• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Death After Life vs Death Before Life

Explorer said:
This debate is surely influenced by the importance, that we, on this forum and elsewhere, attribute to individual consciousness. Understandable, for the reasons of a widespread fear of one's own death, and the unknown. We know we are made of the same stuff of the universe, and the universe contains the essential ingredients in at least one part of itself, that created through the laws of physics an evolved form of organic life that ponders on its own existence. It can be argued that we, human life, is a common consciousness of the universe, and that it is the more relevant description rather than apportioning it to individual humans. If we accept that, then non-existence before and after death, ceases to become important, rather like Twain's quote. More importance perhaps should be given to humanity as an ever growing wave of mass consciousness, dynamically moving along a timeline of existence, where that total of reflexive thought is part of an inevitable development in the evolution of our universe.
Click to expand...
Deep.
 
One might suggest that the fact that we're all made of stuff, and the universe is also made of stuff, is not very good evidence that we won't just die. It would be nice if we didn't of course. Madame Blavatsky said that she believed in reincarnation because it was such a nice idea, but I'm not convinced that the Blavatsky explanation would pass scientific muster.
 
Explorer said:
This debate is surely influenced by the importance, that we, on this forum and elsewhere, attribute to individual consciousness. Understandable, for the reasons of a widespread fear of one's own death, and the unknown. We know we are made of the same stuff of the universe, and the universe contains the essential ingredients in at least one part of itself, that created through the laws of physics an evolved form of organic life that ponders on its own existence. It can be argued that we, human life, is a common consciousness of the universe, and that it is the more relevant description rather than apportioning it to individual humans. If we accept that, then non-existence before and after death, ceases to become important, rather like Twain's quote. More importance perhaps should be given to humanity as an ever growing wave of mass consciousness, dynamically moving along a timeline of existence, where that total of reflexive thought is part of an inevitable development in the evolution of our universe.
Click to expand...

Nah, you've simply accepted the meaninglessness of life, only to search for meaning in another inconsequential concept, presumably to stave off existential angst. The truth is that an individual consciousness, the combined consciousness of all humanity, and whatever abstract universal consciousness one can come up with have exactly the same level of importance: zilch.
 
At the moment, the only places where we know that consciousness exists are inside human skulls; I mean that literally. Looking in those some billions of separate and distinct loci for any kind of universal findings sounds like a losing game.

Okay, maybe also inside some other apes' brain boxes, but don't expect to find anything you'd like to see lighting up the universe. Ditto for those dolphins & whales.

Mysticism grows mold after a while. And it's been a while, dontcha think?
 
Olmstead said:
Nah, you've simply accepted the meaninglessness of life, only to search for meaning in another inconsequential concept, presumably to stave off existential angst. The truth is that an individual consciousness, the combined consciousness of all humanity, and whatever abstract universal consciousness one can come up with have exactly the same level of importance: zilch.
Click to expand...

I haven't accepted anything. It was simply a posit for discussion, which is why I used the word "if". However, thank you for your valued contribution.
 
sackett said:
At the moment, the only places where we know that consciousness exists are inside human skulls; I mean that literally. Looking in those some billions of separate and distinct loci for any kind of universal findings sounds like a losing game.

Okay, maybe also inside some other apes' brain boxes, but don't expect to find anything you'd like to see lighting up the universe. Ditto for those dolphins & whales.

Mysticism grows mold after a while. And it's been a while, dontcha think?
Click to expand...

Mysticism is rather like religion, the latter becoming increasingly moldy as science fills in the gaps with alternative and better explanations of the universe and all things in it.

Consciousness is still one of the gaps where "mysticism" and religion still has a role for those who are happy with the god concept, especially as science has currently not been able to really define it in any comprehensive and meaningful way, that we are used to. I still think there is a long way to go before that happens.
 
Explorer said:
Mysticism is rather like religion, the latter becoming increasingly moldy as science fills in the gaps with alternative and better explanations of the universe and all things in it.

Consciousness is still one of the gaps where "mysticism" and religion still has a role for those who are happy with the god concept, especially as science has currently not been able to really define it in any comprehensive and meaningful way, that we are used to. I still think there is a long way to go before that happens.
Click to expand...
Which gap?
 
Darat said:
Which gap?
Click to expand...

Explorer will correct me, but I think he hasn't been reading enough about recent and current research on consciousness. It's not the gaping mystery that it appeared to be even a generation ago.

NB: I too haven't been following the literature nearly enough. So I'm unplugging from this circuit for a while.
 
Darat said:
Which gap?
Click to expand...

The god gaps, as defined by creationists, and others, who deny certain current scientific theory to explain them.

This is a separate thread in itself. I haven't trawled through everything they cite, and I am sure that others on here could easily debunk much of it very quickly. I have neither time or inclination, but the gap claims are out there if you want to seek them out. Having said all that, I doubt very much anybody on this forum would claim that science has satisfactorily explained everything, as that would bring research to a grinding halt, and make for a lot of unemployment.

Here it is what I found for your enjoyment:

https://www.icr.org/article/gaps-the-god-gaps/
 
sackett said:
Explorer will correct me, but I think he hasn't been reading enough about recent and current research on consciousness. It's not the gaping mystery that it appeared to be even a generation ago.

NB: I too haven't been following the literature nearly enough. So I'm unplugging from this circuit for a while.
Click to expand...

Personally, I have read enough to discount duality theory, but for me to post further on this specific aspect of consciousness, I would need very much to update myself as you suggest. The subject is daunting, and will need a lot of dedicated research and time, so I am not going to comment further either, when my knowledge is too skimpy.
 
What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning.
~ Werner Heisenberg
 
The more I study science, the less the God I believe in resembles the being described by any major religion.
~ Myriad

There is something insane about a lack of doubt. Doubt - to me, anyway - is what makes you human, and without doubt, even the righteous lose their grip, not only on reality but also on their humanity.
~ Swinton
 
"There is nothing scientifically impossible, so far as I can see, in some people seeing things that are invisible to others."

- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom