A Rational Argument for Continued Existence Afte Death

Wowbagger said:
Whatever. This looks like yet another semantics battle.
Click to expand...

Well, if you want to call it that. They are both single instants with nothing following.


What if the afterlife is not unchanging? What if the afterlife is a realm created for our eternal hapiness, perhaps much like Earth, with people around, toys to play with, places to visit, and delicious foods to munch; only there is no pain and suffering, at all.

Not I think there is such a thing. I'm just pointing out that your view of what the afterlife is like, is kinda limited. If someone does have such a concept for the afterlife, they would think it is not pointless to try to get there.

But, yes, an unchanging eternal afterlife: Yes, that would be pointless.
Click to expand...

If it is not unchanging then it is not perfect. Some things would be better than others and we would strive for those better things. Even if the bar were raised to a much higher plane than the one on which we currently sit, if we are the beings in this afterlife then we probably wouldn't notice much difference from what we currently experience. Our nervous systems work off of change from baseline -- pleasure being one possibility and pain another. Constant pleasure for beings like us would cause a down-regulation of dopamine and norepinephrine receptors so we wouldn't notice all the supposedly pleasurable things out there unless the bar were lifted ever higher. But even then, there are limits since we are limited beings.

In other words, we would grow bored with pleasure.

So, either we would necessarily be different creatures in which case it wouldn't be us; or there is an unchanging instant; or that experience would necessarily be removed from time -- which would amount to an unchanging instant.

I'm starting to think the whole concept is untenable.
 
Last edited:
rocketdodger said:
Some might interpret this as "yet again, I would rather insult rocketdodger than actually contribute to this discussion."
Click to expand...

So far you've raised two issues - the one in the OP, and the one that came completely out of left field re nonsensical statements. You haven't even come close to what could be considered a valid argument for either of them, and you either haven't done basic philosophy, or you slept through all your classes. What do you want me to do, give you a cookie and tell you that you'll do better next time? Unless you give me something to actually discuss, I can't take part in a 'discussion'. I might as well serve as a useful warning device for others who think you have something rational to say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom