ADF Posted June 7, 2010 Share Posted June 7, 2010 The absurdity of life after death hit me between the eyes as I watched my stepfather die from pancreatic cancer. This was back in 2003. Towards the end of his illness, his liver began to fail. Toxins which his liver would have normally filtered out of his bloodstream began to circulate throughout his body. They finally poisoned his brain, and he slipped into a coma. Those who believe in life after death claim our consciousness, or "spirit," is a non-material entity capable of existing without our physical bodies. If that is true, why did my stepfather's level of consciousness diminish as his physcial brain became more and more damaged? If his consciousness were seperate from his body, if it were really non-material, the toxins his liver could no longer filter out of his bloodstream should have had no effect on his consciousness whatsoever. But they did. This proves to me that there is no spirit seperate from our bodies. What we call spirit, or consciousness, is a by-product of electro-chemical processes going on in our brains. When our brains die, consciousness ends. Link to post Share on other sites
Ronni_W Posted June 14, 2010 Share Posted June 14, 2010 ADF, Are you open to the idea that intellectual-ego consciousness is, or might be separate from spirit consciousness? I think, though, that it's about going with whatever makes the most sense and best helps us to figure-out how to do this thing we call "life". Interesting to ponder such things. Link to post Share on other sites
Feelin Frisky Posted June 14, 2010 Share Posted June 14, 2010 (edited) The absurdity of life after death hit me between the eyes as I watched my stepfather die from pancreatic cancer. This was back in 2003. Towards the end of his illness, his liver began to fail. Toxins which his liver would have normally filtered out of his bloodstream began to circulate throughout his body. They finally poisoned his brain, and he slipped into a coma. Those who believe in life after death claim our consciousness, or "spirit," is a non-material entity capable of existing without our physical bodies. If that is true, why did my stepfather's level of consciousness diminish as his physcial brain became more and more damaged? If his consciousness were seperate from his body, if it were really non-material, the toxins his liver could no longer filter out of his bloodstream should have had no effect on his consciousness whatsoever. But they did. This proves to me that there is no spirit seperate from our bodies. What we call spirit, or consciousness, is a by-product of electro-chemical processes going on in our brains. When our brains die, consciousness ends. I'm with ya and have long worked to shed hand-me-down notions like this one. Rather than spend a half hour giving what I consider to be proof that the whole idea is ego-centric or human centric parochial narcissism which makes no effen sense, I put a question to believers and fence sitters: If you die and you find out there is a god but he says "I'm sorry but there's no afterlife and in a minute you'll just poof into nothingness" do you throw the life you had back in his face and in a meltdown curse him and say it wasn't good enough? Or do you thank him for the fantastic privilege of have been allowed to live? When people consider that as a serious possibility, it has to be incumbent on them to make this life a sacred gift and not just a tribulation to get through. This question among many others has readied me to accept that this IS as close to heaven as we'll ever get if we endeavor to make it so. Nothingness after death is acceptable--I don't want a manufactured paradise. PS: Sustaining a manufactured paradise is a human-centric view of the cosmos where we assume our importance to be central. There are too many possibilities of intelligent life out there for us to be so self aggrandizing as to rate a god or some kind of manipulated reward system after death. When you're hardware goes, so does your software. Edited June 14, 2010 by Feelin Frisky Link to post Share on other sites
Author ADF Posted June 14, 2010 Author Share Posted June 14, 2010 ADF, Are you open to the idea that intellectual-ego consciousness is, or might be separate from spirit consciousness? I think, though, that it's about going with whatever makes the most sense and best helps us to figure-out how to do this thing we call "life". Interesting to ponder such things. I explained, at some length, why I wasn't open to the idea of a consciousness seperate from the body. If consciousness--in the form of a spirit, soul, or whatever--were seperate from the body, then it shouldn't be affected by the body's deterioration. But it is. Thus, it seems far more likely that consciousess is dependent on the body for its existence. I'm sorry, but I can't go along with the whatever-works-for-you approach to spirituality. Some things about the physical word are just TRUE, whether we like it or not. I think there is great honor, nobility and--yes--morality in facing up to the stark facts of life, rather than buying into fairy tales that keep our fear at bay. Link to post Share on other sites
sally4sara Posted June 14, 2010 Share Posted June 14, 2010 I do believe in life after death but not conscious life. The body stops working and its decomposition is the body's energy continuing on as food or fertilizer. All living things are barrels of fuel yet to be. We house a lot of energy. It is First Law; energy cannot be destroyed, it can only be transferred. I think any other belief is a form of coping for the ego. Link to post Share on other sites
Malenfant Posted June 14, 2010 Share Posted June 14, 2010 i dont believe in life after death. The way I see it, its a natural instinct to hope and wish that we carry on, yet there is really no evidence to suggest we do. just because its a lovely notion, doesnt make it true. People cant get their heads round the idea that one day they will just cease to exist, so an afterlife is imagined as a way for us to not fear death. I would love to genuinely believe that we carry on, but somehow I feel its a belief bourne out of a hope for self preservation. Link to post Share on other sites
Author ADF Posted June 14, 2010 Author Share Posted June 14, 2010 I do believe in life after death but not conscious life. The body stops working and its decomposition is the body's energy continuing on as food or fertilizer. All living things are barrels of fuel yet to be. We house a lot of energy. It is First Law; energy cannot be destroyed, it can only be transferred. I think any other belief is a form of coping for the ego. But now you are stretching the definition of life after death well past any reasonable breaking point. Your use of the phrase "life after death" is purely metaphorical. For most people, life after death implies the survival of individual consciousness. That is what I was talking about. Link to post Share on other sites
sally4sara Posted June 14, 2010 Share Posted June 14, 2010 But now you are stretching the definition of life after death well past any reasonable breaking point. Your use of the phrase "life after death" is purely metaphorical. For most people, life after death implies the survival of individual consciousness. That is what I was talking about. I know what you are talking about. I offered the only "life" after death possible. We are saying the same thing. Link to post Share on other sites
Ronni_W Posted June 14, 2010 Share Posted June 14, 2010 If you die and you find out there is a god but he says "I'm sorry but there's no afterlife and in a minute you'll just poof into nothingness" do you throw the life you had back in his face and in a meltdown curse him and say it wasn't good enough? Not sure I'm following you, FF, but I think one would have to be living from some rather weird/warped ideas and motivations if that would be one's reaction in that situation -- whether in this life one is a non-believer, believer or fence-sitter, I mean. Totally with you on the concept of "heaven (or hell) on earth", though. I do believe that we do it for, or to, ourselves. I explained, at some length, why I wasn't open to the idea of a consciousness seperate from the body. Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I meant more along the lines of the possibility of there being two consciousnesses -- the one that you're referring to, that does indeed perish with the physical body, but maybe also another one that somehow transcends our physical experience. I do get and respect that you don't believe in an afterlife...wasn't/am not trying to change any part of your beliefs. The way you concluded your belief makes perfect logical sense to me, as well. (Er...Is there something like "illogical sense"? ) Link to post Share on other sites
Author ADF Posted June 14, 2010 Author Share Posted June 14, 2010 Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I meant more along the lines of the possibility of there being two consciousnesses -- the one that you're referring to, that does indeed perish with the physical body, but maybe also another one that somehow transcends our physical experience. If such a thing exists, I cannot imagine how we could ever know it. Or why we would believe such a thing exists. Link to post Share on other sites
sally4sara Posted June 14, 2010 Share Posted June 14, 2010 If such a thing exists, I cannot imagine how we could ever know it. Or why we would believe such a thing exists. It is because so many things in life remind us of our mortality. We are so invested in our lives, its unsettling to highly stressful to constantly be reminded that we could have the life we have one minute and just blink out of existence the next. That is why people believe this without any proof. What doesn't help is the instances of people dying and then coming back reporting seeing a bright white light and the sensation of leaving their body. This is just the final thing the brain does before death; a short burst of cascading brain waves. Link to post Share on other sites
Ronni_W Posted June 14, 2010 Share Posted June 14, 2010 If such a thing exists, I cannot imagine how we could ever know it. Or why we would believe such a thing exists. I totally agree -- it would take some serious, cold, hard, irrefutable evidence for me to believe that (a) such a thing exists and, (b) it can indeed transcend our 3D world. That is, it's not something anybody else will be able to satisfactorily "prove" to me...I'm gonna hafta do it for myself (if such proof is "out there" to be found, in the first place.) Link to post Share on other sites
VertexSquared Posted June 18, 2010 Share Posted June 18, 2010 i dont believe in life after death. The way I see it, its a natural instinct to hope and wish that we carry on, yet there is really no evidence to suggest we do. just because its a lovely notion, doesnt make it true. People cant get their heads round the idea that one day they will just cease to exist, so an afterlife is imagined as a way for us to not fear death. I would love to genuinely believe that we carry on, but somehow I feel its a belief bourne out of a hope for self preservation. The best way to describe it, I think, is to imagine what life was like before birth. Link to post Share on other sites
Eve Posted June 18, 2010 Share Posted June 18, 2010 The best way to describe it, I think, is to imagine what life was like before birth. What does this mean? I am curious ... Take care, Eve xx Link to post Share on other sites
TheLoneSock Posted June 18, 2010 Share Posted June 18, 2010 Most atheists/agnostics are just people who want to be convinced, and are frustrated they haven't been yet. How's that for my .02. Link to post Share on other sites
VertexSquared Posted June 18, 2010 Share Posted June 18, 2010 What does this mean? I am curious ... Take care, Eve xx It's a way to describe death. Death is simply a state of nonexistence. We've already "experienced" nonexistence before birth. We can say that death will be the same "experience," which is to say, nothing at all. An afterlife is an emotionally appealing concept, but there's no evidence for it at all. We can describe everything in terms of brain functions. Most atheists/agnostics are just people who want to be convinced, and are frustrated they haven't been yet. How's that for my .02. That is likely inaccurate. I'd say many atheists/agnostics can appreciate that theism is emotionally palatable, but they gain no utility from it in terms of truth/understanding of reality and thus see no reason to believe in it. Link to post Share on other sites
SouthernSunshine Posted June 18, 2010 Share Posted June 18, 2010 Most atheists/agnostics are just people who want to be convinced, and are frustrated they haven't been yet. How's that for my .02. That makes sense! Link to post Share on other sites
Shakz Posted June 18, 2010 Share Posted June 18, 2010 I do believe in life after death but not conscious life. The body stops working and its decomposition is the body's energy continuing on as food or fertilizer. All living things are barrels of fuel yet to be. We house a lot of energy. It is First Law; energy cannot be destroyed, it can only be transferred. The same is true of information. So where does the accumulated data that was your life end up? Is it just floating out there, like a feather on the wind? Link to post Share on other sites
marsle85 Posted June 19, 2010 Share Posted June 19, 2010 I do not find the theory of life after death credible, simply because of our truly biological connection to the planet. Just as I find it silly to imagine the spirit of the racoon-road-kill on the side of the road floating up to Heaven, to me- it's just as unlikely for humans. The only difference is we feel the need to justify, and have purpose for our lives. We can accept the "menial" fatality of an animal, but we're so "special"- we couldn't just possibly just disintegrate in the dirt. Just as many find comfort in faith of God, or spirituality... I enjoy, and appreciate life, evolution and finality by itself. Link to post Share on other sites
aerogurl87 Posted June 19, 2010 Share Posted June 19, 2010 Ya know when I was younger, my mother (who is a Christian) pointed out something to me that got me thinking. She said, "when Lazarus (who was raised from the dead by Jesus like 3 days after he died) was resurrected, did he ever mention being anywhere while he was dead or seeing anything?" I answered "well no" and she said, well that's all the proof you need. When you die, you cease to exist." Link to post Share on other sites
marlena Posted June 19, 2010 Share Posted June 19, 2010 (edited) The best way to describe it, I think, is to imagine what life was like before birth. Yes, this is the most probable answer to man's existential angst. Not all that comforting, I know. Green pastures, virgins, pearly gates, benevolent old men are much nicer to contemplate but, hey, it could be worse! I mean, seriously, imagine if there really were a hell and little red demons ready to toss you into the fire and brimstone botomless pit! Whether we like it or not, it seems most likely that we go back to wherever we came from before we were born. Nothingness. Hard to process, I know but there you have it. Edited June 19, 2010 by marlena Link to post Share on other sites
wuggle Posted June 19, 2010 Share Posted June 19, 2010 I agree there is no 'life after death' in the way that most people think about it. We do not have a soul or spirit that is separate from our body that survives after the body is dead (even though I am still open to the 'possibility' of a minor non conscious energy field that persists for a limited time period after death in the form of a bose-einstien condensate, an energy field that is created by a complex electrical system like the human brain, that I like to think of as a sort of piece of music that drifts off when the brain finally stops -just open to the idea, not done enough research yet) To me a persons 'spirit' should be thought of as the influence they had and continue to have on the world after their death. A great inventor or statesman's spirit can often survive long after their death. People throughout history have left a great mark on huge numbers of people, Ghandi, JFK, Churchill, Lincoln etc, but to a lesser degree we all leave our mark even if we don't realise it at the time. The work we do, the enjoyment we get from life and the enthusiasm and value system we promote and pass on to others are are legacy. When we do something that is altruistic, this will affect others and generally make the human race better, when we are lazy or selfish this to will affect others who may follow our lead and this will make society worse. On a one to one level, the 'spirit' of your stepfather can still be found in how those who knew him think and feel about him and his life. Was he a good person , a lazy person, what values did he pass on ? what lessons did he teach ? was he passionate ? a searcher for truth, a coal miner ? , did he create things or destroy them ? These things are our legacy and true 'spirit' and I think they are actually better when you think about it than any promise of eternity. I would rather die knowing that I created at least one interesting piece of art that will make someone else in the future think or that I gave one good piece of advice that may have changed someones way of thinking just a little, may make even a tiny difference to some part of humanity than to achieve absolutely nothing but have my conscience survive forever (which would if you think about it probably drive you mad anyway !) Enjoy life, revel in it, leave a mark Link to post Share on other sites
Toki Posted June 19, 2010 Share Posted June 19, 2010 I was told there'd be a stripper factory, and a giant beer volcano. Link to post Share on other sites
marlena Posted June 19, 2010 Share Posted June 19, 2010 I was told there'd be a stripper factory, and a giant beer volcano. You can always hope!! Or have blind faith that there is. People can talk themselves into just about anything. Link to post Share on other sites
Trojan John Posted June 19, 2010 Share Posted June 19, 2010 I was told there'd be a stripper factory, and a giant beer volcano. RAmen! Praised Be To His Noodly Appendages. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts