Print Page | Close Window

Do you believe in an afterlife?

Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics not related to music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=123584
Printed Date: September 28 2021 at 01:06
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Do you believe in an afterlife?
Posted By: Logan
Subject: Do you believe in an afterlife?
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 08:27
I don't feel the need to include an "unsure" or "other" option, though I expect that some would like to have that option. I;m me interested in what people have to say than poll results anyway. Answering yes or no does not require certainty. I don't believe that I can be certain of anything, and I am ultimately agnostic on all matters, which does not mean that I don't believe or am not convinced when it comes to many things.

While I don't believe in an after life, that there is something positive "post death" would please me, perhaps not so much an after-life, more a sort of après-vie (to reference Douglas Adams).

Often people say rest in peace, but I don't want to want to rest in peace. I'd rather raise a little hell if it comes down to it. I would rather celebritas ad maximus (party to the max) than requiescat in pace.

Or generally be dead and loving it.



I have had various experiences that have swayed me into the there is something more camp at various times (I mean there is something more in some sense, but it depends upon what one means by something more). At times I have believed that our consciousness, or some such thing, spirit some would call it or a coherent energy, does continue in some form. Ultimately I don't know, but I do not believe so nor am I convinced that it does not. I see consciousness and personality as a product of the brain, and when the brain dies, I would not see why it would continue, but in another sense when thinking of the concept of energy of mind -- at least we need energy for the brain to function even if the energy is not mind itself -- there is the law of conservation of energy. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, but transformed. A sea change into something rich and strange to go all Shakespeare. I don;t feel that I have good reason to believe that the pattern that make us us in a meaningful way continue after brain death. Some take it as a matter of faith,which can simply mean that I believe this despite having good or sufficient evidence to support my conviction. Or as described in the Bible, "faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

And to go with more Shakespeare, "There are more things in heaven and Earth ... than are dreamt of in your philosophy."



Sorry, I know that I haven't posed this as well as I could. With yet another mostly sleepless night, I do so wish that I could rest peacefully. Insomnia is a drag and I get it to the extreme. At least it gives me very long days and more time to waste.

-------------
The first step on the road to wisdom is the recognition of your own cherry pie.



Replies:
Posted By: Snicolette
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 08:38
I have discussed this with you before, and yes, I do.  Shakespeare said so many things so perfectly, and even with the scientific knowledge we do have now, this (and more from his pen) still rings true.  I have certainly witnessed things that I cannot explain otherwise, so I will cast my vote firmly on the "yes," side.  Also, yes to the often laughable way that these things present themselves.

-------------
"Into every rain, a little life must fall." ~Tom Rapp


Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 09:05
I do not.  I would like to think that the heaven depicted in Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey and other movies could exist, but realistically I don't believe that anything like that exists.  And I know that with that attitude after I die I will be reincarnated and come back as a dung beetle.

-------------


Posted By: Shadowyzard
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 09:08
I might even believe immortality, but never an afterlife. NEVER. I'm a strong materialist, and I'm 100% sure that if my material body is gone, I'll not experience anything after that.

-------------


Posted By: Psychedelic Paul
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 09:19
No, I don't believe there's life after ProgArchives, and on the subject of "resting in peace", I don't believe Oliver Reed, Richard Harris, Richard Burton & Peter O'Toole are resting in peace, given their reputations for hell-raising during their boisterous and rambunctious lifetime's. Smile


Posted By: Lewian
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 09:25
I voted no but honestly I'm properly agnostic. Either I'll find out when it comes or I won't be there anymore to care that it doesn't. Quite comfortable really. We don't need opinions on everything, we can just say "let's see what comes (or not)".

I voted no anyway because the idea of an afterlife is just too tempting for humans to come up with regardless of whether it exists that I put a high probability on "this is just made up". 


Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 09:26
Why wasn't "possibly" a choice? I don't know anything as a fact, either way.

-------------
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.


Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 09:38
Yes, there is an afterlife....What you all fail to understand is that this currently IS your afterlife, we are living it now.
Totally makes sense....I voted YES.


-------------


Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 09:43
"I think that when you die your soul goes to a garage in Buffalo." -- George Carlin




-------------
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...


Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 09:44
Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:


Why wasn't "possibly" a choice?
I don't anything as a fact, either way.


I wrote at the top of my OP

Quote I don't feel the need to include an "unsure" or "other" option, though I expect that some would like to have that option. I'm more [correcting a typo in my OP] interested in what people have to say than poll results anyway. Answering yes or no does not require certainty. I don't believe that I can be certain of anything, and I am ultimately agnostic on all matters, which does not mean that I don't believe or am not convinced when it comes to many things.


But I guess my thinking did not come across. Belief does not require certainty. I can't say for certain that there are no dinosaurs still living today, but I do not believe so (okay, that dinosaur issue might open another can of worms). My beliefs are subject to change as new evidence comes along.

It's the same with my rather soft (negative) atheism. I don't believe in a God, but that does not mean that I can say with certainty that there is no God by some metric. I am not convinced that there is a God. As said, I am ultimately agnostic on all matters even if I am suitably convinced when it comes to many things. Saying I don't believe something is not synonymous to me with saying that I don't know something, but maybe that is too fine an epistemological difference for some.

By the way there are many things I don't believe in that exist because I don't know of them, but that's a side-note.

A simpler, and less confusing way for some to think about this topic would be to ask "Are you convinced that there is an afterlife?" Yes, or no.

EDIT: As for "possibly". I'd be wary about believing that something is possible unless it is demonstrated that it is possible, or there is sufficient evidence to accept that something is possible.

-------------
The first step on the road to wisdom is the recognition of your own cherry pie.


Posted By: someone_else
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 09:47
I'll know it when I will have passed away, so I'd say yea.

I cannot imagine I am no longer when my body stops performing its vital functions. Some things are too hard to believe.
By the way, why do all those who don't believe in an afterlife post RIP's in the RIP thread Confused? Someone who is no more does not rest either.



-------------


Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 09:48
Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:


Why wasn't "possibly" a choice?
I don't anything as a fact, either way.


I wrote at the top of my OP

Quote I don't feel the need to include an "unsure" or "other" option, though I expect that some would like to have that option. I;m me interested in what people have to say than poll results anyway. Answering yes or no does not require certainty. I don't believe that I can be certain of anything, and I am ultimately agnostic on all matters, which does not mean that I don't believe or am not convinced when it comes to many things.


But I guess my thinking did not come across. Belief does not require certainty. I can't say for certain that there are no dinosaurs still living today, but I do not believe so (okay, that dinosaur issue might open another can of worms). My beliefs are subject to change as new evidence comes along.

It's the same with my rather soft (negative) atheism. I don't believe in a God, but that does not mean that I can say with certainty that there is no God by some metric. I am not convinced that there is a God. As said, I am ultimately agnostic on all matters even if I am suitably convinced when it comes to many things. Saying I don't believe something is not synonymous to me with saying that I don't know something, but maybe that is too fine an epistemological difference for some.

By the way there are many things I don't believe in that exist because I don't know of them, but that's a side-note.

A simpler, and less confusing way for some to think about this topic would be to ask "Are you convinced that there is an afterlife?" Yes, or no.
Ok then, perhaps I meant it rhetorically. Wink

-------------
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.


Posted By: Shadowyzard
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 09:54
Originally posted by someone_else someone_else wrote:

By the way, why do all those who don't believe in an afterlife post RIP's in the RIP thread Confused? Someone who is no more does not rest either.


I use all the vocabulary and phrases I know whenever/wherever I see fit. Sometimes out of courtesy, sometimes for wishing condolences etc. 

-------------


Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 09:56
Originally posted by someone_else someone_else wrote:

I'll know it when I will have passed away, so I'd say yea.

I cannot imagine I am no longer when my body stops performing its vital functions. Some things are too hard to believe.
By the way, why do all those who don't believe in an afterlife post RIP's in the RIP thread Confused? Someone who is no more does not rest either.

Great point and question....


-------------


Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 10:09
Originally posted by someone_else someone_else wrote:

I'll know it when I will have passed away, so I'd say yea.

I cannot imagine I am no longer when my body stops performing its vital functions. Some things are too hard to believe.
By the way, why do all those who don't believe in an afterlife post RIP's in the RIP thread Confused? Someone who is no more does not rest either.



Of course you won't know it if you cease to exist when you die. If you don't exist you cannot know.

Many things are hard to imagine, but a lack of imagination does not make it true. I can't imagine not existing as how I do I imagine that nothingness? If I try, then I'm observing it and so it's not nothing (I just imagine darkness, but darkness is a quality), but that's a side-point. Nether-the-less I feel comfortable rationally accepting the concept that I will cease to exist. Can you imagine not existing before you were born?

As for such platitudes as RIP, it's just used as an expression by many irregardless of belief or lack there-of. People employ such idioms. I'm sure to some it means that that person is no more as an entity. Death is often regarded as the deepest of slumbers, even if it's not sleep, in an analogous to sleep fashion. It relates again to what one can imagine. Imagining nothing, even the nothing of not having the imaginer to imagine it, would present a challenge.

I still say things like "Bless you", and even "God damn you!" at times despite being an atheist.

Such idioms persist long after we do, I would say, and we absorb such terms (inculcation, learned behaviors, ritualistic language).

-------------
The first step on the road to wisdom is the recognition of your own cherry pie.


Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 10:18
The real question is......If you have no evidence to prove otherwise, because nobody knows the answer, why do you chose to say No?
Fear....?


-------------


Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 10:25
Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

The real question is......If you have no evidence to prove otherwise, because nobody knows the answer, why do you chose to say No?
Fear....?



I say "no" because I'm an not convinced that there is an afterlife. As I said, it does not require certainty, and knowing something is not synonymous to me as believing something. What is the fear thing? I wish there were an afterlife, at least a nice one. I do not believe in fairies, is that fear, no? If we discover fairies then my belief will change. I believe that which I feel I have sufficient reason to believe. That doesn't mean that what I believe is is necessarily true, of course. My beliefs are subject to change as new evidence presents itself, and I am ignorant when it comes to most things. And as aside-note, though I thought this would be obvious from what I've said: Someone saying "No, I don't believe in the afterlife" does not necessitate that person to conclude "I believe that there is no afterlife". That presents a false equivalence fallacy.

Maybe you would expand on your thoughts to present an argument. Why would one assume that it's fear, or that that is the "real" question?

-------------
The first step on the road to wisdom is the recognition of your own cherry pie.


Posted By: Nogbad_The_Bad
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 10:27
Dead is dead, nothing after that.

-------------
Ian






Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 10:34
Yes, wholeheartedly

-------------
In Lazland, life is transient. Prog is permanent.


Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 10:41
Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

The real question is......If you have no evidence to prove otherwise, because nobody knows the answer, why do you chose to say No?
Fear....?



I say "no" because I'm an not convinced that there is an afterlife. As I said, it does not require certainty, and knowing something is not synonymous to me as believing something. What is the fear thing? I wish there were an afterlife, at least a nice one. I do not believe in fairies, is that fear, no? If we discover fairies then my belief will change.

Maybe you would expand on your thoughts to present an argument. Why would one assume that it's fear, or that that is the "real" question?

Actually, the obverse seems more likely. The fear factor is a religious response to the afterlife. It's what drives people to repent at the hour of their death, because of a fear of a vengeful god sending them to hell for whatever particular sin they've committed. If one does not expect an afterlife based on a religious doctrine designed for neolithic shepherds and updated by medieval Ecclesiastics for the sole purpose of maintaining power and wealth, then there really is nothing to fear. 


-------------
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...


Posted By: Argo2112
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 10:43
 I thought this was the afterlife? Confused


Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 10:46
Image result for I dont know

-------------
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.


Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 10:47
Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

The real question is......If you have no evidence to prove otherwise, because nobody knows the answer, why do you chose to say No?
Fear....?



I say "no" because I'm an not convinced that there is an afterlife. As I said, it does not require certainty, and knowing something is not synonymous to me as believing something. What is the fear thing? I wish there were an afterlife, at least a nice one. I do not believe in fairies, is that fear, no? If we discover fairies then my belief will change.

Maybe you would expand on your thoughts to present an argument. Why would one assume that it's fear, or that that is the "real" question?


Actually, the obverse seems more likely. The fear factor is a religious response to the afterlife. It's what drives people to repent at the hour of their death, because of a fear of a vengeful god sending them to hell for whatever particular sin they've committed. If one does not expect an afterlife based on a religious doctrine designed for neolithic shepherds and updated by medieval Ecclesiastics for the sole purpose of maintaining power and wealth, then there really is nothing to fear. 


That's what I think too. I've actually heard the "fear" thing said by various religious people, but I still want to hear his argument in case he's coming at this from another angle. I try to be careful when assuming intention.

-------------
The first step on the road to wisdom is the recognition of your own cherry pie.


Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 10:49
Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

Originally posted by someone_else someone_else wrote:

I'll know it when I will have passed away, so I'd say yea.

I cannot imagine I am no longer when my body stops performing its vital functions. Some things are too hard to believe.
By the way, why do all those who don't believe in an afterlife post RIP's in the RIP thread Confused? Someone who is no more does not rest either.



Of course you won't know it if you cease to exist when you die. If you don't exist you cannot know.

Many things are hard to imagine, but a lack of imagination does not make it true. I can't imagine not existing as how I do I imagine that nothingness? If I try, then I'm observing it and so it's not nothing (I just imagine darkness, but darkness is a quality), but that's a side-point. Nether-the-less I feel comfortable rationally accepting the concept that I will cease to exist. Can you imagine not existing before you were born?

