The concept of the afterlife

[Norsefire]

Like my views on the concept of intelligence, I share somewhat similar views on the absurdity or reasonability of the concept of an afterlife, and I'll tell you why. I believe it is quite natural to propose an afterlife, and that this concept isn't unreasonable; this doesn't make it true, but I do believe there is some underlying logic behind the concept of an afterlife.

We are conscious, and living; when we die, we can assume that we either stop being conscious, or that we continue to be conscious (in some way).


That's about as simple as it gets; I don't necessarily think it is unreasonable to suggest an afterlife, and in fact further study into consciousness might discover that consciousness exists seperately from the brain, in which case an afterlife would be the case.

As for re incarnation, I'm not sure where that idea comes from, what sort of observation or logic.

However, if we assume that consciousness comes from the brain, doesn't that mean that, as long as a brain exists, conscioiusness shall exist? Therefore when you die, new "brains" are being born in which you might be conscious? Not "you" but consciousness

Sorry if the explanation seems sketchy


Anyway the main problem- and this is especially true of the afterlife concept- is that it is absolutely impossible to test but is still a reasonable idea(as I said, we either stop being consciousness or our consciousness continues)

When one dies, they aren't coming back to tell you if there is an afterlife.

[(Q)]

We are conscious, and living; when we die, we can assume that we either stop being conscious, or that we continue to be conscious (in some way).

It is the first, we stop being conscious when we die.

When one dies, they aren't coming back to tell you if there is an afterlife.

Really? That should tell you something about what happens when we die.

[Norsefire]

It is the first, we stop being conscious when we die.

How do you know? I know you might say something like " How do you know [insert ridiculous thing here]"

But honestly it isn't that ridiculous and it is impossible to know....consciousness might exist separately of the brain or might somehow live on.

Really? That should tell you something about what happens when we die.

Actually, even if there is an afterlife we couldn't know, because once people go to it, they couldn't come back HERE. And if there is reincarnation, we'd jsut treat it as new people being born.

[(Q)]

But honestly it isn't that ridiculous and it is impossible to know....consciousness might exist separately of the brain or might somehow live on.

Considering that consciousness is a function of the brain, it is likely that consciousness wouldn't exist without the brain.

[Norsefire]

Considering that consciousness is a function of the brain, it is likely that consciousness wouldn't exist without the brain.

Have we proven that consciousness is derived from the brain?

It could be that our brain supports consciousness to perceive the world, but does not create the consciouisness

i.e, a link between our independent consciousness and the physical world. Therefore our consciousness perceives the world around us through the brain, and the functions of the brain, but doesn't come from the brain

[cosmictraveler]

We are just a part of nature as living humans and when we die we become another part of nature, being used in other ways.

[Norsefire]

We are just a part of nature as living humans and when we die we become another part of nature, being used in other ways.

I know what happens to our bodies, but what happens to our consciousness?

[zerogravity]

I have been reading a lot lately on OBE's during near death experiences, doctors are not performing tests by putting images that can only be seen from the ceiling to see if they are real or not

[lightgigantic]

Like my views on the concept of intelligence, I share somewhat similar views on the absurdity or reasonability of the concept of an afterlife, and I'll tell you why. I believe it is quite natural to propose an afterlife, and that this concept isn't unreasonable; this doesn't make it true, but I do believe there is some underlying logic behind the concept of an afterlife.

We are conscious, and living; when we die, we can assume that we either stop being conscious, or that we continue to be conscious (in some way).


That's about as simple as it gets; I don't necessarily think it is unreasonable to suggest an afterlife, and in fact further study into consciousness might discover that consciousness exists seperately from the brain, in which case an afterlife would be the case.

As for re incarnation, I'm not sure where that idea comes from, what sort of observation or logic.

However, if we assume that consciousness comes from the brain, doesn't that mean that, as long as a brain exists, conscioiusness shall exist? Therefore when you die, new "brains" are being born in which you might be conscious? Not "you" but consciousness

Sorry if the explanation seems sketchy


Anyway the main problem- and this is especially true of the afterlife concept- is that it is absolutely impossible to test but is still a reasonable idea(as I said, we either stop being consciousness or our consciousness continues)

When one dies, they aren't coming back to tell you if there is an afterlife.

what is the difference between "you" and "consciousness"?

As for the difficulty of testing, that's simply because it's difficult to see what one is seeing with.

[Balerion]

Consciousness is a function of the brain. That's why when someone punches you in the jaw, you go night-night. It is a function of the brain.

It's 2008, people. Enough with the fairy tales.

[wsionynw]

I know what happens to our bodies, but what happens to our consciousness?

Then this could also be true for non-human animals, no? Or rocks and plastic toys for that matter!!

If there is an afterlife just to support consciousness then why can we not percieve it in any way?

[VossistArts]

I suppose, that at a glance, when you die, your dead. Done. There may be a lot of things to suggest otherwise, but they are just suggestions after all. Ive read about people who supposedly have remembered past lives, in some cases supposedly able to go where they lived previously, identify themselves as the person known to have been deceased, and then recognize and identify surviving relatives, personal items, recount person history etc. Its said the present Dalai Lama was such a case. But to me, those are still stories. Some people will tell you past lives and reincarnation are true. Others say these things certainly arent fact. In the end how can I believe anything I havent experienced or do not remember having experienced, for myself?

[Cellar_Door]

The concept of the afterlife
Norsefire

If God is love and forgiving...
typingcat

Gods will eventually exist (Multi-page thread 1 2)
Norsefire

We need religion (Multi-page thread 1 2 3)
Norsefire

Why there are no atheist stampedes? (Multi-page thread 1 2)
Syzygys

The gods concept and false arguments against it (Multi-page thread 1 2 3 4)
Norsefire

[Norsefire]

???

[(Q)]

Have we proven that consciousness is derived from the brain?

In light of superstitious or pseudo-scientific drivel, yes.

[flameofanor5]

There's more evidence supporting an afterlife. If there isn't, then really all there is to tell us that is "logic". Whereas if there is, you have evidence from books such as The Kuran, The Bible, etc. To say there's no afterlife doesnt make sense if there's no proof supporting that idea.

[VossistArts]

What evidence for an afterlife is there exactly? Heresay definitely cant be considered evidence. So whats written in books is out.

Personally I tend to believe in continuance of some fundamental aspect of the transpersonal consciousnesson some level. For whatever reasons, the Tibetan Buddhist knowledge and practices surrounding dying, the in between state and rebirth are compelling to me. Still, even though it sounds good, and even though I tend to trust Tibetan Buddhism, I have to acknowledge that anything happening or carrying on after we die may or may not be true. Our logic and reasons have nothing to do with it. If you havent experienced something for yourself in some way, you cant say you know how it is.

[nova900]

What evidence for an afterlife is there exactly? Heresay definitely cant be considered evidence. So whats written in books is out.

Near Death Accounts at least provide some suggestive evidence for the afterlife,otherwise as you say, all we are left with are ancient texts that have been built into(taken for) literal idealogical ideas about the nature of God.