Why do people believe there is something after death? Everything we feel, see, hear, memorize, etc. it is all because of our brain. Now when you are dead, your brain doesn't work anymore. How should we exist somewhere else then?
It's your soul, bub.
Conditioning. The idea of "heaven" has been taught to them since youth. I absolutely believed in Santa until I was 7 because everyone told me he was real and I believed things adults told me.
just wear more fedorinos you unwashed atheist commie.
>>17827618
Because they can feel the fact that their life, their mind, everything that they are beyond their sense of memories and self, is separate from logic and physics.
>>17827618
Your brain is like the electronics of a TV. It registers signals coming in from outside, processes them and produces an experience, sound, vision etc. But there is a watcher of the TV, an observer. This is 'you'. You are the observer of your thoughts, your feelings. Meditation teaches us to cultivate this awareness.
>>17827618
The brain is the middle cog between the spirit and body.
>>17827618
Because there is something more to how it works than "muh signals in brain". Even guys like doctor Parnia seem to have found some weird stuff happening when it shouldn't.
>>17827618
I have never experienced radio without an antenna. If you break an antenna, the radio will stop. Is the antenna on my radio creating the radio signals?
I have never experienced the internet outside of my computer. If I break my computer, the internet stops. Is the internet housed in my computer?
Just because a brain is required for conscious experience to be empirically observed doesn't mean the brain is creating that conscious experience. Also, there is life that can see, feel, hear, memorize, etc. without brains.
>>17827635
>not an argument
>>17827618
This is my view, feel free to discuss...
"consciousness" is merely the result of energy and chemical signals in the brain... whilst alive.
However, upon death, it is not like the atoms and energy you were composed of just turns to nothing, it is transferred- and as such, your consciousness is transferred.
You will experience no complex memories, emotions or experiences like when you had a brain, but some low level of sentience will remain in you. Call me a Pantheist if you will, as I believe everything has some low or high level of consciousness.
I believe sentience never began nor will end, but entropy means as the parts of your brain become less complex, so will your sentience- like how an old person becomes more simple and childlike.
When you were born, your consciousness was made more complex, not made existent, and it grew as you grew, and as you age it will fade, then become very low level, like before you were born.
>>17827839
So it is probably not a good idea to turn bodies to ash after they die.
>>17827839
How do you respond to the problem of interaction?
http://philosophicaldisquisitions.blogspot.com/2011/06/substance-dualism-part-four-problem-of.html
Put simply from quotes:
>everything we know about causation suggests that in order for changes to be caused in a physical object (or for a physical "event" to be brought about) the entity causing those changes must possess two key properties: (i) a spatial location and (ii) the ability to transfer energy
>Both of the key properties for causation are physical in nature, indeed they are perhaps the very essence of the physical. They are not possessed by mental entities.
Thus, how does a mental entity - in your example, the pantheistic consciousness - ever interact with the physical?
There are responses and the author's critiques of those responses in the article. Personally I would consider my response to be (as the author puts it) Occasionalist in nature, especially considering his critiques are things the Gita asserts are true.
>>17827858
I would not say that. The body will decompose anyway. What I'm saying is that any level of matter/energy can be sentient on a low level- even the ash or less.
But as I stress, it would be not even what we call "aware", I'm just saying it would not be completely non sentient, just very, very low level.
>>17827867
Perhaps then, as we become less ordered and our particles fly away from one another, we split into several low level sentient entities, rather than one.
So even each particle of dust would have a low level sentience, which complies with my theory of any level of matter or energy having sentience on some level.
But yes it seems right that if energy cannot be transferred between particles then existence as one sentient entity is impossible.
>>17827884
Also as a note, if you go beyond regular physics into the insane realm of quantum physics, all electrons are the "same" electron/ identical. Therefore we would all be part of one sentient being known as the Universe.
https://www.quora.com/How-is-it-that-all-electrons-can-simultaneously-be-aware-of-the-energy-levels-of-all-other-electrons-in-the-universe
So it seems that sentience either is one being or perhaps my other theory of splitting into multiple beings is right- or perhaps both are right as we may all be part of one connected being but at the same time be all different.