As for such platitudes as RIP, it's just used as an expression by many irregardless of belief or lack there-of. People employ such idioms. I'm sure to some it means that that person is no more as an entity. Death is often regarded as the deepest of slumbers, even if it's not sleep, in an analogous to sleep fashion. It relates again to what one can imagine. Imagining nothing, even the nothing of not having the imaginer to imagine it, would present a challenge.

I still say things like "Bless you", and even "God damn you!" at times despite being an atheist.

Such idioms persist long after we do, I would say, and we absorb such terms (inculcation, learned behaviors, ritualistic language).
To go a bit deeper, and I don't mean this in a negative way. If you're convinced that there is no afterlife, or even if you were convinced that there is, why is it of interest to you as to what others feel about?

-------------
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.


Posted By: AFlowerKingCrimson
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 10:55
Definitely. I think the fact that countless people have seen ghosts is proof that there is something beyond this realm. Also, I knew a guy a long time ago from college who was in Vietnam who had two near death experiences(not one but two!). For one of them he was officially pronounced dead and had the metal on his tooth to prove it. I saw it myself. I'm not sure how he came back but I remember him saying that "there's definitely something out there." 

Anyway, I can't wait for the polls about sasquatch, UFO's etc. ;)


Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 10:58
Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

The real question is......If you have no evidence to prove otherwise, because nobody knows the answer, why do you chose to say No?
Fear....?



I say "no" because I'm an not convinced that there is an afterlife. As I said, it does not require certainty, and knowing something is not synonymous to me as believing something. What is the fear thing? I wish there were an afterlife, at least a nice one. I do not believe in fairies, is that fear, no? If we discover fairies then my belief will change. I believe that which I feel I have sufficient reason to believe. That doesn't mean that what I believe is is necessarily true, of course. My beliefs are subject to change as new evidence presents itself, and I am ignorant when it comes to most things. And as aside-note, though I thought this would be obvious from what I've said: Someone saying "No, I don't believe in the afterlife" does not necessitate that person to conclude "I believe that there is no afterlife". That presents a false equivalence fallacy.

Maybe you would expand on your thoughts to present an argument. Why would one assume that it's fear, or that that is the "real" question?
My thinking on all this has nothing to do with religion really, because once you start trying to explain that a higher being is "allowing" you to live eternally you lose. 
The fear comment is more about the fear of being wrong in your choice if you say yes. To me saying No is the response when you have sufficient proof. Yes is the choice when you don't have sufficient proof.....Like they say "Prove me wrong..."


-------------


Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 10:59
Originally posted by Argo2112 Argo2112 wrote:

 I thought this was the afterlife? Confused
That's what I said earlier.......This is the afterlife....Prove me wrong Big smile

-------------


Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 11:09
Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

Image result for I dont know



Image not showing. But again, knowledge and belief are not being used synonymously. If you consider something to be true, then that is a belief (it doesn't mean it's truth, but you believe it). You don't have to know with certainty, and if it is not a truth then the belief is not true knowledge. Basically, knowledge is considered to be evidence-based whereas belief does not require evidence. Knowledge should be based on evidence,on truth. If I don't see the evidence that something is true such as the afterlife, then my default is not to believe in it, even if I don't ultimately Know (have access to truth writ large). It's compatible to say that "I don't believe in an afterlife and I don't know if there is an afterlife". And one can say "I don;t believe in an afterlife nor do is disbelieve in an afterlife"

I did a pretty deep dive on epistemology in another thread, and discussed difference in belief and knowledge, probably the Bertrand Russel one amongst others, and had a related discussion. I'll look for a link to that.

Like I said, if people think of it as "Are you convinced that there is an afterlife?" "Yes or no", that might make the question easier to understand for some who find it it hard to understand the question as I intended, and why I would frame it with a basic dichotomy. The either you believe something or you don't believe it, which does not require knowing.

-------------
The first step on the road to wisdom is the recognition of your own cherry pie.


Posted By: Snicolette
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 11:19
In thinking about "convinced," vs "believe," I suppose my yes response is that I believe that there is, but I also am quite aware that my belief doesn't make it truth, or proven.  I wish (another funny word) that more humans understood that what they believe may not be true.  

I also know 2 people who had NDE's Near Death Experiences.  Maybe just entirely neurological?  I don't know, but generally, as both of these people tend to speak the truth about other things, I have no reason to disbelieve their experience.  Just because I don't have a cold doesn't make your cold impossible.

I don't know if it's true or not, but I do find the philosophy of Eternalism to be profoundly interesting.  I probably mentioned it in Logan's other topic, but I was introduced to it by Alan Moore's very fine novel, 
"Jerusalem."  Highly recommended (there she goes again).  Anyway, here is a definition of it:  Eternalism is a philosophical approach to the ontological nature of time, which takes the view that all existence in time is equally real, as opposed to presentism or the growing block universe theory of time, in which at least the future is not the same as any other time.


-------------
"Into every rain, a little life must fall." ~Tom Rapp


Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 11:37
Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

Originally posted by someone_else someone_else wrote:

I'll know it when I will have passed away, so I'd say yea.

I cannot imagine I am no longer when my body stops performing its vital functions. Some things are too hard to believe.
By the way, why do all those who don't believe in an afterlife post RIP's in the RIP thread Confused? Someone who is no more does not rest either.



Of course you won't know it if you cease to exist when you die. If you don't exist you cannot know.

Many things are hard to imagine, but a lack of imagination does not make it true. I can't imagine not existing as how I do I imagine that nothingness? If I try, then I'm observing it and so it's not nothing (I just imagine darkness, but darkness is a quality), but that's a side-point. Nether-the-less I feel comfortable rationally accepting the concept that I will cease to exist. Can you imagine not existing before you were born?

As for such platitudes as RIP, it's just used as an expression by many irregardless of belief or lack there-of. People employ such idioms. I'm sure to some it means that that person is no more as an entity. Death is often regarded as the deepest of slumbers, even if it's not sleep, in an analogous to sleep fashion. It relates again to what one can imagine. Imagining nothing, even the nothing of not having the imaginer to imagine it, would present a challenge.

I still say things like "Bless you", and even "God damn you!" at times despite being an atheist.

Such idioms persist long after we do, I would say, and we absorb such terms (inculcation, learned behaviors, ritualistic language).
To go a bit deeper, and I don't mean this in a negative way. If you're convinced that there is no afterlife, or even if you were convinced that there is, why is it of interest to you as to what others feel about?



Or in my case where I am not convinced that there is an afterlife nor am I fully convinced that there is not an afterlife (I don't think there is an afterlife). I'm interested in what people think on a great many issues and enjoy conversation on a great many issues. This is an issue of more interest to me than many others partially because of the experiences I have had (I have been convinced that there is afterlife before) and because I know many religious people ((my wife being a Born Again Pentecostal Christian, or maybe a lapsed one). When her mother died not long ago, at the funeral and after the topic came up more. I was a horrific funeral service, which we paid for.

I guess I studied Philosophy cause I'm interested in such things, although my primary interest was ethics/ norms. It would take me a long time to try explain why the subject is of interest to me.

I will say that it was directly inspired by a Rest in Peace comment in the Tim Smith thread and got me thinking, hell, I would rather him be having a shouty good time in the afterlife than resting in peace and that I would rather raise hell than rest in peace. To me rest in peace sounds depressing-- of course it is sad when someone dies. Maybe too since I have barely slept for a long time (terrible insomnia) it got me thinking more about resting peacefully.

Mortality is not something I'm comfortable with and for ages people have been trying to come to terms with it. I'm not scared to die(part of me would like to live forever), the dying process does scare me (and I've come close -- that last stroke I had was a wake-up call), but it's when those you love die...

Anyway, I have a myriad of reasons why the topic interests me and I am interested in what others think on a myriad of issues, some more consequential than others. Heck, I sometimes write epic long responses (please so one ask me how I define an epic now) about the most inconsequential of things and am interested in the conversation. I participate at the forum because I'm interested in people and their ideas primarily,and often it doesn't even matter to me what the subject is. That's why I continue to be a member.

-------------
The first step on the road to wisdom is the recognition of your own cherry pie.


Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 11:42
Also I do believe that all these NDE are not religious based, has nothing to do with a higher being. Yes I know that most describe a light or such, but life is a light, death is darkness. So in a near death experience if you see light it is because you are coming out of darkness, so to me makes sense you see a light.

This to me is some proof of an afterlife.


-------------


Posted By: MortSahlFan
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 12:07
No.

I think when you're dead, you're dead. Just like it was before you were born. You weren't even conscious. Like dreaming forever with no dream.


-------------
https://www.scribd.com/document/382737647/MortSahlFan-Song-List


Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 12:33
Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

Image result for I dont know



Image not showing. But again, knowledge and belief are not being used synonymously. If you consider something to be true, then that is a belief (it doesn't mean it's truth, but you believe it). You don't have to know with certainty, and if it is not a truth then the belief is not true knowledge. Basically, knowledge is considered to be evidence-based whereas belief does not require evidence. Knowledge should be based on evidence,on truth. If I don't see the evidence that something is true such as the afterlife, then my default is not to believe in it, even if I don't ultimately Know (have access to truth writ large). It's compatible to say that "I don't believe in an afterlife and I don't know if there is an afterlife". And one can say "I don;t believe in an afterlife nor do is disbelieve in an afterlife"

I did a pretty deep dive on epistemology in another thread, and discussed difference in belief and knowledge, probably the Bertrand Russel one amongst others, and had a related discussion. I'll look for a link to that.

Like I said, if people think of it as "Are you convinced that there is an afterlife?" "Yes or no", that might make the question easier to understand for some who find it it hard to understand the question as I intended, and why I would frame it with a basic dichotomy. The either you believe something or you don't believe it, which does not require knowing.
The thing about humans is that we are programed to believe. A Vietnam Vet once told of a time that he went almost outside the "wire" to take a dump at night. He heard twigs snapping in an area that was a "no mans land". He starting firing immediately after yelling to where the noise was and getting no response. He didn't know he was in danger, he only believed it. How much of that thinking are we programed to do? By the way, what was stepping on the twigs was later found to be a warthog.

-------------
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.


Posted By: Shadowyzard
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 12:45
I'm quite a "possibility" guy, if you get what I mean. Yet, life after death sounds just too dumb for me. If I can't learn the facts about something, I almost always carry doubts. It is not actually "carrying", but more like "hah, it can be this, or that; this seems more plausible and/or probable, but that probability is also possible," kind of thinking, and then moving on. Immortality, aliens, time travel etc. are in this category, but afterlife is just a ridiculous concept for me. I can assert that I notice mysteries in life better than most people I know, but afterlife is like NOTHING for me. I don't even take pleasure in discussing it. It is like discussing with a guy who sees long, abundant, and blonde hair over my head, which is actually dark brown and I'm almost bald, haha. Sorry if this sounds offensive, but I'm being accurate and honest here.

-------------


Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 13:03
Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

The real question is......If you have no evidence to prove otherwise, because nobody knows the answer, why do you chose to say No?
Fear....?



I say "no" because I'm an not convinced that there is an afterlife. As I said, it does not require certainty, and knowing something is not synonymous to me as believing something. What is the fear thing? I wish there were an afterlife, at least a nice one. I do not believe in fairies, is that fear, no? If we discover fairies then my belief will change. I believe that which I feel I have sufficient reason to believe. That doesn't mean that what I believe is is necessarily true, of course. My beliefs are subject to change as new evidence presents itself, and I am ignorant when it comes to most things. And as aside-note, though I thought this would be obvious from what I've said: Someone saying "No, I don't believe in the afterlife" does not necessitate that person to conclude "I believe that there is no afterlife". That presents a false equivalence fallacy.

Maybe you would expand on your thoughts to present an argument. Why would one assume that it's fear, or that that is the "real" question?

My thinking on all this has nothing to do with religion really, because once you start trying to explain that a higher being is "allowing" you to live eternally you lose. 
The fear comment is more about the fear of being wrong in your choice if you say yes. To me saying No is the response when you have sufficient proof. Yes is the choice when you don't have sufficient proof.....Like they say "Prove me wrong..."


While I fear making the wrong decisions, and am wary of being wrong, I'd rather be wrong for as short a time as possible, and I hope to learn from my mistakes and be open to new evidence and rational arguments.

Proof can be a bit of a tricky word since it can have different usages in philosophy, law, mathematics and logic.

But basically we can say that proof is a demonstration that has a sufficient argument or evidence that the proposition is true or valid. For instance, if the premises are true then the conclusion will logically follow or if sufficient evidence fits the conclusion then the conclusion is valid.

There is no way to prove or disprove that there is an afterlife that I know of and I don't understand why one's default would be believing in something that cannot be demonstrated. Saying "Yes, I believe in fairies" because one can't disprove their existence would seem very strange to me. I can say "I don't know if fairies exist and I don't believe in fairies".

So if the question were, "Do you disbelieve in the afterlife" I take it that you would vote yes.

It is said that the burden of proof in logic (say, demonstrating to an adequate degree that the proposition is based on false premises and or inadequate evidence, which of course it it does not require certainty) falls on the one who refutes the other. To prove that person wrong it is expected that you can demonstrate that that person lacks a convincing argument (sufficient and valid premises to support the conclusion) or evidence.

