After life

[Benguin]

Just now, Sampson said:

 

So religious teachings are a reason to believe, but the laws of thermodynamics, energy, quantum mechanics and how consciousness work aren't?

 

Why is religion fair game for exploring whether there's an afterlife but science isn't?

 

I'm sure you can find plenty of books which say there is no afterlife and here's the reasons why quoting the laws of physics, thermodynamics and how consciousness works. Why are they not valid but the teachings of ancient Greek gods of Zeus and the Mongolian shamanistic Tengrism are?

As I've already argued, there is not a peer reviewed scientific paper in existence that disproves an afterlife existing and one can only draw at best rational arguments as to why one can't. That is not belief or conviction that is a theory. Religious people on the other hand have absolute belief and conviction as it is a spiritual thing and does not need evidence. I find religious belief absurd but it certainly exists. 

[Sampson]

15 minutes ago, Benguin said:

As I've already argued, there is not a peer reviewed scientific paper in existence that disproves an afterlife existing and one can only draw at best rational arguments as to why one can't. That is not belief or conviction that is a theory. Religious people on the other hand have absolute belief and conviction as it is a spiritual thing and does not need evidence. I find religious belief absurd but it certainly exists. 

And as I've already said, it's not "disproving" anything or saying anything is impossible  (and why should the burden of disproving something be on the non-believer anyway? Surely it should be the opposite? It is the believer in the afterlife who is making the logical jumps).

 

But theory IS how you make best approximations.

 

And I think you have a very naive view of what a "Scientific theory" is - gravity is a theory, electro-magnestism is a theory, atoms are a theory, evolution is a theory, quantum mechanics is a theory - but it doesn't mean that there isn't an almost certain chance that those things are objectively true. 

 

Who is doubting religious belief exists? I'm questioning why you think their existence means there is more reason to believe in an afterlife than not and are then dismissing any arguments on the other side as "tangent" and "the wrong tools" to make an informed judgements

 

I don't understand how any of what you say leads you to believe that there's even less reason to believe an after-life isn't real. Of course it's impossible to know for certain from what we know at the moment, but there is an objective answer to that question and you can make informed judgements based on everything we know and there's plenty of reasons to make an informed judgement that the objective answer is more likely that there isn't an afterlife.

[Benguin]

1 minute ago, Sampson said:

But theory IS how you make best approximations.

 

And I think you have a very naive view of what a "Scientific theory" is - gravity is a theory, electro-magnestism is a theory, atoms are a theory, evolution is a theory, quantum mechanics is a theory - but it doesn't mean that there isn't an almost certain chance that those things are objectively true. 

 

Who is doubting religious belief exists?I'm questioning why you think their existence means there is more reason to believe in an afterlife than not and ate then dismissing any arguments on the other side as "tangent" and "the wrong tools" to make an informed judgements

 

I don't understand how any of what you say leads you to believe that there's even less reason to believe an after-life isn't real. Of course it's impossible to know for certain from what we know at the moment, but there is an objective answer to that question and you can make informed judgements based on everything we know and there's plenty of reasons to make an informed judgement that the objective answer is more likely that there isn't an afterlife.

This debate is pointless as I don't think any science that exists gives any reason to believe there is no afterlife, whereas you do. 

[Drew Peacock]

1 hour ago, Sampson said:

But why does any of that lead you to the idea of an afterlife?

 

At best that means you could make an argument for a passive creator, but everything we know about DNA and cultural and social influence, our senses and their failings and how quantum mechanics shows the molecules  (which make up the neurons of our brain) appear to all just be random decision making (and quantum mechanics is the most thoroughly tested and proven explanation of the universe humans come up with) means it's unlikely we can really have any say on how are brains work and the decisions we make other than just our DNA, culture, learned language, education, past experiences and the very specific interpretation of the universe which our senses give us (which we already know, miss out on giving us the chance to experience the overwhelming majority of what we could actually see, hear, smell, touch or taste) - none of which we control.

 

If there's an afterlife there's an afterlife, but it seems very unlikely to me there's a God or Gods who've created this universe and then placed it in it solely to worship them and as a kind of theatre in which the sole purpose is to play the role a certain way (even though libertarian free-will seems illogical) so they can carry on in the next life.

