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…78101213…16

Comments

  • #452
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,513 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Tonnes, kilos, schmilos. NASA has done worse. And the bigger boys made me do it.

    Scrap the cap!



  • #453
    auspicious
    Registered Users Posts: 4,497 ✭✭✭auspicious


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    What have I done? :eek:

    Zero is a REAL number.
    If zero exists God exists.


  • #454
    one world order
    Registered Users Posts: 592 ✭✭✭one world order


    Simply ceasing to exist means one has to deny the spiritual realm exists. That means denying the existence of angels, demons, people being possessed resulting in abnormal behaviour, many of the new age spiritual practices that involve spiritual guides that are really demons, a person's eternal soul, and a day of judgement for everyone. It's a lot of denying. I don't think there is any atheist that truly believes there is no creator.


  • #455
    tjdaly
    Registered Users Posts: 85 ✭✭tjdaly


    Nobody has a clue OP and don't let the atheists or anybody else tell you otherwise. Enjoy the mystery, use your intuition, and believe whatever makes you happy.


  • #456
    Lorddrakul
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,775 ✭✭✭Lorddrakul


    I would contend that, while no one has definitive answers, the parameters of the discussion are not as unknowable as they might appear.

    For example, it has been known since ancient times, that a bang to the head can fundamentally alter a person's nature.

    We now know that to be brain injury. The Egyptians sent us along the wrong path for millennia, with the heart as the seat of emotions, even though we now also know that there are ganglia of brain-like neurons in the heart too.

    The point is, conscious resides and emanates from the brain and an impaired brain, through injury or disease, can show a deterioration in a person's consciousness.

    Therefore, if consciousness cannot be separated from the brain, then it makes the idea of a soul, spirit, whatever, very difficult.

    Prof Brian Cox put it very succinctly when he said that we have now, for about 150 years, refined what has become known as the standard model, which includes the sum of all knowledge about how matter, space and energy interact.

    All we know thus far, he said, indicates that energy on its own, without physical structure, will dissipate. Therefore, if the soul can exist independently of the body, it does so in a manner not just completely unknown, but also completely unevidenced - as in, no hint or indication what or which might be at play.

    This is tantamount to the very idea of gods themselves - unknowable. And therefore, mere conjecture, up there with teapots orbiting the other side of the sun.

    From a logical perspective, I have to say: feck that from a height.

    Everything we associate with the personal experience of the divine, from the all consuming presence, to the feeling of oneness with the universe, or even the demon presence, can be induced with drugs, or other physical stress. This would indicate that what we are experiencing is not the divine, but a biological interpretation of a set of stimuli that tends to go in one direction. But, that one direction has resulted in the veritable cornucopia of belief, religions and daftness that we enjoy today.

    I do not claim to know why we do this; there are probably evolutionary advantages to having religious ideas, such as social cohesion, order and species distribution, but it does result in some awful behaviour by our species.

    The more we refine our ability to measure what is going on in our brains and nervous systems, the more we understand how our brains work.

    We now know that there is a level of precognition in our decision making that is breathtaking in its effect but very hard to understand in its effectiveness. It has been shown that the certain decisions are made by certain parts of the brain milliseconds before the conscious part becomes aware of it, or responds.

    But the fact remains, consciousness, in every single test that has ever been devised or carried out, does not survive the destruction of the brain that produced it.

    Not only that, everything else we have learned about the environment it exists in supports that position.

    To ignore this and persist in an unsupported belief, or worse still to insist that others alter their lives to conform to it, is the very height of madness.

    I fully believe in people's rights to believe in whatever the feck they like, but as soon as someone thinks that right allows them to compel someone else to do something, then they lose the that right.

    As one wag put it, if one person has an imaginary friend, they are a bit odd. If everybody has the same one, it's religion.

    But back the the original point, if one considers the vastness of time before and after one's own birth, look at the wonder there is to cherish the time you have. Look at the choice you have to either make the world a better place by being kind to all, not because of an eternal reward or the threat of hellfire, but because it's just a good thing to do, or just be a dick and always been known for that.

    I think making that choice, not to be good, but to do good with the time you have, is the most human thing you can do because it contributes to something larger than one's self - the species well being as a whole, with the small resource you have: your time.

    Or something, I dunno.

    What?


  • Advertisement
  • #457
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,778 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    one world order wrote: »
    Simply ceasing to exist means one has to deny the spiritual realm exists. That means denying the existence of angels, demons, people being possessed resulting in abnormal behaviour, many of the new age spiritual practices that involve spiritual guides that are really demons, a person's eternal soul, and a day of judgement for everyone. It's a lot of denying. I don't think there is any atheist that truly believes there is no creator.