I would also say the person who makes a claim to be taken very seriously, especially if an extraordinary claim, can be expected to present sufficient reason to accept the claim as true.

I'm not about to claim that there is no afterlife, because the proposition cannot be validated. It's not falsifiable.

I don't believe anything with absolute certainty, and I prefer not to believe things without what I think are good reasons to believe in them. I am a sceptic. I don't claim to know what is possible or true in regards to many things. If the question were, "Do you believe that an invisible and intangible Santa Claus resides in my my underpants" would your default position be "Yes" if or until the proposition could be demonstrated to be false? I wouldn't believe it, and not just because I'm wearing the underpants.

Just because we can neither prove nor disprove something is not going to make me think that "yes, I believe it' is the rational course.


Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

Originally posted by Argo2112 Argo2112 wrote:

 I thought this was the afterlife? Confused
That's what I said earlier.......This is the afterlife....Prove me wrong Big smile


It can neither be proved nor disproved, and it's unfalsifiable. Have you heard the saying that extraordinary claims requite extraordinary proof/ evidence? I'm not about to believe things just because they can't be demonstrated to be false. That would not seem see a logical or rational approach to me to base one's beliefs on.

Do you believe that I'm a leprechaun with a stash of gold as big as a house and a moustache? Yes, or no. At least that is falsiable. I could demonstrate that I don't have a moustache, although I might have shaved it off by the time you saw my demonstration. As a general rule: I "believe" that a good time to believe things is when they can be shown, and also when there would be means to demonstrate if they are false according to certain metrics.

-------------
The first step on the road to wisdom is the recognition of your own cherry pie.


Posted By: Mortte
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 13:17
I voted yes. But I have often doubts about my belief.


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 13:21
Not many years ago I realized I'd stopped believing in an afterlife. Mind you, like others here I won't say it's impossible, or try to prove there is no such thing. I might say that my attitude about this issue is very similar to Hamlet's in his famous soliloquy: "For in that sleep of death what dreams may come/When we have shuffled off this mortal coil/Must give us pause". In the light of this, I believe the expression "Rest in Peace" makes a lot of sense, even for those who don't believe in an afterlife: if death is the end of everything, it is indeed a kind of peace/sleep, as Shakespeare puts it.


Posted By: Shadowyzard
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 13:24
Rest in Peace is a great phrase. Especially in the past, life was just a neverending struggle for most people. I like that saying a lot, as an atheist.

-------------


Posted By: Shadowyzard
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 13:27


-------------


Posted By: Rrattlesnake
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 13:34
I definitely believe in an afterlife. The thought of eternal darkness is pretty scary.


Posted By: I prophesy disaster
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 14:05


 
 
No, I did not post this in the wrong thread by mistake. The term "Flying Teapot" is based on Russell's teapot, which is sometimes invoked in discussions about the existence of God, although as a general principle about philosophic burden of proof, it also applies to discussions about the existence of an afterlife.

 

 



-------------
No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man.


Posted By: Cosmiclawnmower
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 14:14
Do I believe in an 'After-life'? No. A 'life' after (this?) 'life' as in reincarnation of your conscious mind, personality, the experiences of a previously lived life wholly intact in a fresh, physical, material body? No!
I've lived much of my adult life as a firm atheist and materialist but in the last 10 years or so I have come more to realise it is more the institutions and power structure of organized religion that I have reacted against so strongly. I feel that there is an element of your 'soul' (for want of a better word) which is absorbed, like your physical body, back into 'the One' (again, for want of a better phrase). I see it as a process of Physics and Chemistry rather than a 'Spiritual' one (the word 'Spiritual' is so massively and inappropriately used and misappropriated to make it near null and void in meaning anyway) yet there is a sense of the 'Mystic' (again, again this word loses its meaning by the inappropriate and negative way in which it is used) that I feel saturates the physical, natural world. I do not believe it is 'a' God. It could well be just the workings of a human mind trying to attach meaning to abstract symbols in the world. I don't know. I don't care that I don't know. I have worked and lived in and with the natural environment (farming, gardening, managing and studying landscapes and Eco-systems) all my life and there is something beyond human reasoning that vibrates with energy (maybe higher, maybe more base or probably both) which has NO personality, being or form, benign or malign. Beyond that I don't know. 

I know my mother struggled with her 'Faith' all her life and just before her death she was finally reconciled with 'her Church'.. much of my childhood was spent absorbing and dealing with the bitterness of the effects this had on our family. Religion is definitely for humans.. all other life is outside and free from that shackle and bondage..




-------------
“It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen.”
― George Orwell


Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 14:21
Originally posted by I prophesy disaster I prophesy disaster wrote:


Gong Video
 
 
No, I did not post this in the wrong thread by mistake. The term "Flying Teapot" is based on Russell's teapot, which is sometimes invoked in discussions about the existence of God, although as a general principle about philosophic burden of proof, it also applies to discussions about the existence of an afterlife.

 

 



I knew that and am glad you mentioned him. I'm a big admirer of Bertrand Russell and did a topic called http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=114918" rel="nofollow - A Liberal Decalogue: Russell's Ten Commandments

That was a fun discussion (and is my favourie topic that I've started).

Originally posted by Bertrand Russell Bertrand Russell wrote:

Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time



-------------
The first step on the road to wisdom is the recognition of your own cherry pie.


Posted By: Shadowyzard
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 14:27
Originally posted by Cosmiclawnmower Cosmiclawnmower wrote:

I've lived much of my adult life as a firm atheist and materialist but in the last 10 years or so I have come more to realise it is more the institutions and power structure of organized religion that I have reacted against so strongly. 


Very good post!

Sorry for your mother's loss. May she R.I.P.

As for the part I quoted from your words, I know exactly what you went through. I've had friends that have more or less the same mindset that you once possessed. I've always said "reactionary atheism" is not healthy. Just because something is written in the "Holy" books, shouldn't necessarily mean that an atheist should reject it or fight against it. I've never been a typical atheist (but more of an apatheist), so I guess I'll continue to be a firm atheist and materalist for the rest of my life. Am I 100% sure of this? No. But I see it highly likely.

-------------


Posted By: TCat
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 14:51
20 years ago, I was a very religious, church-going person who devoted a lot of time to my church and held local leadership positions.  Somewhere along the change of the century, I had a major change in my life that threw everything into disarray and turned me into a completely different person when I came out the other side of it all.

My answer to the question is Yes.  But, I do not believe in religious organizations just like I don't believe that corporations are living entities.  To me, it's all the same thing.  A religious organization is only there for profit (or prophet if you are in the mood for a bad pun).  From what I have learned in life, all they were organized for was to destroy the truly ancient beliefs (of which there were many) by consolidating it into one major belief.  Now, look at where that got them.  People love power over others, and people created the religion to hold people under their power.  So, I've given up on finding any answers of any kind in religion.

However, I find it so hard to believe that this life is all there is.  That is the one thing I can't accept.  Just like it is impossible for me to comprehend that the universe has an end, it is also hard for me to comprehend an end to intelligence.  If there is an end to the universe, what is beyond the universe?  If there is an end to life, how can we comprehend simply just ending, not existing anymore?  Some may not have a problem understanding that concept of just coming to an end, but I can't.  All of the things that we have individually worked for in our lives is just for naught?  I just can't believe that at all, but, just like everyone else, I can't prove it either.  

I consider myself quite open minded on the concepts of afterlife.  I have even thought up some very odd possibilities also, but haven't gone so far as to take them seriously I suppose.  I do lend some credence in stories of the "supernatural" as I think there are just too many experiences out there that support the possibilities of an afterlife.  I know some things are made up, but most of it isn't because, what do most people have to gain from making that kind of stuff up?  I highly believe that there are things that science can't explain, though it is the best thing we have right now for general answers on many subjects.  But at least science claims it's not perfect, just as people aren't "perfect" and at this point it seems we never will be.  

I don't think there is a heaven as most people have come to picture it, because, if there was, no one would be there if we are expected to live like religion wants us to.  In my opinion, that is the reason why there are so many problems out there in the world, because religion has created so many rules that are completely against human nature.

I could go rambling on and on, but that's my basic take on it all.


-------------
https://ibb.co/8x0xjR0" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 14:57
^ Mike, Feel free to ramble away if you want to. I really appreciate getting the chance, and even consider it to be an a honour, to read such a heartfelt post that shares your personal experiences, intuitions, and thoughts. Sincerely, thanks for sharing.

-------------
The first step on the road to wisdom is the recognition of your own cherry pie.


Posted By: Shadowyzard
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 15:02
I have (and had) many religious people, or people like TCat in my life as friends, relatives etc. Of course I don't know about TCat that much, but you get what I mean.

I believe how we were brought up and what we experienced made us what we are. So, I really try hard not to hurt people because of what they believe in. I'm also lucky that I haven't experienced anything traumatic yet, by reason of my mindset and at times expressing it in many anarchic ways; yes, I must be lucky about it, considering all my openness about being an anarchist, atheist, and materialist. I should thank the world and everything and everybody for that, I suppose. 




-------------


Posted By: Snicolette
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 16:37
As it is entirely a personal matter, I think people absolutely have the right to believe or not believe in whatever they wish regarding this subject.  And no one has the right to dictate that they do otherwise, or force their beliefs on others.  I can see both sides of is there one, or is there not one?  I enjoy pondering on philosophies as well and finding out what others think about the big questions in life (and death).  Thank you for bringing this up, Logan!

-------------
"Into every rain, a little life must fall." ~Tom Rapp


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 16:44
Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

I don't feel the need to include "other" option, though I expect that some would  

yep! LOL

so "other" for me...  much as anything in life.. or hah.. the after life.. it ain't as simple as black and white ...

yes and no man..


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 16:53
Again, my Yes has nothing to do with religion. I am Catholic, all my life and will end this life as a Catholic, for sure I have wavered here and there as most do with religion. I don't ever see myself leaving the Catholic church.....but nothing in how I was raised or all the Catholic teachings makes me select Yes.

I just believe there is an afterlife. Now if the question is 100% scientific and only that then you can easily argue the answer is No, since there is no proof.

This to me is the same as asking if there is life outside of our Earth........and my answer is of course there is, no way we are the only beings of our kind in the entire universe. 
What we have been able to explore outside of Earth is akin to going outside your house and exploring your porch, no further. As Earthlings we will never have the ability to travel far enough and survive to find another human race. What we are made of exists in space......unlike the robots that roam this website.


-------------


Posted By: TCat
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 17:45
Just to make it clear, since I might have made things a bit confusing at the beginning of what I said, but after my life changing occurrences at the start of the 2000s, I removed any organized religion from my life.  I have never been happier or more content.  But I still believe that there is something beyond this life, or at least I feel it very strongly.  As others have said though, it has nothing to do with religion or what another person wants everyone to believe.  

-------------
https://ibb.co/8x0xjR0" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Snicolette
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 18:13
I have a personal observation to add from when my husband died.  He was in our living room in a hospital bed and died at exactly 8AM.  His son and I were there, and the pets.  About an hour later, as we were waiting for the woman to arrive who would prepare him to be taken to cremation, I was sitting on the couch across from him, with our dog, Ribsey, dozing next to me on the couch.  Ribsey suddenly jerked his head up, aimed his ears toward him, then whined and jumped down off of the couch, ran over to him and licked his hand.  Then he backed up a pace and looked up toward the ceiling.  I cannot help but feel that that is when what many people would call "spirit," left his body.  I'm sure there are a million other explanations, but I do feel that whatever "energy" we are may stay for a bit and then move on, when it's ready.  Where does it go?  Thinking of what Catcher10 said, I think it goes into the stars somewhere.  My husband always said that the music just came to him, he just had to write it down and play it.  I do hope, if it is possible, he went to where the music came from.

-------------
"Into every rain, a little life must fall." ~Tom Rapp


Posted By: Grumpyprogfan
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 18:38
Atheist here.

Curious as to what the afterlife is for believers. Do you take memories and your body? Floating orb soul? No memories = wouldn't remember anyone. How will you find your dog? Wherever this place is wouldn't if have to be big? And those that don't make it, do they really burn in fire forever? That too me would say you need a body or vessel to feel pain. If you feel pain do the other senses work?


Posted By: CosmicVibration
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 19:31

The so-called afterlife is a higher vibrational existence.  When man sheds his material body and leaves this gross vibration of material existence, he exists in a much finer vibrational realm of pure light energy.

There were many Masters that traversed between this physical plane and the astral plane and spoke of it.  The astral plane is basically a blueprint for the physical realm.  Astral energy condenses into what we perceive as matter.

This material universe is actually quite deceptive in that nothing is really solid.  Matter is 99.99% space, the rest being atoms are also mostly space.  And atoms themselves are not really material either but energy vibrations. 

Matter is defined as anything that can be touched physically. But nothing ever touches; you have never touched anything, ever.   If you were to scale up the size of atoms to let’s say the size of golf balls, the closest atom from the tip of your finger to the keyboard key your supposedly touching would be over a mile away.   It seems that we’re living on some kind of Star Trek holodeck with force fields. Shocked  Ok, I’m going off on a tangent here, back on point.

There are many different vibrational levels in the astral world.  Depending on a person’s state of evolution, his vibrational energy determines which level he can reach.  Unless one reaches the highest level in the astral plane one must come back to the slower condensed vibration of the material world.  A person bounces back and forth (reincarnation) between the astral universe and the physical universe for 2 main reasons. One, if there are any debts that need to be paid, large or small, one must come back.  All wrongs need to be righted, all lessons learned. Two, if there are any unfulfilled desires, large or small, they must be satisfied.

