Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

What do you believe happens when we die

1…34689…16

Comments

  • #252
    John Hutton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭John Hutton


    El_Duderino 09 wrote: »
    If dualism is the idea that the body is separate from consciousness/soul, then do you mean materialist tend to be monists? Meaning they don't believe in a soul/consciousness that exists separate from the brain?

    You would think so, but actually no. It tends to go along the lines of some of the posts in this thread "energy" "consciousness" etc. possibly enduring in the ether and that.

    But to be fair, most atheists may not have given these things much thought compared to those atheists who frequent forums like this


  • #253
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,547 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    John Hutton wrote: »
    You would think so, but actually no. It tends to go along the lines of some of the posts in this thread "energy" "consciousness" etc. possibly enduring in the ether and that.

    But to be fair, most atheists may not have given these things much thought compared to those atheists who frequent forums like this

    Fair enough. 79% of people who responded to the poll in this thread are monists - and some of the rest are clearly not atheists as 6% said they go to heaven after we die, so they must be some kind of christian.


  • #254
    jaxxx
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,230 ✭✭✭jaxxx


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    I don't think Fota allow people to be buried in the wildlife park.
    :p


    [Jaxxx proceeds to grab the banhammer from Bannasidhe and hit 'em with it!]


    Obvious Lion King quote was obvious! [the original Lion King, not that pure utter garbage CGI 'live action' rubbish.. .. ..]


  • #255
    John Hutton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭John Hutton


    El_Duderino 09 wrote: »
    Fair enough. 79% of people who responded to the poll in this thread are monists - and some of the rest are clearly not atheists as 6% said they go to heaven after we die, so they must be some kind of christian.

    I voted other!

    I believe it could be hell, heaven or purgatory.


  • #256
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,476 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    John Hutton wrote: »
    Do you not think there is a difference between that and masquerading as a believer to obtain consecrated hosts for the such purposes?

    Did he, though?
    I'm sorry, lying to obtain what believers consider Jesus for the purposes of destroying it

    You know where things you eat end up, don't you?
    Is that more respectful?
    If any religion were giving out free sacred statues to believers and someone lied and pretended to be a believer to get loads of them to smash up I think most people would think they were being pricks. This is far worse to Catholics.

    If somebody is gullible enough to give out free stuff to all and sundry to promote their religion, that's their problem tbh.
    Some people deface those bibles in hotels... when the pope visited here, some people applied for lots of free tickets with no intent of using them. I don't see anything wrong with this, it is freedom of speech same as the promotion of the religion in the first place is freedom of speech.

    Nobody who wants a Gideon bible in a hotel is ever deprived of one (they supply lots of replacements and actually want people to take them home), nobody who wanted to see the pope missed out cause there were loads of people giving away spare tickets in the preceding days and it was 2/3rds empty anyway, I doubt anybody who wants a communion wafer has ever been deprived of one either.
    this is Catholicisms major problem

    IMO one of catholicism's major problems was trying to impose itself across the board in this country, instead of sticking with whatever smaller size of flock was actually interested. As an organisation they became obsessed with temporal power.
    where people went because they felt socially obliged but didn't understand what was going on

    Well when it was in Lain, they had no chance!
    But it's common among religions/cults to keep the actual beliefs at least somewhat mysterious as Nozz pointed out, some like Scientology will even relieve you of large sums of cash to 'reveal' more 'knowledge' to you.
    this is why mass attendance has dropped since the scandals smashed any social obligation.
    It was dropping before that though, and the big decline in vocations started in the early-mid 1970s, can't blame scandals for that because they were still all being hushed up.
    Regardless of their understanding of transubstantiation I think any mass going catholic would object to someone dishonestly obtaining consecrated hosts to burn and otherwise experiment on them.

    They used to object very strenuously to a lot of things, like people being able to buy contraceptives, or watch 18-rated films, or get divorced. Even for people who were not and had never been catholic. So I think I can be forgiven for not giving a fiddler's for what they object to.

    If I've been given something for free, it's now my property to dispose of as I wish. I wouldn't do this myself however as I have no interest in entering a catholic church, never mind obtaining anything from them.

    John Hutton wrote: »
    You would think so, but actually no. It tends to go along the lines of some of the posts in this thread "energy" "consciousness" etc. possibly enduring in the ether and that.

    Is this during extensive research of your own? Because if it's based on the posts here you have no way of knowing someone is an atheist unless they say so.

    John Hutton wrote: »
    And then for good measure bring a bomb with me to blow up the mountain.

    Well, this is getting very silly indeed.

    The only people who like to deface and vandalise mountains in Ireland are christians, sticking their ugly crosses on top as a sign of dominance of their religion over everyone else.

    Scrap the cap!



  • #257
    blinding
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,466 ✭✭✭blinding


    jaxxx wrote: »
    When we die, our bodies become the grass. And the antelope eat the grass. And so we are all connected, in the great circle of life.
    They are burying us too deep for that !


  • #258
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    jaxxx wrote: »
    [Jaxxx proceeds to grab the banhammer from Bannasidhe and hit 'em with it!]


    Obvious Lion King quote was obvious! [the original Lion King, not that pure utter garbage CGI 'live action' rubbish.. .. ..]

    My Bad Bannasidhe

    *morto*

    :o


  • #259
    John Hutton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭John Hutton


    Anyway I have intruded on this forum long enough so I will probably say goodbye with this post. (So no one need feel obliged to go to the trouble of replying to my posts when I probably won't reply again in turn)


  • #260
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,547 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    John Hutton wrote: »
    I voted other!

    I believe it could be hell, heaven or purgatory.

    Right, but they're Christian concepts. So you're not representing atheists. Or are you an atheist who believes in a hell, heaven or purgatory?


  • #261
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,476 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    Rather I find the humanist, and probably truly Christian too ironically enough, way to treat individuals is..... as individuals.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHbzSif78qQ


    I couldn't let that opportunity go! :)

    Scrap the cap!



  • Advertisement
  • #262
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,476 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    John Hutton wrote: »
    But I guess the hope for those who do commit acts of sacrilege is that death is indeed the end... because if it isn't there is that perfect justice I referred to earlier.

    So you're (a) assuming that the only possibilities after death are either nothing, or that your religion is correct. (b) wishing eternal punishment on someone. Not cool - I think words to that effect were written down in a book a long time ago?

    Scrap the cap!



  • #263
    John Hutton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭John Hutton


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    So you're (a) assuming that the only possibilities after death are either nothing, or that your religion is correct. (b) wishing eternal punishment on someone. Not cool - I think words to that effect were written down in a book a long time ago?
    I think snipping out that sentence from a longer post and portraying it the way you did is a bit unfair, especially as the next sentence says "As i said multiple times this type of thing is just sad,on multiple levels. With regard to the individual it's like watching someone destroy themselves and self destruct with drugs, you hope and pray they "see the light" at some stage, for their own sake if nothing else."



    I didn't wish hell or anything on anyone. And nor would I. I don't know definitively who would end up in hell only that certain actions would tend to push one in that direction and that's best avoided. In fact, hell might be far emptier than one would think. Bishop Barron (who I very much like but don't always fully agree with) has a take on this. I am not a universalist myself (this is a heresy) but I think, although have no way to know for sure, that there are far more people in heaven - or making their way there via purgatory - than there are in hell.



    So again, my position, far from wishing people were in hell, is wishing and praying that people don't end up there ! This is the Catholic position.



    I do think my religion is correct, I wouldn't believe it otherwise.


    One of the nice things about Catholicism is that forgiveness is guaranteed should it be asked for.


  • #264
    John Hutton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭John Hutton


    El_Duderino 09 wrote: »
    Right, but they're Christian concepts. So you're not representing atheists. Or are you an atheist who believes in a hell, heaven or purgatory?
    It seems I have done one of the things which I fond irritating in others by saying I am probably (I did give myself an out!) done with this thread only to have this be a false goodbye.