    And what divine power do you posses that you claim to know what every atheist does or does not believe? I rather doubt that anyone can categorically state that they know what anyone believes other than themselves. Some seem to struggle even with that ;)

    Subjectively, I know you're wrong as I personally have never believed in the existence of a creator. Objectively you are also most probably wrong given that ~80% of the people on this poll believe death is final which wouldn't tally with your creationist stance. Or perhaps you believe that I'm lying and they're all lying too?


  • #458
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,513 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    one world order wrote: »
    Simply ceasing to exist means one has to deny the spiritual realm exists. That means denying the existence of angels, demons, people being possessed resulting in abnormal behaviour, many of the new age spiritual practices that involve spiritual guides that are really demons, a person's eternal soul, and a day of judgement for everyone.

    All of that stuff has never been demonstrated to be anything other than complete and utter nonsense.
    I don't think there is any atheist that truly believes there is no creator.

    You can think what you want, but you'd be wrong.

    Scrap the cap!



  • #459
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I don't think life is as linear as we perceive it. The past exists in the past in the same sense that the future exists in the future. Take the linearity out of it and our whole life exists all in the same instance. Not even an instance because even that has a linear meaning. It just all is. So make the most of it because its all you'll ever have.


  • #460
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,190 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    one world order wrote: »
    Simply ceasing to exist means one has to deny the spiritual realm exists. That means denying the existence of angels, demons...

    What about the Tooth fairy, the Easter bunny, Santa Claus, the Bogeyman?
    I don't think there is any atheist that truly believes there is no creator.

    Yes there is, just one. :pac:


  • #461
    auspicious
    Registered Users Posts: 4,497 ✭✭✭auspicious


    Lorddrakul wrote: »

    Therefore, if consciousness cannot be separated from the brain, then it makes the idea of a soul, spirit, whatever, very difficult.


    All we know thus far, he said, indicates that energy on its own, without physical structure, will dissipate. Therefore, if the soul can exist independently of the body, it does so in a manner not just completely unknown, but also completely unevidenced - as in, no hint or indication what or which might be at play.

    We can't argue against the fact that brain deterioration changes one's perception of reality. The brain is the seat of perceptual experience after all albeit a subjective impression on a very narrow 'bandwidth', specialised to each species; we will never know what it is to see like an eagle or smell like a dog.
    We know our eyes only see a fraction of the information available so we see far far less than we think we do. Our senses are completely fooled into believing a material reality exists. Science has shown us an atom is empty space and in fact a wave until interacted with.
    The consciousness we know is only of this reality and the brain just the tool for experience. Anything beyond I agree is unknowable until super A.I. comes along perhaps.

    [quote="Lorddrakul;115039747"

    But back the the original point, if one considers the vastness of time before and after one's own birth, look at the wonder there is to cherish the time you have. Look at the choice you have to either make the world a better place by being kind to all, not because of an eternal reward or the threat of hellfire, but because it's just a good thing to do, or just be a dick and always been known for that.

    I think making that choice, not to be good, but to do good with the time you have, is the most human thing you can do because it contributes to something larger than one's self - the species well being as a whole, with the small resource you have: your time.
    [/quote]

    A compelling argument to go vegan if ever I heard one.


  • Advertisement
  • #462
    auspicious
    Registered Users Posts: 4,497 ✭✭✭auspicious


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwkCXjRn2NA


    http://noosphere.princeton.edu/measurement.html


  • #463
    saabsaab
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    Interesting article below re consciousness after death..



    '2016 study published in the Canadian Journal of Biological Sciences, doctors recounted shutting off life support for four terminally ill patients, only to have one of the patients continue emitting delta wave bursts—the measurable electrical activity in the brain we normally experience during deep sleep—for more than 10 minutes after the patient had been pronounced dead; no pupil dilation, no pulse, no heartbeat. The authors were at a loss for a physiological explanation.Newsweek subscription offers >
    Related Stories




    Parnia's research has shown that people who survive medical death frequently report experiences that share similar themes: bright lights; benevolent guiding figures; relief from physical pain and a deeply felt sensation of peace. Because those experiences are subjective, it's possible to chalk them up to hallucinations. Where that explanation fails, though, is among the patients who have died on an operating table or crash cart and reported watching—from a corner of the room, from above—as doctors tried to save them, accounts subsequently verified by the (very perplexed) doctors themselves.
    How these patients were able to describe objective events that took place while they were dead, we're not exactly sure, just as we're not exactly sure why certain parts of us appear to withstand death even as it takes hold of everything else. But it does seem to suggest that when our brains and bodies die, our consciousness may not, or at least not right away.
    "I don't mean that people have their eyes open or that their brain's working after they die," Parnia said. "That petrifies people. I'm saying we have a consciousness that makes up who we are—our selves, thoughts, feelings, emotions—and that entity, it seems, does not become annihilated just because we've crossed the threshold of death; it appears to keep functioning and not dissipate. How long it lingers, we can't say."


  • #464
    one world order
    Registered Users Posts: 592 ✭✭✭one world order


    smacl wrote: »
    And what divine power do you posses that you claim to know what every atheist does or does not believe? I rather doubt that anyone can categorically state that they know what anyone believes other than themselves. Some seem to struggle even with that ;)

    Subjectively, I know you're wrong as I personally have never believed in the existence of a creator. Objectively you are also most probably wrong given that ~80% of the people on this poll believe death is final which wouldn't tally with your creationist stance. Or perhaps you believe that I'm lying and they're all lying too?

    Reading some of your previous posts, you have a lot of hostility towards God. The reason most atheists are so hostile is because deep down they know God is real, and trying to suppress God's existence makes them angry when someone talks about God. People that try to suppress God usually resort to mocking and name calling to make God a joke and so overcome that internal conflict.

    I believe this world is under the control of the Devil, trying to deceive as many people as possible. I know God is personal, he will reward those that seek him. We as humans are a sinful people, and it's that sinful nature that separates us from God as he is holy. But God did do something for us for all those sins we have done, and it's that act of love, which comes under the most attack through films, cartoons, media, music and the false indoctrination been pushed in the education system.


  • #465
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,778 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    one world order wrote: »
    Reading some of your previous posts, you have a lot of hostility towards God. The reason most atheists are so hostile is because deep down they know God is real, and trying to suppress God's existence makes them angry when someone talks about God. People that try to suppress God usually resort to mocking and name calling to make God a joke and so overcome that internal conflict.

    Not so, I have no more hostility towards your God than I do Professor Dumbledore in Harry Potter, as I understand both to be entirely fictitious. Nor for that matter do I have any problems whatsoever in people professing a belief in that God and regularly defend people's rights to hold such a belief. I reserve my hostility towards the undue influence of any church within our society who would seek to inflict their belief system on others.
    I believe this world is under the control of the Devil, trying to deceive as many people as possible. I know God is personal, he will reward those that seek him. We as humans are a sinful people, and it's that sinful nature that separates us from God as he is holy. But God did do something for us for all those sins we have done, and it's that act of love, which comes under the most attack through films, cartoons, media, music and the false indoctrination been pushed in the education system.

    Good for you. I believe the above is a load of balderdash, but as above, we're all entitled to our beliefs no matter how utterly bizarre they may appear to others.


  • #466
    Munsterman12
    Registered Users Posts: 91 ✭✭Munsterman12


    We are reborn as ghosts on the moon.


  • #467
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,348 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    one world order wrote: »
    Simply ceasing to exist means one has to deny the spiritual realm exists. That means denying the existence of angels, demons, people being possessed resulting in abnormal behaviour, many of the new age spiritual practices that involve spiritual guides that are really demons, a person's eternal soul, and a day of judgement for everyone. It's a lot of denying.

    It's not all that much denial at all really given you have offered zero reason to think any of the above exists. Claiming our non-belief in them is "denial" therefore is like offering me an entirely empty plate and later claiming I "refused" peas and carrots.
    one world order wrote: »
    I don't think there is any atheist that truly believes there is no creator.

    Funny that, we have another theists in the last few weeks going around insisting on telling all the atheists here what they actually believe and think rather than ever stopping to ask THEM what they believe or think. In fact much like your subsequent claim that atheists deep down know god is real, the user in question in fact started a whole thread claiming exactly that too.

    I wonder if you both went to the same school of presuppositional evangelism as Radio DJ Matt Slick.


  • #468
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,348 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    saabsaab wrote: »
    Interesting article below re consciousness after death..

    It's not though is it? It was an article about minor activity continuing in a short temporary unexplained manner after MEDICAL death was called. (Medical death and actual death being somewhat different).
    saabsaab wrote: »
    Parnia's research has shown that people who survive medical death
    saabsaab wrote: »
    reported watching—from a corner of the room, from above—as doctors tried to save them, accounts subsequently verified by the (very perplexed) doctors themselves.

    And Parnia went on to construct double blind controlled experiments to try and verify that the patients in question actually were viewing the room from the reported locations.

    Thus far, to my knowledge, those experiments have 100% failed to verify a single case of it actually happening. And this is from Parnia who is biased TOWARDS not away from verifying life after death.


  • #469
    one world order
    Registered Users Posts: 592 ✭✭✭one world order


    smacl wrote: »
    Not so, I have no more hostility towards your God than I do Professor Dumbledore in Harry Potter, as I understand both to be entirely fictitious. Nor for that matter do I have any problems whatsoever in people professing a belief in that God and regularly defend people's rights to hold such a belief. I reserve my hostility towards the undue influence of any church within our society who would seek to inflict their belief system on others.

