starscream84
Registered Member
I think that the fact we are aware and conscious at one point means there is a good chance that it could happen again. In what form that is I have no idea.:shrug:
Life after death
- Thread starter James R
- Start date
Why?
Does that same "argument" also not apply to reincarnation?
If I'm aware NOW does that not mean I must also have been aware before?
I choose to believe in life after death.
After reading "The God Delusion," I figured out that this choice of belief discourages me from offing myself.
I believe killing myself is rather like pressing the reset button-I get to start a new crappy life where I get to face a similar set of lessons. So killing myself is pointless
If I was just gone when I'm dead? At my worst nonexistence just sounds blissful.
After reading "The God Delusion," I figured out that this choice of belief discourages me from offing myself.
I believe killing myself is rather like pressing the reset button-I get to start a new crappy life where I get to face a similar set of lessons. So killing myself is pointless
If I was just gone when I'm dead? At my worst nonexistence just sounds blissful.
Fraggle Rocker
Staff member
Please explain your reasoning. You are in a science subforum, not the Religion subforum. The rules of science apply here.
Well the old testament says in the book of Ecclesiastes " When your dead your dead and you no longer have a part in the living so enjoy life while you got it. I believe like someone else stated we live on by our children , but not only that but by our creations that live on too. Like a writer that is well read by many generations or a great piece of art that is held sacred by generations down the line . Jack the Ripper will probably live just as long as Jesus
It isn't necessarily a belief, more of a lack of belief in the afterlife or human soul. Since, damage to the physical brain effects the mind I think the only conclusion is that the mind arises from the brain.
So after the brain some working the mind eases to function, that is death. It is just as the time before your birth. Although, I think most of us leave behind a corpse after death, so death is not non-existence, it is more of an off switch to the senses and consciousness.
Believing in a afterlife with out evidence, becomes wishful think, I do not choose to place my mind on what I hope will happen, rather I want to be as close to reality as freakin' possible.
So after the brain some working the mind eases to function, that is death. It is just as the time before your birth. Although, I think most of us leave behind a corpse after death, so death is not non-existence, it is more of an off switch to the senses and consciousness.
Believing in a afterlife with out evidence, becomes wishful think, I do not choose to place my mind on what I hope will happen, rather I want to be as close to reality as freakin' possible.
Then you do not mourn the dead? Rather, you rejoice?
I think we communicate with the dead!! By reading books by dead people they communicate with us . Now to Me there is a super natural thing going on . I don't quite know what it is . It may just be odds . Like dice and you know if you keep rolling double 6s they are going to come up at some point . So I think we repeat past events and it seems to be in similar patterns . The naming of places and the name of things surrounding a local area seem to me to play a roll . Like it determines genetic links from the past . The genetic links dominates disposition to each new generation . The passing down of culture by genealogies forms the genetic link and keeps the past alive by repetition of similar task orientation . To Me this implies patterns of human activity to move in predetermined course or courses. Repeating of past events or equivalent. So in the end Mikey may do it again , but with more vigor this time
Nope.
They may "communicate" with us, but we can't ever give them our reply.
And by the way:
Terry Pratchett, Eric.
And one more time. Genealogies do not "pass down culture".
How so?
It doesn't need to.
For example, a selection of "None of the above" is perfectly compatible with (and calls for) "Other".
Mind Over Matter
Registered Senior Member
Would this article help?
http://www.heavensfamily.org/ss/resurrection-from-the-dead-pastor-daniel-ekechukwu
http://www.heavensfamily.org/ss/resurrection-from-the-dead-pastor-daniel-ekechukwu
meanwhile your molars rotOccam's Razor...there is no ghost in the machine, no soul, no gods, no devils, no angels. Not until we make these happen.
:shrug:
Fraggle Rocker
Staff member
Yes, but that's not the same as us communicating with them, which was your premise. We already know that communication is typically forward-time-displaced from sender to receiver, because at the macro level all communication proceeds at finite speed. So there's nothing remarkable about Person A initiating a communication and Person B receiving it after Person A is dead. This does not support your premise.
This is exactly where the vast majority of assertions of supernatural phenomena come from: out of people's butts (to put it as rudely as possible in the hope of shocking you back to reality
). "I don't understand how this could have happened! It's way too complicated! Therefore it must be due to a supernatural force. Of course I haven't thought this through at all or I'd realize that the supernaturalist explanation is far more complicated than anything science is likely to come up with, because it will inevitably contradict about 95% of what we have already learned about the way the natural universe works." DUH!
Poster descends into babbling woo-woo.
You can do better than this. As I've pointed out before, you're intelligent and well-educated. You have no need to rely on woo-woo to understand how the universe works. Stop embarrassing yourself or no one will take you seriously any more.
For starters, please refresh your understanding of two cornerstones of the scientific method:
- Occam's Razor. "Test the simplest solution first in case it's correct." You jump to a complicated solution without even looking for a simple one.
- The Rule of Laplace (commonly called "Sagan's Law" these days). "An extraordinary assertion (for example one which claims to falsify the very foundation of science by postulating the existence of an invisible, illogical supernatural universe) must be supported by extraordinary evidence before anyone is obliged to treat it with respect." You make extraordinary assertions that claim to falsify the very foundation of science without providing any evidence at all.
Even if there is no proof of life after death, like any belief, it has an impact on the mind and emotions that contrasts with the lack of such a belief.
As an example, say you had two college students. One beleives there is life after college. While the other beleives that after college you are doomed to a boring life. Would there be differences in college behavior?
The students who is planning beyond college, will make provisions to be ready for his new job and life. He may moderate the partying and avoid too much scandal.. The one who sees this as glory days before the downfall, will try to maximize glory days, but by doing so creates a self forfilling path that might lead to his expectations (fail in college).
Say we tried to talk to the party guy, who beleives college is the end of his good times. We try to explain the best of times will be in the future. He may want proof since he lacks faith. How can you prove this to him, if his mind is made up? All he knows is what is in front of him, unable to extrapolate, to that future.
As an example, say you had two college students. One beleives there is life after college. While the other beleives that after college you are doomed to a boring life. Would there be differences in college behavior?
The students who is planning beyond college, will make provisions to be ready for his new job and life. He may moderate the partying and avoid too much scandal.. The one who sees this as glory days before the downfall, will try to maximize glory days, but by doing so creates a self forfilling path that might lead to his expectations (fail in college).
Say we tried to talk to the party guy, who beleives college is the end of his good times. We try to explain the best of times will be in the future. He may want proof since he lacks faith. How can you prove this to him, if his mind is made up? All he knows is what is in front of him, unable to extrapolate, to that future.
Implicit in your example is the assumption that there is life after death.
Yet to be proved.
Hence, the example is false.
Alternatively: someone who "believes in life after college" spends so much time worrying about that, and planning for it, that he neglects to actually enjoy and make the most of life while at college.
His colleague, however, not bothering about what may or may not come, just gets on with things, enjoys the experience and does his lessons knowing that he's doing the best he can to experience what he has now.