nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Life after death?

Kermit.de.frog

Do you believe in life after death? Maybe not the traditional narratives of heaven etc but maybe something else?

As an aside you know the way a doctor will always say so and so died "peacefully"? Do you believe that is likely? Curious. Because I don't believe that myself but I suppose that is separate.

Discuss!:)

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

And I thought most crime was carried out by little gurriers you couldn't a rats arse about you or any of the reasons you like to attach:rolleyes:

You'd really rather base your argument exclusively on car jackings and the like than take into account world wars, genocides and pogroms? Ok so. There's a pretty neat symmetry between that and only quoting and responding to tiny bits of posts.

krudler

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

And I thought most crime was carried out by little gurriers who couldn't a give rats arse about you or any of the reasons you like to attach:rolleyes:

What's any of that got to do with an afterlife?

go home Kermit you're drunk.

not drunk on facts though it seems.

pickarooney

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

You don't see it. You are ignoring it because you have no answer to it. There is no morality without a far higher power. Morality is redundant under your perspective.

Morality and obedience are completely different things.

Ave Sodalis

Irish ones you wanted, yeah?

http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/ireland/charts/declining_prot_1891_1991.gif
http://chs.revues.org/docannexe/image/1031/img-2-small580.png

krudler

sup_dude wrote: »

Irish ones you wanted, yeah?

http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/ireland/charts/declining_prot_1891_1991.gif
http://chs.revues.org/docannexe/image/1031/img-2-small580.png

Ssshhh it's funnier when he doesn't realise he's talking out of his arse

Ave Sodalis

krudler wrote: »

Ssshhh it's funnier when he doesn't realise he's talking out of his arse

But, but, the inaccuracies! *twitches*

[Deleted User]

Poor Kermit

Macavity.

OP has thrown the toys out of the pram.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Kermit, if you're actually genuinely looking for an answer to "why would someone behave morally in the absence of a belief in the afterlife" then smarter people than us have considered the question pretty in depth.

So y'know, if you feel like taking a break from asking people their opinions and then refusing to understand them, maybe go read a book or something.

Kermit.de.frog

krudler wrote: »

go home Kermit you're drunk.

I don't drink. I will leave the liver disease to others.

On my way to work I saw Dublin City center as absolute chaos - fights, junkies, drunks - it does make me wonder where society is going. A health crisis for sure. It would not be the case 30 or 40 years a go.

Oh wait Ireland was more religious then so I can't say that or bring it up.

Kermit.de.frog

pickarooney wrote: »

Morality and obedience are completely different things.

Sometimes obedience is needed.

Turtyturd

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I don't drink. I will leave the liver disease to others.

On my way to work I saw Dublin City center as absolute chaos - fights, junkies, drunks - it does make me wonder where society is going. A health crisis for sure. It would not be the case 30 or 40 years a go.

Oh wait Ireland was more religious then so I can't say that or bring it up.

I guarantee you seen more people who were not doing these things than doing them.

Morality isn't drawn from Religion, these ideas are part of a social code/conciousness that has developed long before someone came up with that story. There are many cases of animals helping each other in the wild, do they check their bible for moral stance on the issue before acting?

sparkthatbled

Do we not have a natural compulsion to get along and, thus, further our species? I'm pretty sure we are all born with basic instincts that become morals as we grow older. Some people have these instincts inhibited for various reasons and are more inclined towards crime etc, and the rest of us can override them when perceived to be necessary (for example how a junkie sees anything he has to do to get his next fix as necessary) so there is always an element of self-control.

As far as religion goes, I believe that without religion scaring people into line during our development, we never would have gotten to the point where we are now. Now that we have passed a point where we all need it, we can make responsible decisions without it because we have a better insight into the bigger picture. Everyone has the right to believe in whatever religion they want, if it makes their lives easier. I would actually love to have complete faith that when I die I'll be reunited with all my loved ones and spend eternity in blissful happiness. As a realist, I think living forever is more likely to be achieved by science, but the moral implications of that are another discussion entirely.

