Life after Death? The mechanics of it?

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Blaster72 said:

I do however struggle to believe there is such a thing as the afterlife but can't rule it out as no one has proven there isn't.

Nobody can prove I don't have fairies at the bottom of my garden. Invisible ones, that only I can see. Are you saying it's a possibility, and you can't rule it out?

[iambeowulf]

Timmy40 said:

It's Heaven, you'd never want to leave it. That's the whole point.

It's hardly Utopia.

[Chimune]

ewenm said:

Agnostic and atheist are not mutually exclusive. I'm an agnostic atheist. I don't KNOW there's no God - that would require FAITH. I think on the balance on probabilities there is no God, but if testable, repeatable, observable evidence comes along to the contrary I'll re-assess.

Unfortunately for a lot of the faith-peddlers, they're not very open to testable, repeatable, observable evidence. Unlike scientists who rely on it.

What is atheistic about your position ? Looks 100% agnostic to me !

[kiseca]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Blaster72 said:

I do however struggle to believe there is such a thing as the afterlife but can't rule it out as no one has proven there isn't.

Nobody can prove I don't have fairies at the bottom of my garden. Invisible ones, that only I can see. Are you saying it's a possibility, and you can't rule it out?

I've read an awful lot of your posts - I certainly wouldn't rule out the possibility that you can see invisible fairies at the bottom of your garden

[jdw100]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

As a religious person once said to me..."don't cloud the issue with facts."

That's nice..I once had one call me an abomination!

There was a protest at St Albans Abbey - caused by the head chap there mentioning he was gay.

Having seen theses protesters, about ten of them, every morning for a week on my walk to work I thought I'd have a quick chat. Approached one with a beard and a big wooden cross around his neck.

Conversation went a bit like this:

Me "Hi, so you believe in God and all that?"
Him "yes indeedy"
Me "and He judges you on your deeds at the end of your life?"
Him "oh yes"
Me "so...do you think he will look more favourably on you for spending all this time angry and protesting about this one chap and upsetting people or, say, helping poor people or tending to the sick or doing charity work or..."
Him (red- faced and really angry) "you are an abomination, as sinful as this homosexual, you need to find Jesus...!"
Me "blimey, you are an angry chap..I'm off now..bye!"


So apparently I am an abomination...which is nice.

[ewenm]

Chimune said:

ewenm said:

Agnostic and atheist are not mutually exclusive. I'm an agnostic atheist. I don't KNOW there's no God - that would require FAITH. I think on the balance on probabilities there is no God, but if testable, repeatable, observable evidence comes along to the contrary I'll re-assess.

Unfortunately for a lot of the faith-peddlers, they're not very open to testable, repeatable, observable evidence. Unlike scientists who rely on it.

What is atheistic about your position ? Looks 100% agnostic to me !

I don't believe in any God. 100% agnostic would suggest to me someone who thinks the existence of a God has a likelihood of about 50% - right in the middle of the scale of certainty. My estimate of the likelihood of the existence of God is infinitesimally above 0%. I'm not ruling out the possibility of a God, I just think it is very very unlikely.

Edit: You can have agnostic theists (believe in a God but don't rule out the possibility they're wrong) and agnostic atheists (don't believe in any God but don't rule out the possibility they're wrong). The gnostics (those who KNOW) are the strange ones

Edited by ewenm on Thursday 7th May 10:39

[qube_TA]

By most measurements the universe is around 14 billion years old, for most of that period I didn't exist, but everything that is in the universe now was there at the start albeit in a different form. All that stuff condensed to form the first stars and galaxies. Including a particular star that about 5 and a bit billion years ago went nova, but not before it had achieved enough fusion to create all the elements that eventually assembled to form the Solar System and everything in it, including the atoms that I'm made from. In the next 50-ish years I'll die, yet all the bits I was made from will still be there, and the rest of the universe will continue as before, it's possible that some of the atoms or at least particles that I am made out of will feature in something else at some point.

So whilst in the grand scheme of things I am almost infinitesimally small and insignificant it's nice that for no particular reason a tiny part of the universe coalesced for a brief moment to make me.

[RobM77]

ewenm said:

Chimune said:

ewenm said:

Agnostic and atheist are not mutually exclusive. I'm an agnostic atheist. I don't KNOW there's no God - that would require FAITH. I think on the balance on probabilities there is no God, but if testable, repeatable, observable evidence comes along to the contrary I'll re-assess.

Unfortunately for a lot of the faith-peddlers, they're not very open to testable, repeatable, observable evidence. Unlike scientists who rely on it.

What is atheistic about your position ? Looks 100% agnostic to me !

I don't believe in any God. 100% agnostic would suggest to me someone who thinks the existence of a God has a likelihood of about 50% - right in the middle of the scale of certainty. My estimate of the likelihood of the existence of God is infinitesimally above 0%. I'm not ruling out the possibility of a God, I just think it is very very unlikely.

Edit: You can have agnostic theists (believe in a God but don't rule out the possibility they're wrong) and agnostic atheists (don't believe in any God but don't rule out the possibility they're wrong). The gnostics (those who KNOW) are the strange ones

Edited by ewenm on Thursday 7th May 10:39

It's a matter of definitions and people differ on that. Even Richard Dawkins doesn't call himself an atheist, other than for the sake of brevity; if you actually quiz him on it (or read his book) then he'll state that there's no evidence for a god/gods, but obviously he's not 100% sure because that would be unscientific and illogical. I'm much the same way and it sounds like Ewen is too.

[Ayahuasca]

vanordinaire said:

Ayahuasca said:

vanordinaire said:

ewenm said:

We live on after death in the memories of our friends and relatives and in the ongoing results of our actions when alive.

