Printable View
Do you believe in a 'Afterlife'? Well do you?
I for one, used to think about it being like a "Hell on Earth." But after coming here, and remembering my 'dream'. I have second thoughts. And by the way. My old theory of "Hell on Earth" isn't what it sound like. Just you live again, because your true purpose or goal was never fulfilled. Unless you're helped to move on.
This the right section to post this?
Yeah, guess so. Philosophy may have been better, though maybe not. Anyway...
To put it simply, no, I don't believe in an afterlife. At present, I see no reason why one should exist, and cold though it may be, I do not believe. At the end of one's life, my best bet is that it's just lights out, game over. Many find this thought cold and scary, offering little comfort, but look at it this way: it isn't an eternity of nothingness...you won't be around for any of it.
My two cents.
Absolutely, i believe in an afterlife of sorts. If you mean a spiritual afterlife in which my soul carries on after my body is no longer living than i would be inclined to say that i am unsure of that (agnostic) and quite doubtful.
The afterlife life i believe in, is the only afterlife i can really be sure of. That is that the sum of my parts will be recycled into the environment and distributed and incorporated into the various living organisms of this planet. (See food chain/pyramid)
Before or after
When were you ever not?
Now has always been Now
What does such know of before or after?
The idea of an "afterlife" is a superstitious means for combating the fear of death. One must be extremely arrogant to believe there is a system in place allowing them, a microscopic dot on a microscopic dot of the universe, to live forever. Besides, eternity is a long time; you wouldn't want it.
Mario pretty much has things right.
I believe in proper grammar.
a afterlife...
lol
I would love to believe that when I die I will live again, that some thinking, feeling, remembering part of me will continue. But much as I want to believe that, and despite the ancient and worldwide cultural traditions that assert an afterlife, I know of nothing to suggest that it is more than wishful thinking. The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there's little good evidence. Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides.
-Carl Sagan
<3 Carl Sagan
The human body is a very intelligent biological organism that we do not understand rather than something insignificant. Absolute arrogance or stupidity would be associating such intelligence and complexity with something meaningless such as a insignificant dot. Consciousness as we experience it is something quite valuable. Life as a human is quite amazing if you care to notice. Just because the universe is so large doesn't mean we are not important. Just because the universe is so infinite doesn't mean we don't have a life of our own within it. There's just as many lifeforms of intelligence functioning below us. In comparison to things like bacteria we are highly evolved beings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Conkt
As for not wanting to live forever. That is more shortsighted nonsense and a childlike attitude. Any intelligent person worth their salt certainly wants to live forever if possible. In fact that's the ultimate goal of every decent alchemist throughout history. Anyone that doesn't want to live forever has not yet understood how to appreciate life and it's diversity. Has not yet understood about it's infinite possibility. Only a fool chooses death over eternal life.
Is there an afterlife? It's a logical conclusion from the information avaliable today. Unbiased research would lead you in that general direction.
Evidence and sources would be much appreciated here, seeing as how I have seen absolutely no reliable evidence to support the notion of an afterlife.Quote:
Originally Posted by Praise
Even if I gave you sources you would complain about them with a closed mind. That's why I give you none.
I'm perfectly open to new ideas, and while I do not presently believe, things change. I would do little more than analyze them critically and as logically as possible, whilst doing my best to maintain an open mind and unbiased view. Believe it or not, I would love to believe in the afterlife, but as I stated, I have not yet come across any convincing arguments or scientific evidence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Praise
EDIT: and just a note on close-mindedness:
If you haven't come across any sources. That's your own problem. If you are happy in your ignorance thinking you are balanced that is not my business either.Quote:
I'm perfectly open to new ideas, and while I do not presently believe, things change. I would do little more than analyze them critically and as logically as possible, whilst doing my best to maintain an open mind and unbiased view. Believe it or not, I would love to believe in the afterlife, but as I stated, I have not yet come across any convincing arguments or scientific evidence.
The burden of proof is on the one making the positive claim.Quote:
Originally Posted by Praise
How did I make a positive claim?
You claim that an afterlife exists, and therefore, are making a positive claim. This is tantamount to claiming that a flying spaghetti monster exists. It is a claim in the positive; it exists. The burden of proof is on the one making the positive claim.Quote:
Originally Posted by Praise
And please stop calling me close-minded and ignorant...these are untrue claims. The video posted above will explain this.
an afterlife is a logical estimate from modern research. Since you are not dead yet you cannot conclude there is no afterlife. Please enter the chat room so we can stop mucking up this thread.
I gotta back up mario on this. he is using the only logical approach to this. I would love evidence if you have it. But that is not to say I will accept it. In fact if I call it as mumbo-jumbo I will refute it n a second. But that's how logic works. If it can't be explained in a way that makes sense, there is no reason to believe it, and no reason to be scolded for not believing in it.
As someone posted on this forum before, or at least I think it was this forum, before you were born, there were billions of years of there being no you. how did that feel? Did it feel bad? No. Did it feel good? No. Did it feel like anything whatsoever? No!
And as Conkt was saying, in the grand scheme of things, we ARE insignificant. If someone destined to work at McDonalds their whole life were to die right now, how many people would be affected? Hundreds? Thousands at the most optimistic level. You talk of alchemy, and it reminded me of a part if FMA where they were forced to understand that the world doesn't care who dies. It doesn't care who lives. We were in all probibility created by chance. If life were to never exist anywhere, would the universe survive? Hell yes it would. Even people as important as hitler are insignificant. In one million years, man kind will not know you. They won't, accept it. They won't remember any of us. Some men try to leave their mark on the world, but eventually the sands of time always smooth it away.
since I haven't had a kid yet, there is a very good chance that when I do it will in fact be a giant strawberryQuote:
Originally Posted by Praise
very funny.
but the point it made was serious. You can't say it makes sense just because there's absolutely no evidence of it or anything else.
If you can't find the evidence in this modern age with computers and google at your finger tips, there is no way you will ever know how to research properly by now.
Excuse me, WTF are you doing?
So let me get this strait; Not only is the afterlife logical because of a lack of evidence, but google also knows all the possible to know answers of the universe and we've hit a climax of civilization. Damn life here on out will suck royally then.
I wanted to keep this civil in private messages, but now that ship has sailed. Did you even watch the video Mario posted? You sound almost EXACTLY like one of his examples. If it's unexplainable, like the afterlife, that doesn't make it paranormal or spiritual, it makes it UNEXPLAINABLE! No evidence of anything whatsoever means NONE of it makes sense, not that the one most people believe in makes sense.
Are you really this obnoxious or are you just a troll? Funny that people have asked you about five times to give a single example and all you've done is dodged the question and made accusations of people being closed minded.Quote:
Is there an afterlife? It's a logical conclusion from the information avaliable today. Unbiased research would lead you in that general direction.
You're in denial.
Prove me wrong.
[Typed a bunch, and then deleted.]
No.
Links given to me by Praise. For the furthering of the thread, I will post them.
http://www.near-death.com/
http://www.near-death.com/experience...rnation01.html
This whole argument is ridiculous as Praise doesn't know what he's talking about, is close minded, and is unfamiliar with logic. No offense. I'm going to have to call you out on this, Praise, but you did not review sources before making your fantastical claims about the afterlife. That's why you avoided giving a source. Instead, when people grew tired of your fact dodging, you googled and copy-pasted two links.
In this we see the critical difference that marks the schism between science and religion, knowledge and ignorance. The former would look at the evidence and for conclusions therein. The later decides (and often invents) conclusions and then scavenges for evidence (or, many times, doesn't, as you did) to support their often erroneous claims. As Mario stated, you have the burden of proof. Your claim has as much credibility as the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Ramen.
Checkmate.
What would we have ever been able to accomplish without the Flying Spaghetti monster? You have to admit it is a pretty useful tool. I almost want to start an R/S thread about whether or not it exists.
I was considering doing that last night, but was to lazy and went to play left 4 dead 2 instead :P. We should make one, but let's make it VERY official first. You, me, and Mario should all collude and make it good?
Yes. I think we can easily protect the possibility of a flying spaghetti monster using tactics of the ignorant.
Edit: and in case it wasn't obvious, I planned on making the thread satirical.
It is in the nature of His Noodlyness to be satirical.
We have officially trolled this thread into submission, without the trolling.
Applause, gentlemen. It was not we who who trolled but Praise himself for adding words but not substance to this thread.
No I studied pages and pages of writing and research from the website that you have not refuted yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Conkt
How is this conclusive proof of an afterlife, though? If you saw the video I posted above (and I'll post it again, just for you), you'll notice that you're trying to explain something which cannot be explained, which is a contradiction. The unexplained is just that: unexplained. When you say, "It is inexplicable how a person can recall a past life, so it must be the work of an afterlife," you are basically saying, "This event is unexplained, therefore, I can explain it," which is a contradiction. Although modern medicine and science may not understand how quite everything works yet, it is no reason to go jumping to illogical conclusions with admittedly shaky evidence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Praise
Evidence and sources of no after life would be much appreciated here seeing as I have seen absolutely no reliable evicence to support the notion of no afterlife.Quote:
Evidence and sources would be much appreciated here, seeing as how I have seen absolutely no reliable evidence to support the notion of an afterlife.
You say it is on us to prove that there is an afterlife, there is a God etc but guess what,I don't really care what you believe and I don't think anyone else does either no matter what they say to your face. Anyhow, what I believe is what I believe. I don't really care if you believe it or not. So why don't you prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that evolution happened, that somehting blew up in space and formed earth, that there is no God what so ever. Go ahead and prove it....
[QUOTE=davej;1275333]Evidence and sources of no after life would be much appreciated here seeing as I have seen absolutely no reliable evicence to support the notion of no afterlife.
[quote]
I hate to do this because i know it's used in every thread everywhere but
We have no evidence that anything i can come up with in my mind doesn't exist. So if I declare randomly that there are seven violet flowers, on a planet on the other side of the galaxy, singing in unison, you can't disprove it.
Obviously though, this is no reason to believe it.
Maybe I'm mistaken, but are you basing your belief in something on the fact that it isn't proven wrong? Because that seems an awfully negative way of thinking.
Besides, as far as I'm concerned there actually is evidence of no afterlife, at least not in the simple way you and most religions mean it.
We have pretty conclusive evidence of how our personality, memories, basically who we are, corresponds to various parts of the brain. Want evidence, go talk to someone who has brain damage. Their whole personality can change, they can become essentially a different person, just from a knock to the brain.
When we die, our brain, which all evidence suggests is at least an essential part of our person, rots.
So it would seem that as who we are is rooted in our brain, and our brain is rotting, that who we are is not continuing into an afterlife.
And you should constantly be questioning it. Do you?Quote:
Originally Posted by davej
Carousoul, that still proved nothing. Your thing about your brain rotting has nothing to do with the afterlife. it is your soul that goes. Good try though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by davej
I'm not trying to prove anything. It just seems to me that there is evidence and reason to believe that who we are to all effective purposes dies with the body. I might be wrong, but if I am show me how.
What is a soul, and what has it got to do with you, if it is not what makes you a person?
if you are not trying to prove anything, you sure went to a lot of trouble.
I want us to learn and understand :'(Quote:
Originally Posted by davej
Don't push me away.
Here's the bottom line. Religion can't be proven, an afterlife can't be proven, God can't be proven, Jesus dieing on a cross and rising 3 days later can't be proven. It is all about faith.
So I've heard.Quote:
Originally Posted by davej
I'm just not sure what faith is, and what is beneficial about it.
I've read a great deal on the sources I gave and it's pretty obvious to any discerning unbiased researcher that you have some significant evidence that is likely to point in the general direction that consiousness can exist outside the body and continue on when dead. We are extremely close to proving it for certain. Science is almost there. If I was to give an educated estimate I would say there is an afterlife for sure.
http://www.near-death.com/evidence.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praise
The vast majority of those are people's highly personal experiences. Which although evidence of a sort, I don't find as convincing as repeatable or testable evidence.
Maybe I missed something, but if there is something there which is something that maybe we could really look at and test empirically, and not what someone says they experienced, then show me. I don't trust my information sifting skills :3
As a slight side note, after reading all the NDE business, it always strikes me as odd that people report witnessing their body from outside of it or somesuch.
Mainly because they report seeing themselves, and there are various cases of people seeing things they couldnt possibly have known.
Seeing.
Seeing is based on eyes. If you're out of your body, you don't have eyes, but people describe it as if they were a floating pair of eyes.
Personally, I would have thought that the method of the soul would be a totally new kind of sensory experience. But people report hearing and seeing things.
Hearing and seeing things are based entirely on the physical workings of the eye and ear.
You can't "see" in the traditional sense without reflection of light distorted by your retina and so on and so forth.
Likewise the sensory experience we call "hearing" is our nerves encountering various vibrations of liquid or something in our ears.
The point is that these experiences are totally based on the mechanics of the body.
To have an out of body experience, which seems to resemble on the whole exactly the same ways of experiencing the world as the body creates, seems silly.
Why would the soul not experience the world in a totally more profound way? Why see bright lights, or hear things?
What this all suggests to me, sadly is that it is within peoples minds.
The way in which people simulate an out of body or near death experience within their minds, can only work within the constraints of what they have experienced in life, they have nothing else.
So you end up with the logical inconsistancy of souls with eyes and ears.
This has just come to me now, and it seems quite a good idea.
Here is one such example.Quote:
if there is something there which is something that maybe we could really look at and test empirically, and not what someone says they experienced, then show me. I don't trust my information sifting skills :3
Quote:
In 1968, a paper by Dr. Charles Tart was published entitled "Psychophysiological Study of Out of the Body Experiences in a Selected Subject" concerning a woman who successfully read a 5-digit number while having had an out-of-body experience. This is verifiable evidence of out-of-body perception and supports veridical perception in NDEs.
That does indeed sound interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Praise
But i'd like to see something like that redone and really scrutinised. That just sounds like a woman produced a number which was correct once. Maybe they did repeat it, but it doesn't sound like that.
Also I'm not sure how we'd go about verifying that what she had was an OBE rather than some other factor.
The onus of proof is on the one making the positive claim. How many times must this be stated? It's stupid to believe something without sufficient evidence to back it up. The afterlife, religion, and God are such entities, as are the flying spaghetti monster and unicorns. I happily accept the burden of proving evolution (it has, by the way, been proven as a scientific theory, the single highest status an idea can achieve in the scientific community). The big bang also has great evidence, and while we do not currently know how or why it happened, it is fairly much agreed that it did, indeed, happen. Trying to explain it via a god or gods, however, is close-minded.Quote:
Originally Posted by davej
Technically, you can't prove that the hands you used to type that message even exist. You can, however, show which option is vastly more probable than the others, and nullify the probability of other events to virtually nothing at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by davej
As a side note, why is faith good? It seems to be holding back society in general.
People should take the time to research it's easy to put the burden on someone else who believes something different. A wise person studies rather than asks for proof all the time. A wise person is humble enough to consider all possibilities. You can use the spaghetti monster to make anything non existent that you want. Not just god, the afterlife, or religion. But also evolution, the big bang, and more could be associated to a spaghetti monster.
If evolution is proven where is the sources for that. Saying god is involved is not closed minded. It's introducing faith into the equation and faith is a very good thing to have when answers are not clear. How can faith in something good produce anything bad?
The onus of proof is on the one making the positive claim. It is your belief, ergo, you should research it. I could claim leprechauns exist, but it would be ridiculous to try and make you research this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Praise
Evolution, the big bang, and the like have loads of well-documented evidence that can be repeated time and again under laboratory conditions. God, the afterlife, and spaghetti monsters do not.
Do you read? Did you take any biology course after the sixth grade? Evidence/proof of evolution is everywhere, and the sheer volume and quality is absolutely staggering. Furthermore, anyone with a very basic high school lab and some fruit flies can see evolution in action.Quote:
If evolution is proven where is the sources for that.
In short: http://records.viu.ca/~johnstoi/essays/courtenay1.htm
This is, of course, highly simplified, but it hits on the main points, and rest assured, there are mountains of evidence to back it up.
Again, did you see the video? By introducing God and faith into the equation, a person is more likely to glob onto this idea rather than consider other ones. It is also a contradiction (please don't make me repeat myself). It gets in the way of true progress. Instead of questioning and researching matters further, people with faith are more likely to say, "God did it, end of story. Next problem."Quote:
Saying god is involved is not closed minded. It's introducing faith into the equation and faith is a very good thing to have when answers are not clear.
How about that case with the people who tried to deny their son much needed Chemotherapy in exchange for "natural remedies" which didn't work? They had faith in something good, and it backfired.Quote:
How can faith in something good produce anything bad?
Mario, why do I need to prove it to you? I am extremely secure in my beliefs. I see proof for myself in my everyday life. I still don't understand why so many find a need to down religion. do you get a boost in ego by doing it?Quote:
The onus of proof is on the one making the positive claim
Mario92 Leprechauns probably do exist. Why would I want to prove something to someone else. It's up to each one of us to find the truth no-one can force it into you.
How does the existence of an afterlife contradict evolution
A smart person with faith would not abuse their faith. If I concentrated on the dumb person who is atheist they would also abuse it.
Truth. Truth is the ultimate quest of man. It's in our friggin' name, for Christ's sake! Homo Sapiens, "The Wise Human." Sure, you could stick to your beliefs and life a life of relative comfort, but if you are wrong (and there is a strong probability that you are), then you have only aided in the spread of ignorance. Question; it is the only way to higher knowledge.Quote:
Originally Posted by davej
Please tell me you're joking...because if you aren't, then there really is no use even attempting to argue with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Praise
Who said it does? You wanted me to show the evidence and sources for it, and I happily obliged. What's wrong with that?Quote:
How does the existence of an afterlife contradict evolution
Faith: Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief, trust.Quote:
A smart person with faith would not abuse their faith. If I concentrated on the dumb person who is atheist they would also abuse it.
Christianity - The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
Yes, I see no possible way a person who does not need logical proof or evidence to believe in something would have a closed mind or be of hindrance to the quest for higher knowledge.
By contrast...
Atheist: One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods.
An atheist does not have the convenience of trusting everything to the hands of God, and therefore, is far more likely to search for the truth behind an event or phenomenon, rather than taking it at face value. Again consider the video; specifically, the bit with the ghost and the lamp shade. The one with faith immediately leaped to the conclusion of the supernatural, while simultaneously closing his mind to any alternate possibility for the moving lamp shade.
Evolution is both a fact and a theory. You can have faith without Christianity. Faith does not have to hinder the search for truth when you are balanced. Atheists don't have faith in a god. So they cannot experience the benifits of faith in something supernatural. An atheist can make wrong conclusions just as someone who has faith in a god can make wrong conclusions.
Finally, a common thread!Quote:
Originally Posted by Praise
Never said you couldn't.Quote:
You can have faith without Christianity.
But so many people are not.Quote:
Faith does not have to hinder the search for truth when you are balanced.
You wanna explain that a bit more?Quote:
Atheists don't have faith in a god. So they cannot experience the benifits of faith in something supernatural.
Yes, but the nonreligious are more likely to keep questioning and keep searching for ultimate truth.Quote:
An atheist can make wrong conclusions just as someone who has faith in a god can make wrong conclusions.
So basically you are saying that those who believe in some sort of religion is ignorant and stupid? just because one believes in A God or gods does not mean that they can't learn and soak up all the information they can. I know many people who are brillant and are extremely religious. being religious does not stop you from understanding the THEORY of evolution or the big bang THEORY or anything else you may learn in school.Quote:
Truth. Truth is the ultimate quest of man. It's in our friggin' name, for Christ's sake! Homo Sapiens, "The Wise Human." Sure, you could stick to your beliefs and life a life of relative comfort, but if you are wrong (and there is a strong probability that you are), then you have only aided in the spread of ignorance. Question; it is the only way to higher knowledge
So lets just say there is no God and when I die, nothing happens. What have I lost, nothing at all. I lived as a Christian and I enjoyed being a Christian. It didn't do any harm to me so I really lost nothing. Now if you die and CHristianity was real, well then you my friend are screwed.
Who the hell said that? I'm saying to keep an open mind. Believe whatever the hell you want to, but keep in mind that you could be very wrong, as could I, and neither of us should stop questioning.Quote:
Originally Posted by davej
1. Derp. 2. How many times must it be said? A theory in the scientific community is as good as fact. Remember the whole THEORY of gravity? Or would you assume that gravity is pure speculation, and the only thing that keeps us flying into space is the hand of an almighty being?Quote:
just because one believes in A God or gods does not mean that they can't learn and soak up all the information they can. I know many people who are brillant and are extremely religious. being religious does not stop you from understanding the THEORY of evolution or the big bang THEORY or anything else you may learn in school.
I see...so you go to such great lengths to cover your own butt. Interesting. I will gladly accept any punishment, as any god that puts faith before logic and reasoning is not worth worshiping.Quote:
So lets just say there is no God and when I die, nothing happens. What have I lost, nothing at all. I lived as a Christian and I enjoyed being a Christian. It didn't do any harm to me so I really lost nothing. Now if you die and CHristianity was real, well then you my friend are screwed.
EDIT: And by extension of the "what if" scenario, what if you are wrong, and the correct religion is buddhism, but it still involves eternal damnation? What if unicorns are really running the show, and anyone who does not believe is gored to oblivion in the afterlife? It is ridiculous to assume something without strong evidence or proof.
Mario the benifits of faith in something supernatural.
1) Through Prayer, you can have a positive effect on your life
2) Believing in an all loving god brings you endurance through difficult times.
3) Imaging the god you look up to creates character in yourself that is similar and so develops the god character in the individual which then contributes to society.
4)faith in something holy can heal others who do not have the faith that they might need to succeed. So they act as a supporting agent in the life of someone else.
The nonreligious may not have the capacity of devotion that the religious acquire as they work on their faith. What motivates the non religious to look for answers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praise
Some may look to prayer, but it is not the sole means by which someone may achieve a positive effect on their life. It is only one way of literally hundreds.Quote:
1) Through Prayer, you can have a positive effect on your life
Eh...again, this is a generalization. There are plenty of other ways to find comfort and reduce pain.Quote:
2) Believing in an all loving god brings you endurance through difficult times.
This can be true, but not always. Actually, in my experience, the religious tend to be some of the biggest hypocrites in society. This is a generalization, so please do not take offense, but among certain religious sects, it seems that many are quick to condone others, yet turn right around and commit the same or similar "sins." Think Catholicism, here. You confess your sins, and everything is just fine...Quote:
3) Imaging the god you look up to creates character in yourself that is similar and so develops the god character in the individual which then contributes to society.
Besides that, it has been shown time and again that atheists have just as strong, if not stronger, a moral code than theists. The number of atheists in jail by proportion is also remarkably small. http://www.holysmoke.org/icr-pri.htm
Surprising, since an estimated 16% of the American population is nonreligious.Quote:
Atheist.....................0.209%
You may need to explain this one as well. If this is one of those "power of prayer" things, then we have reached an impasse. If you mean that the religious are more likely to show sympathy and help others through their difficult times, I'm going to need some statistics that shows a direct causation between religion and sympathy/empathy.Quote:
4)faith in something holy can heal others who do not have the faith that they might need to succeed. So they act as a supporting agent in the life of someone else.