>>17827884
You misunderstand. The critique of Dualism (the broad philosophical category that states the Mind/Observer is separate from the Body) is that consciousness MUST stem from the physical organization/processes of the body in order for it to affect the body. Since the mind apparently does just this (i.e. - I think about taking a drink, thirsty or not, formulate a plan to get water, then the body carries it out), someone who believes the Mind/Observer is separate from the Body must explain how the Mind exerts this force on the body, why this force is not detected, and how it breaks thermodynamic laws of all energy in a closed system equals zero.
>>17827906
Ah I get you. So the theory is more about actual physical explanations of sentience. So chem reactions and electrical signals etc.
I'm speaking from a much more abstract and philosophical point of view here. I understand that in sentience as we generally accept now, we must see that an observable force/ flow of energy etc. is working to give the brains instructions to the body.
In turn the brain itself is just a collection of matter and signals must pass through the neurons and synapses to formulate a working sentience.
However, I was not stating that the mind is separate from the body. The "mind" is a by-product of the brain activity, I realize that.
My theory is that even when the particles all decompose in the brain into smaller pieces, like ash particles, each individual ash particle still might have some small independent sentience.
>>17827618
quantum explanation of consciousness. look up "Orch OR"
>>17827954
Each ash particle may still have moving atoms, small amounts of energy being transferred be it kinetic, thermal etc.
Therefore it may have some consciousness. It would not be able to emit "instructions" as you say, or even knowingly interact with the Universe, but as transfers of energy and movement of matter is still occurring slightly, a slight sentience may still exist, as in the end, that is what a sentience is composed of.
>>17827963
"Orchestrated objective reduction (Orch-OR) is a hypothesis that consciousness in the brain originates from processes inside neurons, rather than from connections between neurons (the conventional view). The mechanism is held to be a quantum physics process called objective reduction that is orchestrated by molecular structures called microtubules."
Not sure I agree. Seems to me like the connections are what form the complex minds we have, but I guess it could be a bit of both.
Sadly this would not support any idea of an afterlife as the neurons do break down when the being dies.
Also I would say this supports a more multi sentient being hypothesis
>>17827999
Can you stop spamming this bullshit, fucking halfwit degenerate mongoloid spaz moron?
>>17827999
Also, checked.
>>17827975
I think I understand. So for you, the body creates the mind by changing Something in the material/atoms/QM/whatev. Similar (tho not analogous since this example requires an outside actor) to how a book is wood pulp and ink whose Something has been changed to encode a story.
Now, even if you destroy the body, like destroying a book, the Something remains changed.
>>17827730
That's too cool not to be noticed. It should be on a shirt or something.
>>17828027
Yes. Basically this.
Also, note that our sentience is a flowing, ever changing concept. You have completely different atoms in you to when you were born, ordered in a different way, but your reality seems steady and flowing.
So when the body is destroyed, the "something" is merely recorded again, be it more drastically. And as long as that something is changing and moving, like energy or matter or whatever, some level of mind continues to exist.
I believe that if the matter or energy or whatever you want to think about ceased to stop changing and moving, consciousness on any level would stop.
So if you Universe ends up becoming below absolute zero and all the particles cease to move, they then cease to exist, and then sentience stops existing also.
Once something is not changing and is constant, it no longer exists. The only constant is change and for absolute nothingness, the only constant is non-change, as nothingness can't change.
So the same can be said for the mind, if no change is going on in the particles or atoms or quarks etc. The mind cannot exist- in quantum physics, the particles themselves could not exist, which is what the mind is attached to.
Ultimately, in my view, the only non sentient thing is complete nothingness
>>17828041
But not all of us believe in a "spirit". I believe the matter and energy is what composes the experience of being "awake".
Don't get me wrong though if you believe in a spirit that is metaphysical, power to you. It is valid as any other explanation of our crazy existence in my eyes.
>>17827778
This
>>17827618
to the atheists/non-spiritual in this thread, (im not trying to debate im genuinely curious) could you depict what you believe happens after you die? just eternal blackness with no ability of thought or ego or emotion or memories? just dark nothing?
Reincarnation is a metaphor for life existing. All we know is existing. When you die will existence still be? Of course. We are existence. We are the universe. When you die your still gonna be the same shit you always were.
>>17828071
Incarnation of complete nothingness here. I'm sentient too. I don't know how the fuck reality managed to warp itself bad enough to make me incarnate, but here I am.
>>17827618
>Why do people believe there is something after death?
Because they aren't convinced that everything we are is caused by the brain.
>>17827839
>You will experience no complex memories, emotions or experiences like when you had a brain, but some low level of sentience will remain in you.
In other words, it might as well be nonexistence.
>>17828213
I don't think anyone gives a fuck if their molecules survive. What people care about is whether or not their *consciousness* survives in a form similar to how it feels now, not some vague metaphysical bullshit about how the materials of our body still exist so we still exist in some abstract way.
>>17827618
because we are not our physical brain, as you've said.
we are the signal that our brain is picking up
ever heard the saying by tesla, "My brain is only a receiver, in the Universe there is a core from which we obtain knowledge, strength and inspiration. I have not penetrated into the secrets of this core, but I know that it exists."
>>17827618
dreams
zombies
angels
reincarnations
etc
there is definitely something after death
I'm just not trying to be a human cockroach like Young Thug lol
It depends on which side of death you're on.
If you're on this side that we're talking on right now through 4chan, then "you" become a corpse and eventually decay. If you're on the side where your consciousness resides, and thinks the thoughts that nobody can know except for you, then"you" dream. It really depends how you define yourself.
There's a growing number of humans that claim they exist solely on the side of physical reality, with no consciousness whatsoever, and lately I'm inclined to believe them. It's disorienting for me to have a conversation with a thing that claims to be a bundle of autonomous reflexes, but I suppose if that's who they want to be, more power to them.
>>17828388
This said, I've come very close to death a number of times, and each time I enter a dream so vivid that it is indistinguishable from this reality experience. The time flow is not synced in any sense. Time inside does not affect time outside, nor vice-versa as far as I can tell.
Common themes I've experienced:
-- Festival scenes, much dancing and swirling of clothes, endless motion as far as the eye can see.
-- Incredibly good vibes, difficult to concentrate because the mood is so relaxed. Little to no stress, nobody's in a rush.
-- Circular designs, if there's architecture of any kind, it favors rotation and organic patterns rather than the rectangular, sharp corners that are such a part of our world here.
But I imagine it's unique for every person. You can think of your life force as a rubber band--every experience, memory, plan you don't resolve in this life rebounds back into your next not-life, or whatever people want to call it. The fox spends its entire life studying the rabbits it chases, learning their behavior, getting inside the mind of its prey. Then what happens?
>>17827618
Because the people here believe in wacky fairy tales
>>17828194
You're not quite understanding, the way you say "dark".
It's not darkness, because darkness is something. It's not eternity because eternity is something. It's nothing. There's nothing there. Not only do you not see or hear nothing, you also don't remember not seeing or hearing anything, because you don't know anything. There is no knowing, because "you" (separate from "your body") cease to exist.
Here's an idea of what it's like:
The afterlife looks, sounds, feels, smells, and tastes exactly like the beforelife. Do you know what the before-life felt like, the time before you existed? Of course you don't, because you didn't exist. You weren't there to experience anything.
The afterlife is basically just going back to that. Your consciousness (the 5 senses, memory, attention, thought, imagination, personality, preferences, quirks, etc.) dies, and "you" are gone.
You won't even know it. Consciousness is basically a complex pattern of brain activity. It starts shortly after you are born, and it ends when you are either old or unfortunate, and due to either decomposition (aging) or trauma, the brain's electrical/chemical pattern gets interrupted and breaks down, causing the pattern to crash, and end.
Consciousness is like a roughly 90-year-long sneeze. What happens to a sneeze after it's done? does its essence go to a metaphysical sneeze repository where it is either lavished with fantasies or indentured into eternal worship of the sneezer? No, it's just gone. Same deal with consciousness.
Death isn't the greatest unknown part of this universe. Life is.
>>17828458
I once tried to ask /sci/ what the scientific age for not believing in fairy tales anymore was, but it got deleted.
>>17828481
And you know this from experience..? Or...
>>17828506
Yes, fuckwit. I died, and stopped existing, but I came back into existence just to make a post on a Singaporean needlework forum.
>durr hurr you don't know for sure because you didn't experience it yourself!
Hey man, all that stuff about sharks biting people? Total bullshit. I've never been bitten by a shark. Have you? No? Well then all those things the sheeple believe about sharks are just speculation and rumors! Let's go have a steakfight with blood super soakers in the middle of the Pacific Ocean just like we always should have been!
I have experience with several Physiological Psych and Neuroanatomy courses. This knowledge covers many bizarre cases and experiments, and everything that would even seem like demons or magic to the unaware, can be explained and replicated with biological understanding.
Is science 100% factual and accurate? No one can say, but it's the best idea we (humans) have about the universe around us.
>>17828537
>I have experience with several Physiological Psych and Neuroanatomy courses. This knowledge covers many bizarre cases and experiments, and everything that would even seem like demons or magic to the unaware, can be explained and replicated with biological understanding.
Oh. I get it. You're one of those people who can only keep track of one explanation at a time for any given scenario. This video will change that aspect of your mind.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Cqbf86jTro
>>17827778
>Memorize without brain
Example and source to read up?
What are /x/'s thoughts on reported changes in the body's electromagnetic field for near-death experiencers?
http://www.wakingtimes.com/2014/11/06/startling-effects-near-death-experience/
>>17827618
>it is all because of our brain
No. The physical body is a drone. Our brain is the drone's CPU. Somewhere inside the brain (specifically in the pineal gland according to some) there is an antenna connecting the drone to the pilot (the real you).
If the body dies, you get disconnected from controlling it, that's all.
>>17827839
congrats, you found out about ego
>>17828388
Very true. It's no stranger to me for a person to declare that they are nothing but an epiphenomenous meatbag as it is for them to declare that deep down, they're really a purple fairy dragon otherkin.
>>17828900
The most extreme example would be plants. Had this one pulled up in anticipation:
http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/2/e1501340.full
>Prior mild exposure may prime a plant against future stress or promote an acclimated state that may persist until a subsequent exposure. In this way, it is widely accepted that plants have the capacity for what can be described as memory.
Clearly - not even having a nervous system let alone a brain, plant memory is not the same as ours. However a plant has ways to retain advantageous system reactions to previous stimuli. The article goes into three different processes plants have to create these memories.
>LSD is the answer
For all I know this is not the farthest reality. This is just the one my conscious has chosen to occupy. All of the realities follow the same "script" that is what fate, or destiny is. Our life is already predetermined on a script we call fate. There's no changing it because if you think you can change fate, fate made you think that. Everything you do fate has made you do. Example, fate does not exist I can change my future. The script of fate made your thought process think that. This is where I discovered that this loop we are In is what the universe actually is, there is no beginning of the universe and there is no end, it will continuously loop this life forever. Everything that happens to you, past, present, future, is happening in another reality and when you die you're conscious will start over in a new loop like it did when the previous brain died. You're life will forever be exactly the same, and you will never know as you're conscious will not remember the previous life's. Example, the discovery of the universe caused by fate, I will discover it again in another life because my conscious is in the loop called life as it is currently doing in other realities. After thinking harder, why am I the one to discover this? Why does no one else have this knowledge. Now is where the insane thoughts started to come in. I began thinking that I was made by the universe to discover it. And no I am not special, because I am the universe, I am the only existing reality. Much like a video game you play as one character who is chosen for whatever to reason, I am the character, the universe is the one controlling me, no other realities exist or other consciousness' they just simply exist as "extras" or non playing characters in this game. Now, I thought that I am the only entity of the universe, and my job was by the universe, was to discover the secret behind the universe. Because that's what my fate is. Now beyond this I do not know what will happen.
>>17827618
There is life after death in Jesus Christ. He loves everyone. You as well.
>>17827648
This is referred to as delusional
>>17828388
I haven't dreamt since 2007
>>17829308
kek
What has been will never bee again.
>>17829609
what is will always be, it only changes.
>>17828481
This is not exactly true because consciousness doesn't immediately die off when you die. This may suggest that it does indeed continue long after we have physically died, but no memories are made due to the death of brain cells.
>But in this case conscious awareness appears to have continued for up to three minutes into the period when the heart wasn’t beating, even though the brain typically shuts down within 20-30 seconds after the heart has stopped. This is significant, since it has often been assumed that experiences in relation to death are likely hallucinations or illusions, occurring either before the heart stops or after the heart has been successfully restarted. but not an experience corresponding with ‘real’ events when the heart isn’t beating.
>>17829705
The source for this is the following journal article:
http://www.resuscitationjournal.com/article/S0300-9572(14)00739-4/abstract
>>17827618
>inb4 publisher shill
Read this book, it's on LibGen: http://www.zero-books.net/books/dispirited
Spirituality and religious mysticism are cancer.
>>17829609
She left me with pieces of itself in my back brain.
How I'm followed absolutely everywhere.
Lol electric current, right?
>>17829322
stop smoking pot anon
>>17827618
Because even after we die THE BEAT GOES ON...
>>17829304
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_return
Time stops,
Everything that is permanent is washed away
Now,it just is
>>17827618
You came into existence at least once. It will happen again. You can only hope to be born once more in a first world country and human. Eternal death would be mercy.
>>17827778
/thread
>>17827778
You aren't even comparing apples and oranges, you're comparing apples and fucking lawnmowers you fucking dingus
Idk its a conundrum i dont get. There are religions that dont believe in life after death yet their prophet or messenger always speaks about coming from another life or how to avoid death. How would he know without facing the challenge that is death?
Ive been told that if you die in your sleep, part of the last dream becomes a reality in the afterlife. And it confuses the soul because you remember that part likenit was yesterday. How verifiable is my source? dunno. He may be crazy.
>>17827680
How does your meditation go? I'm beginning to learn how. Usually I imagine myself breathing underwater and thoughts rise n burst at the surface. How bout you anon? Care to depart wisdom?.
>>17827680
Great way to put it too.
>>17829217
Now, let's add this. A big cyst on the pineal gland. Which I have and insanely vivid dreams. I wake up exhausted from my dreamares.
>>17829275
Looks like you schooled this kid >>17828900
>lrn2 biology kid
>>17828275
Very true but psychologically and logically, if you neglect your future forthcoming you deny yourself entry into whatever divine expectation your or your religious leader have set. You do not want to be barred from the movement as it is the most personal of achievements.
I believe there is a school of thought that says our energies leave our bodies at the time of death in waves. Spiritually it is said that after we pass we go to a similar land but everything is strange and turbulent. The journey of our souls is to find stability.
>>17827648
That's because they're stupid
>>17827618
Because they can't comprehend not existing, and it terrifies them, or they were raised to believe it by one religion or another.
>>17827618
>ITT: It's, like, your spirit, man. You gotta let your third eye take in all those positive vibes, brah.
>>17832307
If we could somehow convert stupidity into energy, the stupid shit this board says could power New York for a few thousand years, at least.
>>17827618
Our eyes pick up a very insignificant light spectrum as our ear only pick up vibrations in an environment of gas. We are so dependant on our physical bodies that it's very easy to see this as truth and disregard anything outside of it while we actually aren't aware at all how insignificant our bodies actually are.
If there is something after death it would be something your brain wouldn't be able to comprehend or perceive let alone properly memorize it and seeing as people identify themselves with their physical bodymass, from the point of view of the body there really isn't anything after death but decomposition of the body. The question would be, who are we exactly?
In the end, it doesn't really matter what is after death since most of you faggots don't know even how to live. Deal with your life first, go see what's after your life when you die one day. And since death is a certainty anyway, there's no need to worry or think about it.
>>17828280
Its pretty scary as how one embodied sentience can attach itself to another.
It is correct to assume that life as we know it does not exist without a computational unit to make sense of the stimulus that is provided by our given reality.
It is in human nature to be hopeful in the face of total despair. It is our biological drive to continue living for as long as possible that causes us to believe that there absolutely must be more life after life ends. It is simply how we are programmed.
It is a particularly dangerous situation since we cannot know anything that our brain cannot decipher. Death exists where the brain does not and that makes total, absolute death unknowable as there is no way to compute without a computer, i.e. the brain.
It is utterly unknowable and it is far better to use what life you have left rather than ponder unknowable existential questions. In the end, we will all perish and what lies after the death of what allows us to interpret reality is out of our comprehension as mortal beings.
>>17832209
>Ive been told that if you die in your sleep, part of the last dream becomes a reality in the afterlife. And it confuses the soul because you remember that part likenit was yesterday. How verifiable is my source? dunno. He may be crazy.
I don't think that would happen. Nearly everyone who has a near-death experience says that the afterlife feels more real than our physical life, and that the physical world feels like a dream in comparison. If there's any confusion at all, it will probably be from some part of your waking life on Earth that overlaps into your afterlife a bit. That's probably the source of a lot of those stories about people who don't know they're dead.
>>17832306
I'm not sure about that. Based on the information from things like NDEs, it would seem that we can't really screw up too badly no matter what we do on Earth. Basically, we're here to learn stuff and have experiences. Sometimes things go wrong, but in the end, it's like dying in a video game and reloading your save.
>>17827618
Because endless oblivion terrifies almost all people.
