RE: Life after death?
July 20, 2014 at 12:45 pm
(This post was last modified: July 20, 2014 at 12:47 pm by Jenny A.)
(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?
If there is a god, I want to believe that there is a god. If there is not a god, I want to believe that there is no god.