Yes, there is death after life.

(July 20, 2014 at 12:06 pm)Ksa Wrote: The problem with visualizing death is that man often uses waypoints/parameters/values in life that are not part of reality. If you cannot visualize death, it's fairly simple why, you're trying to fit a triangle into a square hole. Trying to describe an element of reality with elements that are not part of that reality. If everything you use to perform your analysis was indeed part of reality, such as your identity "you", then you would have no issues relating to death.

I'm not having any trouble visualizing death, but you seem to be. Death isn't going into a void, it's simply the end of life. Where life or personality goes is a null question because there's nothing left to do the going.

(July 20, 2014 at 12:06 pm)Ksa Wrote: Person, nothing, void, God etc. are simply abuse of language. It doesn't exist anywhere. We say person why? Because the individual has a personality, therefore he's a person. But how many elements does his personality have, and how many regions of his brain govern that personality? And if some of those regions change or become deactivated, wouldn't that make him a different person?

Philosophical questions about whether a person remains the same person over the course of their life are not relevant to the question of life after death. Unless you believe there is such a thing as a person (however changing) outside of brain function, how changeable or stable that person is is irrelevant to the question of whether a person continues after the brain in which it existed ceases to function. The brain ceases to function and the personality or ever changing personality ceases.

If you want to argue that there is not and never was a person in the first place, I repeat you have a platform problem. You need to go back and ask who it is that is typing your entries in this debate. To call yourself I is not an abuse of language, it is the foundation of language. "I" and "is" are an irregular noun and an irregular verb in every language because of frequent use. This is because they are the basis for every language. If there is no I, there is no speaker, no thoughts, no argument.

---

(July 20, 2014 at 12:31 pm)ShaMan Wrote: Yes, there is death after life.

Why do you think there is life after death?

(July 20, 2014 at 12:45 pm)Jenny A Wrote:

(July 20, 2014 at 12:31 pm)ShaMan Wrote: Yes, there is death after life.

Why do you think there is life after death?

That's not what I said

(July 20, 2014 at 12:48 pm)ShaMan Wrote:

(July 20, 2014 at 12:45 pm)Jenny A Wrote: Why do you think there is life after death?

That's not what I said

Sorry brain fart.

Jenny and Shaman are my two new favorite newbies. That is all. ^_^

Additionally I don't see how there could be life after death when its been confirmed that consciousness lies in the brain. Just ask coma patients who wake up new people.

(July 11, 2014 at 6:50 pm)Ksa Wrote: Why would it not be you?

The fact that You (Y) and Other Universe You (OUY) occupy different locations by default means that they are not identical. A simple thought experiment should dismantle whatever remains of the idea of sameness.

Given your notion of an exact copy in another universe I can accept the idea that if we were to instantaneously interchange Y and OUY, neither would know the difference. But, what would happen if we introduced them? The immediate divergence of experience destroys any notion that we are dealing with the same person. Also, I don't think it unreasonable to conclude that Y, upon introduction, will immediately conclude that OUY is someone else despite the uncanny resemblance.

The other 'identical' universe may not 'diverge' from identicalness with our universe for another billion years, perhaps.

---

And assuming an infinity of other universes, there will be 'identical' ones to ours that maintain their identicalness 'forever', and there will be an infinite number that maintain their 'identicalness' with ours for only finite periods. And there will be examples at intervals of all possible increments of the Planck time.

There will also be non identical universes at their starts that will evolve into identicalness with ours, and again, plethoras of them at every possible Planck time.

There will also be universes identical to ours with differing Planck intervals.

You cannot be dead guys, you can only be alive. The verb to be applies to living things only. Take a break. Grab some nicotine, you'll forget all about death and things.

Guys....since I see alot of invocations of identity I want to point out that our inability to grasp a concept or form a proper thought in the absence of identity does not actually mean that identity exists. It just means that we are incapable of contemplating the opposite with any rigor. That's to be expected, no? Let's not reduce the cosmos to our own human ticks - even if we have every reason to reduce our comments about the cosmos along the same lines.

(for the record, "I" don't subscribe to the idea of self....but "I" manage to have other thoughts just the same - "I'm" just not willing to become a cognitive hedge-witch......Rasetsu..where "you" at?)

-tedious, aint "it" "ya'll".

(July 20, 2014 at 12:45 pm)Jenny A Wrote: I'm not having any trouble visualizing death, but you seem to be. Death isn't going into a void, it's simply the end of life. Where life or personality goes is a null question because there's nothing left to do the going.

I just told you void doesn't exist, why on Earth would I believe that. Put no words/things in my mouth please, or I'll be tempted to do the same, especially if you got a cool profile pic <3

(July 20, 2014 at 12:45 pm)Jenny A Wrote: Philosophical questions about whether a person remains the same person over the course of their life are not relevant to the question of life after death. Unless you believe there is such a thing as a person (however changing) outside of brain function, how changeable or stable that person is is irrelevant to the question of whether a person continues after the brain in which it existed ceases to function. The brain ceases to function and the personality or ever changing personality ceases.

Sister, when you are brain-dead, when there's no cerebral activity...are you dead or alive? Dead or alive? Rhetorical question, you don't need to answer it, so now, if only a part of your brain shuts down, how are you? Dead or alive? Can't you get it that it's not black and white, it's a gray area? A part of you is dead and the other stayed alive! So then of course you can abuse the language and say you're alive but everyone knows that it's the alive part talking...dead one is gone.

My goodness. I can't explain better.