>>17832822
>Implying any two death experience stories are the same
>>17828194
The same as before you were born. No consciousness, no memories, no thought of sensory experience. Your life ends with a full stop.
>>17833054
/thread
>>17828388
I'm one of those 'bundles of autonomous reflexes', though I prefer the term 'biological substrate intelligence'.
I can't really grasp why one would assume that intelligence comes from outside of the brain. The brain is a marvelous candidate for generating intelligence. Millions of neurons with thousands of synapses. Scores of neurotransmitters and chemical feedback loops. Electronic impulses flashing everywhere at once at incredible speeds.
I'd mention the mountain of scientific evidence which favours the brain as the seat of consciousness but I've dealt with the whole 'antenna' argument enough to know that conversation goes nowhere.
So lets look at why a perfectly sane, intelligent animal might choose to think that its consciousness arises from someplace other than the middle of its head (despite a good amount of evidence to the contrary).
The only answer I can guess at is: Fear. Mortality is a chilling thing. It makes children scream and old men cry. Society as a whole has a bad habit of teaching falsehoods when it comes to mortality. Heaven, reincarnation, dualism ect are all just safety blankets against the unacceptable truth that human beings are flawed creatures which will eventually break down and die.
Asking what happens to your consciousness after you die is like asking what happens to your patella reflex or your heartbeat. It stops.
>>17833084
Oh. Well, do you know the answer to the sleeping beauty problem?
>>17833084
People who are put into sensory deprivation tanks forget who they are. This would seem to indicate that personality information is streamed into the brain from the outside--without the stream, it disconnects.
>I can't really grasp why one would assume that intelligence comes from outside of the brain.
Just what exactly do you think perception is? Saying that you don't believe intelligence comes from outside the brain is like you're saying everyone is completely shut off from the world, and simply inventing their own realities from their imaginations. Surely SOME intelligence comes from outside, or else how do people every communicate with each other.
>>17833116
What sleeping beauty problem?
>>17833116
There aren't any real answers unless the subject 'cheats'. Questions about credence are pretty much bunk when you introduce amnesia drugs.
>>17833120
>People who are put into sensory deprivation tanks forget who they are
Is that so?
I'm defining intelligence as an optimization process which understands the value of knowledge.
We are essentially shut off from the world, we receive sensory impulses which our brains interpret as perception. We are essentially viewing reality through a keyhole. Good enough for a prehuman on the savannah, but still extremely flawed and imprecise.
>>17833134
>There aren't any real answers unless the subject 'cheats'.
Here's a theory--maybe there's two answers depending on from whose perspective the question is asked.
>I'm defining intelligence as an optimization process which understands the value of knowledge.
I'm assuming that you believe intelligence is derived from electrical impulses and other physical stimuli. Here's the thing though--the electrical activity at any given point in the universe is not zero. The universe is full of ambient electricity and light. Even when it's night, thermal radiation from the planet produces *some* EM radiation that's even within the visible spectrum. In the in the dark depths of space, the average temperature is not zero.
Now, there are these growing number of people making a claim that they *can* sustain a consciousness experience with sufficient complexity to understand the value of knowledge, even with the ambient forces of the universe. How long are you going to ignore them, before you devise a test of your own making to determine exactly how much interconnected exchanges of energy are necessary for a "person" to exist? Just what exactly are you measuring to make that determination? What is the unit of measurement when a person asks "what am I?"
>>17833127
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Cqbf86jTro
>>17827778
>If I break my computer, the internet stops
And that's where you're wrong, kiddo.
>>17833147
Or maybe you can go for the straight up 1/2 certainty if you assume the question is what is the probability that a heads was flipped before this interview. Or you can take a meta stance and guess 1/3 if you attempt to aggregate out your guess across multiple possible awakenings. Both answers are rational solutions. But as I said, the problem is lack of information, if I were sleeping beauty I would find some way to cheat.
For example biting my lip on each awakening to signal to my future self(s). With a signal like that I could answer with 50% certainty on the first awakening and 100% certainty on the possible second. Best chance of maximizing credence.
>How long are you going to ignore them
As long as they fail to produce evidence to substantiate these claims. Like I said, the brain is a marvelous candidate for producing intelligence. It's large, high powered and extremely complex. Not to mention it has several protective layers to prevent outside radiation from interfering with it's internal workings.
Open air can't sustain the same complex interactions needed to give rise to intelligence. No synapses, no neurotransmitters, low energy and high entropy. Its like trying to draw a picture on the surface of water, physical forces would simply destroy whatever pattern you create as soon as you created it.
And measuring intelligence? Well like I said, its optimization. Not just problem solving but heuristics as well.
>>17827618
If you think life is just the physical then I have some bad news for you.
There's a reason that firing up the whole body of a recently dead individual doesn't reanimate it.
>>17833163
>As long as they fail to produce evidence to substantiate these claims.
I suppose you'll get your answer with straight up certainty when you die. I hope you won't try and disrupt those who are in the process of acquiring that information without needing to die first.
The next time somebody puts forth a claim of sustaining a consciousness experience without needing a human body to do it, are you going to consider what they say, or are you going to explain to them that "No, I've already determined that is not possible, and I'm educated."
>>17827618
Can you blame them? What do us atheists have to look foward too? The destruction of the universe and all life as we know it? We shouldn't judge them for wanting a brighter tomorrow, the truth scares everyone my friend.
>>17833198
Sure. Or maybe people who don't believe in reincarnation do so, because they fear the idea of an existence that never ends.
You can convince yourself people do anything they do, if you're willing to assume they do it because they'd be afraid to not do it.
The only way to test this would be to devise an experiment which shows conclusively that there is no method of reincarnation, show it a person who believes there is, and then measure their pupils or whatever method you use to determine if a person is experiencing fear or not.
Do you have such an experiment? I would love to peer review and replicate the experiment which conclusively proves there is no way to sustain a consciousness experience without a body, if you do have one in mind. I've done several "experiments" of my own, involving putting myself into dire situations, and every time I come away with memories of a life that runs parallel to this one. But if you think you have a falsifiable test to determine the possibility of sustaining a consciousness experience without this body of mine, I will certainly give it a try as well.
>>17833179
I have a better solution.
Don't die.
>>17827618
>tfw you are a brain but you constantly refer to yourself in 3rd person
God is Schizo you guys.
>>17833339
Glorious goat tower.
existence is suffering the creator is Satan the destroyer is GOD
>>17833084
>I've dealt with the whole 'antenna' argument enough to know that conversation goes nowhere.
Nowhere you like, perhaps.
>The only answer I can guess at is: Fear. Mortality is a chilling thing. It makes children scream and old men cry. Society as a whole has a bad habit of teaching falsehoods when it comes to mortality. Heaven, reincarnation, dualism ect are all just safety blankets against the unacceptable truth that human beings are flawed creatures which will eventually break down and die.
But of course, you're above all that, and you're brave and tough enough to face the truth. Is that about right?
I have a medical condition that has completely ruined my life and removed all hope of me ever having the life I want. Whenever I see enthusiastic atheists preaching the platitude of "You have one life, so live to the fullest!", it makes me want to hit them right in their smug, pretentious faces. What do those fuckers have to say to people like me?
>>17833054
Energy cannot be created nor destroyed. To believe "this" consciousness ends can be accept. But to downright believe to be gone forever is downright as hypocritical as believe a god DOES exist
>>17829319
It'd be called dissociation of psychosis in the terms you're thinking of it in, but I'm not talking about that. I'm not talking about feeling the separation itself, but feeling that separation is part of why we can do be be what we are. It's usually a subconscious thing that people don't notice outside of just kind of believing there's something more than physics at play in their manifestation of self.
>>17832307
Not at stupid as refusing to believe in free will.
>>17827778
Internet and radio don't "stop", retard, its just you not being able to recive them. Like when you die, world doesn't end.
>>17827618
Because they are stupid.
>>17829308
Retard alert
>>17835736
>I can't read: the post
>>17835642
>dissociation or psychosis
fix
>>17827618
Because I don't know how it would be possible for me to not exist for an infinite amount of time before I was born so I don't think that's a realistic idea for what comes after.
>>17832815
a man once died, everything was the same, but he knew death. hope was completely lost and he now knew there was never hope. no longer was his Family, Family. But monsters. angry, tortured, real, real interested in ripping his Flesh from his Failing existence. Liberation? life was all he knew and wanted. but life was the disease that made him Fear his liberation From hopeless clinging to that which is not real, when reality came to set him free all he could see was a Family of demons taking the only thing "he" knew. the very "he" he never was.
>>17836549
this is the very long vivid near death experience of a russian man.
