Afterlife vs Not

[hellfire]

-
" We are the only beings that I know of that will knowingly risk that very existence, going against that imperative, for any number of causes."

I would suggest that even when humans commit a seeming altruistic act, they may be merely responding to an inbuilt survival impulse. Man is a social animal and over an extended period, the many acts of helping each other will contribute to the ultimate survival of the group. Loss of life will occur, but the overall result will be a positive one for survival. So such acts may not really be going against the imperative.

[mamamia88]

Here is what I believe. The human brain is the control center of the body. Everything about your existence is contained in you nervous system, everything else is just dumb parts. An example for me would be a computer. Remove the harddrive or cpu and you will still have the case and mobo but you you would have removed the esscensce of the computer. Remove the brain and you have nothing. So it stands to reason that if the brain is dead you just experience pure nothingness. I don't know for sure but that's my best guess. I used to think people clung to religion due to fear of death but what do you have to fear from nothingness? It's like going into a dreamless sleep without ever waking up

[Strappado]

I'm a materialist atheist, so I don't believe in an afterlife. I wouldn't say that the lack of an afterlife detracts from this life. On the contrary, if you have only one life then this one life matters a lot more.

[Edwardo Piet]

There is no afterlife because just as when the body is on standby or damaged (specifically, the brain) consciousness is lost somewhat, when it has stopped functioning altogether or has been killed conciousness has gone altogether.