By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 08:25 - Nov 7 by WarwickHunt
Guff. Utter guff.
Unusually uncharacteristic response.
Could you not have said something like, "I don't believe that"? Or "that hasn't been proven to my satisfaction"?
The minds who saw that as a truth were more intelligent and better-read than anyone on this message board, and deserve better then "Guff. Utter guff."
Or, you might have said, "I think I'll look into that 'over-soul' and see if I can learn what it means before I respond." Now that would have been much more characteristic of you.
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 08:45 - Nov 7 by Morfa_Same
It genuinely amazes me the number of people who still believe this nonsense in the 21st century.
It has long been proven that our thoughts are electrical signals in the brain. We have RAM and a CPU (the brain), wiring (veins and arteries) and even a power supply (heart and lungs) yet people still refuse to accept that we are biological machines.
People are entitled to believe in superstition if they want, but please don't try to pass it off as equally plausible as science.
Was your post above intended as humour?
How can a serious person describe a discussion of this thread's subject call it "nonsense" and "superstition"?
Your second paragraph is also deeply amusing. Computers do use electrical signals, have RAM and a CPU, and wiring, and even a power supply. Does that give them life? Do they actually "think," or do they regurgitate what their programmers fed them? Do they have a conscience, or a moral sense, or an ethical sense, or the ability to self-reproduce? I could go on, but that seems to be more than enough of a difference.
"Because I do not understand something does not mean that it is not so." Now write that a hundred times.
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 09:25 - Nov 7 by Parlay
I don't see the correlation. You are talking about the mechanics of a body which isn't disputed by anyone as far as i am aware. Im pretty sure "science" has never claimed to know what happens after you die so the notion of some sort of life after death being more plausible than science isn't a relative thing.
Life is energy and energy gives life - without it we wouldn't exist irrespective of mechanics of our physical bodies. Once i die, my energy remains (factual) - if the same energy which gave me life then gave another animal life (larvae for example) then my energy would live on. That is one example of how humans limited knowledge still gives a reasoning to "life" after death.
What people consider "life" however is different to everyone. Some people consider life after death as the conscious human life, the only reference source they have. There are an infinite amount of possibilities outside our understanding.
Science is incredibly limited and only explains what we know, it doesn't even begin to tell us what we don't.
Superb post. I've copied it and will save it. Thanks.
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 09:28 - Nov 7 by Morfa_Same
The point was that if our thoughts are electrical signals in our brains, then how can the thoughts continue when the body no longer exists? It would be like a computer continuing to process information after you turn the power off and disassemble it.
No, the point is that our thoughts are not electrical signals in our brains.
Electrical signals merely carry our thoughts. The thoughts have to have been created somehow in order to travel on electrical signals.
Thank you Dav, explaining things for everyone to understand isn't my strong point, especially on such a topic where there is great confusion anyway, but i did my best and glad you understood what I was suggesting.
Its also the case that Religion is and always has been subjective.
If you believe the Creation and the Bible then ergo its the truth and all oters are wrong by definition. Much craven images, much superstition and much fear intertwined gives people every reason to be cycnical.
Science cannot and never will determine if we will live after death;it is a belief. Your sprit? well will eternal life be like a pleasant dream and damnation just a living nightmare. I ve no idea DAV and neither have you, parlay ,your milkman or your favourite dog.
Im firmly agnostic and until someone co0mes back from death, rises from the grave, meets me in Wethrespoons on a Wednesday evening, I ll remain so.
Every single person of religious faith is 100% sure that what he/she believes is right and they d be wrong.
For anyone else going to burning hell ,the two cantankerous fookers squabbling by the Hearth will be Chrissy second coming and me. The two dragging us apart wioll be lifelong and wayne, although they seem to nice not be be going to Heaven ,although me dad told me you had to be believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and the resurrection to enter the kingdom of heaven ;this blows the Catholic belief to pieces so there we go.
Lady Perch and I will be dining out tonight so have a good evening y a ll
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 16:15 - Nov 7 by Davillin
No, the point is that our thoughts are not electrical signals in our brains.
Electrical signals merely carry our thoughts. The thoughts have to have been created somehow in order to travel on electrical signals.
Now, are they created in something like "a mind"?
I state up front in this that I have no particular leaning towards religion, and no idea whether or not there is such a thing as life after death in whatever form that takes. My 'reason' if you like says that it is more likely than not that we don't exist in any understandable way after death, although I believe it wouldn't be rational to have some faint hope that this may be wrong !!
Anyway, that aside, my meagre knowledge on all of this understands that the amount of energy that exists in the universe is both fixed and unchanging, and therefore it converts from one form to another form (and again, my understanding Dav to the question what were the dying stars before, well they were something else, because all the energy that exists now has always existed as i understand it). But that is the scientific stuff and I think your point here is very interesting.
It is not entirely different to the point I once heard framed which said that our bodies do not have souls to help us feel and be aware, it is more accurate to say that our souls have bodies to help us experience and interact.
The question that I do find interesting is the one of self awareness. There is definitely something in us (which doesn't seem to be present in other living things, at least not to the same extent) which is 'aware' of ourselves and our existence. That is bizarre from a scientific perspective. And not only do we appear to be aware, but we are aware of ourselves in a quite specific way, that transcends what we look like and the external stuff. (I've often wondered about this with transgender people for example - they have an awareness which doesn't even correlate to their gender - such that they say they are 'shocked' when they see themselves). It's similar to when we dream and 'know' that someone is in the dream, even though it doesn't look like them, we know it's them.
Now I don't know whether this 'self' is a mix of the brain with hormones etc. but as I say, it does seem both powerful and odd scientifically. And I guess that when we talk about 'life after death' what we are really talking about is whether this sense of self lives on in a different form.
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 13:37 - Nov 7 by Naughty71
I don' t wish to be flippant on this subject as it can REALLY cause offence to people, but the "logic" that people use to try to explain that they believe their spirit lives on sometimes borders on farcical.
"There is no proof that there is life after death"
"There is no proof that there isn't"
Disregarding the fact that the burden of proof doesn't lie with atheists but with believers, you could just as easily proffer because there is a wealth of literature on fairies, Father Christmas, Harry Potter (just as much as religious texts, and in some cases, more), that believers in these fictitious characters are just as valid?
Like I said, I just can't put it into words without it seeming flippant or condescending, there are many people who take comfort in their beliefs. I am not one of them, and without definite proof of and afterlife (I'm not talking about a grainy photo of "ghostly figures", or visits to mediums - who can be discredited with research on how they cold read people to glean information from them (see Derren Brown)), I will not sway my position.
Cold, hard, scientific proof. Possibly an interview by Wogan with a ghost would do.
See what I mean about flippancy? I'm sorry, strike that last remark from the record.
Fascinating post!
Because you do not understand or believe something does not make it "farcical." Your lack of understanding or belief would be equally "farcical."
Sometimes we can observe something in Nature without being able to explain it. For some, that means that it doesn't exist. That is farcical.
Well, in an attempt to clarify the thread question, let me try to define "life," as requested in an earlier post.
Assume that there will be a definite moment in time when this body of mine "dies." In the split second before that moment, and in the split second after that moment, before the decaying process begins, the physical, chemical, biological, anatomical, and in all other scientific senses, of both bodies are identical in matter.
Before that moment (which we call "death"), my body was able to use all of its senses, to use intellect, to imagine, and on a more physical level, feel pleasure and pain, and move, and procreate, and more things that your imagination can fill in here.
After that moment, we can do none of those things.
What is different is that the latter body no longer has "life." And "life" is much more than electrical currents. The electrical currents merely carry the tools of "life," but do not create them or sustain them. "Life" does that.
We can see and describe what "life" does, but we do not know what it is, how it got there, and what happens to it when the body "dies."
All of this applies equally in form, if not in depth and intensity, in all other "life forms."
Most important of all is that the thread title and basic question, "Is there life after death?" does not ask what happens to the body, but what happens to the "life" which energizes [or a hundred other terms] a body into being "alive."
O.K. we do not know the answer in a literal way, but the experience and deep thought of thousands of great thinkers in History have given various answers -- all tending to the conclusion that "life" continues even after the body "dies."
Believe that or do not believe that, but please don't put your insufficient understanding of our most important question up against those myriad philosophers and call them "farcical."
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 16:30 - Nov 7 by perchrockjack
Its also the case that Religion is and always has been subjective.
If you believe the Creation and the Bible then ergo its the truth and all oters are wrong by definition. Much craven images, much superstition and much fear intertwined gives people every reason to be cycnical.
Science cannot and never will determine if we will live after death;it is a belief. Your sprit? well will eternal life be like a pleasant dream and damnation just a living nightmare. I ve no idea DAV and neither have you, parlay ,your milkman or your favourite dog.
Im firmly agnostic and until someone co0mes back from death, rises from the grave, meets me in Wethrespoons on a Wednesday evening, I ll remain so.
Every single person of religious faith is 100% sure that what he/she believes is right and they d be wrong.
For anyone else going to burning hell ,the two cantankerous fookers squabbling by the Hearth will be Chrissy second coming and me. The two dragging us apart wioll be lifelong and wayne, although they seem to nice not be be going to Heaven ,although me dad told me you had to be believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and the resurrection to enter the kingdom of heaven ;this blows the Catholic belief to pieces so there we go.
Lady Perch and I will be dining out tonight so have a good evening y a ll
Love and Light
[Note unrelated to my reply: It is you, I think, who has injected religion into this thread.]
I have said dozens of times in discussions of this nature, as in this one, that I reject the stories in the Christian Bible, and in other ancient bibles.
The question of "life after death" is almost a universal theme in bibles, but it is also a theme of science or near-science, and more importantly, of philosophy.
I never said that I "know" what happens to one's body, "life," or "soul" after death," just basically implied, if not said, that I don't believe that one's soul/spirit dies with the body. I did not reach that conclusion from religion in any way, but had to reject religious teaching in order to arrive at my views.
Without being crude about it, I do not address most of the rest of your post because it is anti-biblical, as am I, and basically agree with you, although i don't use that to deny some form of life after death. Nor am I addressing this subject as "a person of religious faith."
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 16:45 - Nov 7 by londonlisa2001
I state up front in this that I have no particular leaning towards religion, and no idea whether or not there is such a thing as life after death in whatever form that takes. My 'reason' if you like says that it is more likely than not that we don't exist in any understandable way after death, although I believe it wouldn't be rational to have some faint hope that this may be wrong !!
Anyway, that aside, my meagre knowledge on all of this understands that the amount of energy that exists in the universe is both fixed and unchanging, and therefore it converts from one form to another form (and again, my understanding Dav to the question what were the dying stars before, well they were something else, because all the energy that exists now has always existed as i understand it). But that is the scientific stuff and I think your point here is very interesting.
It is not entirely different to the point I once heard framed which said that our bodies do not have souls to help us feel and be aware, it is more accurate to say that our souls have bodies to help us experience and interact.
The question that I do find interesting is the one of self awareness. There is definitely something in us (which doesn't seem to be present in other living things, at least not to the same extent) which is 'aware' of ourselves and our existence. That is bizarre from a scientific perspective. And not only do we appear to be aware, but we are aware of ourselves in a quite specific way, that transcends what we look like and the external stuff. (I've often wondered about this with transgender people for example - they have an awareness which doesn't even correlate to their gender - such that they say they are 'shocked' when they see themselves). It's similar to when we dream and 'know' that someone is in the dream, even though it doesn't look like them, we know it's them.
Now I don't know whether this 'self' is a mix of the brain with hormones etc. but as I say, it does seem both powerful and odd scientifically. And I guess that when we talk about 'life after death' what we are really talking about is whether this sense of self lives on in a different form.
Very brief but respectful replies to some of your post, much of which I tend to agree with.
1. The issue is not "whether we exist in any understandable way after death," but whether "there is life after death," with an unstated subset of questions about how much, if anything at all, we will experience. [Oops! Can of Worms Alert.]
2. My question about the origin of dying stars is a form of my almost insistently regular question in answer to anyone who posits the beginning of existence with some thing [like dying stars]. The answer should be, "I don't know," or "I don't know, but I believe . . . ." [fill in the blank].
3. I very much like the souls/bodies quote and will borrow it, record it, and try to find its author. Thanks.
4. The question of self-awareness is one being assiduously studied by behavioral scientists. I see TV programs about that research on a fairly regular basis. I have been convinced that other species do. After having had a pack of dogs for over 40 years, I know that dogs do have self-awareness, without reservation.
