Does the mind survive death?

[Norfolk And Chance]

I fainted the other week after having a pee, I thought it was just me. Smacked my head off the bathroom door when I landed.

I'd also been drinking.

[simplexity]

Not enough information. I'm going to go with probably not.

[Norfolk And Chance]

I'd go further than "probably not".

I just can't see how the mind can continue after death.

Even if it could, it'd be blind, deaf and dumb without the very real physical parts that it needs to plug into for the senses.

Anyone who has ever been unconscious for a while (for example under anaesthetic) has seen a window into death.

[bennyboy]

I'd go further than "probably not".

I just can't see how the mind can continue after death.

Even if it could, it'd be blind, deaf and dumb without the very real physical parts that it needs to plug into for the senses.

Anyone who has ever been unconscious for a while (for example under anaesthetic) has seen a window into death.

Well, first we have to define "mind."

If you take out all sense perceptions and thoughts, is there some little spark that is still mind? Or is there a background canvas on which those perceptions and thoughts are "displayed?"

I think most here would define mind simply as a single label for all the brain function which can be experienced, in which case the death of the brain would mean no mind.

However, if you treat mind as the medium rather than the processes, then I personally would say that whatever mind is, it pre-exists (and survives) thought processes.

However, this is little comfort because who gives a crap about an abstract spark when all your thoughts and memories are gone?

[CleanShavenJesus]

How are defining "mind" here?

Because the brain is dead when we're dead...that's the reason we die.

So, uh, short answer: no. Even if there was an afterlife (doubt it, but we could all be wrong) I don't think it'd be the mind that you possess here, would it? I guess we can't go into that because it would be an debate centered around intangible, blank assertions.

[simplexity]

I'd go further than "probably not".

Everything that I believe is defined by the phrase "probably", or "Probably not". There is no reason to believe from the evidence given that the "mind" will survive death. So I don't believe it. But, the fact remains that we don't understand what consciousness even is, let alone understand the process. There are hypothesis, definitely.

But, other things are understood, like how memories, genetics, environmental properties, genetics, etc, define your personality and they way your "awareness" is received. And those things do die at death, so even if consciousness is discovered to be a medium outside the body, you need the physical for the entire mind to survive. Without the brain there is nothing to process an awareness, and so the "mind" cannot survive after death.

[Walking Void]

The logic makes for an easy answer: the mind is only associated with a living brain, unconscious or not. We do not look at rocks and from our studies find that, "oh! This rock has a mind!". Clearly. When the brain is no longer alive, no longer processing, it is safe to say that a mind that was dependent on the brain no longer processes: it ceases to continue.

[bennyboy]

The logic makes for an easy answer: the mind is only associated with a living brain, unconscious or not. We do not look at rocks and from our studies find that, "oh! This rock has a mind!". Clearly. When the brain is no longer alive, no longer processing, it is safe to say that a mind that was dependent on the brain no longer processes: it ceases to continue.

There are no studies which show which objects, brain, rock or otherwise, possess the quality of mind (i.e. sentience). What we have is the fact that we only know about mind through reports of language-capable organisms, and the set of such organisms consists of exactly one type of animal. But the fact that other things SAY they are sentient isn't really sufficient proof to prove that they are, IMO.

Maybe all matter contains a kind of atomic sentience, along with its other properties. This would explain how a mechanical structure, the brain, can magically create something not mechanical-- subjective experience: it doesn't.

But unfortunately my attempts to interview rocks only result in meaningful conversations when my own brain and mind are altered in interesting ways.

[FifthElement]

I faint a lot ...

They do too, lol

[Walking Void]

The logic makes for an easy answer: the mind is only associated with a living brain, unconscious or not. We do not look at rocks and from our studies find that, "oh! This rock has a mind!". Clearly. When the brain is no longer alive, no longer processing, it is safe to say that a mind that was dependent on the brain no longer processes: it ceases to continue.

There are no studies which show which objects, brain, rock or otherwise, possess the quality of mind (i.e. sentience). What we have is the fact that we only know about mind through reports of language-capable organisms, and the set of such organisms consists of exactly one type of animal. But the fact that other things SAY they are sentient isn't really sufficient proof to prove that they are, IMO.

Maybe all matter contains a kind of atomic sentience, along with its other properties. This would explain how a mechanical structure, the brain, can magically create something not mechanical-- subjective experience: it doesn't.

But unfortunately my attempts to interview rocks only result in meaningful conversations when my own brain and mind are altered in interesting ways.

You realize that sentience is only 1 of multiple properties of a mind, yes ? Feeling alone does not constitute for the label of mind. Feeling is not measurable outside of a brain or better yet, nervous organism. We can see which parts of that brain activate under different feelings-related influence. You can test pain on plants and animals but if You subject a rock to trauma You will only find trauma because neurologically, the rock is absent. It has no nervous system at all. Does the rock die ?