disco_stu:

Quote :

"I submit that they could actually be more happy with a more realistic outlook on life and death. I don't believe that it is actually integral and could easily be replaced by realism."

McDanger:

Quote :

"It's possible, but I doubt it's true for all people. We don't need to derail this thread into this discussion, but I don't see any reason to believe that your psychological needs are the best or most justified, or even well suited to the majority of people on this planet. You may want to think that over some. People are mentally different."

Your dialogue interests me. Please continue. So derail here instead

Also I might as well throw in a poll:

Do you believe...
[ ]there is good reason to believe there is probably or definitely an afterlife
[ ]there is not sufficient reason to believe an afterlife is likely (but hooray for kids or memories or contributions to society or whatever)
[ ]other - please explain

8/31/2010 10:21:51 PM

carl sagan

Quote :

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"

8/31/2010 10:46:06 PM

Other--neither reason to believe nor disbelieve. Logically speaking, that's pretty much the same as #2, but practically speaking, I have no quarrel with people who do believe in an afterlife.


I also am pretty much like-minded with what McDanger said.

8/31/2010 10:46:45 PM

I don't think there is an afterlife in the sense that some magical part of your body floats off to the holy land. I do believe that it may be possible that portions of our brains could continue to function for a short period of time even after we die. If our brains were deprived of dopamine and lost their sense of time while simultaneously being deprived of imput from the rest of the body, it's possible that our minds would get trapped briefly in an a state similar to dissociative hallucinations that seemed like an etermity. If you were in such a state, you could probably interpret the events taking place as a heaven or hell based on how you felt about your life and the events surrounding your death.

8/31/2010 11:50:03 PM

Afterlife, LOL.

Whatever helps you sleep at night, I guess.

8/31/2010 11:55:19 PM

The only problem I have with the concept of an afterlife (other than it's lack of evidence or any logical support for its existence) is that too many people use that belief as an excuse to behave poorly when they are alive, see: religious nutjobs of all manner (suicide bombers, abortion clinic shooters, etc.). Sadly, I think if it could be proven that there was no afterlife those same kind of people would just go on nihilistic rampages while another segment of the population would become depressed, lethargic, and unproductive at least in the short term and possibly in the long term. For many it also gives a sense of consequence for their actions leading to self-regulated behaviors that are beneficial.

Religious belief serves a purpose for a lot of people, IMO it's a mental crutch, but it helps folks function positively in society. Sadly it also holds back human progress in many very real ways.

On the whole I'm not sure whether proof or disproof of an afterlife would be beneficial for humanity. I'd like to find out though.

9/1/2010 12:37:36 AM

Maybe THIS is the afterlife for all the people who screwed up in their previous life.

9/1/2010 12:43:08 AM

Yes, and maybe our whole universe is just like, one atom in the fingernail of a giant being.

But probably not.

9/1/2010 12:52:36 AM

Long-term prospects remain good: It's either death or Singularity.

9/1/2010 1:30:46 AM

What is to stop humanity from doing bad and turning to chaos and anarchy?

Certainly nothing on earth, that's for sure...

9/1/2010 1:27:50 PM

Quote :

""Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence""

I'm a huge Sagan fan, but this quote always disappoints me due to it's hypocracy. Granted, it's a good point, but his career is founded on prophetic embellishments.

9/1/2010 1:38:57 PM

There is empirical evidence for the persistence of consciousness beyond physical death.

http://www.near-death.com/evidence.html

[Edited on September 1, 2010 at 1:56 PM. Reason : evidence, not proof]

9/1/2010 1:43:55 PM

LOL @ your use of the words "empirical evidence". Anecdotes from severely distressed individuals whose brains are going through such trauma that we don't currently understand it's effects on senses do not constitute evidence.

Are drug-induced hallucinations of Jesus also "emperical evidence" of the afterlife?

Also, NDEs appear to be culturally influenced. Muslims see Islamic angels. Native Americans see spirits, etcs. From your own website: http://www.near-death.com/muslim.html , http://www.near-death.com/elk.html .

Empirically these are "evidence" of the fact that people when their brains are in severe distress, they hallucinate in ways that we don't yet understand. Their interpretation of these hallucinations are highly biased by their culture.

Also, did you know the symptoms of NDEs are reproduced in gravitation accelerators (centrifuges) Again from the NDE site: http://www.near-death.com/experiences/triggers06.html.

Are we to believe that the gods who snatch up souls are fooled by spinning people around a bit?

The actual evidence suggests that "NDEs" are purely physiological.

That being said, my stance on an "afterlife" is well-known around these parts, I'd wager.