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 16:25 - Nov 7 by Parlay
Thank you Dav, explaining things for everyone to understand isn't my strong point, especially on such a topic where there is great confusion anyway, but i did my best and glad you understood what I was suggesting.
I thank you for your posts, which have been most revelatory on difficult issues. I learned a lot from you today.
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 17:12 - Nov 7 by Davillin
Very brief but respectful replies to some of your post, much of which I tend to agree with.
1. The issue is not "whether we exist in any understandable way after death," but whether "there is life after death," with an unstated subset of questions about how much, if anything at all, we will experience. [Oops! Can of Worms Alert.]
2. My question about the origin of dying stars is a form of my almost insistently regular question in answer to anyone who posits the beginning of existence with some thing [like dying stars]. The answer should be, "I don't know," or "I don't know, but I believe . . . ." [fill in the blank].
3. I very much like the souls/bodies quote and will borrow it, record it, and try to find its author. Thanks.
4. The question of self-awareness is one being assiduously studied by behavioral scientists. I see TV programs about that research on a fairly regular basis. I have been convinced that other species do. After having had a pack of dogs for over 40 years, I know that dogs do have self-awareness, without reservation.
[Post edited 7 Nov 2014 17:16]
re no. 4 first (as it may be easier) I heard recently (and I can't for the life of me remember where) that we are the only animal born with a knowledge of our own certain death. I don't know whether this is remotely trues, but it seems quite an important part to me of self awareness. That is different btw to the 'self preservation' instinct that all animals have.
re point 2. I think the whole point (as I understand it anyway) is that there isn't a beginning. The energy has always existed - a concept that we can't understand because we have no capacity to understand infinity.
My understanding (and this may be complete rubbish by the way) is that the Big Bang explains the start of what is now the universe, not the start of everything, and that the energy contained within the whatever it was before big bang was the same as the sum of the energy in the universe today. Equally, I thought that when the universe stops expanding and starts contracting again (which I believe it is supposed to do), then after an insanely long period of time it will be back to a pinprick (yes, I know - miles smaller than that, but using it for simplicity) and the energy will still remain the same. Then it repeats, maybe not exactly, but in some way. For ever. In the same way as this is a repetition. The 'before' bit doesn't actually exist I don't think, because time is, in itself, part of that same energy that has no start and no end and doesn't disappear, just change. This is so far beyond my ability to comprehend though that as I say, it may not be what the theory actually is but I believe it to be pretty close.
0
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 18:24 - Nov 7 with 1111 views
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 01:06 - Nov 7 by johnnyKing
Yes, more out of curiosity went to see a psychic medium in Swansea, she told me things about my life that she should never ever know, followed by messages from past relations which were spot on, with names and descriptions. Speak as you find. she was spot on.
I went with the intention of not giving anything away, but she blew my mind.
She also does past life regression, which I didn't do but friends have.
[Post edited 7 Nov 2014 1:08]
The likes of Derren Browne can explain to you how these Psychic`s seem to know so much about there victims.
0
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 18:44 - Nov 7 with 1103 views
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 20:33 - Nov 6 by dgt73
And it's sheer speculation that there is no life after death to. Where is your evidence ? I won't hold my breath.
[Post edited 6 Nov 2014 20:34]
It`s all about logical and rational thinking, if i told you that my god exists in the shape of a teapot you can not prove that my god does not exist in the shape of a teapot, but it sounds just as dumb as your belief`s really, as for evidence about no life after death well i guess you get that every day, every dead person that`s get buried remain in that box, how the fcuk are they alive after death, dig them up and they are always still there, and still dead, but no doubt you will now come back with the spirit pop`s off somewhere else notion, which of course has not a cent of evidence to back that one up.
0
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 18:50 - Nov 7 with 1100 views
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 08:45 - Nov 7 by Morfa_Same
It genuinely amazes me the number of people who still believe this nonsense in the 21st century.
It has long been proven that our thoughts are electrical signals in the brain. We have RAM and a CPU (the brain), wiring (veins and arteries) and even a power supply (heart and lungs) yet people still refuse to accept that we are biological machines.
People are entitled to believe in superstition if they want, but please don't try to pass it off as equally plausible as science.
Sadly a lot of it has to do with the fear of the harsh reality of death, or in the case or priests, Psychics etc a good way to make money off the vulnerable.
0
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 19:25 - Nov 7 with 1070 views
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 15:52 - Nov 7 by Davillin
Serious question: If "...the physical universe and us [were] made up from tiny atoms formed by the decay of dying start," what had those dying stars been made up from?
I don't know is the simple answer, but some scientists believe that there is another type of matter that exists but can't be seen. Maybe that is what drives the universe .
Later on in this thread there is mention of the universe expanding and contracting from and to a "pinprick" or a singularity of infinitesimal tinyness.
I don't profess to know the origins of the universe and the scientific explanations are mind boggling. Maybe our bodies are a universe that will dwindle to "nothing" as well.
0
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 19:40 - Nov 7 with 1061 views
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 17:01 - Nov 7 by Davillin
[Note unrelated to my reply: It is you, I think, who has injected religion into this thread.]
I have said dozens of times in discussions of this nature, as in this one, that I reject the stories in the Christian Bible, and in other ancient bibles.
The question of "life after death" is almost a universal theme in bibles, but it is also a theme of science or near-science, and more importantly, of philosophy.
I never said that I "know" what happens to one's body, "life," or "soul" after death," just basically implied, if not said, that I don't believe that one's soul/spirit dies with the body. I did not reach that conclusion from religion in any way, but had to reject religious teaching in order to arrive at my views.
Without being crude about it, I do not address most of the rest of your post because it is anti-biblical, as am I, and basically agree with you, although i don't use that to deny some form of life after death. Nor am I addressing this subject as "a person of religious faith."
Churchgoers are always suspicious of spiritualists. I was brought up as a Roman Catholic... I always thought spiritualism suited me more. As I grew up, I found my religion was run by hypocrites and spiritualists much more open minded without agendas. To sum up my meanderings... Some great well thought out responses on this thread. We'll all find out one day, that's for sure.
It's just the internet, init.
0
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 20:04 - Nov 7 with 1049 views
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 19:40 - Nov 7 by Starsky
Churchgoers are always suspicious of spiritualists. I was brought up as a Roman Catholic... I always thought spiritualism suited me more. As I grew up, I found my religion was run by hypocrites and spiritualists much more open minded without agendas. To sum up my meanderings... Some great well thought out responses on this thread. We'll all find out one day, that's for sure.
No mate, you really won't, no more than you know now what was happening before you were born. 'You' will have ceased to exist.
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 16:45 - Nov 7 by Davillin
Fascinating post!
Because you do not understand or believe something does not make it "farcical." Your lack of understanding or belief would be equally "farcical."
Sometimes we can observe something in Nature without being able to explain it. For some, that means that it doesn't exist. That is farcical.
Well, in an attempt to clarify the thread question, let me try to define "life," as requested in an earlier post.
Assume that there will be a definite moment in time when this body of mine "dies." In the split second before that moment, and in the split second after that moment, before the decaying process begins, the physical, chemical, biological, anatomical, and in all other scientific senses, of both bodies are identical in matter.
Before that moment (which we call "death"), my body was able to use all of its senses, to use intellect, to imagine, and on a more physical level, feel pleasure and pain, and move, and procreate, and more things that your imagination can fill in here.
After that moment, we can do none of those things.
What is different is that the latter body no longer has "life." And "life" is much more than electrical currents. The electrical currents merely carry the tools of "life," but do not create them or sustain them. "Life" does that.
We can see and describe what "life" does, but we do not know what it is, how it got there, and what happens to it when the body "dies."
All of this applies equally in form, if not in depth and intensity, in all other "life forms."
Most important of all is that the thread title and basic question, "Is there life after death?" does not ask what happens to the body, but what happens to the "life" which energizes [or a hundred other terms] a body into being "alive."
O.K. we do not know the answer in a literal way, but the experience and deep thought of thousands of great thinkers in History have given various answers -- all tending to the conclusion that "life" continues even after the body "dies."
Believe that or do not believe that, but please don't put your insufficient understanding of our most important question up against those myriad philosophers and call them "farcical."
You're correct, using the term farcical was confrontational and flippant ( as I stated, it's quite difficult as an atheist not to sound flippant when discussing the subject)' and for that I apologise.
Someone else pointed out that sciences' flaw is that it can't explain what it doesn't know, but I think that that is the main strength that comes from scientific method. The bravery to say, without any embarrassment " I don't know ".
Science will not put credence into anything that cannot be proven without evidence as back up.
The perfect example is "The Big Bang" - supposedly the creation of everything. But until there is concrete evidence to back this up, it will remain a theory.
You could say the same for the notion of life after death, just a theory without scientific credence.
So perhaps that's where my thinking is at? Not proven, so unlikely. Open to learning more, but without a proven scientific method behind it, most likely not to be true?
"Who scored that Naughty?", "I don't know, I've forgotten my bl**dy glasses again!".
0
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 22:18 - Nov 7 with 1006 views
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 18:44 - Nov 7 by shingle
It`s all about logical and rational thinking, if i told you that my god exists in the shape of a teapot you can not prove that my god does not exist in the shape of a teapot, but it sounds just as dumb as your belief`s really, as for evidence about no life after death well i guess you get that every day, every dead person that`s get buried remain in that box, how the fcuk are they alive after death, dig them up and they are always still there, and still dead, but no doubt you will now come back with the spirit pop`s off somewhere else notion, which of course has not a cent of evidence to back that one up.
You are confusing life after death with resurrection there.
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 09:25 - Nov 7 by Parlay
I don't see the correlation. You are talking about the mechanics of a body which isn't disputed by anyone as far as i am aware. Im pretty sure "science" has never claimed to know what happens after you die so the notion of some sort of life after death being more plausible than science isn't a relative thing.
Life is energy and energy gives life - without it we wouldn't exist irrespective of mechanics of our physical bodies. Once i die, my energy remains (factual) - if the same energy which gave me life then gave another animal life (larvae for example) then my energy would live on. That is one example of how humans limited knowledge still gives a reasoning to "life" after death.
What people consider "life" however is different to everyone. Some people consider life after death as the conscious human life, the only reference source they have. There are an infinite amount of possibilities outside our understanding.
Science is incredibly limited and only explains what we know, it doesn't even begin to tell us what we don't.
Parlay, firstly let me just say I have enjoyed a few of your recent posts BUT i must say the following excerpt is absolute guff (copyright Mr Hunt)...
"Life is energy and energy gives life" - BOLLUCKS, life is almost certainly unachievable without energy and from a combination of certain energy and biological structures life can arise but the quoted piece is just drivel.
My final word on the matter is... ENTROPY.
Goodnight to you sir, please keep posting and leave out the spurious stuff.
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan
0
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 23:20 - Nov 7 with 969 views
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 22:50 - Nov 7 by DJack
Parlay, firstly let me just say I have enjoyed a few of your recent posts BUT i must say the following excerpt is absolute guff (copyright Mr Hunt)...
"Life is energy and energy gives life" - BOLLUCKS, life is almost certainly unachievable without energy and from a combination of certain energy and biological structures life can arise but the quoted piece is just drivel.
My final word on the matter is... ENTROPY.
Goodnight to you sir, please keep posting and leave out the spurious stuff.
Happy for you to disagree, but "guff" it is not, i thought we had got rid of the dross contributions early in the thread.
It would be superb to have a thread where people do not insult and berate each others opinions, especially when the opposite opinion is not forthcoming or indeed attempted to be explained. "Bollox" and "guff" is tantamount to putting ones fingers in ones ears and stamping ones feet.
So back to the debate - what can live without energy? .... And most importantly, what do you consider "life"? To know what it is we are looking for after "death" we must both have the same understanding of the word "life".
iS tHERE lIFE aFTER dEATH on 01:10 - Nov 7 by Davillin
I'm shocked. I would never have guessed that you would brush off that bit so lightly.
There are some who believe in a single "over-soul" that inhabits every living thing. Follow that to its logical conclusion and, I think, you'll see the possibility of life after death, not a physical life, but life as part of that over-soul. If you want to push the envelope, the over-soul would of necessity include life before physical life.
One thing few people want to talk about is where life itself comes from, and, by extension, where one's soul comes from, and then where it goes.
We are talking about the single most important aspect of human existence, and I fail to see why it should be so simple as it would appear to be without some kind of life beyond the physical.
p.s. I must repeat that I do not intend even the slightest connection with biblical stories.
And I see the over soul as mother nature. When I die tbere will ge a transmutation, into what I know not. But life carries on. Intelligent or not, physical or not, but nothing truly dies it just changes into something else. And that statement is backed up by science.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