    What is it about Jesus Christ that you want gone from society? You see it in so many areas of this world, the Muslims deny Jesus died on the cross, new age spiritual practices don't talk about the problem of sin or Jesus, moderators on boards ban anyone that talks about the truth, so many people following the world are so hostile to reading the bible. There is something about Jesus Christ that those not in the truth do not want to be told. Why is that?


  • #470
    saabsaab
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    It's not though is it? It was an article about minor activity continuing in a short temporary unexplained manner after MEDICAL death was called. (Medical death and actual death being somewhat different).




    And Parnia went on to construct double blind controlled experiments to try and verify that the patients in question actually were viewing the room from the reported locations.

    Thus far, to my knowledge, those experiments have 100% failed to verify a single case of it actually happening. And this is from Parnia who is biased TOWARDS not away from verifying life after death.


    Those studies as far as I can make out aren't finished. The visual tests were unsuccessful so far in a very small number but an audio hit was confirmed.


  • #471
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    one world order wrote: »
    What is it about Jesus Christ that you want gone from society? You see it in so many areas of this world, the Muslims deny Jesus died on the cross, new age spiritual practices don't talk about the problem of sin or Jesus, moderators on boards ban anyone that talks about the truth, so many people following the world are so hostile to reading the bible. There is something about Jesus Christ that those not in the truth do not want to be told. Why is that?

    There is more to religion than Jesus, more alleged gods than Jehovah, so ask yourself if you want Allah or Kali or Thor 'in your life' in such a way as Jesus is inserted into Irish people's lives and you will be able to answer your own question.

    For an athiest Jesus is no more or less relevant than Allah or Kali or Thor. Just another deity other people believe in.

    And as we live in a Republic we should be able to live our lives utterly free from each and every diety should we wish.


  • Advertisement
  • #472
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,778 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    one world order wrote: »
    What is it about Jesus Christ that you want gone from society? You see it in so many areas of this world, the Muslims deny Jesus died on the cross, new age spiritual practices don't talk about the problem of sin or Jesus, moderators on boards ban anyone that talks about the truth, so many people following the world are so hostile to reading the bible. There is something about Jesus Christ that those not in the truth do not want to be told. Why is that?

    You're on an atheist forum here where most people don't believe any stories from the bible. I would recommend that if you want to discuss Christianity with like minded folk that you'd be better on the Christianity forum. If you're here to preach, you're most likely going to have a hard time of it as you're looking for others to treat your beliefs with respect while trampling over theirs. This is something most atheists are all too used to and tend to treat with derision. I often wonder what motivates a proselytising Christian to do this. Honestly, it comes across as looking for brownie points with your deity in the hope of an easier entrance into the pearly gates. One would hope an omniscient deity would see through this ruse.


  • #473
    saabsaab
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    There is more to religion than Jesus, more alleged gods than Jehovah, so ask yourself if you want Allah or Kali or Thor 'in your life' in such a way as Jesus is inserted into Irish people's lives and you will be able to answer your own question.

    For an athiest Jesus is no more or less relevant than Allah or Kali or Thor. Just another deity other people believe in.

    And as we live in a Republic we should be able to live our lives utterly free from each and every diety should we wish.


    I guess that there are many names for a supreme being as there are messengers like Jesus/Mohammed/Budda


  • #474
    one world order
    Registered Users Posts: 592 ✭✭✭one world order


    smacl wrote: »
    You're on an atheist forum here where most people don't believe any stories from the bible. I would recommend that if you want to discuss Christianity with like minded folk that you'd be better on the Christianity forum. If you're here to preach, you're most likely going to have a hard time of it as you're looking for others to treat your beliefs with respect while trampling over theirs. This is something most atheists are all too used to and tend to treat with derision. I often wonder what motivates a proselytising Christian to do this. Honestly, it comes across as looking for brownie points with your deity in the hope of an easier entrance into the pearly gates. One would hope an omniscient deity would see through this ruse.

    You want Jesus gone from society but if I ask why, you tell me to go to the Christianity forum. Surly you can come up with a reason, and no I am not looking for brownie points from God, the salvation of my soul is already secured.


  • #475
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,778 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    one world order wrote: »
    You want Jesus gone from society but if I ask why, you tell me to go to the Christianity forum. Surly you can come up with a reason, and no I am not looking for brownie points from God, the salvation of my soul is already secured.

    You might point out where I said I want Jesus out of society. What I would like is for religious zealots of all religions to stop trying to inflict their dubious beliefs on others. How would you feel for example if the state spent your taxes trying to pressure your children into becoming Muslim?


