Is there any evidence we dont live on in some way after death

[xonage]

I have gone back and forth with what I believe about this. Although there is no evidence to believe we have a life after death, there is also no evidence to the contrary that I have encountered. It seems if we are part energy, and energy can never cease to exist, then part of us must be eternal. Anyone with some concrete evidence that we are completely finished at the time of death, please speak up.

p.s. to all the suspicious douche bags who live on this forum and think I am some theist in disguise, get a life. I am just a curious person.

[BethK]

I have gone back and forth with what I believe about this. Although there is no evidence to believe we have a life after death, there is also no evidence to the contrary that I have encountered. It seems if we are part energy, and energy can never cease to exist, then part of us must be eternal. Anyone with some concrete evidence that we are completely finished at the time of death, please speak up.

Well, the simple answer is that there is no evidence for or against life after death. The truth of the matter is that no one who has died has come back to tell us one way or another. Many many people have tried to contact the dead, and Harry Houdini had a code to give his wife/widow, and no medium or spiritualist ever came up with it. Sure, there are Near Death Experiences, but the key word there is "near". Those people were not actually dead.

What makes you think we are "part energy"? It's true that energy cannot cease to exist, but what's the evidence for that which makes each of us "us" is any sort of measurable energy, beyond that in the molecules and atoms making up the neurons in our brains, storing our memories and personalities?

Without any evidence one way or another, it is logical to presume the obvious - that there is no life after death - when one is dead they are dead. It is not logical to presume that something happens for which there is no evidence.

If you think there is life after death because of some "energy" that is within us, do you believe that is just humans? How about chimpanzees? How about dogs? How about cats? How about parrots? How about goldfish? How about chickens? How about cattle? How about earthworms? How about cockroaches? How about bacteria? How about apple trees? How about broccoli? How about ragweed? How about yeast? How about viruses? Where do you draw the line and why?

[Anymouse]

I have gone back and forth with what I believe about this. Although there is no evidence to believe we have a life after death, there is also no evidence to the contrary that I have encountered. It seems if we are part energy, and energy can never cease to exist, then part of us must be eternal. Anyone with some concrete evidence that we are completely finished at the time of death, please speak up.

p.s. to all the suspicious douche bags who live on this forum and think I am some theist in disguise, get a life. I am just a curious person.

The proof of the extraordinary being on the claimant, the claim "life after death" seems extraordinary over "no life after death."

Energy, like matter, does not exist in a void. If one were to claim an energy which exists beyond death, the proof would be on the claimant to show it exists, not on the person who says "I see no evidence of such energy."

James

[Alastor]

It seems if we are part energy, and energy can never cease to exist, then part of us must be eternal.

If you are referring to the E=mc^2 equation in saying we are part energy, then this is not true. We are all energy, and yes that energy survives death; the bodies decomposes and it's molecular constituents return to the earth. To say we are part energy requires one to accept that some part of us cannot be described as mass, but this has not been proven, to my knowledge anyway; furthermore, if it was not mass, this equation would not apply and one would, then, have to show why this non-mass based energy form is indestructible.

Being energy also does not demonstrate any particular likeliness for an afterlife due to its property of indestructibility because all matter, living or non-living, consist of non-destructible energy. I think the best argument for a possible after-life would be to show that consciousness is a distinct energy form found to have significantly different properties from non-conscious or non-living matter and also found to not depend on an unique arrangement of organic matter to exist. However, it has not been demonstrated, to my knowledge, that such a distinction exist.

Anyone with some concrete evidence that we are completely finished at the time of death, please speak up.

As you must have expected, no one can give this to you. Hence, also why no one can prove there is no afterlife.

[Anomalocaris]

Well, the simple answer is that there is no evidence for or against life after death. The truth of the matter is that no one who has died has come back to tell us one way or another. Many many people have tried to contact the dead, and Harry Houdini had a code to give his wife/widow, and no medium or spiritualist ever came up with it. Sure, there are Near Death Experiences, but the key word there is "near". Those people were not actually dead.

What makes you think we are "part energy"? It's true that energy cannot cease to exist, but what's the evidence for that which makes each of us "us" is any sort of measurable energy, beyond that in the molecules and atoms making up the neurons in our brains, storing our memories and personalities?

Actually, there is evidence both for and against preservation of consciousness after death. It's just that evidence for is much more ambiguous than evidence against. Story of near death experiences may count as evidence for. The fact that consciousness in life, including near-death experience, is incontrovertibly associated with patterns of measurable neurological activity which is demonstrably no longer there after death would count as evidence against.

We are all energy in the E=MC^2 sort of way. But ultimately lump of granite the same mass M as you have the exact same amount and nature of imperishable energy. Can you commune with the granite after death? If not, then clearly more needs to be there than energy for life to go on. No? That your carbon atoms would last till the end of universe is neither here nor there as evidence of the continuation of your life. No? What needs to be there? We are not totally sure. But for starters, how about such structure as to permit the pattern of neurological activity mentioned above? If that no longer exists, neither would you. Sounds like a more reasonable assumption?

[Anymouse]

---

Well, the simple answer is that there is no evidence for or against life after death. The truth of the matter is that no one who has died has come back to tell us one way or another. Many many people have tried to contact the dead, and Harry Houdini had a code to give his wife/widow, and no medium or spiritualist ever came up with it. Sure, there are Near Death Experiences, but the key word there is "near". Those people were not actually dead.

What makes you think we are "part energy"? It's true that energy cannot cease to exist, but what's the evidence for that which makes each of us "us" is any sort of measurable energy, beyond that in the molecules and atoms making up the neurons in our brains, storing our memories and personalities?

---

Actually, there is evidence both for and against preservation of consciousness after death. It's just that evidence for is much more ambiguous than evidence against. (rest cut)

The ambiguous evidence for is all subjective, thus not generally acceptable as evidence. Subjective evidence such as "near-death experience" is no different than evidence for Jesus (I know he exists because I can feel him).

The prior explanation of the loss of energy (gradual decomposition, &c) is much better than mine. Kudos.

James.

[Napoléon]

You must first ask what it is which you define as life. Or even 'living'.
Now personally when discussing humans I would tend to accept that in order to 'be alive' the brain must be active in some way.
When you die, the brain ceases to operate, and due to this the bodily functions you would associate with a living creature stop also.
Short answer is without the brain there is no organically possible way of having conscious thought, nor any way to operate an advanced organism such as a human being without a brain. When the impulses in the brain stop, that is when it is generally accepted that a person is dead. So scientifically there is no 'life after death', in any form because in order to have such 'life' you must be 'alive' which is what I have described as above. The whole premise of death is that there is no life. No function. No brain activity. Nothing.

Any form of life after death would be in no way recognisable or similar to life as it is now, that is ofcourse if it is at all possible (which if you look at it from a scientific perspective is not because it goes against the very definition of what being 'alive' is).

Essentially any reasoning for life after death is simply wishful thinking, and as the scientific descriptions and evidence of what happens when we die contradict it, people generally only believe in life after death because they can't comprehend the fact that once you die, you die.


I look at it as though we just simply revert to the state which we were before we were born. No consciousness, no life.


PS. I've just tried to outline why life after death is a contradiction by it's own very nature. If you want 'evidence' go read a biology book. Alternatively you can look at this Wiki page to see exactly what the scientific descriptions are regarding what happens when you die: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death

In order to understand why there is no life after death, maybe you should try and understand what 'life' is and what 'death' is. The two are not compatible. You are either one or the other.

[BloodyHeretic]

I have gone back and forth with what I believe about this. Although there is no evidence to believe we have a life after death, there is also no evidence to the contrary that I have encountered. It seems if we are part energy, and energy can never cease to exist, then part of us must be eternal. Anyone with some concrete evidence that we are completely finished at the time of death, please speak up.

p.s. to all the suspicious douche bags who live on this forum and think I am some theist in disguise, get a life. I am just a curious person.

There is no evidence against an afterlife. That's not the point, there's no evidence for it, burden of proof. Simple as.

As to your post script, well the things you say sound quite similar to things theists might say on these forums, and we've all seen the 'atheist' who suddenly converts..... so you're going to have to forgive us our suspicions when you ask "Anyone with some concrete evidence that we are completely finished at the time of death, please speak up."

[DaveD]

The best evidence for life after death is described in that wonderful old hymn "On Ilkla Moor Baht 'at"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Ilkla_Mo...'at#Lyrics

[Rayaan]

Interestingly, however, I read in an article that consciousness is something which is connected to spacetime geometry and it may be possible for it to leak out or dissipate beyond the Planck scale if quantum information does not get destroyed:

---

I don't necessarily ascribe to any particular religion, but I think through quantum physics, three essential components of spirituality can have a plausible scientific explanation. Namely, these are first, interconnectedness among living beings via quantum entanglement. Second is guidance by Platonic wisdom. Penrose also embedded Platonic values in spacetime geometry which can guide our actions, and be viewed as following the way of the Tao, or divine guidance, or whatever you want to call it. And finally, even conceivably the possibility of afterlife or consciousness outside of the body. Because if consciousness is happening in the spacetime geometry, normally in the brain, then when the blood, oxygen and metabolic energy stop driving the classical auto-pilot activity, the quantum information extending to spacetime isn't destroyed, but can perhaps leak out or dissipate in a more holographic distribution, but remained entangled. So it's possible that a soul could exist afterwards in Planck scale geometry. There could be reincarnation. I don't have any proof, and I'm not saying this necessarily happens, but if it does, here is a plausible scientific explanation.

---

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfai...verse.html

Also, see this article: Conscious Events as Orchestrated Space-Time Selections