Finally I know there's a lot of links in my post, but check out Penn & Teller's video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvxFXkv7L24&feature=player_embedded#!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To expound slightly on what I was referring to: the understanding that our lives are finite makes each moment more meaningful. It makes everything, every relationship, every conversation, everything more meaningful because we only get one ride through this life. The belief of the afterlife is wishful thinking of people that are afraid to die and want to live forever.

[Edited on September 1, 2010 at 2:36 PM. Reason : P&T]

9/1/2010 2:10:11 PM

You are semantics fail. There's nothing amiss with my use of the term "empirical".

Are you chalking it up to coincidence when these "drug-induced hallucinations" reveal real information to the subject that he/she can't possibly know?

Quote :

"Are we to believe that the gods who snatch up souls are fooled by spinning people around a bit?"

No. Not all metaphysical study involves religion.

9/1/2010 4:14:31 PM

Quote :

"Are you chalking it up to coincidence when these "drug-induced hallucinations" reveal real information to the subject that he/she can't possibly know?"

I'm chalking it up to shitty memory and people trying to make a buck selling books about NDEs and the afterlife.

I dream about talking to people that have been dead for years and they tell me stuff that I couldn't possibly have known that sometimes later turns out to be true. Coincidence or proof of a magical dream realm where I can talk to spirits? (or even more likely I may believe I could not have possibly known it when in fact I could possibly have known it)

What it boils down to is that there is anecdotal "evidence" for everything. Which is why it's not really evidence. (your use of the word 'empirical' was not my gripe)

Quote :

"No. Not all metaphysical study involves religion."

I was being snarky. A better question would be are we to believe that we can somehow expose people who are not in actual danger of dying to the afterlife simply by spinning them a bit?

Also, metaphyical studies are bullshit.

[Edited on September 1, 2010 at 4:49 PM. Reason : "evidence"]

9/1/2010 4:26:34 PM

Quote :

"the understanding that our lives are finite makes each moment more meaningful."

Though a popular theme in human thought from the beginning, I find this argument nothing more than rationalization. Death inflicts tremendous physical and/or emotional trauma. It's a nasty business. Mortality as our species knows and has known it isn't worthy of the slightest respect.

9/1/2010 5:32:14 PM

^^You do realize that empirical evidence, by definition, is directly observable and able to be repeated in experimentation, right?

So yes, there is something "amiss" with you passing off some anecdotes and secondhand stories as empirical evidence.

9/1/2010 5:35:03 PM

wont we eventually be immortal when we combine with our robot overlords? life either without decay or the ability to switch into new shells

serious question, btw

9/1/2010 5:48:42 PM

These aren't stories. They're research experiments conducted with the full spectrum of scientific skepticism. I'm not asserting that we've found an "After-life". I'm just saying there is real, credible evidence that our brains are capable of metaphysical acts that we can't yet explain.

If you're going to dismiss them as fraudulent without proof, that's one thing.

9/1/2010 5:52:47 PM

LOL at "research experiments conducted with the full spectrum of scientific skepticism".

You are confusing a "science-y" sounding propoganda website with actual peer-reviewed scientific analysis. You aren't the first, and you won't be the last.

9/1/2010 6:45:09 PM

Quote :

"wont we eventually be immortal when we combine with our robot overlords? life either without decay or the ability to switch into new shells"

That's one plausible future, yes, though the mysterious nature of identity calls into whether such methods would actually preserve the individual.

9/1/2010 7:03:03 PM

my belief in an afterlife has the same merit as someone who believes in naturalism.

They can't prove how life started.

I can't prove how life ends.



[Edited on September 1, 2010 at 7:26 PM. Reason : I spell like a pro]

9/1/2010 7:26:21 PM

Partially #2, Partially Other.

I don't believe in an afterlife due to lack of evidence, but I also don't think my belief in its existence or non-existence should have any impact on my behavior in life... I generally have the same outlook on the existence of a god: I don't strictly believe in any all-powerful supernatural beings, but even if I did, I wouldn't behave any differently. I'd be the same person whether I'm an atheist or a deist.


Of course, if by some insane chance we were given undeniable proof that the Christian god and Christian heaven exist, I'd probably start following them... but even the Bible says that such proof won't ever happen until judgement day anyway, and by then it'd be too late.

9/1/2010 7:54:35 PM

ah the old "i could tell you but id have to kill all of you"

9/1/2010 8:32:17 PM

Quite literally, too.

I wish there were, but I can't imagine there is.

9/1/2010 9:35:42 PM

Where to begin? Sigh...

Quote :

"Though a popular theme in human thought from the beginning, I find this argument nothing more than rationalization. Death inflicts tremendous physical and/or emotional trauma. It's a nasty business. Mortality as our species knows and has known it isn't worthy of the slightest respect"

Death does not have to inflict tremendous physical or emotional trauma. It only does so because people fear it and ignore it until they are about to die. Embracing my mortality from an early age has been a blessing.

Quote :

"wont we eventually be immortal when we combine with our robot overlords? life either without decay or the ability to switch into new shells serious question, btw"

Is a copy of your brain really you though?

Quote :

"These aren't stories. They're research experiments conducted with the full spectrum of scientific skepticism. I'm not asserting that we've found an "After-life". I'm just saying there is real, credible evidence that our brains are capable of metaphysical acts that we can't yet explain. If you're going to dismiss them as fraudulent without proof, that's one thing."

No they're not. They're stories. Show me one controlled study showing credible evidence that our brains are capable of metaphysical acts that we can't yet explain. It is nearly infinitely more plausible that each NDE is a oxygen-loss induced hallucination.

Prawn Star has already responded to this.

Quote :

"my belief in an afterlife has the same merit as someone who believes in naturalism. They can't prove how life started. I can't prove how life ends. "

Holy shit, wow. There is a colossal amount of actual evidence to support naturalism and absolutely zero actual evidence to support the afterlife. The wonderful thing about science is that it doesn't have to have all the answers to everything in order to be the most plausible way to explain reality. I'm not sure how many times I have to explain this on this board, but just because science cannot yet explain something (and it's getting really fucking close to explaining the origin of life, btw) DOES NOT MAKE A SUPERNATURAL CAUSE ANY MORE PLAUSIBLE.

Your belief in the afterlife has absolutely no merit. Belief in Naturalism is backed up by every single scientific fact that has ever been proven, falsified, refined, studied, reviewed, refined, and proven again.

Your belief in the afterlife has exactly the same merit as the belief that giant purple unicorns control everything in a way that we can't observe. ZERO until supported by at least some evidence.

Can't you see that there are an infinite number of made up things that have the exact same amount of plausibility as the afterlife, God, and anything else that "cannot be disproven?" You discount all of those, why does afterlife and your god get a pass? Why not Zeus? Why not Valhalla? Why not the Matrix?

Finally, why have you not addressed my point about dreams? Are dreams evidence of a magical realm where we can talk to dead people, fly, have magical powers, and bang any woman we want at any time? You easily discount dreams as figments of our extremely complex sensory input system, but NDEs, oh no, those are evidence of another side.

You know how I know there is most likely no such thing as anything "metaphysical"? No one has claimed Randi's million dollar challenge. No psychic has won the lottery. Anyone claiming anything metaphysical is trying to sell something, and the situation is no different with NDEs. Watch the P&T video I linked above. It lays the whole bullshit regarding NDEs out for you pretty plainly.

9/2/2010 1:32:25 AM

[x]its not possible to know/who cares

The idea that people cant handle life or that they would do "wrong" without the strict guidance of a religion or threat/reward of an afterlife is pretty atrocious.

9/2/2010 9:51:32 AM

Dreams don't tell people the 5-digit alpha-numeric serial code on top of the hospital water-tower (no human access). Dreams don't let patients, who've been blind since birth, describe, in accurate detail, the painted (flat) markings and ink posters on the wall of their operating room and rooms adjacent which they've never entered. Dreams don't allow one to understand deep conversations in languages they've never spoken.

Granted, you could dismiss these as "coincidence" or "fraud". Also, due the unpredictable nature of NDEs and the fact that only one subject can actually observe the event, it's impossible to produce a controlled study with 100% impartial analysis.

However, the sheer number of reviewed and verified cases, and the statisticalyl singificant similarities is compelling to me. There's no way we're being scammed by thousands of people, including young children, over thousands of years.

There are plenty of peer-reviewed studies at the near-death site. Near-Death study has its own peer-review journal printed by Allen Press.

9/2/2010 9:52:16 AM

I do dismiss them as coincidence or fraud. Link to me the peer-reviewed studies. I can't find it on that site with the shitty organization and religious links.

Keep in mind that the site that you're using as a reference includes such wonderful topics as "Scientific evidence of reincarnation exists".

[Edited on September 2, 2010 at 10:18 AM. Reason : .]

9/2/2010 10:14:30 AM

Quote :

"Death does not have to inflict tremendous physical or emotional trauma. It only does so because people fear it and ignore it until they are about to die."

Are you familiar with how people die in practice? It's ugly and unpleasant in the extreme. Embracing the experience leads to a profound incoherence of values unless you're for pain and suffering in general.

9/2/2010 10:17:04 AM

"profound incoherence of values?"

How is accepting that death is the natural terminus to life lead to a "profound incoherence of values?"

I don't get where you're going here. Yes, dying is a traumatic experience and often (but certainly not always) painful. So is childbirth. So what?

To be honest, I'm for doctor-assisted suicide so you can go out in the manner that you choose if you learn that it's likely that your end will be painful.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also want to take this opportunity to point out http://www.near-death.com/experiences/research17.html . Your website has a page dedicated to ORBS and even a picture that they use as evidence of orbs. Holy shit.


[Edited on September 2, 2010 at 10:50 AM. Reason : ORBS!]

9/2/2010 10:25:18 AM

Quote :

"Are you familiar with how people die in practice? It's ugly and unpleasant in the extreme. Embracing the experience leads to a profound incoherence of values unless you're for pain and suffering in general."

I don't know that death is worse than, say, living without any senses, or living without limbs, or living but not being able to have sex. There are many things that are worse than no longer existing as a person.

Afterlife is just another thing that "can't be disproven," so people will believe in it. I could make up anything about what happens to our consciousness when we die and none of it could be verified in the real world. What's the point? All life, and all memory of what we have done on this earth, will perish. None of this will last. I could think about how bad dying is going to suck, or I can solemnly accept that I've got a limited time to do what I want to do. Most believers won't admit it, but they're scared to death of going to Hell, or just being dead in the ground, and they will perform any kind of mental gymnastics necessary to keep up their belief and avoid eternal torment and/or live for all eternity.

[Edited on September 2, 2010 at 11:16 AM. Reason : ]

9/2/2010 11:07:37 AM

Quote :

"I don't get where you're going here. Yes, dying is a traumatic experience and often (but certainly not always) painful. So is childbirth. So what?"

My morality centers on reducing suffering. If death causes suffering, which it does, it's bad regardless of whether its natural. I accept the likelihood of mortality without trying to make it into something positive.

Quote :

"To be honest, I'm for doctor-assisted suicide so you can go out in the manner that you choose if you learn that it's likely that your end will be painful."

I agree with this. In theory, I would favor painless suicide booths as much as life extension. The goal is to avoid unpleasant mental states. However, in the current culture suicide tends to cause considerable emotional harm to the living and with current technology even physician-assisted suicide can go awry.

Quote :

"I don't know that death is worse than, say, living without any senses, or living without limbs, or living but not being able to have sex."

For serious?

Quote :

"There are many things that are worse than no longer existing as a person."

I've nothing against nonexistence. It's getting back to that condition that's the tricky part.

9/2/2010 3:26:32 PM

I think we're pretty close to the same position. Maybe I've been a little off on my representation regarding death. It's not that I'm suggest making into a positive but acceptance of it as the inevitable terminus of existence, painful though it may be, is itself a positive thing. Living your life as though it is your only one, giving it the importance that it deserves, recognizing everyone else's mortality along with your own, not living your life in fear of death, not acting on false hope; these are positive things.

And yeah, suicide booths would be great.

[Edited on September 2, 2010 at 3:37 PM. Reason : others]

9/2/2010 3:36:24 PM

Decided to plug the word prelife into some statements to replace the word afterlife and see how well they still hold up (in a few I made some extra edits to make it fit):

Quote :

"Other--neither reason to believe nor disbelieve. Logically speaking, that's pretty much the same as #2, but practically speaking, I have no quarrel with people who do believe in a prelife. "

Quote :

"Prelife, LOL. Whatever helps you sleep at night, I guess."

Quote :

"Maybe THIS is the prelife for all the people who screwed up in their afterlife."

Quote :

"There is empirical evidence for the existence of consciousness before physical birth."

Quote :

"Are drug-induced hallucinations of Jesus also "emperical evidence" of the prelife?"

Quote :

"These aren't stories. They're research experiments conducted with the full spectrum of scientific skepticism. I'm not asserting that we've found an "Pre-life". I'm just saying there is real, credible evidence that our brains are capable of metaphysical acts that we can't yet explain."

Quote :

"my belief in an prelife has the same merit as someone who believes in naturalism."

Quote :

"I don't believe in a prelife due to lack of evidence, but I also don't think my belief in its existence or non-existence should have any impact on my behavior in life"

Quote :

"Your belief in the prelife has exactly the same merit as the belief that giant purple unicorns control everything in a way that we can't observe."

I'd so some more, but anamnesis is kicking in right now so I'd better go do my homework while I can.

9/2/2010 4:09:22 PM

wtf is this shit?

9/2/2010 4:36:36 PM

Quote :

"wtf is this shit?"

I'll try and explain. Prelife, or the soul/person existing before birth, is another non-falsifiable concept that people have subscribed to at times.

Substituting it for the word afterlife was not merely an exercise in mad libbing, but also to highlight how these statements hold up without bringing in our preconceived notions on the afterlife.

Quote :

"These aren't stories. They're research experiments conducted with the full spectrum of scientific skepticism. I'm not asserting that we've found an "Pre-life". I'm just saying there is real, credible evidence that our brains are capable of metaphysical acts that we can't yet explain."

For example evidence of the metaphysical is no stronger evidence for an afterlife than it is for a prelife.

Quote :

"Your belief in the prelife has exactly the same merit as the belief that giant purple unicorns control everything in a way that we can't observe."

Whereas a statement like this seems equally plausible regardless of which term you use.

Quote :

"Maybe THIS is the prelife for all the people who screwed up in their afterlife."

That was just an attempt to be funny.

[Edited on September 2, 2010 at 5:32 PM. Reason : .]

9/2/2010 5:31:45 PM

^^^wat


oh, and:

[ ]there is good reason to believe there is probably or definitely an afterlife
[X]there is not sufficient reason to believe an afterlife is likely (but hooray for kids or memories or contributions to society or whatever)
[ ]other - please explain

[Edited on September 2, 2010 at 5:34 PM. Reason : .]

9/2/2010 5:32:38 PM

I agree with what disco_stu is saying in this thread, but with a less assholish tone of voice.

And religious-based models of an afterlife can be objectively proven to be impossible.

9/2/2010 9:07:57 PM

Quote :

"I agree with what disco_stu is saying in this thread, but with a less assholish tone of voice. And religious-based models of an afterlife can be objectively proven to be impossible."

Haha, dont hate on disco...he has to constantly respond to idiotic posts from people like myself!

As for objectively proving, please commence.

9/2/2010 9:12:23 PM

^ it depends on what you believe in particular… everyone believes slightly different things, and i’m not going to presume what you believe.

What do YOU think the afterlife will be like?

Quote :

"However, the sheer number of reviewed and verified cases, and the statisticalyl singificant similarities is compelling to me. There's no way we're being scammed by thousands of people, including young children, over thousands of years. There are plenty of peer-reviewed studies at the near-death site. Near-Death study has its own peer-review journal printed by Allen Press. "

That website itself doesn’t claim as boldly as you are that consciousness is outside the brain. You either are mis-reading the website, or you never actually read the website in the first place.

And there are definitely tons of empirical proof that people have NDEs (this is almost a common sense kind of thing), but there is definitely no empirical proof that NDEs are actually the consciousness escaping the brain.

[Edited on September 2, 2010 at 9:29 PM. Reason : ]

9/2/2010 9:26:23 PM

^I am scientologist hindu with a dash of buddhism...but jewish when it comes to finances...

but seriously christianity and Go!

9/2/2010 10:10:53 PM

All evidence suggests that that Bible was written by people and not divinely inspired. None of the fantastical claims in the New Testament can be reproduced, and all of the creation theory of the Old Testament has been proven false. Christianity is but one of nearly 10,000 religions that has been practiced throughout the course of humanity. Absolutely no viable evidence of Christianity's veracity exists, but there are mountains of evidence to its contrary. It is therefore logical to consider it false until substantial evidence is provided, just like every other of the infinite metaphysical claims that can be created.

Ergo the Christian concept of the afterlife should also be considered false. This says nothing of the paradox of an all-loving god damning souls to Hell. Logically, the concept of Heaven and Hell and a god that has the power to send everyone to Heaven doesn't make sense, unless the Christian God is the most sadistic being in the Universe.

[Edited on September 3, 2010 at 12:59 PM. Reason : a]

9/3/2010 12:59:20 PM

^^ haha, even Christians don't all believe the same thing...

I'm saying do you think in heaven you'll be yourself? you'll remember your life on earth? you'll see your grandma/mom/dad/whatever? Do you think you'll remember your friends that are in hell? Is it a state of perpetual bliss? Is it none of these things?

9/3/2010 6:55:33 PM

Quote :

"Do you think you'll remember your friends that are in hell?"

It'd be cool tho, b/c you would know they deserved what they got. (shouldn't have eaten that shellfish)

9/7/2010 2:28:00 PM

Emperor constatine oversaw.writing of much of what became the new testament in order to assure it met the political needs of the roman empire

9/7/2010 3:32:49 PM