  • #476
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    saabsaab wrote: »
    I guess that there are many names for a supreme being as there are messengers like Jesus/Mohammed/Budda

    And a guess is all you have... btw, you might want to 'brush up' (I believe that is the current term) on Siddhartha Gautama's view on the existence of this alleged 'supreme being' before lumping him in with Jesus and Mohammad, then your guess may be better informed.


  • #477
    one world order
    Registered Users Posts: 592 ✭✭✭one world order


    smacl wrote: »
    You might point out where I said I want Jesus out of society. What I would like is for religious zealots of all religions to stop trying to inflict their dubious beliefs on others. How would you feel for example if the state spent your taxes trying to pressure your children into becoming Muslim?

    The church is the body of Christ. It's a common theme with atheists. They say they're tolerant, their diverse but when it comes to the teaching of the gospel, they are angry and hateful. It shows the spirit that operates in most people today is an anti Christ spirit. They hate God, they hate Christ and they hate the word of God. You don't want to hear about God because you know your own actions condemn you and you are on your way to hell so you ignore the truth.

    Look around you, we are living in the last days that the bible warned us about. People parading around their sin, sleeping around and thinking that's right. So many people nowadays are self centered, lovers of money, proud, ungrateful, unreligious, full of lust and hating what is good. They don't want to hear about God as it highlights something about one self they know is wrong.


  • #478
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    one world order wrote: »
    The church is the body of Christ. It's a common theme with atheists. They say they're tolerant, their diverse but when it comes to the teaching of the gospel, they are angry and hateful. It shows the spirit that operates in most people today is an anti Christ spirit. They hate God, they hate Christ and they hate the word of God. You don't want to hear about God because you know your own actions condemn you and you are on your way to hell so you ignore the truth.

    Look around you, we are living in the last days that the bible warned us about. People parading around their sin, sleeping around and thinking that's right. So many people nowadays are self centered, lovers of money, proud, ungrateful, unreligious, full of lust and hating what is good. They don't want to hear about God as it highlights something about one self they know is wrong.

    What does it say about a person who constantly calls for people to endanger the lives of others, fawns over people in power who have committed multiple sins by their own religious standards and actually worse by most people's standards, while quoting know conspiracy theorists?


  • #479
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,778 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    one world order wrote: »
    The church is the body of Christ. It's a common theme with atheists. They say they're tolerant, their diverse but when it comes to the teaching of the gospel, they are angry and hateful. It shows the spirit that operates in most people today is an anti Christ spirit. They hate God, they hate Christ and they hate the word of God. You don't want to hear about God because you know your own actions condemn you and you are on your way to hell so you ignore the truth.

    Look around you, we are living in the last days that the bible warned us about. People parading around their sin, sleeping around and thinking that's right. So many people nowadays are self centered, lovers of money, proud, ungrateful, unreligious, full of lust and hating what is good. They don't want to hear about God as it highlights something about one self they know is wrong.

    As I've already said, I no more hate your god than I hate Odin or Allah or Homer Simpson. I consider them all equally fictitious and not worth hating. You on the other hand show a distinct intolerance for other people's right to hold beliefs that run contrary to your own. That is something I do have a problem with as does society at large. The anger you see with atheists is not with your religion it is with your intolerance, aggressive zeal and utter disrespect for the beliefs of others.


  • #480
    pauldla
    Registered Users Posts: 2,247 ✭✭✭pauldla


    Ah, the 'Why do you hate Jesus' argument...


  • Advertisement
  • #481
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,348 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    saabsaab wrote: »
    Those studies as far as I can make out aren't finished. The visual tests were unsuccessful so far in a very small number but an audio hit was confirmed.

    That is why I said "thus far". Parnia and a few others have been doing this work for a very long time. I first heard of the studies quite some years ago. And thus far nothing of note has come from them.

    The visual tests are the interesting one as it would require the patient be outside their body.

    "Audio hits" however is more vague as hearing things in your surroundings while apparently unconscious is less indicative of the paranormal or the supernatural than it is of us simply not understanding the workings of the brain.

    I think an error here many people make is to assume that if a patient is entirely unconscious that their brain is "off". That is a dangerous assumption. The brain can still be quite active on it's own without the person being conscious.

    When sound hits the ear hairs the body will still translate that into electrical impulses. Those impulses will still travel to the brain. And at some level the brain will still process them. I know of no reason why the brain can not "hear" sound, and even lay down that sound as memory, without a conscious perceiver being on line at the time.

    So while "Audio Hits" will be very interesting in terms of our understanding the brain and it's functionality.... it will be much less interesting in terms of subjects like consciousness existing outside the body, after the death of the brain, or the existence of an after life.


  • #482
    pauldla
    Registered Users Posts: 2,247 ✭✭✭pauldla


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    ...

    I think an error here many people make is to assume that if a patient is entirely unconscious that their brain is "off". That is a dangerous assumption. The brain can still be quite active on it's own without the person being conscious.

    ...

    Not meaning to interject, Nozz, but this paragraph reminded me of that phenomenon, surely familiar to many, of when you are driving and suddenly realise that you have absolutely no memory of the previous ten kilometers. 'Autopilot' driving. Yet had there been an incident - a child running on to the road, for example - you would immediately have snapped back to reality.

    'On' and 'off' are much more complex than may seem.


  • #483
    babi-hrse
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 788 ✭✭✭babi-hrse


    All our material parts just erode away into another form of physical matter or energy. Our consciousness goes probably back to wherever it came from.
    I find it difficult to wrap my head around how we can all be born the same way but yet all confined to our vessel. You may look like me even twins may look alike but yet each has their own consciousness and can't just flit from one body to the next or share both experiences. The closest thing to discribe it and still fall so short of what I'm trying to say to make it a poor similae is every computer could be built the same but each one will have their own Mac address making them different in some small way that separates them.


  • #484
    babi-hrse
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 788 ✭✭✭babi-hrse


    pauldla wrote: »
    Not meaning to interject, Nozz, but this paragraph reminded me of that phenomenon, surely familiar to many, of when you are driving and suddenly realise that you have absolutely no memory of the previous ten kilometers. 'Autopilot' driving. Yet had there been an incident - a child running on to the road, for example - you would immediately have snapped back to reality.

    'On' and 'off' are much more complex than may seem.

    Its amazing how one can be focused writing a letter but when it comes to driving they can follow all the rules and end up at a location following all rules of the road and stopping at amber crossings yet have no memory of most of the journey as you said only snapping back when something requires deliberate thought.


  • #485
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,420 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    And as we live in a Republic we should be able to live our lives utterly free from each and every diety should we wish.
    That's just one thing which a secular republic should provide - also needs generally to guarantee the freedom for all citizens to hold, without state interference one way or the other, whatever metaphysical beliefs they wish, including none.

    It's something which should in theory appeal to all religious people - the state shouldn't tell people what to believe - but in practice, it tends to appeal only to members of minority religious beliefs, as the majority religious belief usually manages to pervert elements of the state to its own ends.

    I recall tell of a book or report or something from a few years ago which compared the RCC's approach to secularism in different countries - main finding was that where the RCC was a minority religion, the RCC supported secularism, and where it was majority, it didn't. Any idea what that might have been?


  • #486
    saabsaab
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    That is why I said "thus far". Parnia and a few others have been doing this work for a very long time. I first heard of the studies quite some years ago. And thus far nothing of note has come from them.

    The visual tests are the interesting one as it would require the patient be outside their body.

    "Audio hits" however is more vague as hearing things in your surroundings while apparently unconscious is less indicative of the paranormal or the supernatural than it is of us simply not understanding the workings of the brain.

    I think an error here many people make is to assume that if a patient is entirely unconscious that their brain is "off". That is a dangerous assumption. The brain can still be quite active on it's own without the person being conscious.

    When sound hits the ear hairs the body will still translate that into electrical impulses. Those impulses will still travel to the brain. And at some level the brain will still process them. I know of no reason why the brain can not "hear" sound, and even lay down that sound as memory, without a conscious perceiver being on line at the time.

    So while "Audio Hits" will be very interesting in terms of our understanding the brain and it's functionality.... it will be much less interesting in terms of subjects like consciousness existing outside the body, after the death of the brain, or the existence of an after life.


    Fair enough but the jury is still out and a disembodied consciousness has yet to be definitively ruled out. Imagine the excitement if it is eventually proved.


  • Advertisement
  • #487
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    robindch wrote: »

    I recall tell of a book or report or something from a few years ago which compared the RCC's approach to secularism in different countries - main finding was that where the RCC was a minority religion, the RCC supported secularism, and where it was majority, it didn't. Any idea what that might have been?

    This article I found to be solid in it's broad strokes history of secularism - at least in the areas I would be familiar with : Early Modern, Revolutions, and 19th century.
    https://www.amacad.org/publication/secularism-its-discontents

    If anyone has access to jstor this is an interesting examination of the RCC and secularism in Modern societies.
    https://www.jstor.org/stable/24457037?seq=1


  • #488
    saabsaab
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    Mod snip of off topic link

    Nope. No link dumps not even if it's ol Blue Eyes himself singing away (whom personally I can't stand but that's by the by)

    If you feel compelled to share some music with the group you will find this thread https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056234801&page=8 a more welcoming venue.


  • #489
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,348 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    saabsaab wrote: »
    Fair enough but the jury is still out and a disembodied consciousness has yet to be definitively ruled out. Imagine the excitement if it is eventually proved.

    The term "jury is out" makes it sound like it is 50:50 or something. Which is potentially misleading. There is currently NO EVIDENCE AT ALL of a "disembodied consciousness". A situation that is not captured well with the phrase "jury is out".

    I could make something up right now like.... give me a moment..... ok when people are unconscious tiny little leprechauns wait until they are JUST about to regain consciousness.... jump into their ear as they are waking up.... and tell them everything they missed. That is how they think they see/hear things while they were unconscious.

    Now I have absolutely no arguments, evidence, data or reasons to suggest that thing I made up is credible, likely, or true. I have nothing. Is "the jury still out" on whether it is true then? You could say so I suppose, but it would not really capture the reality of the situation there either.

    I will be excited whatever the outcome turns out to be though, I agree with you there. If it turns out it is a disembodied consciousness, sure that will be massively exciting. However progress at all in understanding the brain is exciting to me. If we learn more about brain pathways and how the brain operates even when the subjectivity riding on that brain is off line... that will be exciting stuff.

    For me it is analogous to "blind sight". Blind people have been shown to be able to see certain things. One interesting occurrence for example are patients who can see nothing at all. If something is in front of them in reality or on a screen they can not even tell you if it is there. However if that something MOVES, they can tell you it moved and in which direction.

    This was explained because there are pathways from the eye to the brain we did not know about. While the patients were "blind" in the primary pathway we know about, it turns out a pathway for detecting motion exists too. That was exciting stuff too. At least for people like me who are excited by that sort of thing :) I did not need a magical woo explanation of "astral vision" or the like to be excited by the puzzle, the research, the conclusion and the answers.


  • #490
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,783 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    saabsaab wrote: »
    Fair enough but the jury is still out and a disembodied consciousness has yet to be definitively ruled out.

    150,000 people die every day on earth. That is 150,000 tests a day for disembodied consciousness. Over a billion since the start of this millenium. Billions since the start of the previous one. And those tests have never once produced anything reproducible or testable to show that disembodied consciousness is possible.

    The jury isn't just out, it's gone home and forgotten all about this non-starter.


  • #491
    saabsaab
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    150,000 people every day on earth. That is 150,000 tests a day for disembodied consciousness. Over a billion since the start of this millenium. Billions since the start of the previous one. And those tests have never once produced anything reproducible or testable to show that disembodied consciousness is possible.

    The jury isn't just out, it's gone home and forgotten all about this non-starter.


    I assume that you left out 'die'? Many have believed they have seen dead persons close to them or in some cases not know to them and other difficult to explain phenomena. I know that such things are not repeatable scientifically testable phenomena. Mostly due to the fact that in our current state people don't come back to life. Perhaps this could happen in the future bodies in deep frozen state may be revived? I say bring on scientific investigations into this area, they are really just beginning.


  • Advertisement
  • #492
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,778 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    saabsaab wrote: »
    I assume that you left out 'die'? Many have believed they have seen dead persons close to them or in some cases not know to them and other difficult to explain phenomena. I know that such things are repeatable scientifically testable phenomena. Mostly due to the fact that in our current state people don't come back to life. Perhaps this could happen in the future bodies in deep frozen state may be revived? I say bring on scientific investigations into this area, they are really just beginning.

    Do you have a link supporting that assertion? (Guessing you may have meant 'are not' rather than 'are' there).

    I'm not aware of cryogenics for suspending and restoring consciousness is a thing beyond sci-fi but certainly an interesting area of research. I'm sceptical as to whether it is achievable but no admittedly little about the state of current research.


  • #493
    saabsaab
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    smacl wrote: »
    Due have a link supporting that assertion? (Guessing you may have meant 'are not' rather than 'are' there).

    I'm not aware of cryogenics for suspending and restoring consciousness is a thing beyond sci-fi but certainly an interesting area of research. I'm sceptical as to whether it is achievable but no admittedly little about the state of current research.


    Yep, are not. Many scientific discoveries have been made on previously non testable ideas as in time dilation effect at high sub light speeds. What may be next? Parallel universe?


  • #494
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,778 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    saabsaab wrote: »
    Yep, are not. Many scientific discoveries have been made on previously non testable ideas as in time dilation effect at high sub light speeds. What may be next? Parallel universe?

    We can but speculate. As a life long sci-fi fan I'm easily (and happily) enthralled by what might be but I suspect what will likely be is a very small subset of the same.


  • #495
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,513 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    1. Propose some random possibility

    2. State, correctly, "you can't absolutely rule this out"

    3. Think that (2) somehow lends some sort of credence to (1).

    :rolleyes:

    Scrap the cap!



  • #496
    saabsaab
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    1. Propose some random possibility

    2. State, correctly, "you can't absolutely rule this out"

    3. Think that (2) somehow lends some sort of credence to (1).

    :rolleyes:


    Yes, you can do that with anything but the trick is getting many to believe it could be true unless they think it may be seriously possible.


  • #497
    saabsaab
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    Interesting interview below..

    For reasons below..

    Death would be accepted, at least until recently, that if the heart stops and also brain activity stops for any reasonable period of time then you are dead. It is also interesting that in recent times people can be brought back from that state with consciousness intact. If consciousness can remain intact for minutes or hours after being ‘dead’ does it mean it is independent of the brain? Perhaps it can remain in some form independent of the body? This may be a surprise to many and in the context of this thread interesting.



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz_4FGdWVF8


  • #498
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,348 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    Not sure which part is interesting? After minute 1 Parnia starts speaking and absolutely does not answer the question he was asked before bringing it back to the first thing the interviewer said about statistics on believers. So it started quite badly with a blatant evasion.

    He than shows his equally blatant bias (which incidentally I am glad he has because his failure to come up with ANY evidence for his views after all these years can not be written off as him being an anti-believer scientist) when he describes studying patients who have, in his exactly words gone "beyond death". That they have done any such thing is his bias, his assumption, and his fantasy and nothing more.

    The rest of the interview is him basically saying things we do not know, and showing that not knowing gives us the chance to imagine whatever conclusion we wish to. Which is hardly revelation or interesting either.

    What he does not do in the interview is offer a single reason to think there is an after life after the death of the brain. The most he offers here is something we already suspected.... that actual full death of the brain may take longer than we before assumed.

    What does strike me is one hypothesis he does NOT mention in the interview. So what he did not say is actually the most interesting thing about the whole clip. He is trying to understand what happens to consciousness during this period. That if it is there before a point X, not there after a point X, and then back again after some later point Y.... then what "happens" to it in this interim? Where does it go? What is it doing?

    But.... why assume it "Goes" anywhere or anything "happens" to it at all? If I have a candle lit beside me it is giving off a flame. If I extinguish the candle the flame has not "gone" anywhere. Nothing is "happening to it". The candle is simply not producing it any more. If I re-light the candle the next day, because nothing has changed about the candle it gives off pretty much the exact same flame as before. It would be ridiculous to talk about what happened to the flame in that interim, or where it went, or what it was doing the whole time.

    Why could consciousness be any different? Why can it not be something a brain gives off due to the underlying processes of the brain just like a candle gives off a flame due to the underlying processes going on in the wick? And if so, why would we be so surprised that if the flame (consciousness) ceases to be produced.... that hours later if the candle (brain) has not degraded that it could be relit?

    The only difference under that hypothesis would be that the degradation that would prevent this happens in the brain monumentally faster than it does in a candle.


  • #499
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    saabsaab wrote: »
    Interesting interview below..


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz_4FGdWVF8



    MOD

    Not big on link dumps in these parts - or using the likes of you tube to make your arguments.
    Can you please edit your post to state what is interesting about it in your opinion, what relevance it has to this discussion etc etc?


  • #500
    saabsaab
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    I found it interesting at any rate and I’d say others would feel the same.



    Death would be accepted, at least until recently, that if the heart stops and also brain activity stops for any reasonable period of time then you are dead. It is also interesting that in recent times people can be brought back from that state with consciousness intact. If consciousness can remain intact for minutes or hours after being ‘dead’ does it mean it is independent of the brain? Perhaps it can remain in some form independent of the body? This may be a surprise to many and in the context of this thread interesting.


  • #501
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    saabsaab wrote: »
    I found it interesting at any rate and I’d say others would feel the same.



    Death would be accepted, at least until recently, that if the heart stops and also brain activity stops for any reasonable period of time then you are dead. It is also interesting that in recent times people can be brought back from that state with consciousness intact. If consciousness can remain intact for minutes or hours after being ‘dead’ does it mean it is independent of the brain? Perhaps it can remain in some form independent of the body? This may be a surprise to many and in the context of this thread interesting.

    Possibly it's utterly fascinating, but rather than expect people to sit through a video - or read an article -in an attempt to discover what the person who posted it finds interesting it's considered common courtesy around here that the person posting the link provides some contextual information.
    A few words explaining what is contained therein and why the poster deems it interesting/relevant will suffice. This then allows fellow posters to decide if they wish to bother.

    Official mod bit
    Stop dumping links with no contextual information. This is the second time in this thread you have done so. Thanking you.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement