Life after death

I believe (tick all that apply):

  • The human "soul" or "spirit" persists after the death of the body..

    Votes: 41 35.7%

  • Souls go to heaven or hell (or whatever is equivalent in your religion).

    Votes: 19 16.5%

  • The dead will be physically resurrected some time in the future.

    Votes: 14 12.2%

  • We see God after we die.

    Votes: 17 14.8%

  • People who die are reincarnated as different people.

    Votes: 17 14.8%

  • Dead people remain able to watch their loved ones from the "other side".

    Votes: 16 13.9%

  • Dead people are able to communicate with the living.

    Votes: 14 12.2%

  • Souls remain in limbo or unconsciousness until some later time.

    Votes: 10 8.7%

  • (Some) dead people become ghosts or spirits who remain on Earth.

    Votes: 14 12.2%

  • None of the above.

    Votes: 57 49.6%

  • Other.

    Votes: 20 17.4%
  • Total voters
    115
James R said:
Do you believe in life after death?
Click to expand...
Sorta.

Please describe exactly what you think happens after we die, and explain why you believe that.
Click to expand...
I do not know for certain, but I think that the spirits of all living things reincarnate after death, and that all living things have a spirit that exists both in a spiritual plane of existence and in the physical plane. However, I also think that the time elapsed between one's death and one's next life differs from person to person, and can range anywhere from a few seconds to a few thousand years. In that interval, a person's spirit could very well contact the living from the spiritual plane.

Please also say whether you consider yourself religious or a believer in god or the supernatural.
Click to expand...
I consider myself religious, as a Solitary Wiccan, and I believe in multiple gods. However, I do not view any phenomenon as supernatural, as I believe that all things are natural phenomenon, regardless of how well it is explained in human terms.
 
Billy T said:
This is why I too reject the idea of a "soul" but the argument applies equally well to reject the idea that humans have genuine free will. Fraggle did not comment on that consequence. For a long time I believed that humans are just very sophisticated biological machines and incapable of making any real choices as agents with genuine free will. (Being material, humans are controlled by the natural laws just like all matter is.) Now, for reason I have recently described in posts of this thread, I am not so sure that this follows from Fraggle's quote above, but I still tend to think that my belief that I have free will is just the most universal of all "human hubris." What do you think about the falseness of “free will” as also following from your argument, Fraggle?
Click to expand...
There's a thread on that subject on the Cosmology board and I think it's best left there. Not only will it take this one off topic, but I hate it when there are two parallel threads on the same subject with a lot of duplication. I think the question of free will is like string theory or the big bang: it's digging so deep into the structure of the universe that it reaches a place where physics, theoretical mathematics and philosophy begin to overlap.

As for the connection to human hubris, animals make decisions too. If free will is real, then they have it, although perhaps not as extensively as humans. To assert that we have free will but our curious, intelligent and communicative parrots don't... well then that would be "human hubris.":)

Hapsburg said:
. . . . I do not view any phenomenon as supernatural, as I believe that all things are natural phenomenon, regardless of how well it is explained in human terms.
Click to expand...
On this website we adhere to a strict definition of the word "supernatural." It refers to forces, creatures and conditions that exist outside the natural universe. Things in the supernatural universe are not subject to the laws of nature, and in many religious paradigms they don't even seem to be bound by the abstract rules of logic.

So a "supernatural phenomenon" is one that originates outside the natural universe and therefore is not constrained by the natural laws that we have spent the last 500 years studying and codifying.
 
Fraggle Rocker said:
On this website we adhere to a strict definition of the word "supernatural."
Click to expand...
You mean you, and some others, adhere to a strict definition.
I have a much looser look at the words "supernatural" and "natural".
Though, by your definition, the things I believe in probably would be seen as supernatural or paranormal; just remember that your opinions and views aren't the only valid ones in the world.
 
No I do not believe in life after death. The "I" ceases to exist.

That said:
- There is a possibility that there is and I continue.
- There is a possibility that the whole sequence of events leading to "me" happens again and thus am "I" :)
- There is a possibility that there are multiple universes and other "me" very nearly or identical to "me" - maybe an infinity of me?
- There is a possibility that I will not "die". However, I think the "I" that is me will even in this life cease to exist. Looking back a decade ago or a decade before that, I already have...
 
Michael said:
No I do not believe in life after death. The "I" ceases to exist.

That said:
- There is a possibility that there is and I continue.
- There is a possibility that the whole sequence of events leading to "me" happens again and thus am "I" :)
- There is a possibility that there are multiple universes and other "me" very nearly or identical to "me" - maybe an infinity of me?
- There is a possibility that I will not "die". However, I think the "I" that is me will even in this life cease to exist. Looking back a decade ago or a decade before that, I already have...
Click to expand...

I think points 2 to 4 can be dismissed immediately.
2. It won't be you. If you clone yourself the clone wouldn't be you. Environment/experience determine who you are as much as genetics do, maybe even more so.
Even if the 1 in infinity chance takes place that in 500.000 years or so someone gets born with the exact genetic make-up and with the exact same environment, resulting in an I that is the same as yours is now, it still wouldn't be you. His "I" would perhaps be the same as your "I", but that's it. He wouldn't know about you.
3. See 2.
4. Everything ends.

Point 1 is unprovable but just silly.
When you die.. you die, no second chances ;)
 
Enmos said:
2. It won't be you. If you clone yourself the clone wouldn't be you. Environment/experience determine who you are as much as genetics do, maybe even more so.
Click to expand...

No, not more so. Every study that takes heredity and environment into account (usually "adopting" studies and "separated twin" studies) show AT MOST a .25 correlation with environment and AT LEAST a .50 correlation with genetics.

So, you are more than half your genes, and no more than a quarter of your environment.

Back to the thread title: The definition of "Death" is "Absence of Life", so can we please argue about whether or not we believe in Death, and not whether or not some of you believe in Life after Death? If you go on living forever, that wasn't Death that happened. It was something else.
 
swivel said:
No, not more so. Every study that takes heredity and environment into account (usually "adopting" studies and "separated twin" studies) show AT MOST a .25 correlation with environment and AT LEAST a .50 correlation with genetics.

So, you are more than half your genes, and no more than a quarter of your environment.
Click to expand...
That's what I always thought, but people always keep pointing out I'm wrong so I thought I'd stay on the safe side :shrug:
 
Michael said:
- There is a possibility that I will not "die". However, I think the "I" that is me will even in this life cease to exist. Looking back a decade ago or a decade before that, I already have...
Click to expand...
legally you still have the same "I", so something appears to have persisted ....
 
If there were two "me" living simultaneously in alternate universes and we both had the exact same neural cytoarchitecture and undergo the same experiences - are we the same person?

If my body dies and I am "beamed" into another universe and into another body with all my memories - is that me in a new body or is it someone else?
 
Michael said:
If there were two "me" living simultaneously in alternate universes and we both had the exact same neural cytoarchitecture and undergo the same experiences - are we the same person?
Click to expand...
No.

Michael said:
If my body dies and I am "beamed" into another universe and into another body with all my memories - is that me in a new body or is it someone else?
Click to expand...
It's you in a new body.
 
Michael said:
If there were two "me" living simultaneously in alternate universes and we both had the exact same neural cytoarchitecture and undergo the same experiences - are we the same person?

If my body dies and I am "beamed" into another universe and into another body with all my memories - is that me in a new body or is it someone else?
Click to expand...
what if your body is simply a vessel, and the self and the body remain characteristically distinct? (So you could be beamed into the body of a rat embreyo. say?)

There's the issue about whether our mind/body is the essence of our self or merely a reflection of it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top