>tfw you realize there's nothing after you die
>It's pretty much like a dreamless sleep but forever
>I've wasted my life for 20 years
>20 years
Try 35 years kid
doot doot
>>57608537
If that's so, nothing you do here matters.
feels really good to be honest (t b h)
>>57608537
It's like before you were born
>>57608537
>>I've wasted my life for 20 years
Don't you realize? There's no self reflection after you die. A dead movie star is just as dead as a dead janitor. Sure, the former may be commemorated more than the other one, but at the end of the day the dead don't care about being honored, because they're dead. The don't exist, there's nothing that biologically enables them to feel emotions.
Don't you get it? Your life is just as wasted doing nothing as it is doing something.
>>57608537
Too bad my violin is in the shop Id play you a real sad solo.
Please be something after death there has to be something you gotta be kidding me!
>>It's pretty much like a dreamless sleep but forever
This euphoria really hurts my balls.
Okay, so the odds of the Christian conception of the afterlife being true are slim to none. Same goes with every other religion's idea of what happens after we die. So then why do fedoras default to "a dreamless sleep but forever"? There's as much evidence for that being the case as there is for heaven/hell (which is no evidence btw).
>>57608865
Again it's just like before you were born
>>57608865
The only other scientific explanation I've found is quantum immortality
We're all invincible but only to ourselves thanks to different universes
I could literally stab myself in the neck and survive (to you I'd almost certainly die and go down on the news as the retard who thought he was immortal) thanks to quantum immortality
The hermeticists believe that can ascend to higher planes of existence after death, or be reincarnated to the same level if our soul isn't ready to move on.
Anyway the proof for the dreamless sleep thing is people who've died and then been resuscitated
Of course, that doesn't disqualify religion from being true either because God could've known they weren't ready to move on or some shit like that
>>57608865
Because the brain dies, destroying all consciousness and mental function. Having no consciousness or mental function whatsoever means you would cease to exist entirely from your point of view. "Dreamless sleep" is just a concept to help one imagine complete nonexistence.
>>57608865
Actually dying is more like being in heavy coma or being under general anesthesia. Your brain is death, so there is no perception of time.
>>57609037
In a similar thread a few moths ago I raised a similar point, but some anon pointed out that consciousness is a human characteristic (or at the very least animal)and the soul lives in dependant from it.
It would also mean that the soul's state of awareness is fundamentally different from ours (if a soul even has awareness) which would explain why people who've been clinically dead report being in a dreamless sleep. Such information can not be transcribed to a human mind, it simply can't handle it, which is why they remember it as just nothingness.
HOW THE FUCK CAN WHITEY EVEN COMPETE?!?!?1
>>57609324
me on the left (in my dreams)
>>57609310
>and the soul lives in dependant from it
Fammelam a soul is just as much a religious thing as a god. We have no idea if it exists, it's just a concept to help understand the mind and consciousness.
>>57609392
Those better be nightmares you're having
>>57609310
>consciousness is a human characteristic (or at the very least animal)and the soul lives in dependant from it.
As far as I'm concerned, the "soul" is the consciousness.
>which would explain why people who've been clinically dead report being in a dreamless sleep.
Perhaps they filled in the blanks after awaking. Somewhat like how one fills in the blanks between nodding off, dreaming, and waking up after a period of sleep. If there was no brain activity, which there wouldn't be in the case of total brain death, then they wouldn't be experiencing anything when they were "dead".
>which is why they remember it as just nothingness.
Or because there is actually nothing. And if the brain is dead, there certainly is.
>>57608885
>>57609037
>>57609224
Sleep is a lot different than coming into existence. When I wake up from nap or am in post-op I have memories from before sleep. I have memories, I go to sleep and then I wake up and can recall those memories. It's totally different phenomenon from coming into existence and having no prior recollection. I'm not sure that inexistence is anything like sleep as the central components of sleep are not present in coming in/out of existence.
Actually, I'm not sure where I was going with that. Really though, you have no evidence that the particles that make-up the mechanism that gives rise to my consciousness won't reform sometime in the future. Nor do you have evidence that they have not infinitely formed in the past. You also can't say that this isn't just us wearing vr headsets.
Your "eternal sleep" theory just seems very hokey, although I can't put my finger on the exact problem.
WHITEY ON SUICIDE WATCH!!!!
there was nothing before you and there will be nothing after you
>eternal dreamless sleep
>no worries
>no anxieties
Sounds pretty A+ to me, famiglia
>>57609524
This.
>>57609504
That's not how burden of proof works.
We assume that there is nothing until you prove there is something. Practically all current evidence points to there being nothing of you after death.
>>57609022
I have a problem with believing theories like this. If there are infinite "mes" out there, then why am I only experiencing this version of me? If the physical components of my brain are identical in this me and those other mes, why has only this me given rise to my consciousness?
>>57609504
>When I wake up from nap or am in post-op I have memories from before sleep. I have memories, I go to sleep and then I wake up and can recall those memories.
You have memories because of the fact that you're waking up after. You're still conscious and can process memories. In an eternal dreamless sleep, you would not wake up, and you wouldn't be able to process anything. You misunderstand the concept.
>Really though, you have no evidence that the particles that make-up the mechanism that gives rise to my consciousness won't reform sometime in the future
You have no proof that they will, or have.
>although I can't put my finger on the exact problem.
Because you don't understand this simple thought exercise.
its all ogre lads, literally everything is fucking pointless
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_death_of_the_universe
>>57609504
Nobody says they know exactly what happens when we die. It's just that the most obvious and realistic thing is that when you die, you die. Your brain is what keeps your body and 'you' alive and conscious and once it dies there is simply nothing left of you.
Lets say we one day find out that there actually is something supernatural like a soul that keeps you conscious then you can start talking about something after death. But untill that the only thing we can expect is nothing.
>>57609672
That will happen after billions of years thought, we have plenty of time to prepare for that or live as usual
Get with the times lads
Hedonism is the true calling of life now that all our basic needs are met
>>57609577
>Practically all current evidence points to there being nothing of you after death.
Can you link to this evidence?
>>57609625
>In an eternal dreamless sleep, you would not wake up,
I'm not talking about an eternal dreamless. By definition that is something you cannot wake up from. I'm talking about inexistence. Coming into this existence is fundamentally different than waking up after a nap.
>You have no proof that they will, or have.
I know so this whole question should be up in the air, but it's not. Everyone in this thread is under the assumption that nothing happens.
>Because you don't understand this simple thought exercise.
This isn't the first time I've thought about this and when I first considered this thought experiment, I came down on the same side as you guys. I think you're just being a bit incredulous and unwilling to consider any further thought on the question.
>>57609838
Evidence or lack thereof*
All evidence is that your mind = your brain. When you die, your brain dies. No more mind
>>57609695
>Nobody says they know exactly what happens when we die.
That's patently untrue. OP seems pretty damn sure as do some other people itt.
>Your brain is what keeps your body and 'you' alive and conscious and once it dies there is simply nothing left of you.
Thanks for insulting my intelligence.
>Lets say we one day find out that there actually is something supernatural like a soul that keeps you conscious then you can start talking about something after death. But untill that the only thing we can expect is nothing.
That's not true either (i.e. what if we find out this is a simulation) and plus the whole concept of a soul goes totally against what we know about conservation of energy.
>>57609838
>Coming into this existence is fundamentally different than waking up after a nap.
I'm not sure what you're referring to here. But nonexistence would like an eternal dreamless sleep, where the "sleeper" experiences nothing, not even the sensation of nothingness.
>Everyone in this thread is under the assumption that nothing happens.
Because that is what we know will happen after the brain dies. No brain, no existence.
>I think you're just being a bit incredulous and unwilling to consider any further thought on the question.
I'm willing to consider further thought with further evidence.
>>57609726
This guy gets it
>>57609896
Of course nobody can no absolutely, but we can say in all probability and possible certainty that there is nothing after death.
>>57609716
doesnt matter if its billion ot trillion of years, the whole concept of death of the universe doesnt work with the "eternity after death" theory
>>57609938
All the eternity after death theories are religious aka not of this "world"/physical universe.
Bullshit imo but nothing in our universe discounts it absolutely so they can keep believing their fairy talds
>>57609938
That's not how religion works. If you believe in a paradise after death you could just see heat death or whatever end as the apocalypse and believe in eternal life afterwards in some other plane of existence.
That's sort of the point of religion that it can never be debunked. If your god is omnipotent it can circumvent literally any argument ever.
>>57609869
>your brain cannot form again
>>57609917
>I'm not sure what you're referring to here
I'm talking about the nonexistence before this existence. It was not an "eternal sleep." And to say that death will be just like before life does not imply eternal sleep.
>No brain, no existence.
Yeah no shit. But you're all assuming the brain can't form again.
>I'm willing to consider further thought with further evidence
I've seen zero evidence itt for either side. If you could cite something in favor of your argument, I would appreciate it.
>>57609931
Where are you getting this near 100% probability from? How do you know with such certainty that the mind can't come about infinitely more times?
>>57608537
This thread gives me the feels
>>57610094
>But you're all assuming the brain can't form again.
Yes. Of course. I don't even. What?
You think some day your when you brain is dead and gone it's just going to burst back into existence with all your previous memories and then you're just back at it again?
>>57609962
>>57610038
sure, but it disregards at least all the "reincarnation" spiritual bullshit
>>57610094
You're proposing that your brain will form again, exactly the same way it did, with you being the same exact person with the same consciousness?
Even if every single atom that currently makes up your brain formed into the brain of another human, the consciousness wouldn't be the same. That consciousness would not have any memories of its brain's "past life". You wouldn't be resurrected or revived in any way. "You" as in, your one and only consciousness in existence, will one day end forever.
>>57610094
Yes because until you prove it does burst back into life, we know it doesn't.
>>57610157
No jackass. I know nothing about neuroscience other than that some part of my brain gives rise to my consciousness. There are bunch of particles in my brain right now that have formed and allow me to look out from my body. If those particles were to collect in the same way and in proper circumstances, I would come back into existence.
>>57610246
Jesus dude, you're going to make me into a solipsist if you keep talking like this. My memories are not the essence of my being and you would know that if you really are a person.
>>57610278
Holy shit this is wrong
>le absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
>>57610360
Burden of proof. Otherwise literally everything we imagine is 100% real until proven otherwise, which for many things is practically impossible.
Come on man this is a very basic concept.
>>57610360
>My memories are not the essence of my being and you would know that if you really are a person.
Your memories, which are composed of everything you have learned and experienced, do make up your consciousness, which is your being.
>>57610389
>everything we imagine is 100% real until proven otherwise
Um, no
>Burden of proof
Yes, I understand burden of proof, however, that does not mean "until you prove it does burst back into life, we know it doesn't."
You people are like the explorers that thought you could fall off the edge of the world. "Oh, I don't know what's there so I'm just going to assume nothing."
>>57610456
As a person, I know this isn't true. I may actually become a solipsist because of you. As a non-person you just can't fathom phenomenal experience.
>>57610563
>As a person, I know this isn't true.
As a person, I do. I don't know what you hope to accomplish by telling me I'm not a person.
>phenomenal experience
How often do you browse /x/?
>>57610563
Yes, that was what they knew to be true given their knowledge/understanding at the time. This is what we know to be true given our knowledge/understanding at this time.
That doesn't mean it is infallible, it simply means we currently have no reason or proof to believe otherwise.
>>57610599
>As a person
Okay, sure ;)
Seriously though, I'm absolutely not limited to my memories. What the fuck, they're 100% detached from the essence of me. If got a complete 'memory wipe' I can assure you that 'I' would not die.
>How often do you browse /x/?
lmao. You seemed pretty knowledgeable so I figured a little philosophy of mind jargon would be within your purview. Guess not. haha
desu you only exist for a moment. the illusion of the self is just a collection of the memories you've built up, stored in the material brain. the composition of that material matter changes with every moment, rendering a new entity. this truth does not bare many practical implications -- survival depends on ego and illusion of the self -- but it does carry a few. for example, if one were to teleport through the deconstruction and reconstruction of the material self in another location with different but identical matter, then it would make sense that it should be a seamless transition without the experience of death, as any other transition from one moment of the physical self to the next.
>>57610729
>What the fuck, they're 100% detached from the essence of me.
The "essence" of you, your "soul", your "spirit", or whatever term you wish to assign to your consciousness was created by experiences that stay with you now as memories.
>If got a complete 'memory wipe' I can assure you that 'I' would not die.
Your body wouldn't die, but you would be running off of instincts alone, an animal, essentially. You'd be sent to a facility for mental invalids. Your consciousness would be dead.
>Okay, sure ;)
>lmao
>Guess not. haha
So you're just shitposting now.
>>57610964
>So you're just shitposting now.
You're the one accusing me of browsing /x/ becuase you didn't understand a rudimentary philosophy of mind term.
>The "essence" of you, your "soul", your "spirit", or whatever term you wish to assign to your consciousness was created by experiences that stay with you now as memories.
How I view myself or my "self" is what came from those memories. The essence of me, the phenomenal experience I'm undergoing is separate from that. Qualia's now an outdated term, but if you care to learn about what being a person is like, you can start there.
>Your body wouldn't die, but you would be running off of instincts alone, an animal, essentially. You'd be sent to a facility for mental invalids. Your consciousness would be dead.
I should have said a wipe and reload of new, different memories, as yeah I can't experience anything without memory.
>>57611215
>How I view myself or my "self" is what came from those memories. The essence of me, the phenomenal experience I'm undergoing is separate from that.
All you're doing is referring to your consciousness. If you wish to classify this "phenomenal experience" as something separate from your consciousness, which is a produce of experiences and composed of memories, you can do so, but that is your own personal doing.
>but if you care to learn about what being a person is like, you can start there.
I'm a person already, I don't need to use your or anybody else's terms to refer to my consciousness to become a person.
>I should have said a wipe and reload of new, different memories,
This would still result in your consciousness being destroyed and replaced by another.
>>57611395
>This would still result in your consciousness being destroyed and replaced by another.
I seriously doubt this. You're telling me if I have dementia and as I lose "my" memories they're replaced by "someone else's", in a Ship of Theseus type fashion, my experience of the world would go dark and someone else would pop into existence in what is currently my body?
If this is the case then when would my consciousness disappear and when would the other consciousness replace mine?
>All you're doing is referring to your consciousness. If you wish to classify this "phenomenal experience" as something separate from your consciousness, which is a produce of experiences and composed of memories, you can do so, but that is your own personal doing.
I think your getting illusion of the self confused with a totally different phenomenon.
Quit complaining you privileged fuck. The odds of you being born in a 1st world country, in times of prosperity, as a human are so astronomically small that you won the lottery of all lotteries.
Our DNA shows so many different outcomes that most people just won't be born at all.
>>57611790
>I seriously doubt this. You're telling me if I have dementia and as I lose "my" memories
You're confusing the consciousness being physically destroyed/erased with a mental condition that impairs the act of remembering or thinking.
>If this is the case then when would my consciousness disappear and when would the other consciousness replace mine?
If your consciousness is being replaced, overwritten in other words, then instantly. Your body would stay alive, but your consciousness would be entirely different.
>I think your getting illusion of the self confused with a totally different phenomenon.
As I've said, whichever terms you personally wish to use for normal functions of your consciousness, you use.