Same question can be asked of the religious. A desire to understand would be my answer. It is traditionally within human nature to question and question until a desirable answer is reached. Some reach this answer through religion, but others are not content until a logical and rational explanation devoid of the requirement of faith is reached.Quote:
The nonreligious may not have the capacity of devotion that the religious acquire as they work on their faith. What motivates the non religious to look for answers?
I'm not religious in the slightest but I do believe in an afterlife, not a heaven or hell but kind of a spirit world.
I know that this can't be proved or disproved either way, but I do believe in the supernatural, as I've been to clairvoyants telling me precise things that they couldnt've known without supernatural help, as well as people I trust telling me they've seen spirits. With these experiences, to me it seems very likely that theres an afterlife/spirit world.
Can't know for sure though ;)
Guess again:http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80...ir-own-images/Quote:
Originally Posted by Praise
erhaps unsurprisingly, people tend to project their own opinions onto God, according to a new study (in press) in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. But, the researchers say, they also found that when people tweak their own opinions, they tend to also change their idea of God’s beliefs in order to keep the two in line.
So the character they are creating in themselves is just themselves.. not god.
Since this is a lucid dreaming forum, I figured that I'd pose this: have you ever considered that the afterlife may be a dream? I'm not saying that I believe this, but it certainly is interesting to consider.
Dreams, as I understand them, are a manifestation of one's subconscious. Dreams often project inner feelings and emotions present in waking life. Things you've done in the past could "come back to haunt you," so to speak.
This would also be compatible with both Christianity and atheism, as, biologically, God is not required for such a phenomenon to occur but certainly could exist were this the case.
The Christian view that, essentially, moral people have infinite happiness in the afterlife and immoral people have infinite suffering in the afterlife would hold up were this to be the case: any guilt from life would be manifested by the subconscious into some sort of nightmare. Without guilt, one could presume that it would be a rather pleasant dream.
Dreams happen when the mind disconnects from the body, so perhaps this hypothesis isn't too far off. Most likely this is not the case and I doubt that anyone actually believes that the afterlife is a dream, but it certainly creates some interesting discussion.
However it isn't compatible with reality.Quote:
This would also be compatible with both Christianity and atheism, as, biologically, God is not required for such a phenomenon to occur but certainly could exist were this the case.
No god is required for dreams, but a complicated organ sustained via complex chemical reactions is required. You can't have dreams without the brain, and you can't have the brain without physical matter. You can't have dreams when you're dead because the biological processes responsible have halted, and the pathways in the brain quickly start breaking down.
Dreams happen when the brain starts ignoring the sensory input from the outside world and instead starts generating it's own internal sensations based upon our experiences, filling in gaps, and just plain inventing stuff.Quote:
Dreams happen when the mind disconnects from the body
"Disconnect" implies the mind seperating from the body, whereas in actuality the mind simply ignores the body (mostly).
Cold reading and extreme selection bias. The techniques are very well documented, as is the psychology behind it.Quote:
as I've been to clairvoyants telling me precise things that they couldnt've known without supernatural help
As the same question was asked of a professor working with the CERN particle accelerator, I will tell you what his answer, and many others' answers were.Quote:
Originally Posted by Praise
"We are driven to find the answers, because the answers are there to be found"
Almost every answer reflected this one. Religious people are no more and no less driven to find answers. And besides, what have they to look for? Because science just comes up with these cacophony theories of 'evolution' and 'carbon dating' when the bible tells a good Christian that neither of those can possibly be right. So My question to you is what answers are you talking about, because many very plausible scientific theories get shot down based solely on the fact that the bible says different.
Science and religion are symbiotic. Religion tries to explain what science cannot. But when it takes its own claims and spouts them off as scientific fact, they are very far out of line.
Thanks for the reply.Quote:
Originally Posted by Photolysis
You make a very solid argument - there is no evidence to suggest that the mind can function without the brain, but there is still much left that science has yet to discover.
Personally, I don't believe that the afterlife is a dream, but I figured I'd throw it out there and see the responses. This is a dreaming message board, after all, so I thought that perhaps people here have a different perspective on things.
Thank you, GMoney7. You made a statement, you were proven wrong, and you accepted it and learned from it. For this you have earned my respect. I think the overall theme of this thread is represented here, in that this is not only a debate over the existence of an afterlife, but also of how willing people are to learn and admit their mistakes. Good job! :D
:goodjob2:
Thanks, Conkt!Quote:
Originally Posted by Conkt
How can we learn if we don't admit that we're wrong, when need be? I like to keep an open mind and am willing to change my argument if enough solid evidence is presented for the other side.
Many problems could be solved if people would just listen and understand one another...
Not true.Quote:
faith holding society back in general
Actually, having faith doesn't necessarily mean you believe in a God. Truth be told, you shouldn't place faith in any God. You place faith in YOURSELF. Because you are a part of source. This is what LOA and the secret is about, when you really, truly, DEEP-DOWN place faith in yourself, the universe makes things work for you. This has to be experienced , there is no scientific experiment to prove this. The experience will be your proof.
The truth behind ALL religion is that we ARE god. http://www.iawwai.com/TruthBehindReligion.htm
As for the original post, I do believe in afterlife. You could call me a scientific pantheist that believes in an afterlife. There's too much evidence that points to this. I won't post any evidence, it's really not worth my time. It's your job to get proof if you really want it. Why would I try and prove something to you, that you won't believe?. Counter-productive isn't it?Research it yourself.
But, this thread isn't about evidence anyway.
Back to the OP, I believe that lucid dreams are the afterlife. Your beliefs will shape what you experience. That's why practicing lucidity during waking life is important. If you deep-down believe in Buddha or Jesus or The flying spaghetti monster, or a black void that is what will manifest for you. Why go that route when you can do anything that you want?
I believe above waking life, there are dreams which are essentially an infinite pool of thoughts. A dream-scape. Then above that is the universal consciousness. Completely at one with everything and there are no thoughts at all. Just complete awareness.
Someone said there can't be dreams without a brain..well there are a lot of reported experiences where people have been brain dead ( no brain activity ) for over 30 minutes and have still had sensory perception. But it cannot be proven because it's subjective. So objectively, a scientist only sees brain activity or he doesn't. But again, it's back to belief. Skeptics won't believe that, no matter how much scientific evidence is posted. Fear.
Do you know what would happen if the 6 o'clock news came on and the top story was that God was proven, or that there is an afterlife. I wouldn't even want to be there to see the chaos ensue. This stuff isn't meant to be proven.
As far as humans being small insignificant creatures on a microscopic universe. People need to stop the acting and start being their true-self. Then you'll see the magic happen. You have no idea the potential you really have. But this is an inner-journey and you must take the initiative and do it yourself. No one can convince you, no one can provide you with proof. It's up to you to experience/believe all of this. You have to start by working on yourself. Bring out that inner-peace, that childhood happiness. It's sad as hell looking at everyone being a smiling depressive.
Skeptics have it backwards, we aren't afraid of death..that's the whole point. You are afraid of LIFE.
You say you believe that we're just erased from existence when we die. But people show their true identity during their last moments of life. And most people are full of fear.
DO NOT wait until your last moments of life to be your true self. Be your true self, now, and every day. Bring out that inner-child, the real you, while at the same time use the adult logical mind. Shit seriously starts to happen.
Damn, I think I went off on a rant.
Yeah, I'm lazy. That's pretty much all I can read when I'm wide awake. For some reason I can read more when I'm tired. But anyways, would this be anything like 'Manifestation'? Also, what is LOA, I'm not familiar with the abbreviation.Quote:
Originally Posted by HaRd_WiReD
Go away.Quote:
There's too much evidence that points to this. I won't post any evidence, it's really not worth my time.
Ghosts, one of the finest pieces of evidence of afterlife, and NDE's. Ghost stories are creepy because they're so real.
Your evidence of the existence of ghosts is that ghost stories are creepy.Quote:
Originally Posted by hypnocella
I see.
Isn't it funny how so many people claim to have seen ghosts, yet while >90% of the population have camera phones, there are NO acceptable video recordings of ghosts? It's a bit like UFO stories from old farmers.
I found this to be an interesting read.
I only read very little in here, but I thought it might be appreciated.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/29/ma...1&ref=magazine
Please tell me you're kidding. :shakehead2:Quote:
Originally Posted by hypnocella
aww that i make you mad...LOL...damn Xei you so sensitive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xei
Psychics solving impossible crimes by communicating with the victim's spirit. I mean what do you call that exactly, evidence maybe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Carôusoul
Ah, trolling at its finest. Go away, failed troll.Quote:
Originally Posted by HaRd_WiReD
Quote:
Originally Posted by hypnocella
So I go from close-minded to too open-minded in about a day, okay just checking, need to backtrack. If you had an experience like that you might think differently about afterlife. But you don't always have to 1st hand experience something to know it, what you need is a series of very similar but distinct experiences shared by a reasonable number of people, with some of them not believing it before but becoming themselves advocates of that phenomena. I just don't mean ball lightening, but real experiences, interactions with that yield remarkable proof, with the unknown.
...of course, those experiences being purely subjective and not taking place under reasonable experimental conditions. I'm not saying that there is no way in hell that the afterlife exists, but I remain quite skeptical. Why should humans, a tiny speck in the universe, have a paradise engineered for us and waiting for us when we die, which as far as we know consists of only chemical processes shutting down? It seems rather ridiculous to me.
I believe that we all become what we have lkabeled as "ghosts".
If you're talking about psi, than that is not true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Conkt
It's from xkcd -_-Quote:
Originally Posted by dajo
Well it fit anyway.
And Conkt wanted to make a point, didn't he?
I actually don't think he did....Quote:
Originally Posted by dajo
Hehe, oh well. Maybe I wanted to make one ;)
Edit:
Why does the 'afterlife' has to be something resembling a paradise? Could be quite mundane actually.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario92
Or something entirely else.. ?
LOA is the law of attraction. What you feel good about and what you focus on you attract to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xedan
Science proves that nothing is truly solid. In truth, everything is simply energy that vibrates, everything. If you meditate, you can actually make parts of your body vibrate faster. This is how Reiki energy-healing works. Positive emotions cause things to vibrate faster.
The human body has an invisible electromagnetic field around it.
http://www.lawyertopeacemaker.com/images/heartfield.gif
We affect each other's EM-field through emotions. Yes, we in control each other's feelings. You may walked into a house full of depressed people and feel that bad vibe. Or you may get around a fun person and just plain feel better, and happy and have more energy.
You may not notice this, but you definitely are aware of this on weed. I'm not condoning this, I just wanted to note this.
For example, if you compose music like me, and you go into your home-studio, pumped up, feeling good, positive mind set, that energy reaches your keyboard your speakers, your microphone or whatever. You are better, creativity flows through you more easily, what you come out with is going to be sounding good. This also gives you more energy.
If you are depressed, and full of negative feelings/emotions, you will have LESS energy. You'll stress. And you might not come up with a good composition.
When you change your personal electromagnetic field from negative/depressed to happy/positive, you WILL influence others. It STILL amazes me that this is actually true. This is why I quote ghandi on saying be the change you want to see in the world. Because all of us really are in a big unified electromagnetic field effecting each other with emotions.
When you change your EM-field with positivity/laughter/happiness, you automatically change other's EM field. Then they end up changing someone else's EM-field, and so on and so on.
For the Law of attraction, you simply feel good about and visualize what you want like you already have it, and the universe WILL make it work for you. You will get inspiration, motivation...and there will be "coincidences" that will be beneficial to your aspiration.
But don't just listen to me on this, do it yourself, experience will be your own proof of this.
The answer is simple though...be HAPPY. And not the fake happy, the real genuine inner-you happy. It will liberate you and make your life better ways you didn't think were possible
I find it funny that they say I'M trolling, yet they are skeptics that are constantly in a religion/spirituality sub-forum trying to debunk all of it and get tlol. Someone's looking for answers are they?
If the afterlife is mundane, I will kill my afterlife self.Quote:
Originally Posted by dajo
Quote:
I find it funny that they say I'M trolling, yet they are skeptics that are constantly in a religion/spirituality sub-forum trying to debunk all of it lol. Someone's looking for answers are they?
THAT is trolling...Quote:
aww that i make you mad...LOL...damn Xei you so sensitive.
The afterlife and Psi are completely different things.
Science has proven that you are your brain. That is to say, by altering the brain you effectively become a different person. By destroying the brain, you are no more. In death, the brain is destroyed, or in Walt's case, made inactive and unusable.
PSI is still within the realm of possibility. It has not been scientifically proven, but there are reports of it such as the previously posted Youtube video. It should be noted that there is evidence that Whales have ESP, and can communicate telepathically.
My XKCD comic was a bit of a joke, but it was also there to punctuate Mario's video on how there have never been any result-yeilding instances of PSI in a scientifically controlled environment.
Edit: HaRd_WiReD, the Law of Attraction likewise has no scientific backing, and is a member of the New Age Club.
umm, actually psi has been proven in a laboratory environment. Or at least one kind of psi, ESP.
Hardwired, you need to join reecejones87's mass meditation sessions. Your most recent post here is pretty much what the whole thing is about. Raising your vibrational pattern to project confidence and love throughout the world.
This is the bit where you're supposed to give some kind of evidence for your claims.
Neuroscience does point to us being our brain. I'm just not very sure thatQuote:
Originally Posted by Conkt
this is the end of it. For example entanglement shows us that there can be
direct connections between particles that have no obvious connection.
Anyway - psi and the afterlife are not neccessarily unrelated, imo.
Because the idea of conscious activity outside of the brain would point
to 'us' not being only limited to the brain and therefore opening up
entire new possibilities of 'us' existing outside of the brain or our body.
You may of course also argue that even if psi does turn out to be true
that this is no evidence at all for there being an afterlife, but I do think
it would just open up a new perspective, or basis for argument, for us
existing outside of our brain and therefore maybe transcending after death.
What do I think? I really don't know.
You can take this as you want to but...
I believe we are all energy, and energy cannot be created or destroyed.
The rest is all theories and things we tell ourselves to make ourselves feel better about death.
*Clarification*
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesus of Suburbia
Also something a clairvoyant said to me once. I was relating to her about how I was excited because I might have seen an orb on the camera at work. But I went on to say that my building doesn't feel haunted. She kind of laughed and said, "Spirits don't just go off to a magical place when they die, Star. They are around us all the time."
I repeat, ESP has been proven. But this doesn't entail the Afterlife existing because it could just as easily be a function of the mind. Ever moved out of the way just in time so that something from behind you didn't hit you? Maybe that reflex is like ESP. Maybe ESP is a survival instinct that, under intense concentration, can be consciously controlled.Quote:
Originally Posted by dajo
I don't know if I really made my point clear in this post, but put simply, the brain would be the most likely source of psi, not the "soul".
Whatever a soul is supposed to be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xedan
But I know of the research done on ESP and Remote Viewing and I
know it is supposed to be valid (I posted that video up there, also).
But you are making a good point!
Oh trust me, it's valid. I'll go look for that thing Nina posted a while back.Quote:
Originally Posted by dajo
EDIT:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquanina
And eternalstar01, saying we are all just energy is just new-age BS. I'm sorry, but it's fluff. It doesn't explain anything. It doesn't mean anything. You might as well say the universe originated from a wollywinkle. Energy is just the manipulation of matter (which is why I've always thought that potential should not be called a type of energy)
@Xedan
Hehe, yeah, I have just recently read that book.
There still is room for some healthy scepticism, though. But you're
barking up the wrong tree there, I am very open towards it. But as
you stated that it would be likely that this process is due to the functions
of the brain, it probably derails this thread.
