Do you believe in God?

[Joel]

Yet the human mind cannot comprehend what being completely dead is like. In other words, I can't physically imagine me not being someway connected to the outside world (no one can actually). Sleeping is the closest most people can come to feeling of non-existent, however, whilst sleeping, you've only lost just one of your 5 senses.

I think this is the whole thing encompassing religion. People just can't come to grips with simply ceasing to exist. Religion provides a nice escape from that.

RE: Conscience, I don't think that a series of impulses based on either societal morality or logical morality (depending on what you go by), lives on after death. Consciences are all brain activity. Death=no more brain activity= no more conscience.

 

[Duke]

Yet the human mind cannot comprehend what being completely dead is like. In other words, I can't physically imagine me not being someway connected to the outside world (no one can actually).

Do not generalize what you feel to assume that all others must feel that. I have no problem whatsoever imagining what death is like - complete nothingness and no awareness of anything at all (since my awareness will be dead as well).

 

[niky]

It's easy to imagine. We've all experienced it. Non-dreaming sleep. No thought. No visual or auditory stimulation. One moment it's night, the next moment it's morning. Without us ever having noticed the difference.

And/or a conscience. Since we know a conscience exists (compared to the soul, which has not been completely understood as to what where talking about), we could ask whether it lives on after death. However, science cannot study a conscience. Once we can determine what a conscience really is, then we can determine whether it lives or dies after death by studying it. (somehow)

Surely you mean consciousness, and not Jiminy Cricket?

-

Science is studying consciousness, but it's very difficult to pin down.... and the very subjectivity of trying to describe your own brain function or trying to examine such a nebulous concept in others has made it a taboo subject for a long time.

It is more than likely that our consciousness is more than the sum of our parts. It involves the brain, the body (chemistry) and the environment.

As it is... physical death ensures that at least some part of what defines you is irretriveably lost.... even if you could somehow copy all neurological information and transfer it to another matrix.

 

[dxm8975]

Yep, I've read somewhere that you always dream six to ten minutes in a whole night, and these dreams are fed by your memories, desires and thoughts. So after death, none of these will remain I presume, since they're related to the sinapses on your brain. In short, you die, there's nothing more to remember or to dream. Unless there's a convincing explanation for the concept of Soul, untill there I can't imagine any other kind of existence other than biological life.

Yup humans can't remember anything or dream after they die, as the brain is the tool that enables us to do so while we are asleep. Though the soul perpetually exists and when we are born next time, probably we have a start to live with it again, alongside a different body.

 

[Dotini]

Yup humans can't remember anything or dream after they die

Of course it's great for all of us to express our opinions and desires here in the comfortable and safe environment of GTP. But let's not lose sight of the fact that hundreds of scientists (known as doctors and physicians) have verified for decades the reports of thousands upon thousands of NDE'rs that our consciousness survives the death of our physical body, at least long enough to have nearly identical near death experiences no matter what culture or belief system you were brought up in. Go to any library or bookstore, and pick up a copy of the NY Times bestseller, Evidence of the Afterlife, by Jeffrey Long, MD, and you will be better equipped to understand and debate this important topic. Let it be added, as I believe Famine has mentioned, that this is not direct proof of life after death or of God or gods. But it will make you wiser and better able to discuss it intelligently.

Respectfully submitted,
Dotini

 

[dxm8975]

Of course it's great for all of us to express our opinions and desires here in the comfortable and safe environment of GTP. But let's not lose sight of the fact that hundreds of scientists (known as doctors and physicians) have verified for decades the reports of thousands upon thousands of NDE'rs that our consciousness survives the death of our physical body, at least long enough to have nearly identical near death experiences no matter what culture or belief system you were brought up in. Go to any library or bookstore, and pick up a copy of the NY Times bestseller, Evidence of the Afterlife, by Jeffrey Long, MD, and you will be better equipped to understand and debate this important topic. Let it be added, as I believe Famine has mentioned, that this is not direct proof of life after death or of God or gods. But it will make you wiser and better able to discuss it intelligently.

Respectfully submitted,
Dotini

Oh, yeah it's also significant to be familiar with this kind of topic respecting our life-cycle and the experiences after the death by going to a library for books about this as you advised, although I suppose it's quite a difficult topic to debate with other people and show our opinions, specifically for children like me. But thanks for the advice man. 👍

 

[Duke]

Of course it's great for all of us to express our opinions and desires here in the comfortable and safe environment of GTP. But let's not lose sight of the fact that hundreds of scientists (known as doctors and physicians) have verified for decades the reports of thousands upon thousands of NDE'rs that our consciousness survives the death of our physical body, at least long enough to have nearly identical near death experiences no matter what culture or belief system you were brought up in.

NEAR death != death.

There is precisely zero evidence that our consciousness survives actual physical death. Of course, there is no evidence it doesn't, but there is no evidence that an infinite variety of things don't happen. Logic works that way. Therefore the onus of evidence is on the positive side of any argument, so the responsibility of proof is upon those who assert that the soul survives death. Near-death experiences in no way constitute evidence of what really happens in "way past death" experiences.