 

I don't think believing in any God or Gods really has any chance of improving your chance of psssing into the afterlife. It's just as likely that atheists are given an afterlife and religious people aren't or that one of the many failed religions or a religion completely unestablished is the right answer.

 

Therefore, I've never really understood the need to restrict your life and place rules on your potentially only life here based on some modern cultural version of organised religion.

 

The afterlife could be a possibility sure, but I don't really understand why people place their emphasis on finding that through a modern interpretation of old time organised religion. Just feels a bit hollow to me. You can comfort yourself in the thought of an afterlife without thinking the billion odd Hindus in India are going to hell because even though they could be the kindest, most charitable people in the world, they happened to be born into the wrong culture or that you have to waste every Sunday of your life going to church.

 

Doesn't seem worthwhile thinking that your belief system or decisions is what decides whether you enter an afterlife or not (and Ive nrver understood why anyone would want to worship a narcissistic God who punishes people for not bowing down to him and kissing his feet constantly anyway and constantly punishes people to "test them" - that doesn't sound like the kind of morale being I would ever like to worship, in fact I'd think he was a massive willy puller if I saw him on earth) when it seems so unlikely we can actually control what we think or the decisions we make anyway.

 

Just my interpretation of course, but I've just always never felt that it's possible that anything we did or thought could change whether we enter an afterlife or not and even if it were - it's impossible to know what those thoughts or actions were - so it's not really worth thinking about. And restricting your life with these ideas.

 

Believing in an afterlife is one thing, but believing that your mindset or certain actions you do (and we can ever know what they are) are what get you into that afterlife has always seemed strange to me.

In answer to your question in the first line of your post, it doesn’t. I’m not claiming there is. Whether there is a God or not, both arguments intrigue me, that’s all. It seems natural to me to question what life is about. 

My own viewpoint is agnostic, I’m just not sure. I don’t think there has to be meaning to life, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t. 

I guess my point in various comments is that there is doubt on both sides of the argument, or at least questions that can’t be answered. I think fundamental belief in something about the meaning of life is wrong whether that be fundamental religion or fundamental atheism, or science. Even science is not all knowing.

Some people won’t believe whatever philosophy or scientific explanation, quite logically, unless they have facts. But lack of facts doesn’t necessarily mean it’s not true. 

There does have to be truth of some sort though, but there is only one certain group who can know it, or not know it I guess if there is nothing to follow this life, and that’s the dead.

[SouthStandUpperTier]

What's with all this "just got to make the most of this life" bullshit I keep reading in this thread? Why have I? I'm 39 and have achieved absolutely nothing. Couldn't be happier. Butter the toast, eat the toast, shit the toast.

[ozleicester]

Dont believe in an afterlife for one moment,

 

Even if i try to think it through.... the physical impossibility of it all just stops me (dead  )

 

It disturbs me that the afterlife is used to control people in their real life and then gives them an out. 

 

Apparently you can be all kinds of ar$ehole in your life, then say a couple of hail mary's or find budda/Hamish/Muhammed or whoever on your deathbed and die believing youll "live" happily ever after in cloud cuckoo land.

 

If you acknowledge that this is it!..one life!, then perhaps you will focus on living this one, not planning for the next one.

 

Just, be nice, try not to hurt others and help where you can.

 

Enjoy yourself. (its later than you think).

 

 

[Captain...]

1 hour ago, ozleicester said:

 

If you acknowledge that this is it!..one life!, then perhaps you will focus on living this one, not planning for the next one.

And be an even bigger selfish arsehole with no care or thought for what you leave behind. Dead is dead why should I care about the environment or long term impact of my actions. I'm going to be a complete **** and then die. I don't even have to repent.

[ozleicester]

1 minute ago, Captain... said:

And be an even bigger selfish arsehole with no care or thought for what you leave behind. Dead is dead why should I care about the environment or long term impact of my actions. I'm going to be a complete **** and then die. I don't even have to repent.

 fair point... explains a lot

[SpacedX]

9 hours ago, KingGTF said:

I don't really believe in an afterlife but as I see it, if I exist now then there is a possibility that I will exist again.

What if you're reincarnated as a Forest fan?

[ozleicester]

Just now, Line-X said:

What if you're reincarnated as a Forest fan?

You wouldve had to be a complete and utter **** in this life to get that.

[Captain...]

7 hours ago, Benguin said:

This debate is pointless as I don't think any science that exists gives any reason to believe there is no afterlife, whereas you do. 

I agree, science can still only explain a fraction of everything that is out there and beyond. Do you believe in a specific afterlife or just that there is one?

 

[SpacedX]

6 hours ago, SouthStandUpperTier said:

What's with all this "just got to make the most of this life" bullshit I keep reading in this thread? Why have I? I'm 39 and have achieved absolutely nothing. Couldn't be happier. Butter the toast, eat the toast, shit the toast.
 

Yeah,this carpe diem "seize the day" bullshit is tiresome at best and largely the preserve of cod psychology and shite millennial tattoos. Try explaining it to a Mayfly - it''ll probably already understand.

[Benguin]

16 minutes ago, Captain... said:

I agree, science can still only explain a fraction of everything that is out there and beyond. Do you believe in a specific afterlife or just that there is one?

 

I don't believe in an afterlife, I just also do not see any reason why one can't exist beyond scientific understanding since the whole premise of an afterlife would be way beyond scientific understanding.

[Webbo]

We'll all find out when we're dead.

[Benguin]

2 minutes ago, Webbo said:

We'll all find out when we're dead.

That depends on whether there is an afterlife. We can't learn anything if we're just dead!

[RODNEY FERNIO]

Not normally a fence sitter myself .... but going to sit on the fence on this one.

Nobody can categorically prove there is an after life and then again nobody can categorically prove there isn't one.

[Drew Peacock]

4 minutes ago, Benguin said:

I don't believe in an afterlife, I just also do not see any reason why one can't exist beyond scientific understanding since the whole premise of an afterlife would be way beyond scientific understanding.

Nail on head.

We are limited in our understanding, so we limit to what we find comfortable or rational. And you can't rationalise the unknown or life after death.

What chance have I got when I even struggle to fathom why Andy King still gets some match time?

[Simi]

Anyone watching The Good Place on Netflix? If that's what life after death is like I'm all for it. Especially if Jameela Jamil is there.

[Benguin]

4 minutes ago, Simi said:

Anyone watching The Good Life on Netflix? If that's what life after death is like I'm all for it. Especially if Jameela Jamil is there.

I take it you mean The good place with Kristen Bell? Just googled it, might give it a watch.

[Simi]

Just now, Benguin said:

I take it you mean The good place with Kristen Bell? Just googled it, might give it a watch.

Sorry, yes. That's what I meant. It's still early.

 

Well worth a watch if you're looking for something easy going and funny.

[ozleicester]

Just now, Simi said:

Sorry, yes. That's what I meant. It's still early.

 

Well worth a watch if you're looking for something easy going and funny.

Im still hoping the Afterlife is like the Good Life with Felicity Kendal

[Benguin]

1 minute ago, Simi said:

Sorry, yes. That's what I meant. It's still early.

 

Well worth a watch if you're looking for something easy going and funny.

Going to try it, I still say Kristen Bell is a totty so if nothing else there is that.

[Izzy]

3 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

Im still hoping the Afterlife is like the Good Life with Felicity Kendal

One for the teenagers on here Oz 

[Fox92]

10 hours ago, Captain... said:

Why?

 

Is there more to the ants life before you step on it? The chicken's life before you eat it? The weird fish thing that crawled out of the sea and evolved into mammals or the single called organisms that started it all?

 

We aren't special, we're just an evolutionary leap ahead of instinctive animals. We have moved beyond evolutionary principles, eat, survive, procreate, die. So we apply meaning to that which has none to find sense in a world that has none. There is no reason for there to be more than just this.

I never mentioned animals. Jesus man chill out. 

 

This thread was about humans so I gave my input. What I think about animals is irrelevant, you just brought that up.

 

As I said I like a good discussion about life but not when you're jumping to silly conclusions, this thread ain't about animals.

[whoareyaaa]

This is a tough question and none of us will ever know what happens when you die, it's abit like the how did life get here question, it's something our minds can not comprehend and never will....

 

Every action has a reaction (Negative or Postive) and Karma is a part of that...

 

For that reason I believe that there is life after death in some shape of form but we will never understand it just be a good person, live your life and be thankful that you are alive.