I am just generally very careful what I call true beyond any doubt,
especially when I have not experienced these phenomena myself
beyond any doubt. But that's all right. I'm also generally open towards
a lot of things, without having to decide if I absoluetly believe it or not.
What do you think about psychics talking to dead victims and solving cold cases? I just saw that last night in Bio of all channels.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xedan
If you looked at things my way, you might feel like me about it. You would see other people's collective experiences as meaningful, and make a conclusion, like betting on a good poker hand that's really what making a conclusion is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario92
Actually the Ganzfield experiment was very dodgy.
Magicians once convinced a laboratory that psi existed. Then afterwards they revealed it was all just bull to show that such experiments can be easily broken.
Xedan, you really are wasting your time trying to convince them that this is real. No matter what kind of evidence you provide ( legit or not ) their not going to believe it, attack the source, or find another way to tear it down ( like Aquanina's post which IS valid. )
They WANT to believe it..that's why they constantly come to religion/spirituality sub-forum. They WANT to believe that chaos/sigil magic , law of attraction works and that you can get tons of money and girls without going to a 4-year college, reading a whole bunch of bullshit that you don't want to learn. But they just can't process it.
Your best best is to just ignore them..because arguing with skeptics is like getting on a slow boat going nowhere fast. It's really not worth the effort. I mean seriously, look how mad they get when you bring this sort of stuff up and don't provide evidence. Teach those that want to learn and move on.
Have you ever seen the show "Psych"? That's my only answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by hypnocella
Also, people aren't seeing things the way you do because you're making bad cases for yourself.
Links or gtfoQuote:
Originally Posted by Xei
http://www.skepdic.com/ganzfeld.html
The article linked to at the end is quite good too.
I believe the magician thing was done by Randi. Edit: it was called Project Alpha, there's plenty on Google.
can't someone give a real answer please.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xedan
...or, if you wanted to seem like you had any sort of education at all, you would observe the collective experiences and, instead of jumping to conclusions, would design experiments, form alternate hypothesis, speculate on what may cause this phenomena. The idiotic thing to do would be to say, "well, these people all have similar experiences, sooo....THIS MUST BE PROOF OF AN AFTERLIFE!!!" Lolwut? No. Who's to say that NDE's and OBE's aren't caused by hormones being released by the dying body and oxygen deprivation? There are too damn many variables to reach a confident conclusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by hypnocella
Yes, I'd like to believe in magic. The world would be so much nicer. But it isn't. Deluding yourself into believing a magic space-god has a plan for you is no better than being a druggy.Quote:
Originally Posted by HaRd_WiReD
A belief in psi is not a belief in a magick space-god's will. In fact, a belief in psi is heavily rooted in science. It is the belief that the brain can do much more than commonly believed. Magick is a very medieval term and is just psi before it was explained in better terms.
Semi-unrelated question: I like fire. How do I go about making PSI fire? Honest question.
I'll link you up. Though I've never been successful. It may seem strange, but the first step is to put out flames. Then learn to light their embers, then light random things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario92
Cool. Much obliged. If this works, I will owe you an eternity of gratitude...and bonfires on-demand. :biggrin:
This is the best I could find. A really good site I used to go to got shut down or something, so I lost my main tut source.
This site uses a really annoying italics+underline+color format so I'll just post it here:
Method # 1: Dancing Flame
Well you may or may not want to but eat and do some meditation in front of a candle first then blow out the candle and start now get in a relaxed or ok position that you are very well comfortable in and grab a match put it on something that you don't want to get burned perhaps a metal bowl outside on the concrete i don't know don't start a fire again it isn't my fault now light the match on fire and focus on it and the flame of it create a string or a tunnel or a hople between you and the flame be one with the flame visualize it going out.You must be completely focused on the flame for this to work with enough power and thinking clearly you can make the flame go out.Now once you have made the flame go out and you do it alot of times or if you think you're ready you can try to relight it from when you made it go out so focus on the flame relighting after a couple of days even weeks of this you will start to see the ember start to turn back red again and once you will it hard enough and visualize it being a flame again it will relight.Nice going your moving well if you have done it.
Method # 2:Lighting a Candle:
After getting proper rest and have eaten and arn't hungry get relaxed and get a candle visualize the wick of the candle being made up of hundreds of thousands of spheres and dots or cubes as you visualize more and more of them they swirl faster and faster feel them becoming hot very hot until they glow like suns that are little.When they are glowing real bright then bring part of your focus back to the wick as a whole of it while still seeing and feelin g the molecules of excitment see the wick start to glow then visualize it burning into a flame and with enough power it will.Now you need to produce a psi ball around the wick if you think your a natural or at least produce it for a while until you get it.If you want to change the shape or mind of a flame then just will it to and visualize and concentrate.
upon further reading of this I notice a stunning lack of punctuation. I'll definitely look for a better tut.
Here's another of my old useful sites, though it's pretty satanic if you venture away from the linked page. http://www.666blacksun.com/Pyrokinesis.html
Cool, thanks, mate. I can see some real-world applications for this if you get really great...the perfect arson? :-? It'd be impressive as hell to conjure fireballs from thin air, you have to admit. :wink:
And another http://psi.wikia.com/wiki/Pyrokinesis
Yeah, that would be sick, but it would take a lifetime of training to be able to do that without much preparation in advance, like very deep heat meditation and making a psiball.
Wow wow wow, hold on. Mario, stop toying with Xedan! ;)
Xedan, is there any scientific backing to your pyrokenesis? Haven't you ever noticed how everyone says "this will work, I just haven't gotten it yet"
Proof or GTFO.
Hahahah, yeah, you got me...I'm being a bit too eager here. Consider this more of...a personally-conducted experiment. ;) I'm approaching this skeptically, but open-mindedly. If I achieve any results, you can be assured, my first stop will be at the College laboratory.Quote:
Originally Posted by Conkt
...the wiki tut has me questioning some of its credentials, especially since it brings up ki balls and blasting huge pillars of flame...sounds sort of like it was written by a DBZ fanatic. :lol:
I don't have proof because I don't know anyone who can do it and any other source is via the internet. And neither of those sources would prove anything to you, anyhow. I can't prove it to you, but that doesn't mean it can't exist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Conkt
Yeah, a lot of sites seem to be messing around like that. But to clear things up, I don't know if it was in DBZ or not, but ki is basically the energy psi supposedly comes from, the energy that flows through the chakras.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario92
I think I hear a ghost!
"Ooooooooopen miiiiiiiiiiiiiiiind" "Braaaaaaaiiiins faaaaaalllllliiiiiing oooooouuuuut!"
OMFG Xedan, you were right. I just concentrated my Ki and my study sheets caught fire! There's something burned into it...
Gul- guller- gulliber... gullible! Haha, I used my Ki to spell gullible! I'm sorry I doubted you!
Seriously, don't peg me as a case of "hear it=believe it". I came to the personal conclusion that it exists. I did approach it skeptically. And I still believe in it. But I researched it for a month or two, so it would be extremely difficult to show you all the sources I came by.Quote:
Originally Posted by Conkt
Bwahahah! Conkt, this is why you're on my buddy list. :D I'm still forging ahead as planned, though. ._.
Now that's just trolling. See my above post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Conkt
You gotta admit, though, it was funny.
One could say that the spreading of false information is trolling, Xedan.
Eh, sort of. It mostly annoying when it's aimed at you though. Such is the purpose of sarcasm, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario92
One could say that, but it hasn't been proven false. And it has WAY more accounts to back it up than the spaghetti monster example you were going to use if I hadn't added this last sentence to the post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Conkt
Well, it's my bed time. Good luck on your quest, Mario :)
Edit: Pastafarianism has a lot of backing. In fact, there are more Pastafarians than Jews. Look up "Intelligent falling", it makes ore sense than gravity does.
Thanks, Conkt. Egg is going to be on someone's face at the end of it, and I have a feeling it will be mine.
Damn, this thread has really derailed. And for once, it hasn't fallen apart into either creationism vs. evolution, or atheism vs. Xtianity...an R/S first! :D
I'm so happy to have made the waves!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario92
Yeah, you combo-breaking bastard. :wink:
But it means I have no reason to believe it exists.Quote:
I can't prove it to you, but that doesn't mean it can't exist.
ffs...
Don't let it get you down brahQuote:
Originally Posted by Xei
And they all lived happily ever after, with the exception of Mario who developed pyrokenesis and was seized my the government.
I told you to stay away from those fire flowers.
It would be a first in the entire history of the world. :>
derrrpppQuote:
Originally Posted by Xedan
I was going to answer this question but then I realized I have no idea what the fuck an 'afterlife' really is.
That's why it's a silly question. In most people's minds they just think of it as "not really" dying when you die. So in fact keeping living. Basically people seeing death, getting cold feet and trying to find a way for death not to be death. Which is absurd by definition.Quote:
Originally Posted by CanceledCzech
Indeed it is. I admit that question was half-serious. I understand what was meant with 'afterlife' (being, what you just said), and to which I'd say 'No' only because if who "I" am can be completely altered by one traumatic blow to the cranium, then it likely suggests that everything that is me exists because of some wrinkles on a 3 pound mass of fat resting in my skull. And once that starts to decay, you can rest assured that this Czech will be canceled (I know, I know, I couldn't resist)Quote:
Originally Posted by Carôusoul
Of course, I don't even know what it means to be, let alone what it means to be human or even what it means to be Me.
As I said in another thread, I'm still kind of grappling with, "Holy fucking shit I and everything around me is condensed fucking light."
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanceledCzech
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D :D:D:D
Don't begin to slide down the road of considering "you" as a thing. Like a thing in your mind or whatever. The only reason we have the idea of there being a "you" in the same way there might be a table somewhere, as a thing that exists in the world, is because our language uses words like "you" in the same way as it uses "table" or "duck". It's confusing.Quote:
Originally Posted by CanceledCzech
I think as far as we CAN put a definition on these things, "you" are your interactions with the world. Don't be taken in by people saying things like "you carry on" or "if you were in another body". It's a confusion of how we use language.
We only try to define "you" because we have the word, and find it fits oddly into certain sentences [see: "you carry on after death"]. In such a sentence it seems to make grammatical sense, and so we try to get our heads around this when in fact it is a misuese of language. We don't stop to think the word may simply be a weird phenomena in language which doesn't apply to something in the same way other words do. Maybe you is a verb, not a noun, as people usually take it. Either way, don't come to strong conclusions.
We just use it like a noun, and I feel that is where an awful lot of confusions such as ideas of souls come from.
I don't think you could have said this any better, especially considering your audience. While I'm not saying I disagree, I have to say I don't think I agree 100%. Regardless, this is a really good way to look at it, and I will get a lot of use out of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Carôusoul
Absolutely. I wasn't telling you what to think there, or even putting forth an argument, hell I don't 100% agree with what I said, just helping you shop around ideas. Opening things up.Quote:
Originally Posted by CanceledCzech
I most certainly DO NOT believe in a "After-Life" because i don't believe "Life" ends. I will most certainly return to the earth and will "Live" on threw any plants or creatures who find me most delightfully tasty. I believe the Consciousness is a mystery and you will only ever know when that time of returning comes for you, until then to claim you know is sheer foolish childs play, a way of keeping the fear of death at bay. NO ONE KNOWS so no one should be able to form any idea other than saying "I'm not sure". I stated my opinion because i do not have fear of death, to me death is an absolute must, how undeserving a human is of eternity. You believe the things you do in 100 hundred years warrant you a seat as audience to the rest of eternity? Get over your ego if so. You're living on borrowed time and borrowed energy, and you would be a thief of life itself if you did not return what is not rightfully yours. Life is a gift, it was never yours, it was gained and is to be given again, and to halt the said cycle is to show just how ungrateful you truly are of the gift to the rest of the universe and all life in it.
Through, not "threw".Quote:
Originally Posted by MementoMori
Also, that's not really "you" is it? See the posts above between CC and me.
yeah i typed quick and didn't give it a thorough read over, sorry, i'll read through my posts from now on lol.
When i say you i mean all the things you do and all your thoughts.
So basically "you, i, & me" to me is the accumulation of my experiences, not this body or the brain.
Edit: also, only a procrastinating being looks to their future with thoughts of an afterlife. Life is what you do now, what you make of the time given, not how you spend it thinking of what comes next. So many waste their lives with thoughts of an after-life...
Life is something so grand and truly amazing, that to say there is something greater such as an After-Life is to be ignorant of it's gift and to truly be blind of it's miracles. Have any of you actually set and staired at a blade of grass and thought of just how amazing it is that you were given the chance to lay on the ground and look at something so beautiful. Maybe it comes with the awakening but it truly is mind blowing when you see what life really is. It's a rare gift, and you are a rare recipient of the gift. The body you're experiencing it through is not you, it's a filter for the world. You are the experience, you are what you do, and when you die all other things do not, so life does not end, simply a source of change has ended and another will take it's place...
Well that kind of flies in the face of saying "you" will live on in animals who eat you.Quote:
Originally Posted by MementoMori
Because they're eating your body and brain, not "all the things you do and your thoughts"
Well I kind of look at it like this: When your brain stops working, you die. But I never had a brain before I was born, just like I won't have a brain after I die. So really, being dead and being unborn ought to feel a lot alike. What did I feel or remember before I was born? For the billions and billions of years before I was born? Well, Fuck all.
Something woke up from a dreamless sleep, and I was born; and someday I shall return.
No. I think that we're no different from any other animals, except that we happened to think somewhere along the line that there's a higher power. Just my two cents.
This has already been said on DV, and I agree completely both then and now.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpecialInterests
Then you're saying you don't believe in an afterlife?Quote:
Originally Posted by Xedan
Edit: Demara, we are different from other animals in that we have consciousness. Most other animals can't think, and are, in essence, organic computers.
A few related factoids...
- Origin of the word SOUL
The word for SOUL was originally used in ancient Greece, and what they meant by it was the thinking part... ie the mind. later the church claimed that there's another part, one whose existence can't be proved, that is actually what "goes on". Wish I remembered where I read this or at least more details. But this suggest that from the very beginning the church appropriated ideas and twisted them to suit their needs.
- The concept of "self" or identity
This was found in one of the Sagan books I read recently... but not sure which one. There's a little area of the brain responsible for creating the sense of being a unique individual, or of having a unique identity. In people where this area has been damaged there's no sense of being anybody in particular... these people think of themselves as simply existing in a rather unconscious state, undifferentiated. It's believed that this area of the brain exists only (or mostly) in the "higher animals" and than most animals don't think of themselves as individuals at all, but rather as almost automatons, like ants. I like to think that those of us who do have the 'sense of individuality' are lucid in waking existence because of it, while I think of lower animals as living in a rather 'regular dreaming' state... unaware in the fullest sense of the term. Probably not a very good analogy though, I haven't really thought it through.
- Possibility of living again or living on after death
Ok here Im going into pure personal conjecture... these thoughts do not represent my "beliefs", only ideas that I like to play around with. I'm an atheist (sometimes I call myself an agnostic) and while I agree with about 99% of what Mario says on these hallowed fora, I like to stay pretty open-minded about those possibilities that science hasn't yet uncovered.
Spoiler for My weird theories about reincarnation and the collective unconscious...:
This was something I posted on the board recently and just copy/pasted in here. Again, not an actual BELIEF of mine, but something I like to think about.
Essentially it's about the idea that after your body dies YOU might live again through another body... but of course absolutely without any memories or thoughts continuing from your "past life".
I don't think I'm phrasing this very well at all... I'm not really saying you "go on" after you die, but that you rise again as somebody completely different... maybe an animal... a consciousness (and the only way a consciousness can exist is through a living host body, right... which is a life support system for a brain, which supports a consciousness). The nature of consciousness itself is so shrouded in mystery.... and while I absolutely agree that your own sense of identity can't pass to another body after this one dies, what about the theoretical possibility that a whole new sense of identity is developed and that it becomes YOU.
Ah crap... this is too hard to express!! :?
I'm working on refining this idea so I can express it better, and I suppose posting it here can help toward that. I think the idea Carousoul posted about "YOU" being basically a grammatical error when used in the expression of reincarnation can help a lot toward this.
HaRd WiReD said most of what I was going to say, so I won’t have to type as much, but I’d like to say a few things that may go off topic.
In order to understand or believe the concept of the “afterlife”, you’d also have to ponder and understand reality itself, the two forms reality takes, and the importance of awareness. To most, reality is only a physical experience and can’t go beyond that, but in truth reality is made up of two universes: the ethereal and physical. And one can only experience either reality by themselves--not simultaneously. Proof of the ethereal is given to you when you sleep and dream; its existence can’t be refuted. It’s there and your consciousness experiences it when it can’t experience the physical, again more proof that an afterlife must exist.
I view “death” as the shutting down of one consciousness and the awakening of another, but unlike those who believe in multiverses, or similar, your consciousness is unique to you and can only experience two realities--physical and ethereal; however, it can reside in the many subdivisions of both. There may be other material universes similar to our own, but I find it to be highly unlikely, illogical, and meaningless, whereas in the ethereal it would be more likely as consciousness is more abstract, free, independent, and personal. I do, however, believe that there may be a physical “clone” of ourselves on other worlds within this universe, but to have separate, physical realities would be pointless since it is believed to be the “lowest” reality. Physical matter is also too restricted by the laws of physics, so it could never branch off or become an “island” like an ethereal reality could. What we see, and experience currently, is--and will always be--the one physical reality.
As for the guy who says you lose your personality if your brain gets damaged: that’s true in terms of the physical self, but as far as the self entirely, that can’t be proven because the ethereal self is a subjective experience and can’t be evaluated by anyone but the individual themselves. They also wouldn’t be able to provide evidence of this since their physical brain would be “damaged”, so what they experience outside the material world is usually forgotten by them after waking up. What you feel here is different (in most cases) than what you feel in the ethereal. Logic doesn’t exist in the ethereal; thus, the emotion experienced there is the purest of form and ultimately the true self of an individual. Without the physical brain to subject you to logic and reason, doubt and fear can’t dictate your personality and behavior. Also, you could argue that the emotion experienced in dreams are a product of the brain, but I’ve always viewed emotion as a stand-alone energy, manipulated by hormones and other stimuli. I would explain further, but it’ll be viewed as “arrogant”, so I won’t.
Then there’s awareness and why it makes an afterlife possible. It is, after all, the sole reason why life itself exists. Without awareness there is nothing, or a need for anything to exist… but we’ll skip that thought because that’s a whole other, and lengthy, discussion. Awareness’ role in life is simple: to allow experience. Once one is aware, they are always aware, though, the complexity of the awareness one achieves is determined by that being. Unlike some religions/spiritualists, though, my belief is that all organic life retains its physical form. For example: a human soul will always reincarnate into a human, or something similar. It could never reincarnate into a “lesser being” because the mind of a lesser being couldn’t hold the capabilities that a human soul has. However, I believe that a soul/energy can “upgrade” to a higher being, but I’m rambling now.
Now, the ones who seem to be atheist and against spirituality, I have a few questions. Why do you waste your time arguing against these things? As someone said earlier, if you desire evidence and refute it when given, why bother trying to understand? You’ll never understand because you simply choose not to and argue against it; that is the very definition of close-mindedness. A close-minded person will argue any chance they get, while an open-minded person will do anything to try to understand the material. Arguing only strengthens a stance, it very rarely changes it. Most spiritualists will understand your stance, me being one, considering I was once atheist. What “turned” me was all the evidence that I found for myself, what I experienced, and all the questions I asked, which took more than just a few hundred google searches, library trips, and an outer body experience. I’ve spent about elven years of my life studying this (almost half my life), so my beliefs aren’t something that came to me overnight. If you’re not willing to put that much time and effort into research, why bother? Especially in a subject like this, where it’s either you believe or you don’t.
Before I end this, though, I’d like for everyone to remember this: Death isn’t a state, it’s a transition.
EDIT: Darkmatters, I liked your post. A lot of what was said on it is similar to my own beliefs, except with a few differences. I still believe that we can have awareness after physical death because what would be the purpose of evolution and betterment? Absolutely none. Why do some people choose to believe such things and others don’t, or why do some comprehend them better than others? Some memory must be retained, as a connection is made with the belief(s); some people even feel emotional connections to past individuals.
Also, I’d consider you agnostic.
I just spent over an hour writing what I thought was a really awesome post as a reply to this, only to submit and have been logged out. Back on the browser was merely a tragic log in screen, which, upon logging in, presented to me this, this empty box.
So I won't write all that out again, for some time.
Rather, I'll just put one point here for the time being. So I didn't TOTALLY waste the past hour :[
Quote:
Originally Posted by Re-l Mayer
If our dreams are in some sense our tapping into this ethereal reality, which is a wholly non-physical existance, then why is it that our supposed experience of said reality is through physical means?
I'll try and make it a bit clearer. You say that we are experiencing the ethereal when we dream. [I think? If not, please correct me]. However let's think about how in fact we do experience the things in our dreams. When I dream of a naked indian boy speaking cryptically, in what sense could I be said to experience him? Well, through seeing him, and through hearing him. Seeing, is simply the word we use to mean the process carried out by the eyes. Now the eyes are physical things, and seeing is simply the mechanism of these particular physical things. Likewise, hearing is the word we apply to the process of the ears. Ears are physical things, and hearing is the mechanism these physical things undergo.
So why would it then be the case that our non physical selves in a non physical reality, hear and see. If we are in a non physical reality, how are physical processes, hearing and seeing, occuring?
I would imagine that if truly I were to experience an absolutely different and non physical ethereal reality, I would experience it through a way totally different to how I experience the physical world, surely.. Yet we cannot concieve of experience which does not occur through sensory, and by extension physical, means.
I take this same problem with alleged "Out of Body Experiences". People claim to see and hear their body from outside of it, or to see things like a number or whatever, which they couldn't possibly have known. Now like I said, "seeing" is merely the mechanism of eyes. So why would a travelling consciousness experience the world in the same way a body does? Why not experience the world in a profound totally different somehow "non physical" sensory perception?
Double thanks, carou!
And another thing about that, if it is the ethereal, then why is it so self centered and changing from person to person and night to night? If it was some other plane of existence, could we not expect at least the slightest bit of uniformity? And why is it that the ethereal must create DC versions of people you know when they appear in your dreams? Quite often you will dream of a person and, if you tell them about your dream, you can be sure their consciousness wasn't really there. But if everyone sleeps at roughly the same time (or at least everyone you know locally) why wouldn't you just meet them in this etheric plane?
...or it could be your subconscious, sleeping mind...and being that the mind is so incredibly complex, I wouldn't put it past our brains to come up with a decent quality dream-scape...Quote:
Originally Posted by Re-l Mayer
Proof of the ethereal is given to you when you sleep and dream; its existence can’t be refuted. It’s there and your consciousness experiences it when it can’t experience the physical, again more proof that an afterlife must exist.
I don't believe in the afterlife that is mostly accepted by religions I suppose... more of an overexagguration of every sensory apparatus in the mind all detached and free flowing until it dies out indefinitely.
So I guess I kind of don't believe in it, as much as I really really would like to.
I believe in one. ^.^
But ya'll already knew that.
There are no other hells that you have been forced to acknowledge or what you have created for yourself. I understand the curiosity, but patience is also a virtue. I think you'll see after you die. Or not if there is none, to that matter. I cannot stress this enough. You will most likely know after you are dead and gone. Seek the truth then.