    So I should come back to you too. My point, probably unnecessary, was that the only option a Catholic could really pick was "other".


  • #265
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,476 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    John Hutton wrote: »
    I think snipping out that sentence from a longer post and portraying it the way you did is a bit unfair, especially as the next sentence says "As i said multiple times this type of thing is just sad,on multiple levels. With regard to the individual it's like watching someone destroy themselves and self destruct with drugs, you hope and pray they "see the light" at some stage, for their own sake if nothing else."

    I don't see how the context helps you there, if anything it's even more patronising and arrogant than what went before it.
    I didn't wish hell or anything on anyone. And nor would I.

    We know well what your "perfect justice" was supposed to mean, let's not nitpick on the word 'eternal', purgatory is still a punishment. So your are still hoping they receive some sort of divine retribution after death.

    Judge ye not..?
    I do think my religion is correct, I wouldn't believe it otherwise.

    But you expect us to entertain that as a possibility but are not prepared to entertain any other possibilities yourself.

    Scrap the cap!



  • #266
    John Hutton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭John Hutton


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    I don't see how the context helps you there, if anything it's even more patronising and arrogant than what went before it.
    You basically said that I wished damnation on the poster. I did not.
    We know well what your "perfect justice" was supposed to mean, let's not nitpick on the word 'eternal', purgatory is still a punishment. So your are still hoping they receive some sort of divine retribution after death.

    Judge ye not..?
    I really I don't follow where you are going with this. I just wrote that I do not know if people or a person would end up in hell (i.e. I cannot judge). I also said that I pray and wish that people won't end up there, and that I suspect that there are less people there than one might think.

    As for purgatory, I think I'd be happy enough to stumble over the line into purgatory for a spell.

    Sorry to disappoint you by not screaming about how I want hellfire and eternal punishment for those who don't agree with me or the religion I subscribe to.

    Nevertheless, I maintain my position as outlined earlier in the thread that some may take comfort in their belief that there will be no higher authority to exercise perfect judgement on them after they die. There is a comfort in this nothingness. Some might find it most unwelcome to discover that death is not the end, should that be the case. A definitive end might be welcome to some.
    But you expect us to entertain that as a possibility but are not prepared to entertain any other possibilities yourself.
    I think we can all learn something from talking to each other. I don't expect you to change your mind about such massive issues based on my statements of what I believe and why.

    I have considered many things (I was an agnostic/borderline atheist from my teens until my mid/late twenties) and will continue to do so, but I am not going to pretend that I have come to this thread unsure of what I think or believe. I have long considered these issues.

    I haven't demanded that anyone change their mind or become a Catholic. I think people can fundamentally disagree on something but still talk about it with a degree of respecting each others positions - i.e. not expecting or with the aim of trying to force people to agree with you.


  • #267
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

    But you expect us to entertain that as a possibility but are not prepared to entertain any other possibilities yourself.


    But your position can't be 100% positive whereas a believers can be. It only takes God to exist and demonstrate himself to someone for them to be sure he exists.

    It's irrelevant that they cannot prove it to you - the issue is whether they can be sure.

    And so, since you can't be positive, you must remain open to other possibilities. No?


  • #268
    VeryRapidSkoda
    Registered Users Posts: 100 ✭✭VeryRapidSkoda


    A different angle...Are we going with the idea that there is just one of us? What happens if the theory of parallel universes is true and that there are infinite versions of ourselves. Do we meet ourselves in a single heaven? Are there multiple heavens/hells. Is our consciousness like a telephone signal that when one version dies we jump to another version like from mast to mast? Could this be how reincarnation / nde and possibly even deja vu is experienced.

    I believe something happens but I don't know what


  • #269
    John Hutton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭John Hutton


    VeryRapidSkoda wrote: »
    A different angle...Are we going with the idea that there is just one of us? What happens if the theory of parallel universes is true and that there are infinite versions of ourselves. Do we meet ourselves in a single heaven? Are there multiple heavens/hells. Is our consciousness like a telephone signal that when one version dies we jump to another version like from mast to mast? Could this be how reincarnation / nde and possibly even deja vu is experienced.

