• Gregory
    4.6k
    Time is not linear. To live now is to live the after life
  • Raymond
    815


    On the contrary. The chance is exactly 1. I happen in an infinite variety of ways.
  • Agent Smith
    9.5k
    We can come up with a sensible answer to this very vexing question the OP asks.

    After death

    The body (brain included): Decays and, as some spiritual folks like to describe, poetically, returns to the earth.

    The mind: Supposing it survives physical death, its fate is unknown.
  • Raymond
    815


    If you considerate the vexing mind to be situated inside matter, then it becomes blatantly and unrefutably clear that reincarnation won't happen in the lifetime of present universe. The existent universe basically renders active reincarnation inoperative. The very constitution of the present universe militates against the concept, proving it an unacceptable notion. The reincarnated will be subject to it while the universe plays a leading role and gives rise to disconnected forms of the incarnate. The present universe makes itself felt and serves the purpose of the disconnected incarnates while offering no ground for the reincarnate. The inexorable dual ejaculate, that epic clarion of dual delight, serves the purpose to rigorously divide the realms between which true reincarnation takes effect, thereby effectively eliminating the naive notion of the soul transmigrating through bodies.
    The higher dimensional erect, that strict domain on which the dual ejaculate propagates, combined with the triumphant and objective analysis of the ejaculates, categorically liquidates the phenomenon of a reincarnation in the current universe.
    We are inevitably led to the trident conclusion that the age-old shields, swords, and banners utilized to sustain the irrational image of a reincarnating soul, should be merciless eliminated and be replaced by the more modest notion of eternal reincarnation.
    Let's all celebrate this historic victory of science pure and simple!
  • Torbill
    7
    The story of Phineas Gage is in all likelihood a popular delusion, repeated endlessly, including within the neuroscience community, which should know better. But it supports their narrative, which could be why they keep peddling it. The facts, to the extent that there are any reliable ones, strongly suggest that Gage suffered a temporary disruption and that there was not a permanent change. Wikipedia has a summary, as a starting point for further investigation.
  • Philosophim
    2.2k
    The story of Phineas Gage is in all likelihood a popular delusion, repeated endlessly, including within the neuroscience community, which should know better.Torbill

    Though your assertion is questionable, Gage was only used as a popular reference. His contribution to our understanding that the brain is who you are is so insignificant, it doesn't matter whether you doubt the account or not. Here's a link that covers a brief history of lobotomies since the 1880's.
    https://www.livescience.com/42199-lobotomy-definition.html

    Here's a quote from it:
    While a small percentage of people supposedly showed improved mental conditions or no change at all, for many patients, lobotomy had negative effects on their personality, initiative, inhibitions, empathy and ability to function on their own, according to Lerner.

    "The main long-term side effect was mental dullness," Lerner said. People could no longer live independently, and they lost their personalities, he added.
  • 180 Proof
    13.9k
    "Life after life" (anti-anxiety placebo) is nonsense like e.g. north of the North Pole.

    :death: :flower:
  • Raymond
    815
    Life after life" (anti-anxiety placebo) is nonsense like e.g. north of the North Pole.180 Proof

    But there is above the North Pole. North is up, south is down. Reflecting the Boreal Imperium being on top of the globe. Like after this life is a logical necessity actually.
  • 180 Proof
    13.9k
    :rofl: And besided, "logical necessity" =/= necessity in fact.
  • sime
    1k
    "Life after life" (anti-anxiety placebo) is nonsense like e.g. north of the North Pole.180 Proof

    Does tomorrow come after today, or is today always today?
  • Gregory
    4.6k


    You are thinking of yourself as object instead of treating yourself phenomenologically
  • 180 Proof
    13.9k
    Another "today" does not follow the last "today", does it?

    I am – highly corroborated by the extant physical, biological, neurocognitive & existential evidence – an 'ecology-bound, phenomenal self-modeling, agent' object ... and not (merely) a woo-of-the-"explanatory gap" idealist/subjectivist (re: "bracketed" phenomenology, etc).
  • dimosthenis9
    837


    Worm's fest is what happens.
  • Raymond
    815
    Say I am the collection of particles in a collection of surrounding particles. It seems clear that in such scenario I will not return in this universe.

    But what if a new universe comes to be behind this one, in a new big bang. Why shouldn't the new particles there condense in a new me? This wouldn't be possible in two parallel universes because my parallel copy can't be me. Suppose all particles in our universe get lost, leaving photons only. Wouldn't the collection of newly condensed particles into me actually be me?
  • Gregory
    4.6k


    Anatman suggests we come from our body but death has nothing to do with consciousness
  • Agent Smith
    9.5k
    "Life after life" (anti-anxiety placebo) is nonsense like e.g. north of the North Pole.180 Proof

    :up:
  • BC
    13.1k
    I think the after you die bacteria, enzymes, creepy crawlies, and maybe larger animals break the body down into its most digestible forms and when that is all done, one's substance is taken up into other organisms.

    For the individual there is nothing, then there is life, then there is nothing. Everything that composed one's life -- muscle, senses, memories, ideas, dreams, fears, hopes... disappears forever.

    My view rules out the existence of an after life; it doesn't rule out the existence of God. Perhaps God thinks that one life is sufficient, is gift enough. I haven't checked with God on that point. I don't find the idea of an eternal life all that attractive.
  • Outlander
    1.8k
    Interestingly enough, pretty much. You're not far off. I'm responding more to the title of course.
  • Agent Smith
    9.5k
    one life is sufficientBitter Crank

    Some things, once is enough (visit to the dentist).

    Some things, we want more and more (horizontal dancing).

    We don't ever want to see our dentist, die! You want coitus, live! Hmmmmm... Diabolical!

    Are we in hell?
  • Raymond
    815
    disappears foreverBitter Crank

    That's what you think. The body brain and physical world can reappear again after a new big bang. How much we don't like this, it will still happen.
  • BC
    13.1k
    The body brain and physical world can reappear again after a new big bang. How much we don't like this, it will still happen.Raymond

    That's what you think.
  • Changeling
    1.4k
    @Raymond @Bitter Crank you're both way off, and so am I.
  • Changeling
    1.4k
    None of you should be speaking for the dead. It's quite unbecoming.
  • BC
    13.1k
    One is not supposed to speak ill of the dead. I haven't heard any rules against speaking for them.
  • Changeling
    1.4k
    I did say I was way off...
  • Agent Smith
    9.5k
    Pre-life nonexistence Existence (life) Post-life nonexistence (aka death) ?

    We were dead (pre-life nonexistence)! There was something and we can't remember OR there was nothing, that's why we don't remember. Memory is the key to solving the mystery of death. However false memories, confabulation, Mandela effect, poor recall (memory isn't perfect). Even then, re Socrates & rationalists, what we don't recollect is physical in nature; we still seem to be perfection-oriented (Platonic Forms)...some of us at least.
  • Agent Smith
    9.5k
    One is not supposed to speak ill of the dead.Bitter Crank

    De mortuis nil nisi bonum
  • karl stone
    711
    Here's what I think happens after death; the same kind of nothing that pertained for all time, before I was born. Accepting that makes my life special; and the sustainability of human existence a must. I see my existence in terms of a torch bearer; my personal obligation is to use the gifts shaped and passed onto me by the struggles of all previous generations, to secure the future for all subsequent generations; and in this way - I serve myself in the present.
  • Cornwell1
    241


    Everybody loves you when you're dead. They crucify you when you get it wrong, when things are fine they put you ahead.They laugh at you with your trousers down or pick the stones and aim them at you're head. When you're alive, they won't care what you said or what you deserve and all the blood you bled.
    It doesn't matter what you try to hide, the sun comes out and then the truth is read. Your fans will love you while you're alive, but the wreaths are laid by the rest instead.
    Everybody loves you when you're dead.
12Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement β€” just fascinating conversations.