs. The slow decline in the mind of an Alzheimer's occurs in lockstep withe the damage to the brain.

From this we expect the mind and brain to function jointly. It is a good reason to suppose that when the brain goes, so does the mind.

 

[Ekolite]

I've always imagined that the last thoughts or feelings you have before you die might seem to last for eternity, and that they might be the basis for a kind of dream-like afterlife. If you die happy and fullfilled, you essentially experience that kind of satisfaction for eternity. You might relive when you were in your prime for example. If you died thinking of your deceased spouse you would be reunited with them in your personal afterlife etc etc.

I don't believe in heaven and hell in the Christian way, but the people's afterlifes could mirror either one potentially, especially if you were a strong believer in it.

It's hard to explain, but to me as a (kind of) Christian it just seems quite logical this way.

 

[GhostWriter16]

What if a person imagines themself in eternal anguish? What if a person isn't thinking there is an afterlife at all?

 

[Singularity]

I believe all our neurons has a twin particle that exists in a different universe in a vessel so unlike our frail corporal forms that I can't begin to describe them, as we wink out of this existence they switch on in that giant nursery. God is the caretaker, Jesus the usher and St. Peter the bouncer.

Seriously though. Afterlife is probably the biggest meta in the metaphysics of religion. It's proportionaly important to us compared to our fear of dying, and I predict a lot of us resign to Believing in it at the end when all hope and meaning start to fade away. Somehow I don't quite believe people who say they've lived full lives and doesn't want to keep on going...

 

[Narz]

I believe all our neurons has a twin particle that exists in a different universe in a vessel so unlike our frail corporal forms that I can't begin to describe them, as we wink out of this existence they switch on in that giant nursery.

Dude, that's awesome! If only it could be true!

 

[Perfection]

Dude, that's awesome! If only it could be true!

Unfortunately, in that universe all you get to do is sit in a fabric cube and write memos about paperclip usage for all eternity.

 

[Ekolite]

What if a person imagines themself in eternal anguish? What if a person isn't thinking there is an afterlife at all?

It doesn't matter whether they're thinking there is an afterlife or not. That's totally irrelevent. It's how they're feeling that counts. If a person feels anguished when they die they will continue that pain for their ''afterlife''. I never said the afterlife was neccessarily nice or fair.

 

[Perfection]

Why should you think it is that way?

 

[Ekolite]

I sat down one day and decided that to me this seemed like the most logical answer. To me it just feels right. When we can't objectively test something the only thing we can do is philosophise, and this is my philosophy.

 

[Perfection]

Well, I most heartily object to the notion that if something is "philosophical" it must be reasonless or that we cannot explore why we think that way!

For example, I have applied reasoning about my views on the afterlife here.

 

[Ayatollah So]

I used to think an afterlife would be nice, but when I started thinking about the implications of my consciousness continuing forever, I grew less fond of the idea.

"My consciousness" is easy to say. It's grammatical. But in the context of an afterlife it presumes too much. Consciousness doesn't come with a Certificate of Ownership (tm). But if you're willing to look forward to an experience that doesn't belong to your body, who needs an afterlife?

My death isn't the end of the world. It's just the end of me. There will still be experiences to look forward to - all you need to do now, to look forward to them, is pay attention. Want something to look forward to? Then do so.

If you subscribe to the theory that your personhood consists of your body, mind and soul, you lose two, but a part still survives. And the soul is the most important part anyway, since both your body and mind are earthly and impermanent.

The body is composed of energy (mostly in the form of mass). Energy is conserved. Some of the matter that is now part of you will in the future be part of other thinking, feeling people. "Reincarnation" (multiple simultaneous reincarnation, even!) is statistically inevitable.

It's all about the ride, my dear friend, and it is not pointless. I can understand "the destination is the only thing that matters" mentality, but it seems rather depressing.

Yup. Are people with that mentality bad lovers? Seems likely

But I believe it's clear that there is an extremely strong dependence of mind mental state to brain physical state.

I believe he was saying it's the same state, differently described. Compare: one theorist might describe an event at the Farmer's Market as an economic exchange, another as a social interaction. Neither one is wrong: they're just describing it at different levels.

 

[Perfection]

I believe he was saying it's the same state, differently described. Compare: one theorist might describe an event at the Farmer's Market as an economic exchange, another as a social interaction. Neither one is wrong: they're just describing it at different levels.

"He" being Kyriakos? If so maybe, to be honest, I can barely understand anything he says.

In any case I would consider the mind mental state and the brain physical state being one and the same to fall under "extremely strong dependence".

 

[GhostWriter16]

It doesn't matter whether they're thinking there is an afterlife or not. That's totally irrelevent. It's how they're feeling that counts. If a person feels anguished when they die they will continue that pain for their ''afterlife''. I never said the afterlife was neccessarily nice or fair.

So you think if someone feels anguish at death, they will feel anguish forever? Or do you think they can change their feelings after awhile.

 

[Ekolite]

No that they'll feel it forever. It would be dreamlike and perhaps a little vague at times, but they'd feel it forever.

 

[GhostWriter16]

No that they'll feel it forever. It would be dreamlike and perhaps a little vague at times, but they'd feel it forever.

That definitely sounds horrible.

But, in a dream, eventually I always seem to figure out its a dream (If I don't wake up before that) so why couldn't that happen here?

 

[Ekolite]

In reality this is happening only in the moment of death, but to the person experiencing it it is essentially forever and feel like . I didn't say it was a dream, only that it would be like a dream. Indistinct and not really making any sense, while the person would not be entirely conscious of events, just how things are in dreams.

If everything that happens is based on the moment of the death, then it would be impossible for them to consciously realise and change their surroundings. Unless at the very moment of their death that's what they were thinking .

It's hard to explain.

 

[GhostWriter16]

So its forever but its only a second? I'll be honest, that makes no sense to me at all.

 

[Ekolite]

That's okay, you're political views make no sense to me

 

[Mr. Dictator]

So its forever but its only a second? I'll be honest, that makes no sense to me at all.

Who said anything in existence has to make sense?