Problem dealing with death as an atheist

[Carnavon]

Near death "experiences" suggests the odds of people halucinating when they are going through a traumatic event are pretty good. I might even say 50/50, but I think that is a bit high. The safest option is to bet that they are halucinating during a traumatic event.

Yes, I agree with you. It may very well be just hallucinations and nothing more.

Actually science has proven this to be true over and over again. The brain is dead, so you can think. When the brain is dead, you no longer have an idea of "self" or anything else. Your thoughts ARE your ego, your thoughts ARE electrochemical..once that reaction stops, there is no more YOU.

True that no brain activity is normally associated with death. That however proves nothing insofar as a "soul"/""spirit" is concerned, as it would not depend on electromagnetic activity.

People who say otherwise best have some OUTSTANDING EVIDENCE or prepare to be accused of being ignorant or deluded.

People who believe otherwise are in the same position as you. No proof either way.

Science has also proven that life comes from lifeless particles. Life is made from DNA. DNA is composed of Hydrogen, Carbon, Oxygen, and Nitrogen. Four lifeless elements come together to create life. Anyone who claims otherwise should have OUTSTANDING eveidence to the contrary or expect to be accused of being ignorant or deluded.

Yes, they have found what lifeless particles are present, yet unable to create a living organism using only those particles. It should be easy, should it not be? Just four little elements and the big wigs are unable to create a living organism despite the best technology and untold experiments? (They have to rely on existing living organisms)

However, we are going off at a tangent. The question is about having a problem with death. What is the problem? How can that be a problem if all there is to it is to stop living? Please explain to me why in principle it is a problem? Just because we are a newer model ape?

[Zenith]

But NOTHING can be 100% proven. Not even your existence to yourself, so why even bother bringing that up?

I also notice you use reasonable doubt, but focus solely on the popular myths of the time. Why not Olympus, Tarterus and Hades? Oh yeah, because they arent popular anymore.

the reasons are:
1. the greek mythologies are not popular at all: It's a kind of, no one can believe in the ancient greek gods anymore. They can't even be seen as a possibility, because they hadn't been able to keep any of their worshipers (seemingly).
2. I don't know too much about them: I didn't study the greek mythologies, the greek gods, all what the people believed about them, etc. I know only a few things about them. So it's harder to use them as examples.
3. I am a bit fascinated about Islam: "kill the jews wherever you find them!", "whoever changes his religion, kill him!", "if one desires other religion than Islam, never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter He will be in the ranks of the losers", etc. - they all sound funny (at least to me). And I usually use Islam & Allah as bad examples or as the worst possible choices.

As about the afterlife, I do consider the fact that if the muslims are right, then I will go to hell of Allah, because I willfully reject Islam. As about the ancient greek gods, I don't think they had a "hell" for the unbelievers, so I could have not used them as a hellish example.

Soul? what the fuck is a soul? Where is it? Where is it located in the body? What is it made of? How much does it weigh? What are its physical dimensions?

I found a definition:

the spirit or immaterial part of man, the seat of human personality, intellect, will, and emotions, regarded as an entity that survives the body after death

As about "spirit", I guess it's supposed to be some kind of energy. If you've looked on paranormal broadcasts or something, you know, stuffs with ghosts and spirits, etc. (though I'm sure there's a lot of embellishing to fascinate the viewers), you may get a better view of what they may be.

anyway, you've said:

I guess it would be best that I learned how to survive as much as possible. By learning how to get back up on my feet, to stock food, spend wisely, make good decisions, things like that.

I would also stay away from gambling because it tends more to be negative on a life than positive.

I think that would be the best thing to do, and then if you die and find yourself in another life, then you are prepared to handle yourself, pick yourself up after falls, and SURVIVE.

So how do you understand to live after death? you're body will surely decay, and it'll be eaten by maggots. So doesn't the idea of life after death imply that there is something of you left after you die that bears your personality and memory? There can't be a life after death otherwise. Or, how do you understand "life after death"? Even if we talk about reincarnation, it cannot be without a spirit (some kind of energy that is 'you' and goes from your body to the body of a baby, so it would be 'you' living again).

If the spirit/soul is some kind of energy, then these questions are clearly absurd: "Where is it located in the body? What is it made of? How much does it weigh? What are its physical dimensions?". For instance, you can't say about the kinetic energy "where is it located in my body?", "what is made of?", "how much does it weigh?", "what are the physical dimensions?". Also, though this is not energy, is good as an example: a burning fire (e.g. it burns some wood on the field): "which is the precise location in space?", "which are the bounds/margins of it?", "what is made of?", "how much does it weigh?", "what are the physical dimensions of fire?". Oh, you can't give answers to these questions? Then the fire cannot exist! it's an absurdity! And perhaps we should consider the kinetic & potential energies a bullshit, because we cannot touch them and we cannot measure them with the ruler and we cannot measure their weight! So, aren't they absurd??

In other words: not everything is a solid object that you can feel by grabbing.

You also cannot prove that a belief in a soul will get you into a heaven.

Did I claim so??
(I'll understand "heaven" as "paradise")

Perhaps belief in a soul is a test by the creator, and if you believe in one then you get punished for all eternity..those who do not will get everlasting paradise. If a god exists, then he must be an atheist, so therefore he would like atheists better than others. See, I even have some good arguments for it. So I guess you should take that into equal consideration as well. If you dont, then you are close minded.

Everybody has "good" arguments and "good" justifications, for everything.
Anyway, to answer your logic: if God exists, He is not an atheist, because He is convinced that there is one God: Himself. Likewise, if you had been the only man on earth, you would have been convinced that "man" exists, because you know that you're a man. As about "Perhaps belief in a soul is a test by the creator", I think it would be a stupid test. Anyway, an insane God could even punish us in a hell for eternity for not torturing and killing our own babies - though one needs to be really insane to imagine this theory and believe it.

And also, when I was born into this life, I didnt have some judge with a book of names judging over me, so why should I think different or expect different if I happen to find myself in another life?

The same with reincarnation: when a man is born into this life, he may not expect that in the next life he'll be a rat in the sewers. If you expect the same in another life, perhaps you should tell me how you get to have it, if you don't have a soul (an existence, beyond the body). If a 'soul' exists, then you may have a life where you'll eat and use the wisdom and knowledge you have acquired here, in a 'reincarnation' (perhaps on the same earth, but we can imagine a very far away planet that is similar to ours and somehow you get there, inside the body of a child, waiting to be born, and hoping that you'll not die at birth).

And there you go giving heaven and hell the benefit of the doubt when there are SO many other ideas that are equally as plausable.

I didn't. I took Islam as an example: in Islam, if you reject Islam, whatever else you believe (in God, in souls, in afterlife, etc.) you go to hell.

[reverendjeremiah]

Yes indeed, it is not irrefutable evidence. My question is only this:" If an honest man has all this information available, what conclusion would he come to?
This is not to suggest that all questions are answered. There is the problem of suffering. There I can only speak for myself in that the part of my life where I was supposed to have the worst "suffering" (diagnosed and treated for cancer) was indeed the best part of my life - and not because I held onto an idea that will help me through that (like positive thinking or similar) but it just happened. There is a little poem about "footsteps in the sand", which I found to be true.
Regards

An honest man may come to any conclusion, be it atheism or Hinduism or Islam.

An honest and EDUCATED man would look at all of the evidence science has gathered and come to the conclusion that Gods, souls, and religion are not needed...and are more than likely fictional.

---

Look at your posts Carnavon, swelling your chest up and claiming you are justified because absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Its nothing to be proud of.

---

As about the afterlife, I do consider the fact that if the muslims are right, then I will go to hell of Allah, because I willfully reject Islam. As about the ancient greek gods, I don't think they had a "hell" for the unbelievers, so I could have not used them as a hellish example.

They had many different kinds of afterlives, and some even believed in reincarnation on top of it. For the most part normal mortals went to Hades. Hades was not "satan" back then. He was the judge of the mortals. Those who did specific things or kindnesses and such were allowed to enter Elysium. Those who did not stayed in the realm of Hades, or were eaten by Cerebus, or Orcus, or Thanatos (depending on what Helenic sect you were). If you were a member of the Orphic mysteries, or one of the many mystery cults they had back then (eventually Christianity sprouted as a greek/hebrew inspired mystery cult) you would become "one" or live forever in the after life with your god (who was usually killed, born again, raised from the dead..the mystery cults get pretty deep).

So when I say "Greek religion", that in and of it self are several beliefs and mysteries involved in it. Of which most people know NOTHING of, and therefore put themselves in a dire situation with the 12 gods of Olympus for ignoring them. Quite frankly the popular religions of today are dwarfed by the entire Helenistic pantheon, and I dont even know all of it, after years of study.

Popular ones of THOSE days I can pull from my memory:

Bachus/ Dionysos

Apollonius of Tyana (mortal worshipped as the son of god)

Demeter/Persephone/Hades

Pythagoras (mortal who was worshipped as the son of god)

[Cinjin]

Thank you for the fantastic responses. Unfortunately, I've already thought of and told myself most of them.

The idea of death as an ultimate peace doesn't work for me because to me, I can't be in peace if I don't exist anymore. And by "I" I mean myself consciously speaking. I guess part of my recent discomfort with the idea of death is that there won't be a "me" (in the consciousness sense) to even acknowledge the "peace." Maybe this borders more along the psychological lines, but I'd rather live with a disability or with boredom or with stress than not live at all.