 

[Famine]

*glances up*

Oh, NDEs again. Demonstrated as a natural state that occurs in oxygen starvation conditions even when there is no danger of death. Wonder when they'll be brought up again?

 

[homeforsummer]

Do not generalize what you feel to assume that all others must feel that. I have no problem whatsoever imagining what death is like - complete nothingness and no awareness of anything at all (since my awareness will be dead as well).

It's easy to imagine. We've all experienced it. Non-dreaming sleep. No thought. No visual or auditory stimulation. One moment it's night, the next moment it's morning. Without us ever having noticed the difference.

Though you could reason whether it's actually possible to say you know what that nothingness "feels" like, given that by it's nature you aren't "experiencing" it. If you have no consciousness and no stimuli, it is impossible to say you know exactly what it's like. You can only know what something is like if you've experienced it...

Or put in other words, you can't be aware of a state of no awareness. By "imagining" what "nothing" is like, you're still creating a situation in which something exists - yourself. If you imagine sleep, or death, to be endless blackness, then surely death is no different to standing in a pitch black room? Of course not, because even in a pitch black and soundproofed room you're still conscious of your own existance.

So I'd argue that sam48 is actually quite right - you can't imagine not being conscious, or being dead. Because when you're not conscious, you aren't aware that you're not conscious...

Edit: Apologies for all the double negatives. I was always told to not use no double negatives...

 

[Dan_]

Near death experiences aren't precisely related to death, since you're still alive and then your brain is still active to an extent. Also, many people who almost died, reported things like going through a tunnel or walking to the light, which pretty much describes what you often see in movies ( Ghost..), so they can pretty much be hallucinations, caused by the this conjecture: Your body struggling to still alive (Lack of oxygen - notably will be hazardous to cerebral activity, cardiac insufficience - then lack of oxygen as a cause, at cetera), and the memories which usually are associated with this kind of experience, provided by movies and/or histories.

I will take a look at the article mentioned by Dotini.

 

[Keef]

Or put in other words, you can't be aware of a state of no awareness. By "imagining" what "nothing" is like, you're still creating a situation in which something exists - yourself. If you imagine sleep, or death, to be endless blackness, then surely death is no different to standing in a pitch black room? Of course not, because even in a pitch black and soundproofed room you're still conscious of your own existance.

Right. I can easily imagine "nothing" or "unconscious" like Duke said, but that assumes that I'm still here and able to imagine. It's impossible to imagine literally nothing because we can't imagine at all without our own consciousness.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Though you could reason whether it's actually possible to say you know what that nothingness "feels" like, given that by it's nature you aren't "experiencing" it. If you have no consciousness and no stimuli, it is impossible to say you know exactly what it's like. You can only know what something is like if you've experienced it...

You experienced it years before you were born.

 

[Touring Mars]

You experienced it years before you were born.

Indeed. Or go see Partick Thistle playing... it's the same feeling.

 

[homeforsummer]

You experienced it years before you were born.

Except I didn't experience it, because you can't experience something if you aren't there to experience it.

That's my point.

You cannot say you know what being completely unconscious feels like, because when unconscious you are completely unable to experience any stimuli telling you that something is going on.

The very most you can get out of the "experience" is the moment you fall unconscious and the moment you become conscious again - but if that's something like sleep, very few people should be able to tell you exactly what it feels like to fall asleep, because by it's very nature you're entering a state of unconsciousness where you lose the ability to feel anything.

And I'm talking about deep sleep rather than REM sleep. When you're dreaming you aren't fully unconscious, which is why events in the outside world can sometimes infiltrate your dreams (such as the times when I've been woken by a fire alarm, when the alarm has been a part of my dream for several seconds before I became fully conscious and realised it was going on in real life too...).

 

[Duke]

That's my point.

You cannot say you know what being completely unconscious feels like, because when unconscious you are completely unable to experience any stimuli telling you that something is going on.

...which means that I CAN know what being unconscious feels like. It feels like the complete and total inability to experience any stimuli. Just like it was before I was born.

 

[homeforsummer]

...which means that I CAN know what being unconscious feels like. It feels like the complete and total inability to experience any stimuli. Just like it was before I was born.

But you can't, because you have to have had some base for comparison. You can't know what it feels like to experience an absence of stimuli, because to experience an absence of stimuli you have to have at least one faculty left to experience it...

Or perhaps you can describe to me how you felt before you were conceived?

 

[Danoff]

But you can't, because you have to have had some base for comparison. You can't know what it feels like to experience an absence of stimuli, because to experience an absence of stimuli you have to have at least one faculty left to experience it...

Or perhaps you can describe to me how you felt before you were conceived?

Fair enough, but now you've defined it in a way that doesn't fit with the conversation here. The point is that you're not going to sense it when you're dead because you didn't sense it before you were born.

The faulty assumption is generally that there is something to sense after you're dead. The point I like to make is that all of the evidence contradicts this. In some sense, you know exactly what the experience of a complete lack of sense or awareness is like, because at one time, this is what your cognition was subjected to - nonexistence.