Kermit.de.frog

Turtyturd wrote: »

I guarantee you seen more people who were not doing these things than doing them.

Actually the vast majority were drunk. Some insanely drunk. It was chaos between Pearse St and Dame St.

But we are getting a bit a way from the thread. I'd like to go back to the two questions in the OP.

Turtyturd

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Actually the vast majority were drunk. Some insanely drunk. It was chaos between Pearse St and Dame St.

But we are getting a bit a way from the thread. I'd like to go back to the two questions in the OP.

So you work nights? Hardly valid.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Actually the vast majority were drunk. Some insanely drunk. It was chaos between Pearse St and Dame St.

But we are getting a bit a way from the thread. I'd like to go back to the two questions in the OP.

People answered your question, you just didn't like the answers and derailed your own thread into a discussion of the possibility of being atheist and not rampaging through life leaving a trail of bodies.

Turtyturd

On the original question, I would like to think you come back again either as someone else or in some kind of time loop where you relive your life. I know you don't but that would be what I would like.

I don't think there is someone from a story waiting to judge us on our actions at the end, and it's liberating.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

And I mean, who knows what your brain does? Maybe the last few minutes before the lights go out, you experience as an eternity of Christmas and flying and reacharounds and whatever else. You never know

That'd be nice.

_Brian

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Do you believe in life after death? Maybe not the traditional narratives of heaven etc but maybe something else?

As an aside you know the way a doctor will always say so and so died "peacefully"? Do you believe that is likely? Curious. Because I don't believe that myself but I suppose that is separate.

Discuss!:)

Life after death, I don't think so but it's a real comfort if an idea for so many.

As for the "dies peacefully".
I've been with a number of relatives that have died. Some indeed were relaxed and peaceful at the end. But not all, one in particular seemed to fight death, forcing every breath. I' thought she should have got a strong sedative to ease things as death was inevitable.

ceadaoin.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I don't drink. I will leave the liver disease to others.

On my way to work I saw Dublin City center as absolute chaos - fights, junkies, drunks - it does make me wonder where society is going. A health crisis for sure. It would not be the case 30 or 40 years a go.

Oh wait Ireland was more religious then so I can't say that or bring it up.

What does this have to do with life after death or morals?

Incidentally, historically people drank a lot more than they do now. Relax

Phoebas

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

On my way to work I saw Dublin City center as absolute chaos - fights, junkies, drunks - it does make me wonder where society is going. A health crisis for sure. It would not be the case 30 or 40 years a go.

Oh wait Ireland was more religious then so I can't say that or bring it up.

And you stopped to ask the junkies and drunks about their religious beliefs, right?

professore

sup_dude wrote: »

Irish ones you wanted, yeah?

http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/ireland/charts/declining_prot_1891_1991.gif
http://chs.revues.org/docannexe/image/1031/img-2-small580.png

This appears to show if we get rid of all the protestants it will drop our crime rate to zero!

Akrasia

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

What is your moral compass then? It's easy to be smart and just dismiss it but if you want to foist that view on the world then maybe you should also endeavor to explain what moral views people should hold to themselves and the rest of humanity. If you just wilt and die like a plant than why not simply turn on each other and kill each other? No consequence and sure it's darkness in the end.

Because we only have a brief window of life, we should make this place the best possible experience for everyone, and a place where everyone was constantly out to get everyone else would be hell on earth.

Also, just because something doesn't last forever, doesn't mean it has no value while it exists.

Then there's the fact that we evolved as social animals who can only thrive when people play by certain rules of behaviour, and natural selection saw the emergence of the 'conscience' which most (but not all) humans experience to a lesser and greater degree. The conscience rewards altruistic behaviour through releasing endorphins (which make us feel good) and punishes rule breaking behaviour through the release of stress hormones (which make us feel bad). People generally want to maximise their own pleasure and nature found a way to make us feel bad for making others feel bad, and vice versa

A lot of clever people like to be clever and tell people there is nothing afterward without thinking what fills the void.

The void is filled by matter and energy, just not necessarily conscious matter and energy like us. The 'spiritual void' can be filled by all manner of things and it is up to each individual to find some passion in life that is fulfilling for them. Many choose religion, If that's what they want that's fine, there's nothing wrong with fantasy if that's what makes you happy, but I prefer things that are real and I think seeking understanding and knowledge is more rewarding than clinging to answers provided by someone else.

professore

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I don't drink. I will leave the liver disease to others.

On my way to work I saw Dublin City center as absolute chaos - fights, junkies, drunks - it does make me wonder where society is going. A health crisis for sure. It would not be the case 30 or 40 years a go.

Oh wait Ireland was more religious then so I can't say that or bring it up.

Look up some old court records. That kind of stuff always went on and always will. And if youlook at Russia now vs the old soviet union, there is far more of it now ... So an atheist state is therefore more moral by your reckoning?

Look at the sickening abuse that the catholic church practised here for decades. Religion or a higher power didn't stop them! Enough said.

Mick55

jester77

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

You don't see it. You are ignoring it because you have no answer to it. There is no morality without a far higher power. Morality is redundant under your perspective.

Never heard of common sense?

Reindeer

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The fact is, whether atheists like it or not, the vast majority across the world take their code from a religion and act accordingly. I don't believe many of them would be satisfied by nothingness.

It's a point often ignored by those that preach atheism and such. I'm not religious, far from it, but I recognise this issue and the reality is that the theory of nothing after death does leave a void and something has to fill it. Simply living and no aspiration to something better afterward won't bind society together or make people act good in my opinion.

I often hear religion cited as a means for people to act morally. It would seem to me that such people have a rather selective recollection of history, let alone modern times.

Drakares

Deleted User wrote: »

I wrote this six years ago, the point still stands.

Not really. I have met plenty of atheists who are complete tools and don't give a toss about the people around them. Same with religious folk.

nozzferrahhtoo

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Do you believe in life after death? Maybe not the traditional narratives of heaven etc but maybe something else?

Nope. Not in the slightest. I simply have never been shown a single shred of argument, evidence, data or reasoning that suggests human consciousness or subjective experience can survive the death of the brain or can operate independently of it.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

A lot of clever people like to be clever and tell people there is nothing afterward without thinking what fills the void.

It is called sticking to the topic. In the OP you asked if we believe there is such a life after death. The implications of that belief are irrelevant to the question. The truth remains the truth regardless of whether the implications of it please you or not.

That said there are a multitude of ways to usefully ground moral and ethical discourse without having to fantasize about after lives. In fact I find the concept of an after life is positively corrosive to a useful moral system. You appear to think, for reasons unsaid, that the opposite is true..... and that a moral system depends on an after life. Why could that be?

And that is not to mention the gall it takes to openly ask people their opinion and when they give you an answer you accuse them of "foisting" their opinion. Have at least some decorum please. Asking for peoples opinion and then getting uppity and haughty when they give you it.... is shameful.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The fact is, whether atheists like it or not, the vast majority across the world take their code from a religion and act accordingly.

Ah the old "Fact" approach where you say something entirely unsubstantiated and act like calling it "fact" will make it one by default.

Sorry kid, it don't work that way.

Actually I see no reason whatsoever to think what you say is true. An equal possibility for example is that people cherry pick and/or are attracted to the morality in any given religion that they themselves already hold. They do not get their morality from religion so much as they are attracted to the parts of religion that fits the morality they already have.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I don't believe many of them would be satisfied by nothingness.

As above, this is entirely irrelevant. The question in the OP was whether we believe something to be true or not. You are derailing your own topic into whether what is true will please you or satisfy you or not. Facts and truth do not owe you happy slappy feelings or satisfaction. They remain true, or false, regardless of your subjective reaction to them.

There simply are no arguments, evidence, data or reasoning on offer to suggest there is an after life. Much less so from the likes of you.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

the theory of nothing after death does leave a void and something has to fill it.

I find living the life we have in the here and now fills it quite nicely thank you. If your life is unsatisfying and therefore unable to fill that void, then I extend to you my sympathies.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Do you see what I am getting at?

Of course we do because the line of argument you are representing quite poorly has actually existed for centuries before you joined this forum. We do not need to see what you are getting at as we have heard it all 1000 times before and know exactly what it is you are flailing at trying to say.

WHY you felt the need to say it by creating a thread with an OP that was not representative of your actual motivation and intention for the thread is opaque to me but it certainly has done nothing to raise the hopes that the discourse with you on the topic will be an honest one from your side. But we can at least remain polite and give you the benefit of the doubt in this regard.

You have gone from asking if we think there is a life after death.... to derailing the topic entirely into whether this belief has implications on our moral system.... to very quickly saying we need to be "answerable to a higher power". So while you claim not to be "religious" in one of your posts..... you have very quickly moved from one specific question to the hearth of theism in only a few posts.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Morality is redundant under your perspective.

So now you have moved from asking a question that you did not actually want an answer to.... through deism.... to theism.... and now to soap boxing and preaching.

Rather than asking questions about the "perspective" of people here you are now presuming to tell THEM what their perspective is.

Now who is doing the "foisting" kid? Seems the one with problems of morality, ethics and honesty here is YOU. Ironic huh?

My hopes that we can give you the benefit of the doubt as regards honesty has waned considerably I am afraid. Needless to say however that your straw man representation of the perspective someone like me holds.... is not even remotely representative of the actual reality of the perspectives I hold.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Why would anyone be moral without religion or a higher power or whatever? Why?

Simple.

When two people come together and start a relationship they lay down ground rules of these relationships. They layout their expectations and boundaries for how each person in the relationship will conduct themselves. That is how human relationships work.

Some of those rules and boundaries are so common that they are taken for granted and unspoken such as "Dont go shagging anyone else but me".

Now ask yourself how is society any different? You ask why we should have morality but why would we NOT would be my counter question? It is no different from relationships. Society is just another forum of human relationship and when we come together as as species to live in that relationship.... we recognize the utility in laying rules, boundaries and expectations on how people will conduct themselves in that relationship.

QED really and your theism or anyone elses atheism has nothing to do with it whatsoever. It simply is not required.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Simple. Plot a graph of the decline in religion in Ireland against the rise in violent crime and murders over the last 40 years. Point made.

Do it then because for one I do not think you will find the statistics on crime in Ireland actually are going in the direction you think they are. Remember however there are many of us here, myself included, trained in statistical analysis. So make sure you check and recheck your figures and graphs lest you make a fool of yourself.

This is all without mentioning statistics for example like the fact that atheists are highly unrepresented in prison populations.

Further however even if we were to imagine.... and imagining is all it would be.... that the graph comes out like you want it to..... this in and of itself shows nothing. You would be making what is known as the "Correlation causation error" which is where people arbitrarily graph two things against each other, and declare there must be a connection.

For example I could show you a graph showing that as piracy on the open seas has increased.... so to has the number of people dying from cancer. Does this mean there is a connection? No of course not.

Simply showing that the value of X has varied at the same as the value of Y in no way supports the contention that X is influencing Y. It is regrettable that you (presumably) completed Junior Cert Mathematics and Science without being informed of this fact. Your school owes you an apology for this.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

But we are getting a bit a way from the thread. I'd like to go back to the two questions in the OP.

That would be nice as it appears that you had no interest at all in the questions in your OP as you very quickly derailed your own thread into something else entirely.

The question in your OP is about an after life. The simple answer to your question is that at this time, much less from you, there simply is no arguments, evidence, data or reasoning on offer to suggest any such thing exists.

If you are aware of any by all means present it!

Calibos

Kermit, you of all people should think of it like reincarnation. I'll use a boards.ie metaphor. Think of it like sinning in the past and a heavenly moderator banning you from life but you find a way around it with a new IP address and come back to life. Instead of learning from past lives, you start travelling down a road which will take you to the same ultimate destination as before. I'm stretching the metaphor but you'll end up losing access to parts of that life that you love all because of what you do in other parts of that life.

Ie. there's no point in reincarnation if you don't learn from past lives.

Final bit of advice..... Carpe Diem