When those 2 conditions are met, man breaks the cycle and there is no need to come back to the material universe.

There were a few Masters that even peered into a sphere beyond the astral plane and spoke of it.  A realm of pure consciousness, where anything is possible, the only limitation is one’s imagination.   This realm, the causal universe, is a blueprint for the astral universe.  Thought from the causal world condenses into energy of the astral world and the energy from the astral world condenses even further into our physical reality.

Man’s final transcendence is beyond that of all vibratory realms of the physical, astral and casual.  This final unity with Spirit is beyond the cognitive ability of man.  It is said to be beyond thought itself, even with a limitless imagination it cannot be grasped.

Remember, you are not your body, you are not your thoughts..



Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 21:30
Originally posted by Snicolette Snicolette wrote:

I have a personal observation to add from when my husband died.  He was in our living room in a hospital bed and died at exactly 8AM.  His son and I were there, and the pets.  About an hour later, as we were waiting for the woman to arrive who would prepare him to be taken to cremation, I was sitting on the couch across from him, with our dog, Ribsey, dozing next to me on the couch.  Ribsey suddenly jerked his head up, aimed his ears toward him, then whined and jumped down off of the couch, ran over to him and licked his hand.  Then he backed up a pace and looked up toward the ceiling.  I cannot help but feel that that is when what many people would call "spirit," left his body.  I'm sure there are a million other explanations, but I do feel that whatever "energy" we are may stay for a bit and then move on, when it's ready.  Where does it go?  Thinking of what Catcher10 said, I think it goes into the stars somewhere.  My husband always said that the music just came to him, he just had to write it down and play it.  I do hope, if it is possible, he went to where the music came from.
There sure could be a million other explanations......but that explanation could be the same for the millions of times things like this have happened to a family. Again, to me that could be enough "proof" to believe there is an afterlife, rather than not believe. So a question is did Ribsey behave like this normally?

Cool topic, endless discussion for sure.

Carry on....


-------------


Posted By: Snicolette
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 21:35
Originally posted by Grumpyprogfan Grumpyprogfan wrote:

Atheist here.

Curious as to what the afterlife is for believers. Do you take memories and your body? Floating orb soul? No memories = wouldn't remember anyone. How will you find your dog? Wherever this place is wouldn't if have to be big? And those that don't make it, do they really burn in fire forever? That too me would say you need a body or vessel to feel pain. If you feel pain do the other senses work?
  For me, I don't know.  I just think I believe rather than disbelieve, which makes no logical sense. Just like I believe there could be other intelligent life off of this planet, which may never be proven scientifically.  I know some things I've experienced that can't be explained to any certainty.  I just know that until I don't know for certain, there are still possibilities.  I definitely don't believe that there is burning in eternity for those who don't follow one silly stricture or another, that is kind of absurd, since that one usually goes along with the idea of a god or gods.  Why would something so huge be so concerned with such small details of so many individuals?  I think that it is likely that there is more than one reality within these larger realms.  Or maybe not.  Smile  I am just not discounting it until I know for sure it is discountable.

-------------
"Into every rain, a little life must fall." ~Tom Rapp


Posted By: Snicolette
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 21:52
Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

There sure could be a million other explanations......but that explanation could be the same for the millions of times things like this have happened to a family. Again, to me that could be enough "proof" to believe there is an afterlife, rather than not believe. So a question is did Ribsey behave like this normally?

Cool topic, endless discussion for sure.

Carry on....
  Ribsey's job in life was to be wherever Tom was.  He was Tom's dog before we re-met many years after the times we spent together in a larger group of friends and musicians.  We blended our pet families when we moved in together.  Ribsey now is my "guardian."  He follows me in the same way he followed Tom everywhere that he could.  So they certainly were bonded, but Ribsey would not normally whine in this way and then stare at the ceiling, he was just a silent shadow.  He was not a particularly vocal dog (rarely barks) until I became his raison d'tre.  Now he does vocalize, but still not barking, more "talking."  It sure seemed to me that he was aware of something, even though Tom no longer "lived," in that moment.  Another weird thing that happened is that we were playing a classical music station from the time we brought him back from the hospital for hospice care (he lived for just over two days), since they told us hearing is one of the last senses to remain.  He lived and breathed for music.  When his breath stopped, I looked at his son, then over at the clock, and then said, "8:00.  Exactly."  Dvorak's Largo from The New World Symphony began playing on the station.  

-------------
"Into every rain, a little life must fall." ~Tom Rapp


Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 21:55
Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

Again, my Yes has nothing to do with religion. I am Catholic, all my life and will end this life as a Catholic, for sure I have wavered here and there as most do with religion. I don't ever see myself leaving the Catholic church.....but nothing in how I was raised or all the Catholic teachings makes me select Yes.

I just believe there is an afterlife. Now if the question is 100% scientific and only that then you can easily argue the answer is No, since there is no proof.

This to me is the same as asking if there is life outside of our Earth........and my answer is of course there is, no way we are the only beings of our kind in the entire universe. 
What we have been able to explore outside of Earth is akin to going outside your house and exploring your porch, no further. As Earthlings we will never have the ability to travel far enough and survive to find another human race. What we are made of exists in space......unlike the robots that roam this website.


I did a deeper a deeper dive on this I think in the Bertrand Russell thread, but belief as I've been saying I don't treat as synonymous knowledge (related and overlap, certainly, how much so and in what way depends on the angle).

Sorry to repeat myself, but if you consider something to be true, then that is a belief (it doesn't mean it's truth, but you believe it). You don't have to know with certainty, and if it is not a Truth then the belief is not true knowledge. Basically, knowledge is considered to be evidence-based whereas belief does not require evidence (justified belief should be justifiable). Knowledge should be based on evidence, on falsifiability, on perceivable truth (that I could have phrased better). If I don't see the evidence that something is true such as the afterlife, then my default is not to believe in it, even if I don't ultimately know (have access to truth writ large). It's compatible to say that "I don't believe in an afterlife and I don't know if there is an afterlife". And one can say "I don't believe in an afterlife nor do is disbelieve in an afterlife.

The question could be phrased as "Are you convinced that there is an afterlife?" I wonder then how many would say I don't know.

Science isn't about proof, it's about evidence. Now I'm quoting myself from the Liberal Deacalogue thread since I got really into this there:

"The burden of proof is used in law and logic, and formal debate, and in logic means that one should adequately demonstrate a thing to be if not absolutely true, valid reasoning for the assertion (premises should be considered acceptable, relevant and sufficient enough to convince people who have no skin in the game that the conclusion/assertion logically follows), or something similar, been ages since I studied it. Of course what's considered valid etc. depends upon the person, but in logic (and mathematics) the propositions should support the conclusion in acceptable ways that should satisfy the standards of logical reasoning. Making arguments in formal academic logic does have fairly universal standards, and it is a closed-system of propositions (within particular frameworks).

In science, it's about evidence as there is no proof. It's not a closed system and every theory is open to questioning, adaptation or scrapping when new evidence comes to light. Science is about trying to understand how the universe works, but it shouldn't be making absolute truth claims as everything is open to reevaluation -- hypotheses, theories and claims are provisional and tentative -- they are subject to change."

I think you may be confusing the knowledge concept with belief.

When you say, "This to me is the same as asking if there is life outside of our Earth........and my answer is of course there is, no way we are the only beings of our kind in the entire universe" in your analogy you are asking a different category of question to the one I intended. Is there life outside of Earth? I would expect so, I think so, but I don't know (I remain ultimately agnostic on the matter). Do I believe that there is life outside of Earth? Okay, I must admit that I would want to answer in a more nuanced way than yes or no. It seems highly unlikely to me from a probability standpoint that we are alone in the universe. I tend to believe so, but that belief is held tentatively, and I recognise that we lack "proof". I feel that there is justification to believe, or assume, that there is life outside of Earth despite any lack of evidence. I think that it is a reasonable assumption, but it still an assumption.

Of course knowledge and belief are related concepts, and it is said that a sound belief is based on evidence as well, and the time to believe is when something can be demonstrated. Do I have sufficient evidence for a firm belief in extraterrestrial life, no. Am I convinced that there are extra terrestrials, I am reasonably convinced, but it is not held as a true belief because of the lack of evidence even if it is true.

There is a relationship between belief and knowledge of course and I do not mean to,or can I, fully separate the two. In fact knowledge is sometimes called justified true belief.

Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

don't feel the need to include an "unsure" or "other" option, though I expect that some would like to have that option. I'm more interested in what people have to say than poll results anyway. Answering yes or no does not require certainty. I don't believe that I can be certain of anything, and I am ultimately agnostic on all matters, which does not mean that I don't believe or am not convinced when it comes to many things....


yep! LOL

so "other" for me...  much as anything in life.. or hah.. the after life.. it ain't as simple as black and white ...

yes and no man..


Feel free to elaborate on your views any way you can. I'm more interested in people's thoughts and experiences than just how they vote. As I often say, the poll question should merely be treated as an accessory to discussion, and all tangents are welcome. I'm not meaning to force anyone to choose, and if it's other, that can be explained in a post so I can understand better your rationale. I hope you find reading through the read interesting at least. There is room for nuance, but I was approaching this from a particular philosophical standpoint by phrasing it in a dichotomous manner. If you needed a few beers to get through what I was trying to express in the Bertrand Russell topic where I discussed similar things, you might need a case to get through this. I do hope that believing and not believing in the afterlife simultaneously is not causing any cognitive dissonance.

-------------
The first step on the road to wisdom is the recognition of your own cherry pie.


Posted By: Snicolette
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 22:18
I really love how you delve so deeply into the process, Logan.  I admit, sometimes I am just answering in a sort of stream of consciousness way, to see how I arrive at the destination.  I, too, love seeing how others think of these things and how they get there.  We may never know these answers, but at least we ask the questions.  

-------------
"Into every rain, a little life must fall." ~Tom Rapp


Posted By: Tom Ozric
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 22:22
I’ll let you know when I get there


Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 22:37
Originally posted by Snicolette Snicolette wrote:

I really love how you delve so deeply into the process, Logan.  I admit, sometimes I am just answering in a sort of stream of consciousness way, to see how I arrive at the destination.  I, too, love seeing how others think of these things and how they get there.  We may never know these answers, but at least we ask the questions.  


Thank you. I'd like to do more stream of consciousness stuff, I am a terrific rambler, sometimes I do but these days it comes across as so incoherent. I always love reading your thoughts, Nickie, and I used the honour term already for Mike's post, and I mean it too with you, I consider it to be an honour and a privilege to read what you write. Your heart comes through and you have really interesting perspectives that do make me think. You come across as an empathetic and tuned-in individual, and empathy is one of the qualities I most highly value. I can relate to your experiences, and will share some of mine later perhaps. It is a mysterious universe, sometimes painful, but also wondrous. There is very much we may never know, but sometimes it's the journey rather than the destination that matters.

-------------
The first step on the road to wisdom is the recognition of your own cherry pie.


Posted By: Snicolette
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 22:45
Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

Originally posted by Snicolette Snicolette wrote:

I really love how you delve so deeply into the process, Logan.  I admit, sometimes I am just answering in a sort of stream of consciousness way, to see how I arrive at the destination.  I, too, love seeing how others think of these things and how they get there.  We may never know these answers, but at least we ask the questions.  


Thank you. I'd like to do more stream of consciousness stuff, I am a terrific rambler, sometimes I do but these days it comes across as so incoherent. I always love reading your thoughts, Nickie, and I used the honour term already for Mike's post, and I mean it too with you, I consider it to be an honour and a privilege to read what you write. Your heart comes through and you have really interesting perspectives that do make me think. You come across as an empathetic and tuned-in individual, and empathy is one of the qualities I most highly value. I can relate to your experiences, and will share some of mine later perhaps. It is a mysterious universe, sometimes painful, but also wondrous. There is very much we may never know, but sometimes it's the journey rather than the destination that matters.
Some of this stuff is so personal, you don't know sometimes if it is too too much for people who haven't been there to look at it.  My mother taught me the meaning of empathy so many years ago (she also, sadly, died too young, at 47) and the difference between it, and sympathy.  That old saying comes to mind, that a life unexamined, is not worth living. We are here to learn and to learn from each other.  What else makes any sense at all?

-------------
"Into every rain, a little life must fall." ~Tom Rapp


Posted By: geekfreak
Date Posted: July 24 2020 at 23:29
Do i believe in an afterlife...The quick answer is NO! but that`s not nearly true due to the fact of my Dad passed away at 38yrs old way to young and i`d like to think i`ll see him again 

-------------
It’s a mad mad world conspiracy theories on a. Vast scale about “COVID-19 and the Government” cover up..,


Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 01:01
Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

Again, my Yes has nothing to do with religion. I am Catholic, all my life and will end this life as a Catholic, for sure I have wavered here and there as most do with religion. I don't ever see myself leaving the Catholic church.....but nothing in how I was raised or all the Catholic teachings makes me select Yes.

I just believe there is an afterlife. Now if the question is 100% scientific and only that then you can easily argue the answer is No, since there is no proof.

This to me is the same as asking if there is life outside of our Earth........and my answer is of course there is, no way we are the only beings of our kind in the entire universe. 
What we have been able to explore outside of Earth is akin to going outside your house and exploring your porch, no further. As Earthlings we will never have the ability to travel far enough and survive to find another human race. What we are made of exists in space......unlike the robots that roam this website.


I did a deeper a deeper dive on this I think in the Bertrand Russell thread, but belief as I've been saying I don't treat as synonymous knowledge (related and overlap, certainly, how much so and in what way depends on the angle).

Sorry to repeat myself, but if you consider something to be true, then that is a belief (it doesn't mean it's truth, but you believe it). You don't have to know with certainty, and if it is not a Truth then the belief is not true knowledge. Basically, knowledge is considered to be evidence-based whereas belief does not require evidence (justified belief should be justifiable). Knowledge should be based on evidence, on falsifiability, on perceivable truth (that I could have phrased better). If I don't see the evidence that something is true such as the afterlife, then my default is not to believe in it, even if I don't ultimately know (have access to truth writ large). It's compatible to say that "I don't believe in an afterlife and I don't know if there is an afterlife". And one can say "I don't believe in an afterlife nor do is disbelieve in an afterlife.

The question could be phrased as "Are you convinced that there is an afterlife?" I wonder then how many would say I don't know.

Science isn't about proof, it's about evidence. Now I'm quoting myself from the Liberal Deacalogue thread since I got really into this there:

"The burden of proof is used in law and logic, and formal debate, and in logic means that one should adequately demonstrate a thing to be if not absolutely true, valid reasoning for the assertion (premises should be considered acceptable, relevant and sufficient enough to convince people who have no skin in the game that the conclusion/assertion logically follows), or something similar, been ages since I studied it. Of course what's considered valid etc. depends upon the person, but in logic (and mathematics) the propositions should support the conclusion in acceptable ways that should satisfy the standards of logical reasoning. Making arguments in formal academic logic does have fairly universal standards, and it is a closed-system of propositions (within particular frameworks).

In science, it's about evidence as there is no proof. It's not a closed system and every theory is open to questioning, adaptation or scrapping when new evidence comes to light. Science is about trying to understand how the universe works, but it shouldn't be making absolute truth claims as everything is open to reevaluation -- hypotheses, theories and claims are provisional and tentative -- they are subject to change."

I think you may be confusing the knowledge concept with belief.

When you say, "This to me is the same as asking if there is life outside of our Earth........and my answer is of course there is, no way we are the only beings of our kind in the entire universe" in your analogy you are asking a different category of question to the one I intended. Is there life outside of Earth? I would expect so, I think so, but I don't know (I remain ultimately agnostic on the matter). Do I believe that there is life outside of Earth? Okay, I must admit that I would want to answer in a more nuanced way than yes or no. It seems highly unlikely to me from a probability standpoint that we are alone in the universe. I tend to believe so, but that belief is held tentatively, and I recognise that we lack "proof". I feel that there is justification to believe, or assume, that there is life outside of Earth despite any lack of evidence. I think that it is a reasonable assumption, but it still an assumption.

Of course knowledge and belief are related concepts, and it is said that a sound belief is based on evidence as well, and the time to believe is when something can be demonstrated. Do I have sufficient evidence for a firm belief in extraterrestrial life, no. Am I convinced that there are extra terrestrials, I am reasonably convinced, but it is not held as a true belief because of the lack of evidence even if it is true.

There is a relationship between belief and knowledge of course and I do not mean to,or can I, fully separate the two. In fact knowledge is sometimes called justified true belief.

Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

don't feel the need to include an "unsure" or "other" option, though I expect that some would like to have that option. I'm more interested in what people have to say than poll results anyway. Answering yes or no does not require certainty. I don't believe that I can be certain of anything, and I am ultimately agnostic on all matters, which does not mean that I don't believe or am not convinced when it comes to many things....


yep! LOL

so "other" for me...  much as anything in life.. or hah.. the after life.. it ain't as simple as black and white ...

yes and no man..


Feel free to elaborate on your views any way you can. I'm more interested in people's thoughts and experiences than just how they vote. As I often say, the poll question should merely be treated as an accessory to discussion, and all tangents are welcome. I'm not meaning to force anyone to choose, and if it's other, that can be explained in a post so I can understand better your rationale. I hope you find reading through the read interesting at least. There is room for nuance, but I was approaching this from a particular philosophical standpoint by phrasing it in a dichotomous manner. If you needed a few beers to get through what I was trying to express in the Bertrand Russell topic where I discussed similar things, you might need a case to get through this. I do hope that believing and not believing in the afterlife simultaneously is not causing any cognitive dissonance.
Nahh, I'm not confusing "knowledge with belief". The word knowledge is to know....I don't know that there is an afterlife, never said I know there is or is not one. I do believe, but not know it exists.

This is getting too exacting of a conversation with having to define words like a lawyer does in trial...."what do you mean when you say NO..." LOL

The question is not scientific, I don't think you can apply that to the question or anyone's answer, because your right a belief is not science or math, its not exact....It's a hunch, a feeling and nothing more or less.

Those who do not believe in a God, do not know scientifically that a God does not actually exist...they merely believe or think or feel that no such being exists.
Does a God exist? I don't know, but I believe a God exists...Is there an afterlife? I don't know, but I believe there is one.
Everyone's answer here is valid, as nothing has been proven....yet.
Carry on....Smile


-------------


Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 01:44
The "afterlife" and promise of paradise is used as population/social control (be "good" or you'll go to hell) for the gullible


Originally posted by Nogbad_The_Bad Nogbad_The_Bad wrote:

Dead is dead, nothing after that.

ClapClapClap
TBH, the way humanity is going (down the drain), I woudn't want to witness it from anywhere, anyways... LOL


Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 01:55
Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

Again, my Yes has nothing to do with religion. I am Catholic, all my life and will end this life as a Catholic, for sure I have wavered here and there as most do with religion. I don't ever see myself leaving the Catholic church.....but nothing in how I was raised or all the Catholic teachings makes me select Yes.

I just believe there is an afterlife. Now if the question is 100% scientific and only that then you can easily argue the answer is No, since there is no proof.

This to me is the same as asking if there is life outside of our Earth........and my answer is of course there is, no way we are the only beings of our kind in the entire universe. 
What we have been able to explore outside of Earth is akin to going outside your house and exploring your porch, no further. As Earthlings we will never have the ability to travel far enough and survive to find another human race. What we are made of exists in space......unlike the robots that roam this website.


I did a deeper a deeper dive on this I think in the Bertrand Russell thread, but belief as I've been saying I don't treat as synonymous knowledge (related and overlap, certainly, how much so and in what way depends on the angle).

Sorry to repeat myself, but if you consider something to be true, then that is a belief (it doesn't mean it's truth, but you believe it). You don't have to know with certainty, and if it is not a Truth then the belief is not true knowledge. Basically, knowledge is considered to be evidence-based whereas belief does not require evidence (justified belief should be justifiable). Knowledge should be based on evidence, on falsifiability, on perceivable truth (that I could have phrased better). If I don't see the evidence that something is true such as the afterlife, then my default is not to believe in it, even if I don't ultimately know (have access to truth writ large). It's compatible to say that "I don't believe in an afterlife and I don't know if there is an afterlife". And one can say "I don't believe in an afterlife nor do is disbelieve in an afterlife.

The question could be phrased as "Are you convinced that there is an afterlife?" I wonder then how many would say I don't know.

Science isn't about proof, it's about evidence. Now I'm quoting myself from the Liberal Deacalogue thread since I got really into this there:

"The burden of proof is used in law and logic, and formal debate, and in logic means that one should adequately demonstrate a thing to be if not absolutely true, valid reasoning for the assertion (premises should be considered acceptable, relevant and sufficient enough to convince people who have no skin in the game that the conclusion/assertion logically follows), or something similar, been ages since I studied it. Of course what's considered valid etc. depends upon the person, but in logic (and mathematics) the propositions should support the conclusion in acceptable ways that should satisfy the standards of logical reasoning. Making arguments in formal academic logic does have fairly universal standards, and it is a closed-system of propositions (within particular frameworks).

In science, it's about evidence as there is no proof. It's not a closed system and every theory is open to questioning, adaptation or scrapping when new evidence comes to light. Science is about trying to understand how the universe works, but it shouldn't be making absolute truth claims as everything is open to reevaluation -- hypotheses, theories and claims are provisional and tentative -- they are subject to change."

I think you may be confusing the knowledge concept with belief.

When you say, "This to me is the same as asking if there is life outside of our Earth........and my answer is of course there is, no way we are the only beings of our kind in the entire universe" in your analogy you are asking a different category of question to the one I intended. Is there life outside of Earth? I would expect so, I think so, but I don't know (I remain ultimately agnostic on the matter). Do I believe that there is life outside of Earth? Okay, I must admit that I would want to answer in a more nuanced way than yes or no. It seems highly unlikely to me from a probability standpoint that we are alone in the universe. I tend to believe so, but that belief is held tentatively, and I recognise that we lack "proof". I feel that there is justification to believe, or assume, that there is life outside of Earth despite any lack of evidence. I think that it is a reasonable assumption, but it still an assumption.

Of course knowledge and belief are related concepts, and it is said that a sound belief is based on evidence as well, and the time to believe is when something can be demonstrated. Do I have sufficient evidence for a firm belief in extraterrestrial life, no. Am I convinced that there are extra terrestrials, I am reasonably convinced, but it is not held as a true belief because of the lack of evidence even if it is true.

There is a relationship between belief and knowledge of course and I do not mean to,or can I, fully separate the two. In fact knowledge is sometimes called justified true belief.

Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

don't feel the need to include an "unsure" or "other" option, though I expect that some would like to have that option. I'm more interested in what people have to say than poll results anyway. Answering yes or no does not require certainty. I don't believe that I can be certain of anything, and I am ultimately agnostic on all matters, which does not mean that I don't believe or am not convinced when it comes to many things....


yep! LOL

so "other" for me...  much as anything in life.. or hah.. the after life.. it ain't as simple as black and white ...

yes and no man..


Feel free to elaborate on your views any way you can. I'm more interested in people's thoughts and experiences than just how they vote. As I often say, the poll question should merely be treated as an accessory to discussion, and all tangents are welcome. I'm not meaning to force anyone to choose, and if it's other, that can be explained in a post so I can understand better your rationale. I hope you find reading through the read interesting at least. There is room for nuance, but I was approaching this from a particular philosophical standpoint by phrasing it in a dichotomous manner. If you needed a few beers to get through what I was trying to express in the Bertrand Russell topic where I discussed similar things, you might need a case to get through this. I do hope that believing and not believing in the afterlife simultaneously is not causing any cognitive dissonance.

Nahh, I'm not confusing "knowledge with belief". The word knowledge is to know....I don't know that there is an afterlife, never said I know there is or is not one. I do believe, but not know it exists.

This is getting too exacting of a conversation with having to define words like a lawyer does in trial...."what do you mean when you say NO..." LOL

The question is not scientific, I don't think you can apply that to the question or anyone's answer, because your right a belief is not science or math, its not exact....It's a hunch, a feeling and nothing more or less.

Those who do not believe in a God, do not know scientifically that a God does not actually exist...they merely believe or think or feel that no such being exists.
Does a God exist? I don't know, but I believe a God exists...Is there an afterlife? I don't know, but I believe there is one.
Everyone's answer here is valid, as nothing has been proven....yet.
Carry on....Smile


I'm not trying to prosecute you, I'd leave that to Ivan (though you are both Catholic so it might go well). Now Ivan and I, we had some major nit-picky arguments. Sorry if I seem dogged, just trying to understand your positions, (and perhaps better explain mine), as I would hope you would also be trying to do this with me and others. You've raised some points and at least one question and I have tried to address those adequately, and I hope that I've done so fairly. I have tried to understand your positions. I'm interested in all perspectives and I'm not trying to invalidate the belief or lack there-of. The question is not scientific, nor intended to be. It's of a philosophical nature. Not all who do not believe in a God also believe, think, or feel that a God does not exist. A point I've rattled on about too much already perhaps. There's a spectrum of belief-- some believe more strongly than others. Some are convinced that the after life exists, some are convinced that it doesn't, and there's a wide range of shades in between.

Some might never have even been exposed to a God concept and so have no basis to believe anything on the God front, others might be negative atheists (also known as weak, soft and agnostic atheism) who neither believe nor disbelieve in God. Ask them if they believe in God, and they are likely to say no. Ask them if they disbelieve in God and they are also likely to say no. As I've said, an individual can be in the position of neither believing nor disbelieving in the afterlife, which is akin to how one can not know whether or not there is an afterlife (be agnostic on the matter). My wife does not claim to know with certainty that God exists, but she is a believer. I can respect that. My atheism/agnosticism has been more of a problem for her than her theism has been for me, at least when we were dating (she being an ex-Catholic Born Again Christian). I tried to get her into a less orthodox/ more liberal-minded outlook by taking her to the Anglican Church that I liked to attend.

Whether or not everyone's answer is valid, not every argument is going to be valid or logically sound. Some arguments are more valid and logically sound than others (say deductively, that the conclusion logically follows from the premises). One can argue many metaphysical notions in a reasonable manner even if we cannot truly know something.

-------------
The first step on the road to wisdom is the recognition of your own cherry pie.


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 06:03
Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

 
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

don't feel the need to include an "unsure" or "other" option, though I expect that some would like to have that option. I'm more interested in what people have to say than poll results anyway. Answering yes or no does not require certainty. I don't believe that I can be certain of anything, and I am ultimately agnostic on all matters, which does not mean that I don't believe or am not convinced when it comes to many things....


yep! LOL

so "other" for me...  much as anything in life.. or hah.. the after life.. it ain't as simple as black and white ...

yes and no man..


Feel free to elaborate on your views any way you can. I'm more interested in people's thoughts and experiences than just how they vote. As I often say, the poll question should merely be treated as an accessory to discussion, and all tangents are welcome. I'm not meaning to force anyone to choose, and if it's other, that can be explained in a post so I can understand better your rationale. I hope you find reading through the read interesting at least. There is room for nuance, but I was approaching this from a particular philosophical standpoint by phrasing it in a dichotomous manner. If you needed a few beers to get through what I was trying to express in the Bertrand Russell topic where I discussed similar things, you might need a case to get through this. I do hope that believing and not believing in the afterlife simultaneously is not causing any cognitive dissonance.

normally I'd say nah... they are my beliefs and suppose they are not mainstream so what is the point. Ain't no one going to have a sudden epiphany or conversion or some sh*t like that.. and discussing this stuff is akin to talking about sex.. it is not intellectual.. it is spiritual...  not to think. but to feel and thus experience it. Is anyone going to tell me I'm right.. hah... doubt that.. .tell me I'm wrong.. hah.. doubt that. It is merely what I believe and corresponds to my life experiences and observations.

for you I would.. but I think after all these years you know what I am talking about and what I do believe.


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: Grumpyprogfan
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 07:39
Originally posted by Snicolette Snicolette wrote:

Originally posted by Grumpyprogfan Grumpyprogfan wrote:

Atheist here.

Curious as to what the afterlife is for believers. Do you take memories and your body? Floating orb soul? No memories = wouldn't remember anyone. How will you find your dog? Wherever this place is wouldn't if have to be big? And those that don't make it, do they really burn in fire forever? That too me would say you need a body or vessel to feel pain. If you feel pain do the other senses work?
  For me, I don't know.  I just think I believe rather than disbelieve, which makes no logical sense. Just like I believe there could be other intelligent life off of this planet, which may never be proven scientifically.  I know some things I've experienced that can't be explained to any certainty.  I just know that until I don't know for certain, there are still possibilities.  I definitely don't believe that there is burning in eternity for those who don't follow one silly stricture or another, that is kind of absurd, since that one usually goes along with the idea of a god or gods.  Why would something so huge be so concerned with such small details of so many individuals?  I think that it is likely that there is more than one reality within these larger realms.  Or maybe not.  Smile  I am just not discounting it until I know for sure it is discountable.
Once the body dies the brain dies. So how do you process thought? If we are just scattered into atoms in another plane we still can't process thought. So we will never know if we are in an afterlife. Matter will just exist.



Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 07:45
Originally posted by Grumpyprogfan Grumpyprogfan wrote:

Originally posted by Snicolette Snicolette wrote:

Originally posted by Grumpyprogfan Grumpyprogfan wrote:

Atheist here.

Curious as to what the afterlife is for believers. Do you take memories and your body? Floating orb soul? No memories = wouldn't remember anyone. How will you find your dog? Wherever this place is wouldn't if have to be big? And those that don't make it, do they really burn in fire forever? That too me would say you need a body or vessel to feel pain. If you feel pain do the other senses work?
  For me, I don't know.  I just think I believe rather than disbelieve, which makes no logical sense. Just like I believe there could be other intelligent life off of this planet, which may never be proven scientifically.  I know some things I've experienced that can't be explained to any certainty.  I just know that until I don't know for certain, there are still possibilities.  I definitely don't believe that there is burning in eternity for those who don't follow one silly stricture or another, that is kind of absurd, since that one usually goes along with the idea of a god or gods.  Why would something so huge be so concerned with such small details of so many individuals?  I think that it is likely that there is more than one reality within these larger realms.  Or maybe not.  Smile  I am just not discounting it until I know for sure it is discountable.
Once the body dies the brain dies. So how do you process thought? If we are just scattered into atoms in another plane we still can't process thought. So we will never know if we are in an afterlife. Matter will just exist.

Those of us who believe in an afterlife know perfectly well that the brain dies when the body dies. There is a part of us, though, which we feel is something more, something not tangible in the form of bodily parts. Call it your consciousness, self, whatever. It is that part of us which makes us what we are in thought, spirit. I do not believe that that intangible part of us dies.

I might also add that you state your opinion as if it is unalterable fact. Nothing about this is. Nobody really knows. It is the great mystery of life, or death. It is a question of faith, opinion, decisions.

Finally, you make reference to atoms scattered in another plane. There are numerous theories within quantum physics which support this, but also allow for something rather more than mindless atoms randomly wandering.


-------------
In Lazland, life is transient. Prog is permanent.


Posted By: Grumpyprogfan
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 07:51
This is what Stephen Hawking said about the afterlife "I regard the brain as a computer which will stop working when its components fail," he said. "There is no heaven or afterlife for broken down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark." 


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 08:14
and that is why atheists can be as moronic as the other extreme.. the religious fundies.

believe what you want..it is a private belief... but trying to rationalize to others it by comparing humans to computers?

come on man... your brain is only half your essence. Use it! LOLBeer


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: Grumpyprogfan
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 08:23
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

and that is why atheists can be as moronic as the other extreme.. the religious fundies.

believe what you want..it is a private belief... but trying to rationalize to others it by comparing humans to computers?

come on man... your brain is only half your essence. Use it! LOLBeer
Well if you are brain dead, your essence will not keep you alive very long.


Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 08:26
As animals, humans have adopted egocentric and anthropocentric beliefs to adorn the notion that just because we have evolved to become the super-predators on this planet, we have also allowed ourselves the singularity of having souls and an afterlife exclusive to our species, as opposed to the pigs we slaughter in bloody abattoirs to make bacon. 

Our intellect has let us wander into doctrines wherein we have created gods in our own image and likeness, and at one time we believed that the universe revolved around the earth. Thus, we have also created the idea of an afterlife, because our ego-driven supremacy cannot fathom that the souls we have created out of smoke and mirrors and pixie dust would ever end. We wish to be immortal and that death is but a mere stepping stone that will further illumine our perceived greatness as we shuffle off this mortal coil and join with the godhead we have fabricated back when we were chipping away at flint spearheads.


-------------
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 08:31
Originally posted by Grumpyprogfan Grumpyprogfan wrote:

Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

and that is why atheists can be as moronic as the other extreme.. the religious fundies.

believe what you want..it is a private belief... but trying to rationalize to others it by comparing humans to computers?

come on man... your brain is only half your essence. Use it! LOLBeer
Well if you are brain dead, your essence will not keep you alive very long.

you go Hawking.. I'd go Einstein Thumbs Up
 

transformation man...


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: Grumpyprogfan
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 08:34
^Well said, Dark Elf.


Posted By: Grumpyprogfan
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 08:44
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by Grumpyprogfan Grumpyprogfan wrote:

Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

and that is why atheists can be as moronic as the other extreme.. the religious fundies.

believe what you want..it is a private belief... but trying to rationalize to others it by comparing humans to computers?

come on man... your brain is only half your essence. Use it! LOLBeer
Well if you are brain dead, your essence will not keep you alive very long.

you go Hawking.. I'd go Einstein Thumbs Up
 

transformation man...
Since you brought up Einstein, here is his view of the afterlife.

"If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed. The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge. Immortality? There are two kinds. The first lives in the imagination of the people, and is thus an illusion. There is a relative immortality which may conserve the memory of an individual for some generations. But there is only one true immortality, on a cosmic scale, and that is the immortality of the cosmos itself. There is no other."


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 08:51
Clapexactly...  he hits on the head.. thus my answer.

'other' which if you parse exactly what he said.. is exactly what other means.

thus not fitting the traditional christian yes.. nor the athiest no..




-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: Grumpyprogfan
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 09:10
The other he refers to is the cosmos not humans.


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 09:18
yes... but what I think you are failing to wrap yourself around is what he IS saying... and are thinking black and white.. thinking 2-D when this is really a 3-D.. hell.. perhaps 4-D kind of concept. It is Einstein after all hahah.

thus other.. and yeah.. Greg knows how I think and suspect his other comment was directly at me for we've had this discussion in varous forms so many times over the last 15 years here

other...and an afterlife.. an immortality that does not fit traditional models. Einstein nailed it.. you merely illustrated the point I was obliquely trying to make without getting bogged down in a thread with those who, as most do, think it is a black and white heaven/hell or nothing at all kind of question.


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: Grumpyprogfan
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 09:59
Having the same conversations for 15 years doesn't surprise me. Hell, look at the constant threads about the same six bands.



Posted By: CosmicVibration
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 10:10

I like that Einstein quote, but am not entirely sure what he means.

What is the difference between cosmos and universe?  Is cosmos a reference towards all of creation, perhaps a multiverse and other undetected dimensions that may exist?  Or is universe and cosmos synonymous and interchangeable?

According to various ancient scriptures universes come and go all the time.  Our modern science is strongly suggesting this as well; at least this universe may not be eternal and have an expiration date.

There is theoretical science and experimental science.  This should also be the basis of any spiritual quest.  All scriptures tell you to go within yourself and seek the answers there.  There are many ways, many tools and some crutches that can be used for this.  But it all starts with mind control.. no, not trying to control someone else’s mind but your own, which is probably harder.

Controlling the direction of one’s thoughts without derailing is hard enough, but trying to just be, without any thoughts pooping, I mean popping into your head is extremely difficult.  How long can you last as an observer between thoughts?



Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 11:21
Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

Again, my Yes has nothing to do with religion. I am Catholic, all my life and will end this life as a Catholic, for sure I have wavered here and there as most do with religion. I don't ever see myself leaving the Catholic church.....but nothing in how I was raised or all the Catholic teachings makes me select Yes.

I just believe there is an afterlife. Now if the question is 100% scientific and only that then you can easily argue the answer is No, since there is no proof.

This to me is the same as asking if there is life outside of our Earth........and my answer is of course there is, no way we are the only beings of our kind in the entire universe. 
What we have been able to explore outside of Earth is akin to going outside your house and exploring your porch, no further. As Earthlings we will never have the ability to travel far enough and survive to find another human race. What we are made of exists in space......unlike the robots that roam this website.


I did a deeper a deeper dive on this I think in the Bertrand Russell thread, but belief as I've been saying I don't treat as synonymous knowledge (related and overlap, certainly, how much so and in what way depends on the angle).

Sorry to repeat myself, but if you consider something to be true, then that is a belief (it doesn't mean it's truth, but you believe it). You don't have to know with certainty, and if it is not a Truth then the belief is not true knowledge. Basically, knowledge is considered to be evidence-based whereas belief does not require evidence (justified belief should be justifiable). Knowledge should be based on evidence, on falsifiability, on perceivable truth (that I could have phrased better). If I don't see the evidence that something is true such as the afterlife, then my default is not to believe in it, even if I don't ultimately know (have access to truth writ large). It's compatible to say that "I don't believe in an afterlife and I don't know if there is an afterlife". And one can say "I don't believe in an afterlife nor do is disbelieve in an afterlife.

The question could be phrased as "Are you convinced that there is an afterlife?" I wonder then how many would say I don't know.

Science isn't about proof, it's about evidence. Now I'm quoting myself from the Liberal Deacalogue thread since I got really into this there:

"The burden of proof is used in law and logic, and formal debate, and in logic means that one should adequately demonstrate a thing to be if not absolutely true, valid reasoning for the assertion (premises should be considered acceptable, relevant and sufficient enough to convince people who have no skin in the game that the conclusion/assertion logically follows), or something similar, been ages since I studied it. Of course what's considered valid etc. depends upon the person, but in logic (and mathematics) the propositions should support the conclusion in acceptable ways that should satisfy the standards of logical reasoning. Making arguments in formal academic logic does have fairly universal standards, and it is a closed-system of propositions (within particular frameworks).

In science, it's about evidence as there is no proof. It's not a closed system and every theory is open to questioning, adaptation or scrapping when new evidence comes to light. Science is about trying to understand how the universe works, but it shouldn't be making absolute truth claims as everything is open to reevaluation -- hypotheses, theories and claims are provisional and tentative -- they are subject to change."

I think you may be confusing the knowledge concept with belief.

When you say, "This to me is the same as asking if there is life outside of our Earth........and my answer is of course there is, no way we are the only beings of our kind in the entire universe" in your analogy you are asking a different category of question to the one I intended. Is there life outside of Earth? I would expect so, I think so, but I don't know (I remain ultimately agnostic on the matter). Do I believe that there is life outside of Earth? Okay, I must admit that I would want to answer in a more nuanced way than yes or no. It seems highly unlikely to me from a probability standpoint that we are alone in the universe. I tend to believe so, but that belief is held tentatively, and I recognise that we lack "proof". I feel that there is justification to believe, or assume, that there is life outside of Earth despite any lack of evidence. I think that it is a reasonable assumption, but it still an assumption.

Of course knowledge and belief are related concepts, and it is said that a sound belief is based on evidence as well, and the time to believe is when something can be demonstrated. Do I have sufficient evidence for a firm belief in extraterrestrial life, no. Am I convinced that there are extra terrestrials, I am reasonably convinced, but it is not held as a true belief because of the lack of evidence even if it is true.

There is a relationship between belief and knowledge of course and I do not mean to,or can I, fully separate the two. In fact knowledge is sometimes called justified true belief.

Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

don't feel the need to include an "unsure" or "other" option, though I expect that some would like to have that option. I'm more interested in what people have to say than poll results anyway. Answering yes or no does not require certainty. I don't believe that I can be certain of anything, and I am ultimately agnostic on all matters, which does not mean that I don't believe or am not convinced when it comes to many things....


yep! LOL

so "other" for me...  much as anything in life.. or hah.. the after life.. it ain't as simple as black and white ...

yes and no man..


Feel free to elaborate on your views any way you can. I'm more interested in people's thoughts and experiences than just how they vote. As I often say, the poll question should merely be treated as an accessory to discussion, and all tangents are welcome. I'm not meaning to force anyone to choose, and if it's other, that can be explained in a post so I can understand better your rationale. I hope you find reading through the read interesting at least. There is room for nuance, but I was approaching this from a particular philosophical standpoint by phrasing it in a dichotomous manner. If you needed a few beers to get through what I was trying to express in the Bertrand Russell topic where I discussed similar things, you might need a case to get through this. I do hope that believing and not believing in the afterlife simultaneously is not causing any cognitive dissonance.

Nahh, I'm not confusing "knowledge with belief". The word knowledge is to know....I don't know that there is an afterlife, never said I know there is or is not one. I do believe, but not know it exists.

This is getting too exacting of a conversation with having to define words like a lawyer does in trial...."what do you mean when you say NO..." LOL

The question is not scientific, I don't think you can apply that to the question or anyone's answer, because your right a belief is not science or math, its not exact....It's a hunch, a feeling and nothing more or less.

Those who do not believe in a God, do not know scientifically that a God does not actually exist...they merely believe or think or feel that no such being exists.
Does a God exist? I don't know, but I believe a God exists...Is there an afterlife? I don't know, but I believe there is one.
Everyone's answer here is valid, as nothing has been proven....yet.
Carry on....Smile


I'm not trying to prosecute you, I'd leave that to Ivan (though you are both Catholic so it might go well). Now Ivan and I, we had some major nit-picky arguments. Sorry if I seem dogged, just trying to understand your positions, (and perhaps better explain mine), as I would hope you would also be trying to do this with me and others. You've raised some points and at least one question and I have tried to address those adequately, and I hope that I've done so fairly. I have tried to understand your positions. I'm interested in all perspectives and I'm not trying to invalidate the belief or lack there-of. The question is not scientific, nor intended to be. It's of a philosophical nature. Not all who do not believe in a God also believe, think, or feel that a God does not exist. A point I've rattled on about too much already perhaps. There's a spectrum of belief-- some believe more strongly than others. Some are convinced that the after life exists, some are convinced that it doesn't, and there's a wide range of shades in between.

Some might never have even been exposed to a God concept and so have no basis to believe anything on the God front, others might be negative atheists (also known as weak, soft and agnostic atheism) who neither believe nor disbelieve in God. Ask them if they believe in God, and they are likely to say no. Ask them if they disbelieve in God and they are also likely to say no. As I've said, an individual can be in the position of neither believing nor disbelieving in the afterlife, which is akin to how one can not know whether or not there is an afterlife (be agnostic on the matter). My wife does not claim to know with certainty that God exists, but she is a believer. I can respect that. My atheism/agnosticism has been more of a problem for her than her theism has been for me, at least when we were dating (she being an ex-Catholic Born Again Christian). I tried to get her into a less orthodox/ more liberal-minded outlook by taking her to the Anglican Church that I liked to attend.

Whether or not everyone's answer is valid, not every argument is going to be valid or logically sound. Some arguments are more valid and logically sound than others (say deductively, that the conclusion logically follows from the premises). One can argue many metaphysical notions in a reasonable manner even if we cannot truly know something.
That's a good post Greg, nothing there I would challenge, not that I want to do that anyway as I don't think this thread is about that or your question.
My wife was also raised Catholic, we were married in our church before God and we both have a profound sense of appreciation for that moment (well more than a moment, heck an hour long mass then the marriage ceremony....I just wanted some wedding cake!! LOL).
Ivan and I have not had any discussions on that, I really don't want to as they say religion and politics should not be discussed among friends Big smile.

Cheers my friend...


-------------


Posted By: BrufordFreak
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 11:38
Energy follows thought. If one can imagine it, it is possible (even probable). We are co-creators of our own realities.

The world of energy and thought are not bound or confined by laws of four-dimensional physics (unless they choose to be).

Mind, or Consciousness, is separate from (though it uses) the material, four-dimensional world.

I have a body with all of its accompanying senses, for which I am grateful (especially when it serves me well), but I am much more than my body and its sensory inputs and activities.
I have emotions, but I am much more than my emotions.
I have thoughts (clouds in the infinite sky), but I am much more than my thoughts and human intellect. 

We are inspired by the essence of Eternal Consciousness; We are all drops or waves in the Cosmic Ocean of Divine Consciousness.




-------------
Drew Fisher
https://progisaliveandwell.blogspot.com/


Posted By: Snicolette
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 11:39
I like the way you think, Drew.Smile

-------------
"Into every rain, a little life must fall." ~Tom Rapp


Posted By: Psychedelic Paul
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 11:52
Originally posted by BrufordFreak BrufordFreak wrote:

Energy follows thought. If one can imagine it, it is possible (even probable). We are co-creators of our own realities.

The world of energy and thought are not bound or confined by laws of four-dimensional physics (unless they choose to be).

Mind, or Consciousness, is separate from (though it uses) the material, four-dimensional world.

I have a body with all of its accompanying senses, for which I am grateful (especially when it serves me well), but I am much more than my body and its sensory inputs and activities.
I have emotions, but I am much more than my emotions.
I have thoughts (clouds in the infinite sky), but I am much more than my thoughts and human intellect. 

We are inspired by the essence of Eternal Consciousness; We are all drops or waves in the Cosmic Ocean of Divine Consciousness.


Those wise words sound like they could be the inspiration for a proggy 1970's-style concept album on the theme of higher consciousness. Thumbs Up


Posted By: I prophesy disaster
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 11:58
Originally posted by Psychedelic Paul Psychedelic Paul wrote:

Originally posted by BrufordFreak BrufordFreak wrote:

Energy follows thought. If one can imagine it, it is possible (even probable). We are co-creators of our own realities.

The world of energy and thought are not bound or confined by laws of four-dimensional physics (unless they choose to be).

Mind, or Consciousness, is separate from (though it uses) the material, four-dimensional world.

I have a body with all of its accompanying senses, for which I am grateful (especially when it serves me well), but I am much more than my body and its sensory inputs and activities.
I have emotions, but I am much more than my emotions.
I have thoughts (clouds in the infinite sky), but I am much more than my thoughts and human intellect. 

We are inspired by the essence of Eternal Consciousness; We are all drops or waves in the Cosmic Ocean of Divine Consciousness.


Those wise words sound like they could be the inspiration for a proggy 1970's-style concept album on the theme of higher consciousness. Thumbs Up
 
Or Maudlin Of The Well.
 
 


-------------
No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man.


Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 15:47
I do not believe in an afterlife. I do not disbelieve in an afterlife. I hope there is an afterlife. I do not THINK there is an afterlife. Belief stems from people pretending to know what they do not know. I have never run across any indication that reality is altered in a metaphysical sense by belief beyond placebo effect. Thus, there is no need to prognosticate on whether there is an afterlife prior to experiencing it. I have not observed any compelling evidence of an afterlife. As there is no evidence of an afterlife, there is also no indication that there is a way to determine in advance whether an afterlife is automatically available to all or to select some few, or whether it is based on good behavior, faith, continual baptismal purification for the removal of sin (as with the beliefs of the Mandaeans), or whatever. Most mainstream Christians think that faith is the criterion for entry into an afterlife. Given what I have already said about belief, I clearly consider faith the least likely criterion. I am mainly concerned about life now up to and immediately prior to death and about others I leave behind.




-------------
A curse upon the heads of those who seek their fortunes in a lie. The truth is always waiting when there's nothing left to try. - Colin Henson, Jade Warrior (Now)


Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 16:12
Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

The real question is......If you have no evidence to prove otherwise, because nobody knows the answer, why do you chose to say No?
Fear....?
No, why do you choose to say Yes? Hope? Lack of belief is not abandonment of hope. Belief is a cognitive commitment. Lack of belief is simply an absence of a cognitive commitment. Not a denial. And yes, Fear (as in God-fearing and Hell) is something that Christianity has cultivated in concept. It is an act of projection to attribute it to the non-religious.




-------------
A curse upon the heads of those who seek their fortunes in a lie. The truth is always waiting when there's nothing left to try. - Colin Henson, Jade Warrior (Now)


Posted By: CosmicVibration
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 18:25
Originally posted by BrufordFreak BrufordFreak wrote:

Energy follows thought. If one can imagine it, it is possible (even probable). We are co-creators of our own realities.

This is my understanding as well, thought generates energy and energy coalesces into matter.  However, when the ego thinks the energy is usually miniscule and barely perturbs the field.

Our true nature, our Soul, is omniscient and does not need to think.  It would be pointless, it already knows everything. Thought is used only as a tool by the Soul to create anything it wishes, even entire universes, the only limitation is imagination.  Creation is the Souls playground..


The world of energy and thought are not bound or confined by laws of four-dimensional physics (unless they choose to be).

Mind, or Consciousness, is separate from (though it uses) the material, four-dimensional world.

Consciousness can exist without the material world but the material world cannot exist without consciousness.

I have a body with all of its accompanying senses, for which I am grateful (especially when it serves me well), but I am much more than my body and its sensory inputs and activities.
I have emotions, but I am much more than my emotions.
I have thoughts (clouds in the infinite sky), but I am much more than my thoughts and human intellect. 

We are inspired by the essence of Eternal Consciousness; We are all drops or waves in the Cosmic Ocean of Divine Consciousness.

I like the ocean analogy..  God is the ocean and we are waves on that Ocean, playing with storm of delusion.  We think we are separate from the ocean, but we are not.   One day we will calm and unify back with the ocean.






Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 18:33
Originally posted by BrufordFreak BrufordFreak wrote:

Energy follows thought. If one can imagine it, it is possible (even probable). We are co-creators of our own realities.

The world of energy and thought are not bound or confined by laws of four-dimensional physics (unless they choose to be).

Mind, or Consciousness, is separate from (though it uses) the material, four-dimensional world.

I have a body with all of its accompanying senses, for which I am grateful (especially when it serves me well), but I am much more than my body and its sensory inputs and activities.
I have emotions, but I am much more than my emotions.
I have thoughts (clouds in the infinite sky), but I am much more than my thoughts and human intellect. 

We are inspired by the essence of Eternal Consciousness; We are all drops or waves in the Cosmic Ocean of Divine Consciousness.



we have assumed control... we have assumed control... we have assumed control
 
Beer


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 21:47
Originally posted by HackettFan HackettFan wrote:

Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

The real question is......If you have no evidence to prove otherwise, because nobody knows the answer, why do you chose to say No?
Fear....?
No, why do you choose to say Yes? Hope? Lack of belief is not abandonment of hope. Belief is a cognitive commitment. Lack of belief is simply an absence of a cognitive commitment. Not a denial. And yes, Fear (as in God-fearing and Hell) is something that Christianity has cultivated in concept. It is an act of projection to attribute it to the non-religious.


I say Yes because I have zero fear in being wrong. Again, my question has nothing to do with religion. So if you say No you still have hope its Yes??


-------------


Posted By: Snicolette
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 22:06
I say yes, because I don't disbelieve in one.  



-------------
"Into every rain, a little life must fall." ~Tom Rapp


Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 22:49
Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

Why wasn't "possibly" a choice? I don't know anything as a fact, either way.

This.....an agnostic because I simply don 't know. The only tenable position imho.

Smile


-------------
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin


Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 22:53
Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

Again, my Yes has nothing to do with religion. I am Catholic, all my life and will end this life as a Catholic, for sure I have wavered here and there as most do with religion. I don't ever see myself leaving the Catholic church.....but nothing in how I was raised or all the Catholic teachings makes me select Yes.

I just believe there is an afterlife. Now if the question is 100% scientific and only that then you can easily argue the answer is No, since there is no proof.

This to me is the same as asking if there is life outside of our Earth........and my answer is of course there is, no way we are the only beings of our kind in the entire universe. 
What we have been able to explore outside of Earth is akin to going outside your house and exploring your porch, no further. As Earthlings we will never have the ability to travel far enough and survive to find another human race. What we are made of exists in space......unlike the robots that roam this website.


I did a deeper a deeper dive on this I think in the Bertrand Russell thread, but belief as I've been saying I don't treat as synonymous knowledge (related and overlap, certainly, how much so and in what way depends on the angle).

Sorry to repeat myself, but if you consider something to be true, then that is a belief (it doesn't mean it's truth, but you believe it). You don't have to know with certainty, and if it is not a Truth then the belief is not true knowledge. Basically, knowledge is considered to be evidence-based whereas belief does not require evidence (justified belief should be justifiable). Knowledge should be based on evidence, on falsifiability, on perceivable truth (that I could have phrased better). If I don't see the evidence that something is true such as the afterlife, then my default is not to believe in it, even if I don't ultimately know (have access to truth writ large). It's compatible to say that "I don't believe in an afterlife and I don't know if there is an afterlife". And one can say "I don't believe in an afterlife nor do is disbelieve in an afterlife.

The question could be phrased as "Are you convinced that there is an afterlife?" I wonder then how many would say I don't know.

Science isn't about proof, it's about evidence. Now I'm quoting myself from the Liberal Deacalogue thread since I got really into this there:

"The burden of proof is used in law and logic, and formal debate, and in logic means that one should adequately demonstrate a thing to be if not absolutely true, valid reasoning for the assertion (premises should be considered acceptable, relevant and sufficient enough to convince people who have no skin in the game that the conclusion/assertion logically follows), or something similar, been ages since I studied it. Of course what's considered valid etc. depends upon the person, but in logic (and mathematics) the propositions should support the conclusion in acceptable ways that should satisfy the standards of logical reasoning. Making arguments in formal academic logic does have fairly universal standards, and it is a closed-system of propositions (within particular frameworks).

In science, it's about evidence as there is no proof. It's not a closed system and every theory is open to questioning, adaptation or scrapping when new evidence comes to light. Science is about trying to understand how the universe works, but it shouldn't be making absolute truth claims as everything is open to reevaluation -- hypotheses, theories and claims are provisional and tentative -- they are subject to change."

I think you may be confusing the knowledge concept with belief.

When you say, "This to me is the same as asking if there is life outside of our Earth........and my answer is of course there is, no way we are the only beings of our kind in the entire universe" in your analogy you are asking a different category of question to the one I intended. Is there life outside of Earth? I would expect so, I think so, but I don't know (I remain ultimately agnostic on the matter). Do I believe that there is life outside of Earth? Okay, I must admit that I would want to answer in a more nuanced way than yes or no. It seems highly unlikely to me from a probability standpoint that we are alone in the universe. I tend to believe so, but that belief is held tentatively, and I recognise that we lack "proof". I feel that there is justification to believe, or assume, that there is life outside of Earth despite any lack of evidence. I think that it is a reasonable assumption, but it still an assumption.

Of course knowledge and belief are related concepts, and it is said that a sound belief is based on evidence as well, and the time to believe is when something can be demonstrated. Do I have sufficient evidence for a firm belief in extraterrestrial life, no. Am I convinced that there are extra terrestrials, I am reasonably convinced, but it is not held as a true belief because of the lack of evidence even if it is true.

There is a relationship between belief and knowledge of course and I do not mean to,or can I, fully separate the two. In fact knowledge is sometimes called justified true belief.

Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by Logan Logan wrote:

don't feel the need to include an "unsure" or "other" option, though I expect that some would like to have that option. I'm more interested in what people have to say than poll results anyway. Answering yes or no does not require certainty. I don't believe that I can be certain of anything, and I am ultimately agnostic on all matters, which does not mean that I don't believe or am not convinced when it comes to many things....


yep! LOL

so "other" for me...  much as anything in life.. or hah.. the after life.. it ain't as simple as black and white ...

yes and no man..


Feel free to elaborate on your views any way you can. I'm more interested in people's thoughts and experiences than just how they vote. As I often say, the poll question should merely be treated as an accessory to discussion, and all tangents are welcome. I'm not meaning to force anyone to choose, and if it's other, that can be explained in a post so I can understand better your rationale. I hope you find reading through the read interesting at least. There is room for nuance, but I was approaching this from a particular philosophical standpoint by phrasing it in a dichotomous manner. If you needed a few beers to get through what I was trying to express in the Bertrand Russell topic where I discussed similar things, you might need a case to get through this. I do hope that believing and not believing in the afterlife simultaneously is not causing any cognitive dissonance.

Nahh, I'm not confusing "knowledge with belief". The word knowledge is to know....I don't know that there is an afterlife, never said I know there is or is not one. I do believe, but not know it exists.

This is getting too exacting of a conversation with having to define words like a lawyer does in trial...."what do you mean when you say NO..." LOL

The question is not scientific, I don't think you can apply that to the question or anyone's answer, because your right a belief is not science or math, its not exact....It's a hunch, a feeling and nothing more or less.

Those who do not believe in a God, do not know scientifically that a God does not actually exist...they merely believe or think or feel that no such being exists.
Does a God exist? I don't know, but I believe a God exists...Is there an afterlife? I don't know, but I believe there is one.
Everyone's answer here is valid, as nothing has been proven....yet.
Carry on....Smile


I'm not trying to prosecute you, I'd leave that to Ivan (though you are both Catholic so it might go well). Now Ivan and I, we had some major nit-picky arguments. Sorry if I seem dogged, just trying to understand your positions, (and perhaps better explain mine), as I would hope you would also be trying to do this with me and others. You've raised some points and at least one question and I have tried to address those adequately, and I hope that I've done so fairly. I have tried to understand your positions. I'm interested in all perspectives and I'm not trying to invalidate the belief or lack there-of. The question is not scientific, nor intended to be. It's of a philosophical nature. Not all who do not believe in a God also believe, think, or feel that a God does not exist. A point I've rattled on about too much already perhaps. There's a spectrum of belief-- some believe more strongly than others. Some are convinced that the after life exists, some are convinced that it doesn't, and there's a wide range of shades in between.

Some might never have even been exposed to a God concept and so have no basis to believe anything on the God front, others might be negative atheists (also known as weak, soft and agnostic atheism) who neither believe nor disbelieve in God. Ask them if they believe in God, and they are likely to say no. Ask them if they disbelieve in God and they are also likely to say no. As I've said, an individual can be in the position of neither believing nor disbelieving in the afterlife, which is akin to how one can not know whether or not there is an afterlife (be agnostic on the matter). My wife does not claim to know with certainty that God exists, but she is a believer. I can respect that. My atheism/agnosticism has been more of a problem for her than her theism has been for me, at least when we were dating (she being an ex-Catholic Born Again Christian). I tried to get her into a less orthodox/ more liberal-minded outlook by taking her to the Anglican Church that I liked to attend.

Whether or not everyone's answer is valid, not every argument is going to be valid or logically sound. Some arguments are more valid and logically sound than others (say deductively, that the conclusion logically follows from the premises). One can argue many metaphysical notions in a reasonable manner even if we cannot truly know something.

That's a good post Greg, nothing there I would challenge, not that I want to do that anyway as I don't think this thread is about that or your question.
My wife was also raised Catholic, we were married in our church before God and we both have a profound sense of appreciation for that moment (well more than a moment, heck an hour long mass then the marriage ceremony....I just wanted some wedding cake!! LOL).
Ivan and I have not had any discussions on that, I really don't want to as they say religion and politics should not be discussed among friends Big smile.

Cheers my friend...


Thanks, I really appreciate it. I don't know when I'm making sense when I go nights without sleep, but that seems to be the time that I like to get philosophical and make topics such as this one or "Do you think that Mike Pence looks hot in that dress?" I've never really been much of one for debates. I guess that's why I say out of the Politics thread. I like a challenge when I feel there's some hope to understand each other, and sometimes one just wants to pull one's hair out cause it's like you're talking at cross-purposes and you can't get your ideas across. This is not one of those cases.

Many of my favourite people have been Catholics,and I am comfortable attending Catholic Church -- although I guess I shouldn't take communion and I have. Hey, I was baptised a kind of catholic, just not Roman Catholic. I had a Catholic girlfriend at one time, and I went to Catholic Church with her.To be honest, had she been a Scientologist I likely would have gone to auditing even though Scientology makes me really uncomfortable.

I wanted a church wedding, and I had my kids baptised at the church I was baptised and where I attended. It's about bringing them into a community. I'm comfortable in the Catholic Church cause it doesn't feel that different from the Anglican Church, I know what to say. Ivan, he of the vicious big blue font, was fun to argue with. We had a pedantic argument soon after I joined, and it was good, it was like trial by fire. If I could survive that wicked blue font, I could survive anything here.I wish all newbies could go through an Ivan hazing ritual. ;) I like Ivan; good guy.

I have had transcendent experiences at more than one Buddhist Temple while in Japan and on hikes, and once at a church.. Whether that's just brain chemistry/ a physiological reaction, and I expect so, that doesn't negative the experience. I have felt a oneness with the cosmos so to speak -- as the man said to the hot dog vendor, "Make me one with everything." Church has been important to me despite my lack of belief (rather than disbelief, well I have genuine disbelief when it comes to some religious things). But I ramble...

I have a very strong spiritual sense, or sense of the numinous, the transcendent, I might call it, and I have a had a very strong sense that there is some form of "being" beyond death, and have at least thought that I experienced signs of some kind of being after death on several occasions. So ultimately I nether believe nor disbelieve, but I want there to be something beyond and for it to be something good ideally.

-------------
The first step on the road to wisdom is the recognition of your own cherry pie.


Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 25 2020 at 23:02
Originally posted by dr wu23 dr wu23 wrote:

Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:


Why wasn't "possibly" a choice?
I don't know anything as a fact, either way.


This.....an agnostic because I simply don 't know. The only tenable position imho.

Smile


It's not like I'm asking "Is there an afterlife?"

To be agnostic deals with being without knowledge (we cannot know), I'm taking about belief or a lack of belief. If you read the thread, I went into this at some length. Hackettfan expressed my position well: "I do not believe in an afterlife. I do not disbelieve in an afterlife. I hope there is an afterlife. I do not THINK there is an afterlife." If you were to ask me if I believe in the afterlife then my answer would be no. If you were to ask me if I disbelieve in the afterlife, then my answer would also be no. If you ask me if I know that there is an afterlife, then my answer would be no. If you ask me if I know that there is no afterlife, then my answer would also be no. I know, so terribly negative. I don't know if there is or isn't an afterlife, but I don't believe in one. I have a lack of belief/ lack belief, and I lack knowledge.

I'm just going to copy-paste something I wrote earlier in the thread:

"Sorry to repeat myself, but if you consider something to be true, then that is a belief (it doesn't mean it's truth, but you believe it). You don't have to know with certainty, and if it is not a Truth then the belief is not true knowledge. Basically, knowledge is considered to be evidence-based whereas belief does not require evidence (justified belief should be justifiable). Knowledge should be based on evidence, on falsifiability, on perceivable truth (that I could have phrased better). If I don't see the evidence that something is true such as the afterlife, then my default is not to believe in it, even if I don't ultimately know (have access to truth writ large). It's compatible to say that "I don't believe in an afterlife and I don't know if there is an afterlife". And one can say "I don't believe in an afterlife nor do I disbelieve in an afterlife."

I suggested before that if people have difficulty with the question, then perhaps consider it as "Am I convinced that there is afterlife?" Yes, or no. I'm an agnostic on all things, but that doesn't mean that I cannot feel comfortable answering" Do you believe X proposition?" and "Do you disbelieve X proposition."

Quoting myself again from this thread, but I said that I don't believe anything with absolute certainty, and I prefer not to believe things without what I think are good reasons to believe in them. I am a sceptic. I don't claim to know what is possible or true in regards to many things. If the question were, "Do you believe that an invisible and intangible Santa Claus resides in my underpants" would the default position be "Yes" if or until the proposition could be demonstrated to be false? I wouldn't believe it, and not just because I'm wearing the underpants. That doesn't mean that I know it's not there as I can't see it or feel it, but the best time to believe something is when there is evidence and rational reasons to believe in them. A lack of belief makes the most sense to me when it comes to that which cannot be demonstrated, is not falsifiable etc..

I also don't know if an "afterlife" is possible. It might be impossibly. ;)


-------------
The first step on the road to wisdom is the recognition of your own cherry pie.


Posted By: progaardvark
Date Posted: July 27 2020 at 16:58
This is a subject that I have gone one way, then another, and then back again. I don't belong to any organized religion. I also don't consider the Bible a reputable source of information. I'm a big supporter of science, totally convinced of climate change, biological evolution, etc. Given all this, I think there is some curiosities about consciousness that have convinced me that our consciousness is capable of surviving the physical body and I am even considering that reincarnation may be a real phenomena.

The jumping point for me was the works that have come out of the University of Virginia's Division of Perceptual Studies. But keep in mind, I have much more to read from the literature on this subject. 

So, I answered Yes to the question.


-------------
----------
to meet anyone nose at nose
the walls have hearsay
he go to four feet
take the moon with the teeth
he has a good beak
the stone as roll not heap up not foam


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: July 27 2020 at 17:13
^ Then you must look into ~

25489537




-------------
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy


Posted By: Shadowyzard
Date Posted: July 27 2020 at 17:24
In ancient Sumeria, the mythological decrees governing civilization and the Universe were called the 'meh'.
"Meh"...

https://twitter.com/weird_hist/status/1278502453927952385?s=20




-------------


Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: July 28 2020 at 06:31
Tbh, sometimes I feel like I have enough problems navigating this life to worry about another one. LOL

-------------
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.


Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: July 28 2020 at 08:12
Originally posted by BrufordFreak BrufordFreak wrote:

...
We are inspired by the essence of Eternal Consciousness; We are all drops or waves in the Cosmic Ocean of Divine Consciousness.
...

Hi,

Strange for me ... as big as the Universe is when you look out at the stars, and using a term like "Eternal Consciousness", assuming that this is the same in Saturn, Pluto and every other Galaxy out there ... it just doesn't add up FOR ME!

Cosmic Ocean ... of the human aura and awareness which likely surrounds this earth (from Robert Monroe!) ... but I would hardly EVER call it "Cosmic". It's an "Ocean" for the earth ... but not for the Cosmos!

"I'm an atheist! ... Thank God!"
Luis Bunuel


-------------
... none of the hits, none of the time ... favoritism is not an artistic merit! www.pedrosena.com



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk