Life after death
Discussion
hucumber said:
Thats not really my point. At one time classical physics was all we had, and people thought we knew everything about the reality in which we live, then something new came along. I personally find it very arrogant to now assume we understand and know everything. Just because we don't know what happens to the 'soul' when we die, doesn't mean that the only answer is nothing
Simply answer is that you don’t have a “soul”. It is just something humans made up (like God, witches, demons, ghosts, etc). Before I can even consider your claims about the soul surviving after death please explain what you mean by “soul” and provide evidence that it exists.Esceptico said:
Simply answer is that you don’t have a “soul”. It is just something humans made up (like God, witches, demons, ghosts, etc). Before I can even consider your claims about the soul surviving after death please explain what you mean by “soul” and provide evidence that it exists.
I mean your consciousness, the bit that makes you you, the bit that thinks, feels, has emotions etc. Soul in the traditional sense isn't really what I meant, but its the word that fits best. You have no more of an idea than I do what happens after death. Thats my point, and you can argue against it if you want, but the reality is that no one knows. I am absolutely not religious, so I'm not blindly wandering down that path.
Humans think we know so much about the reality we live in, but the truth is we know a very small amount of what our brains can process, which in the big scheme of things, is f
k allhucumber said:
Esceptico said:
Simply answer is that you don’t have a “soul”. It is just something humans made up (like God, witches, demons, ghosts, etc). Before I can even consider your claims about the soul surviving after death please explain what you mean by “soul” and provide evidence that it exists.
I mean your consciousness, the bit that makes you you, the bit that thinks, feels, has emotions etc. Soul in the traditional sense isn't really what I meant, but its the word that fits best. You have no more of an idea than I do what happens after death. Thats my point, and you can argue against it if you want, but the reality is that no one knows. I am absolutely not religious, so I'm not blindly wandering down that path.
Humans think we know so much about the reality we live in, but the truth is we know a very small amount of what our brains can process, which in the big scheme of things, is f
k allWe’re not. We’re animals. We live/breathe/reproduce/die (you can opt out of one of those personally if desired) and that’s it. You (as an individual) mean so very very little in the grand scheme of the universe/time it’s funny, people think they’re important, even those who leave a lasting memory through hundreds and thousands of years of civilisation will one day be forgotten and the universe will carry on as it was. And you will be dead, no afterlife, no heaven, no reincarnation, just a blip on the timeline of the universe.
None of what makes you ‘you’ will carry on, expect the energy your body releases when it rots/burns. Energy is a constant which is at least a nice feeling that you’re not completely useless
you’ll leave memories in the head of others, but in 2 generations that will likely all be long gone as well.Just my 2c etc etc etc
M5-911 said:
What machines are conscious?
A machine doesn't realise it's achievement, doesn't feel joy or sadness, life or death. Only it's creator will be aware of what it realised.
When Deepmind's Alphago beat Lee Sedol in 2016, I don't recall seeing the computer going banana after it's victory.
When Kasparov got humiliated by IBM Deep blue in 97, Kasparov was devastated but when Stockfish8 was beaten by Alpha zero, Stockfish8 didn't shut down his algorithms because it was disappointed.
None of the below description apply to a single machine on earth:
The Cambridge Dictionary defines consciousness as "the state of understanding and realizing something." The Oxford Living Dictionary defines consciousness as "The state of being aware of and responsive to one's surroundings.", "A person's awareness or perception of something."
So if a chess computer was programmed to say 'I'm disappointed' after losing would that make a difference?A machine doesn't realise it's achievement, doesn't feel joy or sadness, life or death. Only it's creator will be aware of what it realised.
When Deepmind's Alphago beat Lee Sedol in 2016, I don't recall seeing the computer going banana after it's victory.
When Kasparov got humiliated by IBM Deep blue in 97, Kasparov was devastated but when Stockfish8 was beaten by Alpha zero, Stockfish8 didn't shut down his algorithms because it was disappointed.
None of the below description apply to a single machine on earth:
The Cambridge Dictionary defines consciousness as "the state of understanding and realizing something." The Oxford Living Dictionary defines consciousness as "The state of being aware of and responsive to one's surroundings.", "A person's awareness or perception of something."
hucumber said:
colin_p said:
From first hand experience having dabbled in death numerous times, twelve cardiac arrests, a few instances of flatlining during two of them and being defibrillated back (I've got a defib/pacemaker residing in my chest), I'd say;
I've never seen any white light, no looking down on ones self, no nothing. Just a short period empty blackness.
When I've been jolted back and come round, I have no recollection of the event after that brief period of empty blackness.
Thats not actually proper dead though, you can't bring actual dead back to lifeI've never seen any white light, no looking down on ones self, no nothing. Just a short period empty blackness.
When I've been jolted back and come round, I have no recollection of the event after that brief period of empty blackness.
Once you are gone, you are gone, that is it. That is proper dead dead and or pretend dead, shocked back to life dead but not really dead dead. Either way you are dead and I'm dead certain that once you are dead you are dead and there are is no sky fairy nonsense.
hucumber said:
I mean your consciousness, the bit that makes you you, the bit that thinks, feels, has emotions etc. Soul in the traditional sense isn't really what I meant, but its the word that fits best.
You have no more of an idea than I do what happens after death. Thats my point, and you can argue against it if you want, but the reality is that no one knows. I am absolutely not religious, so I'm not blindly wandering down that path.
Humans think we know so much about the reality we live in, but the truth is we know a very small amount of what our brains can process, which in the big scheme of things, is fk all
Difficult to discuss this with someone who seems to start with a belief in life after death despite there being no evidence for it and it also not fitting in with our understanding of reality. Waving your hands and saying humans don’t know everything is not really much of an argument and doesn’t address in any way the underlying issues that having a “soul” would cause. You have no more of an idea than I do what happens after death. Thats my point, and you can argue against it if you want, but the reality is that no one knows. I am absolutely not religious, so I'm not blindly wandering down that path.
Humans think we know so much about the reality we live in, but the truth is we know a very small amount of what our brains can process, which in the big scheme of things, is f
k allConsciousness is more than just electric signals in your brain but it can’t exist without said electric signals. Consciousness is easy to destroy. If you have ever had full anaesthesia you will know what I mean. The time spent in surgery just doesn’t exist for you. When your brain dies and the electrical signals disappear so does your consciousness. To think otherwise without a shred of evidence is just facile, wishful thinking.
Some light relief on this issue...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lm6YnAqPv4w
M5-911 said:
bmwmike said:
Derek Smith said:
hucumber said:
Thats not actually proper dead though, you can't bring actual dead back to life
What's your definition of dead?https://youtu.be/Bmyx9qJkeQQ
Often in these types of discussions there’s a group who ask the question “well if you die, what’s the point of life then?”. Above someone asked what the point of evolution was if we just cease to exist.
Why must there be a meaning of life?
We exist purely because we were able to it’s as simple as that.
Take 2 square grates, one with holes 2 cm wide and one with holes 1cm wide. Put them together in a frame snd start shovelling a mixture of rocks onto them.
You’re going to get pieces 1cm in diameter or less (in another experiment you might use a system of air pressure to prevent smaller particles being captured).
Now remove the 1cm grid and you’ll get 2cm pieces going through.
Now why do any particularly sized pieces go through the grate? Is it because they were meant to or just because they can because they are adapted the conditions set up by the grate.
Obviously you now have the dilemma of the grate being deliberately put there or not but in that case you’re deep into creationism and you shouldn’t even be asking the question.
Why must there be a meaning of life?
We exist purely because we were able to it’s as simple as that.
Take 2 square grates, one with holes 2 cm wide and one with holes 1cm wide. Put them together in a frame snd start shovelling a mixture of rocks onto them.
You’re going to get pieces 1cm in diameter or less (in another experiment you might use a system of air pressure to prevent smaller particles being captured).
Now remove the 1cm grid and you’ll get 2cm pieces going through.
Now why do any particularly sized pieces go through the grate? Is it because they were meant to or just because they can because they are adapted the conditions set up by the grate.
Obviously you now have the dilemma of the grate being deliberately put there or not but in that case you’re deep into creationism and you shouldn’t even be asking the question.
Esceptico said:
hucumber said:
Thats not really my point. At one time classical physics was all we had, and people thought we knew everything about the reality in which we live, then something new came along. I personally find it very arrogant to now assume we understand and know everything. Just because we don't know what happens to the 'soul' when we die, doesn't mean that the only answer is nothing
Simply answer is that you don’t have a “soul”. It is just something humans made up (like God, witches, demons, ghosts, etc). Before I can even consider your claims about the soul surviving after death please explain what you mean by “soul” and provide evidence that it exists.The Rotrex Kid said:
None of what makes you ‘you’ will carry on, expect the energy your body releases when it rots/burns.
50% of my DNA is in each of my kids. 25% will be in their kids, 12.5% in their kids and so on. It'll keep being divided by 2 in each generation but it won't disappear, but will be a smaller amount in more people. (unless neither of my kids have kids or none of my grandchildren do.).So in 500 years, there could be someone who smiles a certain way, due to the tiny bit of DNA in them which is mine.
(or maybe I'm just being a bit fanciful with that idea)
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Esceptico said:
hucumber said:
Thats not really my point. At one time classical physics was all we had, and people thought we knew everything about the reality in which we live, then something new came along. I personally find it very arrogant to now assume we understand and know everything. Just because we don't know what happens to the 'soul' when we die, doesn't mean that the only answer is nothing
Simply answer is that you don’t have a “soul”. It is just something humans made up (like God, witches, demons, ghosts, etc). Before I can even consider your claims about the soul surviving after death please explain what you mean by “soul” and provide evidence that it exists.M5-911 said:
In Christianity, the soul is your mind, your emotions et cetera. Who you are basically.
But those are not immutable. Your personality and emotions are tied to your physical body - if you know people who have suffered a brain injury eg stroke, dementia you will have experienced that first hand. Experience can also cause changes in the brain and therefore personality (soul in your language) eg PTSD. Esceptico said:
M5-911 said:
In Christianity, the soul is your mind, your emotions et cetera. Who you are basically.
But those are not immutable. Your personality and emotions are tied to your physical body - if you know people who have suffered a brain injury eg stroke, dementia you will have experienced that first hand. Experience can also cause changes in the brain and therefore personality (soul in your language) eg PTSD. M5-911 said:
bmwmike said:
Derek Smith said:
hucumber said:
Thats not actually proper dead though, you can't bring actual dead back to life
What's your definition of dead?https://youtu.be/Bmyx9qJkeQQ
There’s no medical definition of the crossover between being alive and being dead. There are some extreme situations where we can be assured the person has died, but what about, say, asphyxiation?
Further, in my specific situation, had the doctor (I assume it was they) not intervened, it is likely I would not have started breathing. My heart stopped for some 7 minutes my wife says (she spoke with the doctor). When would I have died if no one could be bothered?
It’s not an esoteric question. It can have important legal ramifications.
Derek Smith said:
Saying what ‘it’ might include is hardly a definition. There’s no explanation of when permanent starts. People have 'come back' from being non-responsive for long periods. 45 minutes? Pah!
There’s no medical definition of the crossover between being alive and being dead. There are some extreme situations where we can be assured the person has died, but what about, say, asphyxiation?
Further, in my specific situation, had the doctor (I assume it was they) not intervened, it is likely I would not have started breathing. My heart stopped for some 7 minutes my wife says (she spoke with the doctor). When would I have died if no one could be bothered?
It’s not an esoteric question. It can have important legal ramifications.
I think that the most interesting is what has happened to his DNA afterward. There’s no medical definition of the crossover between being alive and being dead. There are some extreme situations where we can be assured the person has died, but what about, say, asphyxiation?
Further, in my specific situation, had the doctor (I assume it was they) not intervened, it is likely I would not have started breathing. My heart stopped for some 7 minutes my wife says (she spoke with the doctor). When would I have died if no one could be bothered?
It’s not an esoteric question. It can have important legal ramifications.
Lim said:
My dad choose that piece for his recent funeral. Lovely to read it again.
Similar, I read it privately to my mum end of last year after my nan passed away and also gave a copy to a friend whose daughter passed away in her teens.Both seemed very comforted by it.
Having no religious affiliation, it’s the closest i’ve come to in terms of understanding existence after death.
Lim said:
Terminator X said:
Imagine it like going under anesthetic but just not waking up.
TX.
TX.
I like to imagine it will feel roughly the same as it did before I was born. Takes the edge off the eternity aspect, for me.
robsco said:
Lim said:
Terminator X said:
Imagine it like going under anesthetic but just not waking up.
TX.
TX.
I like to imagine it will feel roughly the same as it did before I was born. Takes the edge off the eternity aspect, for me.
TX.
colin_p said:
But I've still been effectively dead and don't remember a thing or recall anything of the time whilst being dead even if it wasn't proper dead. I'd say being proper dead dead would be exactly the same except you won't come back to talk about it.
Once you are gone, you are gone, that is it. That is proper dead dead and or pretend dead, shocked back to life dead but not really dead dead. Either way you are dead and I'm dead certain that once you are dead you are dead and there are is no sky fairy nonsense.
I've been dead, died from a cardiac arrest while sleeping, was dead for 10 minutes, after 3 jump starts I was un-dead or brought back to lifeOnce you are gone, you are gone, that is it. That is proper dead dead and or pretend dead, shocked back to life dead but not really dead dead. Either way you are dead and I'm dead certain that once you are dead you are dead and there are is no sky fairy nonsense.
From my short time of being dead there was no walking to a light, no heavy blackness, no looking down on myself, no unicorns or rainbows or running around a field as a puppy or being any other reincarnated living animal
There was just nothing, don't remember anything about dying, being dead or coming back to life
I do remember waking up from a 3 day ice packed induced coma though which was quite a strange experience
Interesting thread.
I’ve been getting into meditating quite a bit recently and it does leave you wondering about free will.
The world “outside”, and the world “inside” and are they really as distinct as we believe?
Are we really individuals in control, or are we just something peering in on existence?
Which comes back to Bhuddism/Hinduism and the idea of Brahman.
We spend a lifetime building up our perception of reality, but in those really early moments of our lives we have the clearest perspective... but even still just limited by our range of basic senses.
I think Roger Penrose did some great talks, I watched a bunch on YouTube.
Orch OR theory apparently.
Science is limited by our ability to measure.
There may be far more than we’ll ever be capable of measuring or being able to perceive.
Azimov’s short story “last question” also gets me thinking.
I’ve been getting into meditating quite a bit recently and it does leave you wondering about free will.
The world “outside”, and the world “inside” and are they really as distinct as we believe?
Are we really individuals in control, or are we just something peering in on existence?
Which comes back to Bhuddism/Hinduism and the idea of Brahman.
We spend a lifetime building up our perception of reality, but in those really early moments of our lives we have the clearest perspective... but even still just limited by our range of basic senses.
I think Roger Penrose did some great talks, I watched a bunch on YouTube.
Orch OR theory apparently.
Science is limited by our ability to measure.
There may be far more than we’ll ever be capable of measuring or being able to perceive.
Azimov’s short story “last question” also gets me thinking.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff