Life after death?

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

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 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.

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.

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?

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!