While I am afraid of dying, the fear (of death) is only half my problem. The other half of the problem is that I have a very "clear" concept of death. I know the basic science of decaying bodies, and that both myself and the universe did not exist at one point and all of that. I also know that nothing lasts forever, and that there's nothing that can be done about death. But for some reason, the thought of never thinking again is something I can't quite accept.

Psychologically speaking, I feel like even if I find someone who is an atheist to talk to about it, that the chances are they won't be able to give me input that the intelligent atheist community would (hence me looking for input on these forums). And all the drugs in the world aren't going to change the fact that there won't even be a me to acknowledge that I don't exist anymore.

I know that there's no real answer or fix or solution to my inability to ease my problem. Some really great ways of coping with death have been presented in this thread. None of them really work for me though.

wow ... are you as high-maintenance in real life??? Can this even be for real??
How can anyone possibly worry about how they will feel when they already believe that they will not be able to feel anything at all? If what you're saying is truly the way you think than guy, you are officially the stupidest person I ever met ...... and I have to tell you, up until now, they've all been christians, so this is a BIG surprise for me.

I'm a deist, I don't believe that God even knows my name, but even I can tell you that if you do ever meet him, he's going to think that you're an idiot. I mean, on a scale of stupid you weigh-in somewhere between "fucking ridiculous nonsense" and "I'm mentally handicap, I need a helmet."

[lilphil1989]

True that no brain activity is normally associated with death. That however proves nothing insofar as a "soul"/""spirit" is concerned, as it would not depend on electromagnetic activity.

How do you know? You haven't defined any of the physcial characteristics of a soul.

Yes, they have found what lifeless particles are present, yet unable to create a living organism using only those particles. It should be easy, should it not be? Just four little elements and the big wigs are unable to create a living organism despite the best technology and untold experiments? (They have to rely on existing living organisms)

Easy?!
Do you know how difficult it is to manipulate single atoms?
Do you have any idea how difficult it is to build a single molecule from single atoms, especially when those molecules are 10s or even 100s of nanometres in size?
What on Earth gave you the idea that it should be easy?

But I'll tell you on thing of which I'm fairly sure: if the rate of the expansion of our scientific knowledge and technological capabilities continues unabated, there will come a time when we can build living cells. And your god of the gaps will be forced into a still deeper recess.

Just because we are a newer model ape?

Actually, a model released simultaneously with the ape

Psychologically speaking, I feel like even if I find someone who is an atheist to talk to about it, that the chances are they won't be able to give me input that the intelligent atheist community would (hence me looking for input on these forums). And all the drugs in the world aren't going to change the fact that there won't even be a me to acknowledge that I don't exist anymore.

So why should you care? Surely this is just a reason to make the most of the tiny speck of time that you do have to exist?

[reverendjeremiah]

Yes, they have found what lifeless particles are present, yet unable to create a living organism using only those particles. It should be easy, should it not be? Just four little elements and the big wigs are unable to create a living organism despite the best technology and untold experiments? (They have to rely on existing living organisms)

I suggest you look up "abiogenesis" to see just how wrong you are. There have been many successful lab results of making basic chemicals of life from basic atoms, and not just the Miller-Urey experiment either.

How do you know? You haven't defined any of the physcial characteristics of a soul.

I have asked him and he gave me some crappy "its a religious concept" definition. I asked him for specific dimensions and properties of a soul, to which he could not name one.

To RATIONAL people, they would say "hmm..come back to me when you get ANY kind of data" and then no longer pay it any mind.

[bozo]

As an atheist I do not see death as a problem. Death is inevitable.
Once it arrives that's it, end of.
I much prefer that belief to a belief in either heaven or hell, or whatever.
I fear living to an age when I am merely existing ( and probably being a real pain to others ) as more of a problem.

[Carnavon]

Yes, they have found what lifeless particles are present, yet unable to create a living organism using only those particles. It should be easy, should it not be? Just four little elements and the big wigs are unable to create a living organism despite the best technology and untold experiments? (They have to rely on existing living organisms)

I suggest you look up "abiogenesis" to see just how wrong you are. There have been many successful lab results of making basic chemicals of life from basic atoms, and not just the Miller-Urey experiment either.

The point is basically that it is still a theory and no living organism has been successfully "created" from non-living matter.
But even if they were able to do that, it means ziltsh. The very laws and conditions that would make it possible was not self-created but obeys certain rules.
Consider for a moment that you are implying that things "self-assemble" into very complex units - the likelihood being much smaller than what is normally regarded as no possibility.
You thus prefer to believe what is impossible rather than believe in a Creator. And this is often referred to as a sign of intelligence.

---

As an atheist I do not see death as a problem. Death is inevitable.
Once it arrives that's it, end of.
I much prefer that belief to a belief in either heaven or hell, or whatever.
I fear living to an age when I am merely existing ( and probably being a real pain to others ) as more of a problem.

You are correct. It is a choice whether you accept it or reject it. Does it mean that you would prefer to rather ignore the possibility that you will eventually have to take responsibility for your choices and actions?
As far as being a pain is concerned. Do you regard looking after people you love as a pain - whatever their condition? I bet you don't.

---

How do you know? You haven't defined any of the physcial characteristics of a soul.

If there was any "physical" characteristics such a electromagnetic fields, there would be no discussion, yes? I have not suggested that a soul may be physically proven. Can you prove the absence?

Easy?!
Do you know how difficult it is to manipulate single atoms?
Do you have any idea how difficult it is to build a single molecule from single atoms, especially when those molecules are 10s or even 100s of nanometres in size?
What on Earth gave you the idea that it should be easy?

Excellent! You prove that even with the latest technologies and despite the fact that experiments are targeted towards very specific outcomes (and not non-directional), there is still no success (Venter still had to rely on existing living material)

But I'll tell you on thing of which I'm fairly sure: if the rate of the expansion of our scientific knowledge and technological capabilities continues unabated, there will come a time when we can build living cells. And your god of the gaps will be forced into a still deeper recess.

Yep, it is a belief or rather should I say wish on your part. You suggest that I believe in God because I cannot explain things and hence attribute it to God? No, to the contrary, the fantastic creation, the very finely tuned universe, the dependability of laws of nature etc convinces me on an intellectual level of the existence of God. On a spiritual level, He has changed my life and removed the fear of death altogether.
In oppopsition to this, I see lies associated with "discoveries" that is supposed to discredit the Bible, assumptions and theories (despite knowledge that the "facts" presented are false) presented as the "truth". And you believe in that? It is a decision to disbelieve, it seems to me, irrespective of the facts.

Actually, a model released simultaneously with the ape

Yes, actually one day apart.

[lilphil1989]

The point is basically that it is still a theory...

Please learn the scientific definition of the word theory.

If there was any "physical" characteristics such a electromagnetic fields, there would be no discussion, yes? I have not suggested that a soul may be physically proven. Can you prove the absence?

How might you prove the existence of a soul outside of physical reality?

Can I prove the absence? Nope. But that's not the point. If you claim something exists and can't offer any evidence that it does, then the default position is not to believe. The burden of proof is on the claimant.

Excellent! You prove that even with the latest technologies and despite the fact that experiments are targeted towards very specific outcomes (and not non-directional), there is still no success (Venter still had to rely on existing living material)

What's your point? 500 years ago people couldn't go to the moon, even with their latest technologies.
The fact that we're currently unable to do something does not imply that it is fundamentally impossible.

Yep, it is a belief or rather should I say wish on your part. You suggest that I believe in God because I cannot explain things and hence attribute it to God? No, to the contrary, the fantastic creation, the very finely tuned universe, the dependability of laws of nature etc convinces me on an intellectual level of the existence of God. On a spiritual level, He has changed my life and removed the fear of death altogether.
In oppopsition to this, I see lies associated with "discoveries" that is supposed to discredit the Bible, assumptions and theories (despite knowledge that the "facts" presented are false) presented as the "truth". And you believe in that? It is a decision to disbelieve, it seems to me, irrespective of the facts.

But that's exactly what you're doing! "Man can't build a living organism yet, therefore life must have been given by god". That's exactly the god of the gaps argument.

Can you lay out your arguments for a finely-tuned universe?

What lies and false "facts" are you referring to?

Yes, actually one day apart.

Care to offer some evidence?

EDIT: I'm going to move this discussion over to the General Science forum, to prevent further thread hijacking: http://atheistforums.org/thread-6554.html

[Frosty]

It's perfectly normal to be afraid of death, I think most people are afraid of not existing after they die, it's ingrained into us at a deep level that we have little or no control over. However it's not healthy to obsess over it continually.

Just keep in mind that it's nothing you'll ever reconcile by thinking about it, you'll think yourself around in circles until you're a jibbering wreck, the best thing to do in my opinion is acknowledge that what we have is special and limited and try and make the most of it.

If you are unable to stop thinking of it naturally you'll probably find that this type of behaviour is a symptom of another (possibly completely unrelated) problem and it would be best to find out what that other problem is and address that, the worry should naturally subside. If the problem isn't obvious or you can't cope then seek help, there's nothing wrong with seeking help from others.

I think of death sometimes, the only way I can logically make any sense of it is to compare it to birth but in reverse. Most of us are terrified of not existing, but this is an emotional reaction and not logical, the universe near as we can tell has been around about 13.75 billion years and we've not existed for approximately 99.999999994% of that.

I rationalise being dead as being exactly like it was before I was alive, that brings me some peace because not having existed all that time before my birth doesn't bother me one bit. Try and enjoy life, find something that makes you happy and pursue it.