I'm having a hard time dealing with non-existing after life. I mean I don't believe in any Gods so therefore there is no reason to believe in an afterlife. I know my conscious mind will be gone and therefore I will not be aware of anything but i still can't believe in completely and total darkness after life.


what do you all believe happens after death? Maybe hearing others opinions will make me feel better about this.

Views: 570

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

thank you Stephen! that was what i needed to hear!

Maybe for you who struggle with the fear of a permanent end to your existence read this. The original is cached.

Death doesn't bother me because I realize just how special and unlikely life is. Nonexistence didn't bother me before I ever came to be, so why should it bother me at death? I will some day cease to be. Consciousness will be gone, senses gone, etc. The chemical and electric reactions in my body will eventually stop and I'll be a simple collection of biological matter. I simply feel that death is just that... the end of the road. No afterlife, and quite frankly that doesn't bother me.


Here's a video of Richard Dawkins that puts it quite eloquently.


My wish for 'after life' is this: Please cremate my body and send the ashes to space, so none of my remaining atoms have to deal with all these idiocy.

To date I have been given no evidence that would lead me to believe anything other than death being the end of an individual person's existence.

I came across this quote the other day that I think applies to your question in a way:

"Life is hard. Then you die. Then they throw dirt in your face. Then the worms eat you. Be grateful it happens in that order." - David Gerrold -

Now that's funny. And true. I'm going remember that.

Afterlife is a fairly good song by Avenged Sevenfold.

True, there is no evidence that what we call "ourselves" or our "soul" that sets behind our brain center exists after death.  But let us keep in mind that science has not yet determined what "we" are.  One view is that we really aren't, that we are just software running on our brains.  I'd be fine with that, except that there are zillions of creatures that have come into existence and whatever "I" am is setting behind the brain center of this one specimine in particular.  Why not any other? 


I think until we understand what we really are, we are only able to say that we just do not know what happens to our consciousness when the brain shuts off.  Science should study it.  Perhaps if we're successful at wrestling this line of exploration away from the religions' grubby hands we can declare it fair game for science.  

I disagree. Believing in an afterlife is just as preposterous as believing in a deity.

Believing in a reality is futile. Pursuing it scientifically is another matter. Asserting we know what happens to our consciousness when we don't even know what it really is not scientifically valid. It's the same situation we were in when we had nor yet discovered extrasolar planetary systems. We had no evidence before the pursuit that other planets existed. We are there now with the question of other forms of life in the Cosmos. So while there is no evidence to suggest our consciousness can exist without our brains, and it may not seem plausible, we have wait for the science before we can say we know so. Just as with the extraterrestrial planets.

No it isn't. There is no comparison at all. And there is no need to wait for the science to catch up with favored world views as the science is already pretty clear about leaving no room for free consciousness floating about in extra dimensions or any of that.

We did have very good reasons to suspect there were planets around other stars. It's part of our theory of the genesis - if you will - of planetary systems and that of the physics of fusion processes in and life-cycles of stars. It would be very hard - I mean to a point of absurdity - to explain the absence of planets forming in the molecular clouds when they gravitationally collapse.

It is was only, very very difficult to see planets around other stars - even small ones or moons within our own solar system. (Only in the last couple of weeks or so we discovered a natural satellite orbiting our own planet and that in a distant past the Earth might have had one more moon.) It was only waiting for the development of accurate and a practical methodology. They are now being detected using statistical analysis in recorded lightcurves.

There are no reasons whatsoever to suspect there being extra-cephalic consciousness floating around. In fact it is a brain function that isn't even guaranteed within our brains and most of what we do we don't need consciousness to take a part in at all. It is actually an extremely small part of what our brains do, containing only a few bits of information at any one time as one day we might develop methods to measure it directly

Are Albert and I in agreement for the first time in the recorded history of the cosmos?


© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service