Sixth post of the thread. This is the answer to the OP's question. All the rest is nonsense or irrelevant.

That is somewhat unsatisfactory as Marcus Aurelius pointed out, "the memory of everything is soon overwhelmed in time."

In the case of memories of you, in the brains of your friends and relatives, maybe just two generations?

Ironic that you quote someone who died 2000 years ago to demonstrate that everyone is forgotten in a couple of generations. Every one of us is a 'memory' of our ancestors from thousands of years ago.

Not ironic at all. Marcus Aurelius is known because he wrote down his thoughts. If you want to 'live on' beyond a couple of generations you need to leave something more tangible than memories. Maybe easier now with video footage on line etc.

[supertouring]

kiseca said:

supertouring said:

One is looking at what we see in the universe we live in and attempts to draw conclusions from that

IMO this also explains the origins of gods.

But it is not about opinion, it is about facts. Science deals with facts, religion deals with opinions.

This is why you will never understand, because you think both are the same when they are clearly not.

[ewenm]

Ayahuasca said:

vanordinaire said:

Ayahuasca said:

vanordinaire said:

ewenm said:

We live on after death in the memories of our friends and relatives and in the ongoing results of our actions when alive.

Sixth post of the thread. This is the answer to the OP's question. All the rest is nonsense or irrelevant.

That is somewhat unsatisfactory as Marcus Aurelius pointed out, "the memory of everything is soon overwhelmed in time."

In the case of memories of you, in the brains of your friends and relatives, maybe just two generations?

Ironic that you quote someone who died 2000 years ago to demonstrate that everyone is forgotten in a couple of generations. Every one of us is a 'memory' of our ancestors from thousands of years ago.

Not ironic at all. Marcus Aurelius is known because he wrote down his thoughts. If you want to 'live on' beyond a couple of generations you need to leave something more tangible than memories. Maybe easier now with video footage on line etc.

Indeed, I'd call that "the ongoing results of our actions when alive"... Now, where have I read that before?

[xjay1337]

I think we may like to believe in there being something after our passing, just to make it seem easier.
In reality, who's to say with all honesty.

Who's been dead technically and then resuscitated, for more than say 20-30 minutes, without brain damage, who can say with any certainty?
There's probably nothing, we wouldn't even realise. That in itself is scary.

I do not believe in God or religion. But I do believe there are things in this life, phenomenon, that we cannot explain. Whether you interpret this to be ghosts, or spirit life, is another matter. There are things we will never comprehend or understand that cannot be explained by science.

[lukefreeman]

My idea of heaven is hell, but I'm a good boy so go to heaven even though I don't enjoy it and want to go to hell.

What happens in this situation?

[cheesesliceking]

lukefreeman said:

My idea of heaven is hell, but I'm a good boy so go to heaven even though I don't enjoy it and want to go to hell.

What happens in this situation?

You end up on Most Haunted, giving Derek the willies.

[dazwalsh]

I don't believe we all just rock up at the pearly gates and float about in the clouds

Nor do I beleive i will be reincarnated as a camel or eagle or any of that st.

But death is something I can't get my head around, much like how we got here in the first place, and the whole flying through space malarky. Just mind boggling.

I would say religion was just made up to cover the bits of life that there is no credible explanation for.

[daemon]

vanordinaire said:

ewenm said:

We live on after death in the memories of our friends and relatives and in the ongoing results of our actions when alive.

Sixth post of the thread. This is the answer to the OP's question. All the rest is nonsense or irrelevant.

Yes. quite.

Hence why i dont really "get" the whole need for religion. It seems such vanity to think we should live forever.

Happy to live my life and die. In fact i'd quite rather not to have been bothered in the first place, but now i'm here i may as well get on with it.

[Blaster72]

Chimune said:

You seem very confused Blaster72. Your statements don't add up...

Blaster72 said:

I've flown around most of the world and can agree that it isn't flat, as for the Sun I can observe our movement relative to the sun for my self so no reason to believe the sun orbits around the Earth.

Two very poor reasons to believe either tbh, yet you take them as read - because your experience appeared to match the stated proposition. Not because someone proved them to you.

Blaster72 said:

I do however struggle to believe there is such a thing as the afterlife but can't rule it out as no one has proven there isn't.

Firstly, you rule nothing out that hasn't been proven to be false ?
Proven by what ? Science ? Or just an experience you have that appears to support the proposition ?

Secondly, everything you have written in this thread points to you being agnostic, not atheist.

I'm not confused at all - I know what I mean

[Blaster72]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Blaster72 said:

I do however struggle to believe there is such a thing as the afterlife but can't rule it out as no one has proven there isn't.

Nobody can prove I don't have fairies at the bottom of my garden. Invisible ones, that only I can see. Are you saying it's a possibility, and you can't rule it out?

If you think you have invisible fairies at the bottom of your garden, who am I to say you don't? Improbable but as pointed out above, reading you posting history - not impossible.

[kiseca]

supertouring said:

kiseca said:

supertouring said:

One is looking at what we see in the universe we live in and attempts to draw conclusions from that

IMO this also explains the origins of gods.

But it is not about opinion, it is about facts. Science deals with facts, religion deals with opinions.

This is why you will never understand, because you think both are the same when they are clearly not.

Don't be daft. You really believe I don't know the difference between an opinion and a fact? Even science wouldn't get anywhere if scientists didn't have ideas.

[Scousefella]

There is not a God, only a Diety (choose yours, there are options!!!) and those who want to embrace faith choose to do so.

Life after death - not a fluckin chance, we are organic matter, we live, we die, we rot.

The circle of life is so simple, well it was until religious intervention got on the case.

This is my personal viewpoint.