 

[homeforsummer]

Fair enough, but now you've defined it in a way that doesn't fit with the conversation here. The point is that you're not going to sense it when you're dead because you didn't sense it before you were born.

But of course - I agree. I did get a little side-tracked, I was just attempting to vindicate Sam48's original post on the matter. Duke was trying to say that you can know what it feels like to have no consciousness. This is impossible for the reasons I've mentioned.

The faulty assumption is generally that there is something to sense after you're dead. The point I like to make is that all of the evidence contradicts this. In some sense, you know exactly what the experience of a complete lack of sense or awareness is like, because at one time, this is what your cognition was subjected to - nonexistence.

I don't disagree that all the evidence points to complete nonexistence after you die - as an atheist I'm quite at peace with the fact that I will simply cease to be once I'm gone and that I won't continue in another place - my point was simply that although we've all not existed at some point, nobody can tell you they know what it feels like to not exist because without existance, there is no feeling.

 

[Danoff]

my point was simply that although we've all not existed at some point, nobody can tell you they know what it feels like to not exist because without existance, there is no feeling.

My point is that 0 is a number.

 

[Duke]

...and nothing to experience is nothingness. I know what it feels like because there is nothing to feel and nothing to feel with, and nothing to process that lack of feeling with. There is NOTHING.

 

[Famine]

But you can't, because you have to have had some base for comparison. You can't know what it feels like to experience an absence of stimuli, because to experience an absence of stimuli you have to have at least one faculty left to experience it...

Whether this is true or not, we are able to thus draw a direct comparison between pre-life and after-life.

We've either already experienced the nothingness of pre-life - because without physical form we have nothing to experience - and can thus say that after-life is the same, or we haven't experience the nothingness of pre-life - because we've not had a physical form with which to experience anything - and can thus say that after-life is the same.

 

[homeforsummer]

...and nothing to experience is nothingness. I know what it feels like because there is nothing to feel and nothing to feel with, and nothing to process that lack of feeling with. There is NOTHING.

Whether this is true or not, we are able to thus draw a direct comparison between pre-life and after-life.

We've either already experienced the nothingness of pre-life - because without physical form we have nothing to experience - and can thus say that after-life is the same, or we haven't experience the nothingness of pre-life - because we've not had a physical form with which to experience anything - and can thus say that after-life is the same.

Famine - what we can extrapolate is that after-life is the same as pre-life. I'm quite happy with this concept, and I've not disputed that in any of my posts.

Duke - What we cannot say is what either of those feel like, as we are not around to experience any sensations of it. You can't say you know what something feels like if there is nothing there to feel. I'm not quite sure how many ways I can write that but I'll keep trying if you keep trying to claim you know what "nothing" feels like. Writing "NOTHING" in capitals doesn't give your point any more realism.

 

[Duke]

And continuing to claim that I cannot possibly imagine what the complete lack of stimulus feels like, when there will be nothing of me to feel anything anyway, does not make it any more true. Nothing feels like... nothing. It does not feel at all because A) there is nothing there to give a feeling, and B), there is nothing there to feel it.

But seriously, we're starting to sound like believers with these idiotic nitpicking semantics.

 

[homeforsummer]

And continuing to claim that I cannot possibly imagine what the complete lack of stimulus feels like, when there will be nothing of me to feel anything anyway, does not make it any more true. Nothing feels like... nothing. It does not feel at all because A) there is nothing there to give a feeling, and B), there is nothing there to feel it.

But seriously, we're starting to sound like believers with these idiotic nitpicking semantics.

If there is nothing to feel, then you can't say you know what it feels like. You have never experienced a situation in which you can feel absolutely nothing, so it is impossible to say you know what being dead will feel like. My reasoning is entirely correct.

But yes, it's all starting to get a bit metaphysical.

 

[Joel]

Regardless of whether or not one can feel nothing, we can agree that nothingness is the most likely state of affairs after death, correct?

 

[homeforsummer]

I agree.

 

[DK]

After reading all of the above, I have to say my head hurts like hell.

 

[Owen.C93]

Nah. And to be honest last time I thought about such things it ****ed me up for a few months. Seriously I go out of my way to avoid thinking about the universe and the unknown questions for the past couple of years. :S

 

[Dotini]

Regardless of whether or not one can feel nothing, we can agree that nothingness is the most likely state of affairs after death, correct?

I agree.

I disagree.

If you could feel nothing, then nothingness is the most likely state of affairs.

But if you could feel something, then nothing would NOT be the most likely state of affairs.

Respectfully,
Dotini

 

[Sam48]

My friends father died in the hospital for about 8 minutes before doctors revived him. During those 8 minutes, he had no brain activity, according to the hospitals computers. However, after he was revived, he recalled a dream he had during those 8 minutes. In that dream, he said he was sitting in a hallway that had no ends in either direction, and on one wall were pictures of past events in his life. On the opposite wall were pictures of what he believes his life could have been like. But before he was able to look closely at them, he was revived. Is this something the brain comes up with before death? It doesn't seem possible to think (dream) this when brain activity is at zero, even though he recalled it happening after death.