    I believe something happens but I don't know what
    The multiverse theory is really very interesting and is often used by atheists to explain how the physical constants in our universe just happen to be perfectly right for life to exist. The odds for our universe, were it the only one, to randomly arrive at the "perfect" life giving numbers are very very high to the extent that it is very improbable.



    If there are millions of other universes however this is different because there is not just "one shot" to get it right, but millions and you can make the argument that everything just clicked into place in our universe by chance (however improbable). However, the argument would then follow that it is likely, if everything is random, that a lot, if not all, of any other universes would be lifeless as they would arrive at physical constants incompatible with life, either at all, or certainly life as it appears to us in our universe would not be possible. So it could be that the only you, is you and could only exist in this universe.



    Should all universes be identical, i.e. they "randomly" arrived at the same identical physical constants as us that would be amazing because it would suggest, to my mind certainly, design rather than mere random chance.


  • #270
    John Hutton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭John Hutton


    John Hutton wrote: »
    The multiverse theory is really very interesting and is often used by atheists to explain how the physical constants in our universe just happen to be perfectly right for life to exist. The odds for our universe, were it the only one, to randomly arrive at the "perfect" life giving numbers are very very high to the extent that it is very improbable.



    If there are millions of other universes however this is different because there is not just "one shot" to get it right, but millions and you can make the argument that everything just clicked into place in our universe by chance (however improbable). However, the argument would then follow that it is likely, if everything is random, that a lot, if not all, of any other universes would be lifeless as they would arrive at physical constants incompatible with life, either at all, or certainly life as it appears to us in our universe would not be possible. So it could be that the only you, is you and could only exist in this universe.



    Should all universes be identical, i.e. they "randomly" arrived at the same identical physical constants as us that would be amazing because it would suggest, to my mind certainly, design rather than mere random chance.
    Sorry I just realised I actually didn't really address anything you wrote, I got excited and carried away :) This is all very interesting again.

    Lets assume that there is a multiverse. This would still be on the "plane of existence" it would just be that we discovered that there are more layers to existence than we thought. It would not answer the fundamental question of how the universe came about (or multiple universes). We would really be in the same position as we are now, but the nature of the other universes (i.e are they random?) could help us to get closer to an answer.


  • Advertisement
  • #271
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    MOD

    There was a very interesting - on topic - discussion happening on the theme of what people believe happens after death which has become sidetracked into a bit of a slagging match on the off topic theme of consecrated hosts and the treatment/acquisition thereof.

    Given so many seem to feel so strongly about "sacrilegious yea or nay" I am looking forward to seeing a possibly heated yet always polite exchange of views in the thread now opened.
    What will end is such a discussion happening in this thread.

    Henceforth such posts in this thread will be zapped.

    Thanking you all for staying on topic.

    Posts on hosts moved to new thread here:
    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058114261


  • #272
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,476 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    "Annihilation has no terrors for me, because I have already tried it before I was born—a hundred million years—and I have suffered more in an hour, in this life, than I remember to have suffered in the whole hundred million years put together. There was a peace, a serenity, an absence of all sense of responsibility, an absence of worry, an absence of care, grief, perplexity; and the presence of a deep content and unbroken satisfaction in that hundred million years of holiday which I look back upon with a tender longing and with a grateful desire to resume, when the opportunity comes."

    - Mark Twain

    Scrap the cap!



  • #273
    auspicious
    Registered Users Posts: 4,497 ✭✭✭auspicious


    Twain had a very nihilistic mood the day he wrote that. Poetic license. If you don't exist you don't experience.


  • #274
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,476 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    auspicious wrote: »
    Twain had a very nihilistic mood the day he wrote that. Poetic license. If you don't exist you don't experience.

    Well the word "annihilation" used in relation to his future death surely imples non-existence? and it's not like we didn't not-exist previously.

    Scrap the cap!



  • #275
    auspicious
    Registered Users Posts: 4,497 ✭✭✭auspicious


    It implies ending or destroy something. Something is or exists until it does. Annihilation does not apply to something that never was.


  • #276
    John Hutton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭John Hutton


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    "Annihilation has no terrors for me, because I have already tried it before I was born—a hundred million years—and I have suffered more in an hour, in this life, than I remember to have suffered in the whole hundred million years put together. There was a peace, a serenity, an absence of all sense of responsibility, an absence of worry, an absence of care, grief, perplexity; and the presence of a deep content and unbroken satisfaction in that hundred million years of holiday which I look back upon with a tender longing and with a grateful desire to resume, when the opportunity comes."

    - Mark Twain
    That quote gets at what I was saying earlier, about some people finding what they feel is comfort from the idea of nothingness and a definitive end.


  • Advertisement
  • #277
    LessOutragePlz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,363 ✭✭✭LessOutragePlz


    Can I clarify what we mean by "we" when we say "we" die as this open to interpretation.

    Do we mean our body? Soul? Consciousness? Spirit?

    As I've already responded in this thread but, that was based on my interpretation of "we" meaning just our body.

    As I believe our inner most being the "I am" that precedes our notion of ourselves and our identity doesn't die as it was not born.


  • #278
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,167 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    LessOutragePlz wrote: »
    our identity doesn't die as it was not born.
    how did it come into existence?


  • #279
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,476 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    OK so where was it for the preceding 14 billion years or so?

    Scrap the cap!



  • #280
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,167 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    my identity is comprised in no insignificant way (to put it mildly) by the circumstances in which i was born and raised. you could argue that my reaction to those circumstances was somewhat predicted by the existence of some pre-existing 'soul', but that would raise the question - how many such pre-existing 'souls' exist, waiting for a corporeal body to inhabit?


  • #281
    auspicious
    Registered Users Posts: 4,497 ✭✭✭auspicious


    LessOutragePlz wrote: »
    .

    As I believe our inner most being the "I am" that precedes our notion of ourselves and our identity doesn't die as it was not born.

    I 'believe' it's turtles all the way down.


  • Advertisement
  • #282
    LessOutragePlz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,363 ✭✭✭LessOutragePlz


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    how did it come into existence?

    It came into existence through our mind and our perception of ourselves.

    Our consciousness doesn't die as it has always existed we only think it exists within our body.

    Our body is like a candle that is lit it keeps burning and will eventually burn out and die but our consciousness is the neverending flame that lit that candle and it cannot die because it was not born as it has always existed.


  • #283
    LessOutragePlz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,363 ✭✭✭LessOutragePlz


    auspicious wrote: »
    I 'believe' it's turtles all the way down.

    I don't know what that means tbh.


  • #284
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,167 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    LessOutragePlz wrote: »
    It came into existence through our mind and our perception of ourselves.

    ...it has always existed.
    does not compute?


  • #285
    LessOutragePlz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,363 ✭✭✭LessOutragePlz


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    does not compute?

    Just answering the question the thread asked not trying to convince anyone that I'm right and their wrong just giving my perspective on it.


  • #286
    10000maniacs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,017 ✭✭✭10000maniacs


    LessOutragePlz wrote: »
    How would we know that we alive if we had not once been dead?

    We aren't born so we don't die.

    Energy can't be destroyed so the energy inside must live on once our body dies.

    And it warms up the coffin for a day or so. The worms enjoy our remains, and that is it.


  • #287
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,476 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    LessOutragePlz wrote: »
    It came into existence through our mind and our perception of ourselves.

    ...and when the percolation of oxygen and nutrients through the brain which brought that mind and that perception into being stops, what then?

    Scrap the cap!



  • #288
    auspicious
    Registered Users Posts: 4,497 ✭✭✭auspicious


    LessOutragePlz wrote: »
    Just answering the question the thread asked not trying to convince anyone that I'm right and their wrong just giving my perspective on it.

    The factor here is your perspective. If your perspective only revolves on your belief then you have to provide evidence that your belief is founded.


  • #289
    LessOutragePlz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,363 ✭✭✭LessOutragePlz


    auspicious wrote: »
    The factor here is your perspective. If your perspective only revolves on your belief then you have to provide evidence that your belief is founded.

    Have a look at Mooji on YouTube as he points towards this and he could explain it better than I could it's a spiritual belief rather than a religious one.


  • #290
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,348 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    John Hutton wrote: »
    That quote gets at what I was saying earlier, about some people finding what they feel is comfort from the idea of nothingness and a definitive end.

    I am not sure how useful an observation that is in isolation however. Because likely you get just as much comfort in your beliefs about an after life as another person might from no after life.

    Their comfort in isolation is not interesting therefore.

    More interesting would be whether a person believes something BECAUSE it brings them comfort.... or whether they believe that something and incidentally the belief also brings them comfort.

    For me it is the latter. I see absolutely no evidence whatsoever that consciousness survives the death of the brain. Simply none. Certainly none on this thread. So I do not believe in an after life.

    That fact is one I am happy about, as the idea of an eternal afterlife is an awful one. The idea of one ruled by a dictator, even a supposed benign dictator, is monumentally worse.

    But my relief that there is no after life has absolutely no impact on my lack of belief in an afterlife. I do not lack that belief because of the comfort or relief it brings.

    I am not sure how the break down between theists and atheists is in this regard. But my years of talking to both camps tells me that belief because of comfort, rather than evidence or lack of evidence, is a trait I find significantly and massively more often in theists.

    One speaker, I think it was Sam Harris, said that in all his public touring debating religious topics.... that defence of religion seemed to fall into three general groups and rarely fell outside it. They were essentially:

    1) Argument that the belief/religion itself was true. (the rarest)
    2) Ignoring the topic and arguing that atheist is dangerous or damaging.
    3) Arguing some narrative that religion brings comfort or happiness, regardless of whether true or not.

    And my experience is much in line with his on both the topic of the existence of god, and in the concept of an after life.


  • #291
    LessOutragePlz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,363 ✭✭✭LessOutragePlz


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    ...and when the percolation of oxygen and nutrients through the brain which brought that mind and that perception into being stops, what then?

    Our consciousness continues to live so death isn't the end for it, our brain and body dies but our consciousness manifested into our bodies to make this very discovery. Like I've said before I'm not talking about the scientific definition of consciousness rather a spiritual one.


  • Advertisement
  • #292
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,476 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    LessOutragePlz wrote: »
    Have a look at Mooji on YouTube as he points towards this and he could explain it better than I could it's a spiritual belief rather than a religious one.

    Spirituality is even worse nonsense than religion. At least we know religions exist! Nobody has ever been able to satisfactorily define 'spirituality' never mind demonstrate its existence.

    Scrap the cap!



  • #293
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,476 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    LessOutragePlz wrote: »
    Our consciousness continues to live

    How?

    Scrap the cap!



  • #294
    LessOutragePlz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,363 ✭✭✭LessOutragePlz


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    How?

    I can't explain that to you as I'm only beginning my own journey into answering that question myself.

    You need to find the answer to that question yourself .I certainly don't claim to have all the answers nor encourage anyone to follow my path as each person must find their own way to know the true self. This true self is free from our identity of ourselves and our ego that we have been conditioned to believe.


  • #295
    LessOutragePlz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,363 ✭✭✭LessOutragePlz


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    Spirituality is even worse nonsense than religion. At least we know religions exist! Nobody has ever been able to satisfactorily define 'spirituality' never mind demonstrate its existence.

    That's fair enough but I believe that not everything in this world can be defined and explained and you can either reject or accept that concept.

    What you call nonsense others call home as spirituality brings people home to their true selves not the person or body that we believe ourselves to be spirituality helps us discover our inner most being.


  • #296
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,783 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    LessOutragePlz wrote: »
    Like I've said before I'm not talking about the scientific definition of consciousness rather a spiritual one.

    What's the difference between a "scientific definition" and a "spiritual one"?


  • #297
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    I am not sure how useful an observation that is in isolation however. Because likely you get just as much comfort in your beliefs about an after life as another person might from no after life.

    Their comfort in isolation is not interesting therefore.

    More interesting would be whether a person believes something BECAUSE it brings them comfort.... or whether they believe that something and incidentally the belief also brings them comfort.

    For me it is the latter. I see absolutely no evidence whatsoever that consciousness survives the death of the brain. Simply none. Certainly none on this thread. So I do not believe in an after life.

    That fact is one I am happy about, as the idea of an eternal afterlife is an awful one. The idea of one ruled by a dictator, even a supposed benign dictator, is monumentally worse.

    But my relief that there is no after life has absolutely no impact on my lack of belief in an afterlife. I do not lack that belief because of the comfort or relief it brings.

    I am not sure how the break down between theists and atheists is in this regard. But my years of talking to both camps tells me that belief because of comfort, rather than evidence or lack of evidence, is a trait I find significantly and massively more often in theists.

    You see no evidence that consciousness survives death of the brain. You believe, presumably, that consciousness resides in the brain.

    You believe. Based on evidence which you find convincing to you. You're am evidence based believer - that belief producing atheism.

    -

    Your conclusion about theists rests on your decision as to what constitutes evidence. They may not lack evidence whilst lacking what YOU hold to be evidence.

    You get to be judge and jury as to what evidence is. And to no great surprise, figure yourself on firm ground and those with a conflicting view, not.

    -

    You speak about evidence in something of a Royal We fashion. Claiming ground no one (but like minds) has granted you.


  • #298
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,348 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    You see no evidence that consciousness survives death of the brain. You believe, presumably, that consciousness resides in the brain.

    My position is that all the evidence we have so far.... not most of it but all of it..... links consciousness to the brain. None of the evidence we have so far.... not some of it but none of it.... shows any disconnect or possibility of disconnect between the two.

    So it is not what I "believe" that is relevant here. It is what the evidence thus far suggests to me. And it suggests one thing only, and not the other at all.

    The rest of your narrative about me..... your usual MO of talking about me rather than ever substantiating your own positions.... is irrelevant therefore. If you have evidence or access to evidence you think I am not considering.... then by all means present it here.


  • #299
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    My position is that all the evidence we have so far.... not most of it but all of it..... links consciousness to the brain. None of the evidence we have so far.... not some of it but none of it.... shows any disconnect or possibility of disconnect between the two.

    So it is not what I "believe" that is relevant here. It is what the evidence thus far suggests to me. And it suggests one thing only, and not the other at all.

    The rest of your narrative about me..... your usual MO of talking about me rather than ever substantiating your own positions.... is irrelevant therefore. If you have evidence or access to evidence you think I am not considering.... then by all means present it here.

    Who's 'we' if not the Royal We I referred to? And aren't you making some assumptions based on some or other philosophy of knowledge when it comes to what constitutes evidence?*

    Since the philosophy you employ rests on your believing it to be correct, doesn't all rest on a belief?


    *for those inclined to reach for dictionary definitions, spare me. Such definitions rest on philosophies. Commonly accepted philosophies granted (even by me up to a point) but only philosophies.


  • #300
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,547 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    LessOutragePlz wrote: »
    Our consciousness continues to live so death isn't the end for it, our brain and body dies but our consciousness manifested into our bodies to make this very discovery. Like I've said before I'm not talking about the scientific definition of consciousness rather a spiritual one.

    What does that mean? What is a spiritual definition of consciousness?


  • Advertisement
  • #301
    saabsaab
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    Some food for thought here..


    https://www.nyas.org/news-articles/academy-news/is-there-life-after-death/


Advertisement