Is there life after death?

nozzferrahhtoo

Hagar7 wrote: »

when you are 8 years old the brain doesn't take in as much as a 1 year old does

Erm I never said it does and nothing I DID say requires that it does So I am not sure what your point actually is here.

Hagar7 wrote: »

explain to me how a 4 year old child can live in France,never out of the country and his mum n dad take him to the local flea pit market where he then informs his parents he'd been there before,he also knew all the streets and what was there before and then described places only historians knew about.

You are kinda proving my point for me above about the whole "This kid has this information and you must explain how" format that all reincarnation claims rely on. There are any number of ways children can obtain information, I could throw out numerous possibilities, but I can not substantiate any of them. Nor can you.

The point however is that a lack of alternatives does not make another unsubstantiated fantastical alternative true. Or even credible. EVERY single time I see the subject come up it is the same thing. EVERY time the people who want reincarnation to be true simply say "This person had this knowledge and we do not know how they came to have it".

And they act like because we do not know... that actually means we know. And that is truely nonsense thinking. Whenever your conclusions are based on "Because we can not explain it.... we can explain it" then you need to rethink your conclusions.

asherbassad

PirateShampoo wrote: »

I think in my past life I must of been a English teacher because youre use of "tae" instead of "to" makes me want to throw a Chalkboard Eraser at you're illiterate head.

'a' English teacher?

'youre' use of.....?

'you're' illiterate head?

Maximus Alexander

Huntergonzo wrote: »

I'd imagine after you die you have similar experiences to what you had before you were conceived.

As someone who is completely agnostic about what lies beyond the veil, and certainly not a believer in 'life after death', I think it's poor reasoning to suggest that not remembering anything prior to conception is evidence that there was nothing.

None of us recall being 6 months old, soiling our nappies and feeding from our mother's breasts either, but we know it happened.

Conall Cernach

Hagar7 wrote: »

Bunkum Mr Watson,when you are 8 years old the brain doesn't take in as much as a 1 year old does,another point,explain to me how a 4 year old child can live in France,never out of the country and his mum n dad take him to the local flea pit market where he then informs his parents he'd been there before,he also knew all the streets and what was there before and then described places only historians knew about.
How can you explain a young 5 year old boy in Arizona who can speak 6 different languages despite never learning them in his short life.

They're fairy changelings. Or maybe there has been a glitch in the Matrix and the child has been uploaded with the wrong data. These explanations are just as plausible as reincarnation.

harry Bailey esq

quote="Hagar7;97700259"]......life after death.
As an 8 year old kid in Scotland,back in 1958,my grandmother who hailed from Lisburn,took me tae Ballyjamesduff.
On the second day I was there a cousin who lived there asked me if I wanted tae go tae see The Dambusters,I said fine,no problem.
Halfway through the film he took unwell and said he had tae go home and said would I be okay finding my way back tae where we were staying and I said I would be fine.
Anyways,come the end of the film I started tae head to where we were staying,or at least I thought I did,there were four different ways out of the town and I chose the wrong way.
Strange as it might seem,I wasn't in the slightest bit scared and each street I came tae,I knew it as if I had been there before,even before I turned a corner I knew what was ahead of me which was odd because I'd never been in Ireland in my life.
Has anyone else ever encountered anything like it before?
I recall seeing this woman on tv a couple of years ago which I found interesting and extraordinary.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PieZfAdIa8

[/quote]

I reckon you just got lost bud.Lovely place to pass through, wouldn't like to live there though. Its hardly as sketchy or vast as somewhere like Kingston Jamaica or Marseilles France.

BenedrylPete

PirateShampoo wrote: »

I think in my past life I must of been a English teacher because youre use of "tae" instead of "to" makes me want to throw a Chalkboard Eraser at you're illiterate head.

Dont mind those people correcting your use of 'you're'.
Concentrate on 'of been' as it is at least 15,000 times more annoying.

Tarzana2

I don't believe there's an afterlife. But I totally understand why people do. I think we humans just cannot get our head around not existing. It's outside our understanding. We can't envisage the world rolling on with us not in it.

captbarnacles

Tarzana2 wrote: »

I don't believe there's an afterlife. But I totally understand why people do. I think we humans just cannot get our head around not existing. It's outside our understanding. We can't envisage the world rolling on with us not in it.

Who's this we? I can.

Sadly or happily depending on your point of view, the world will get on just fine without any of us.

JulianSNZ

No! There is no life after death. This is the only life you've got, Make the most of it.

Tarzana2

captbarnacles wrote: »

Who's this we? I can.

Generally. Your mileage may vary.

Hagar7

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Erm I never said it does and nothing I DID say requires that it does So I am not sure what your point actually is here.



You are kinda proving my point for me above about the whole "This kid has this information and you must explain how" format that all reincarnation claims rely on. There are any number of ways children can obtain information, I could throw out numerous possibilities, but I can not substantiate any of them. Nor can you.

The point however is that a lack of alternatives does not make another unsubstantiated fantastical alternative true. Or even credible. EVERY single time I see the subject come up it is the same thing. EVERY time the people who want reincarnation to be true simply say "This person had this knowledge and we do not know how they came to have it".

And they act like because we do not know... that actually means we know. And that is truely nonsense thinking. Whenever your conclusions are based on "Because we can not explain it.... we can explain it" then you need to rethink your conclusions.

It's not truly nonsence at all,basically you are saying that the Sutton incident is all lies,that the lady in question is a fake,I'm not questioning your faith in any way,shape or form but I believe in God,I also believe in Jesus though I do not believe everything that's written in the bible,I.e. Noah's Ark.
However,if you think it's all hogwash then that's your prerogative,cheers.

nozzferrahhtoo

Except I did not call anything lies. So perhaps keep your words out of my mouth when I clearly have enough of my own. What I DO call it is unsubstantiated. As I say, just because you can not explain something, that does not mean you can explain it. And those who want to convince anyone that reincarnation exists are going to have to do more than "This person knows stuff and you can not explain how, therefore I can". That is as fallacious and unsubstantiated as your idea there is a god.

You can keep faith for yourself, I do not need it nor seek it. I merely go where the substantiation leads.

Hagar7

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Except I did not call anything lies. So perhaps keep your words out of my mouth when I clearly have enough of my own. What I DO call it is unsubstantiated. As I say, just because you can not explain something, that does not mean you can explain it. And those who want to convince anyone that reincarnation exists are going to have to do more than "This person knows stuff and you can not explain how, therefore I can". That is as fallacious and unsubstantiated as your idea there is a god.

You can keep faith for yourself, I do not need it nor seek it. I merely go where the substantiation leads.

So please tell me,was there just a Big Bang and we all just popped out.
Clearly,you do not believe there's a creator and that it 'just happened.'
What is your theory if you don't believe in God.

Maximus Alexander

Hagar7 wrote: »

So please tell me,was there just a Big Bang and we all just popped out.
Clearly,you do not believe there's a creator and that it 'just happened.'
What is your theory if you don't believe in God.

If you don't like the idea that big bang 'just happened', why would you be okay with the idea that a creator 'just happened'?

ThinkProgress

Hagar7 wrote: »

So please tell me,was there just a Big Bang and we all just popped out.
Clearly,you do not believe there's a creator and that it 'just happened.'
What is your theory if you don't believe in God.

Have you ever truely asked yourself why it's so important that YOU have an answer to those questions?

I find many "faithful" people tend to have a difficult time understanding anyone that doesn't have the same desperate desire for those answers as them...

Just like I have a hard time identifying with anyone that's so desperate for answers that they're willing to suspend reality and believe in a fiction.

That's where curiousity and desperation separate for me... We're all curious(or at least should be), but IMO it's desperation that creates strong belief.

Kev W

I feel that people have such a hard time dealing with the idea of no life after death because it's literally impossible to imagine.

You can't truly imagine a void because anything you imagine is inherently something that is perceivable by you, it requires your point of view to imagine it.

The closest we can get to imagining our own non-existence is to imagine an infinite empty darkness, which is quite frightening. Hence the need to imagine an afterlife, perhaps.

The_Valeyard

Kev W wrote: »

I feel that people have such a hard time dealing with the idea of no life after death because it's literally impossible to imagine.

You can't truly imagine a void because anything you imagine is inherently something that is perceivable by you, it requires your point of view to imagine it.

The closest we can get to imagining our own non-existence is to imagine an infinite empty darkness, which is quite frightening. Hence the need to imagine an afterlife, perhaps.

Or maybe there actually might be. Who knows. Either way, we will all find out. The one thing we all have in common. Death. Hopefully, death is simply a transition.

timthumbni

Kev W wrote: »

I feel that people have such a hard time dealing with the idea of no life after death because it's literally impossible to imagine.

You can't truly imagine a void because anything you imagine is inherently something that is perceivable by you, it requires your point of view to imagine it.

The closest we can get to imagining our own non-existence is to imagine an infinite empty darkness, which is quite frightening. Hence the need to imagine an afterlife, perhaps.

I couldn't have put it better than this myself. I am an atheist but I really, really hope that I'm wrong. I think that religion still exists in this day and age, despite no actual evidence of a god or gods of any type, simply because it's too frightening to imagine a void of nothingness.

I sometimes wake up at night and think of just how insignificant we actually are. Like a grain of sand on a beach or a leaf of grass in a field we are really nothing when we are gone. I actually quite enjoyed the theory that we are all in fact in a hell on earth. Because what could be more hellish than being born into a world where you could marry, have children etc but that you knew that in a very short space of time (relatively) that you would die.

As stated I hope I'm wrong but I fear that the void of emptiness is where we are all heading. That really scares me.....

FalconGirl

Not sure but I really hope there is. The parting of my Dad was all to sudden. So much left to do, so much left unsaid. I'd give anything to see him again.

timthumbni

FalconGirl wrote: »

Not sure but I really hope there is. The parting of my Dad was all to sudden. So much left to do, so much left unsaid. I'd give anything to see him again.

Something similar to my own situation. That is why I tell my kids every day that I love them, in case something happens out of the blue. They may find it weird but it keeps me covered. Lol.

colossus-x

I highly recommend the OP to take this excellent and fascinating introduction online lecture course is psychology. Hopefully then you will see that it's not god that works in mysterious ways but your brain. http://oyc.yale.edu/psychology/psyc-110

Hagar7

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

If you don't like the idea that big bang 'just happened', why would you be okay with the idea that a creator 'just happened'?

So who created the Big Bang then?
Did asteroids collide with one another sending particles into outer space and 'hey presto' life on Earth,magic,eh?:)

Hagar7

ThinkProgress wrote: »

Have you ever truely asked yourself why it's so important that YOU have an answer to those questions?

I find many "faithful" people tend to have a difficult time understanding anyone that doesn't have the same desperate desire for those answers as them...

Just like I have a hard time identifying with anyone that's so desperate for answers that they're willing to suspend reality and believe in a fiction.

That's where curiousity and desperation separate for me... We're all curious(or at least should be), but IMO it's desperation that creates strong belief.

That's a few good points there tbh,but in all honesty I'm in no way desperate to find an answer,they only time we will have an answer is when we are all dead and gone,perhaps to a spiritual home,who knows?

Hagar7

timthumbni wrote: »

I couldn't have put it better than this myself. I am an atheist but I really, really hope that I'm wrong. I think that religion still exists in this day and age, despite no actual evidence of a god or gods of any type, simply because it's too frightening to imagine a void of nothingness.

I sometimes wake up at night and think of just how insignificant we actually are. Like a grain of sand on a beach or a leaf of grass in a field we are really nothing when we are gone. I actually quite enjoyed the theory that we are all in fact in a hell on earth. Because what could be more hellish than being born into a world where you could marry, have children etc but that you knew that in a very short space of time (relatively) that you would die.

As stated I hope I'm wrong but I fear that the void of emptiness is where we are all heading. That really scares me.....

Being married isn't all THAT bad.:)

Hagar7

colossus-x wrote: »

I highly recommend the OP to take this excellent and fascinating introduction online lecture course is psychology. Hopefully then you will see that it's not god that works in mysterious ways but your brain. http://oyc.yale.edu/psychology/psyc-110

I'll take a look,cheers.

Galwayguy35

I think there is some form of afterlife but not sure what it would be like and I don't want to find out anytime soon either.

Niemoj

play it again wrote: »

It's fcukin to , not tae

Aye canny understand what tae problem is!

nozzferrahhtoo

Hagar7 wrote: »

So please tell me,was there just a Big Bang and we all just popped out. Clearly,you do not believe there's a creator and that it 'just happened.' What is your theory if you don't believe in God.

Actually the simple answer to this is "I do not know". Because we do not. But it is a very common trick by theists to demand you give them an answer if you do not buy their one. Because they feel that having ANY answer is somehow more credible than having no answer..... no matter how nonsense their answer is.

Imagine this short dialogue between two quite young boys.

Boy1: Where do babies come from?
Boy2: The stork brings them.
Boy1: Really, how do you know that?
Boy2: Well where do you think they come from?
Boy1: I really do not know.
Boy2: AHA! See? The stork brings them!

Boy2 is clearly talking nonsense. He does not know any more than Boy1 does. But he pretends to. YOU are boy2 in this analogy. You have no more answers that I do, so you invent one, or buy into one that someone else invented.

There ARE quite a lot of working theories in Science for where "it all came from" and there is some substantiation for them (unlike yours). But at this point we are still at the "We do not know" stage. But there is come really promising work there. From people like Laurence Krauss.... to people like those working at CERN.... they are looking at the problem and working towards an answer.

Saipanne

Life after death is such a needy, greedy, arrogant and narcissistic concept.

It's not enough that you were given one life, oh no. There's also this other amazing, infinite life for you afterwards.

All we truly know is that we are alive now. It's an amazing gift. Don't waste it by worrying about what comes next.

HIB

Kev W wrote: »

I feel that people have such a hard time dealing with the idea of no life after death because it's literally impossible to imagine.

You can't truly imagine a void because anything you imagine is inherently something that is perceivable by you, it requires your point of view to imagine it.

The closest we can get to imagining our own non-existence is to imagine an infinite empty darkness, which is quite frightening. Hence the need to imagine an afterlife, perhaps.

Strangely enough, I also find the opposite really scary. Imagine true eternal life. Imagine still being around in 1000 years time, 2000, 2 billion, 100 billion years time. Imagine how bored you'd get. Imagine how sick of your own head you'd be. Imagine the idea that it would never end...never. I think I'd commit suicide...but I couldnt...aaaaaaahhhhhh!!!!

HIB

That said. 70-80 years sounds a bit miserable in the scheme of thingd. I'd settle for maybe 200-300.

Saipanne

HIB wrote: »

That said. 70-80 years sounds a bit miserable in the scheme of thingd. I'd settle for maybe 200-300.

Surely that depends on quality of life though.

Maximus Alexander

I don't think I could ever get bored of living so long as I was reasonably fit and healthy.

HIB

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

I don't think I could ever get bored of living so long as I was reasonably fit and healthy.

A lot can happen in 100000000000000000000000000 years. My guess is you'd wake up some day to find your zest for life had deserted you.

Saipanne

HIB wrote: »

A lot can happen in 100000000000000000000000000 years. My guess is you'd wake up some day to find your zest for life had deserted you.

Yep. It's analogous to the "thousand monkeys on a thousand typewriters" concept. You'd eventually run out of original thoughts and experiences after, say 10x10^1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 years or so.

HIB

Saipanne wrote: »

Yep. It's analogous to the "thousand monkeys on a thousand typewriters" concept. You'd eventually run out of original thoughts and experiences after, say 10x10^1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 years or so.

And here's another thought. Presuming you were confined to just use the brain you were born with, wouldn't you eventually run out of space to store new memories. So at some point you would have to start deleting old ones or storing them elsewhere. If they're stored elsewhere then effectively your access to memories is controlled by a 3rd party. And if you don't have your memories. ...are you really you anymore.

...way too deep for a monday morning.

Akrasia

Groundhog day

Maximus Alexander

HIB wrote: »

And here's another thought. Presuming you were confined to just use the brain you were born with, wouldn't you eventually run out of space to store new memories. So at some point you would have to start deleting old ones or storing them elsewhere. If they're stored elsewhere then effectively your access to memories is controlled by a 3rd party. And if you don't have your memories. ...are you really you anymore.

...way too deep for a monday morning.

Surely that immediately solves the boredom problem that you proposed.

MPFGLB

Setting aside how the OP did not do himself any favours with his written English I feel that discussing beliefs (and that is what they are) with out arrogance that assumes that because you are making a jump in faith that somehow you do not deserve the same respect as those who only rely on as yet unknown or unproven scientific explanations is in of itself an arrogant assumption and encompasses no more authenticity.

If we don't know we don't know and reincarnation is as likely to be an explanation as any other. And surely ruling anything out at this stage or chasing people from the boards for no other issue than they cannot defend what they belief against logic is not something to be celebrated

Also posters who fight anti Islamic rhetoric are the same to knock reincarnation which is a fundamental cornerstone of at least one religion I know

I myself veer towards a collective consciousness maybe transmitted through genetic material in much the same way birds who have never been travel to the same watering hole in South America that their ancestors have been travelling to for thousands of years.

nozzferrahhtoo

MPFGLB wrote: »

arrogance that assumes that because you are making a jump in faith that somehow you do not deserve the same respect

I would hope that not many people here are operating that way at all. There are of course _some_ who do, but so far it seems pretty cordial. The recommendation I would give, like you do, is that people talking well proven concepts should be afforded every bit the same quantity of respect as those talking unsubstantiated tosh.

Their beliefs should not however. Respect people, not beliefs I would say.

Beliefs deserve, nor require, respect. And do not make the mistake so many make of conflating the merciless unpacking of someone else's truth claims as being an attack on the person who holds those ideas. It is not, despite many people wishing to pretend otherwise.

MPFGLB wrote: »

If we don't know we don't know and reincarnation is as likely to be an explanation as any other.

I am not so sure that statement tells the whole story. It makes it sound like we are all starting from some zero point, and the claim is just 50:50 as to whether it is true or not.

The reality is however that while we do not fully understand things like human consciousness, we can still safely say that 100% of the things we DO know about it at this stage point to an inextricable link to the brain. While 0% of anything we know at this time is even remotely suggestive of any kind of disconnect between the two. So concepts like reincarnation or some "Collective Consciousness" that you suggested, are simply unsubstantiated at this time.

So I would never say it is just as likely, as not. Because... while it may turn out to be real or true... it certainly goes against everything we know and everything we have observed in controlled conditions.

So it is just another one of the MILLIONS of things we can categorize under "Possible I suppose, but not at all likely, credible or remotely substantiated in reality", which I feel tells a much more honest and accurate story than "as likely as any other".

MPFGLB wrote: »

And surely ruling anything out at this stage or chasing people from the boards for no other issue than they cannot defend what they belief against logic is not something to be celebrated

I do not think anyone was chased away, so much as they removed themselves due to their OWN shame when they were asked if they could substantiate anything they said, and were shown to be doing little better than making it up as they went along.

And while there is nothing to celebrate per se in chasing people off a forum, there certainly is something to celebrate in our discourse as a whole when unsubstantiated nonsense raises its head, is confronted intelligently and cordially, and it ends up running for the hills.

Our species has long since matured to the point where we can stop molly coddling beliefs like babies, and we can stand up and directly ask people who make fantastical claims "How do you know that?" or "Have you any reason to think this is true at all?". While personal "idea space" is free and people have every right to their beliefs..... public or species level "idea space" I do not believe should be and we can certainly say without any qualms "No sorry, that move in this space is not one we are warranted to make at this time".

BenedrylPete

Theres no life without death.

So if theres life after death, you can still die in the afterlife.

Its all very confusing and scary.

Just numb the pain with lolcats and chocolate in the meantime.
Questions bad youtube good.

kowloon

In a past life I was an accountant from Leeds. No historical heroes or royalty for me.

Why do humans need to believe in life after death that is a much more interesting question?

Despite the fact that organised religion has largely fallen away in a lot of western society it has reappeared in a different form, all sorts of new age beliefs, myths, other ways of knowing and so on.

Human consciousness must have a need for belief as a way of coping with our consciousness of our finite existence.

ThinkProgress

Kev W wrote: »

I feel that people have such a hard time dealing with the idea of no life after death because it's literally impossible to imagine.

You can't truly imagine a void because anything you imagine is inherently something that is perceivable by you, it requires your point of view to imagine it.

The closest we can get to imagining our own non-existence is to imagine an infinite empty darkness, which is quite frightening. Hence the need to imagine an afterlife, perhaps.

So in your opinion, the predominant motivation is fear?

So belief is a coping mechanism rather than genuine working theory...

Hagar7 wrote: »

That's a few good points there tbh,but in all honesty I'm in no way desperate to find an answer,they only time we will have an answer is when we are all dead and gone,perhaps to a spiritual home,who knows?

So where does your belief come from? What is your underlying motivation?

The fact you opened this thread would seem to suggest that your belief is closer to hope rather than belief in the true sense of the term.

MPFGLB wrote: »

Setting aside how the OP did not do himself any favours with his written English I feel that discussing beliefs (and that is what they are) with out arrogance that assumes that because you are making a jump in faith that somehow you do not deserve the same respect as those who only rely on as yet unknown or unproven scientific explanations is in of itself an arrogant assumption and encompasses no more authenticity.

If we don't know we don't know and reincarnation is as likely to be an explanation as any other. And surely ruling anything out at this stage or chasing people from the boards for no other issue than they cannot defend what they belief against logic is not something to be celebrated

I can respect people who entertain the idea of a higher power/deity etc... being open to the potential of it is perfectly fine imo.

But what I find difficult to respect, is someone being arrogant enough to tell me that they know something unknowable with absolute certainty. These kind of people are highly frustrating individuals...

"There is a god, this is his/her name, this is their official spoken word"... etc etc... Absolutely no time for that stance!!

I also have the same problem with those who are closed minded in the opposite regard. Those who say with absolute certainty that there is no god, no nothing... we vanish into nothingness and cease to exist.

Both are absolutes and both are a form of extremism. The latter is quite often a reaction to the former, which makes it just as bad.

Closed-mindedness is not just the preserve of the "faithful"... oh no!

mariaalice wrote: »

Why do humans need to believe in life after death that is a much more interesting question?

Despite the fact that organised religion has largely fallen away in a lot of western society it has reappeared in a different form, all sorts of new age beliefs, myths, other ways of knowing and so on.

Human consciousness must have a need for belief as a way of coping with our consciousness of our finite existence.

These are the questions that fascinate me just as much too.

Understanding ourselves, our motivations etc might lead to greater understanding of why we're here and what it's all about... (or even just a happier, less fearful existence)

Then maybe after we've got a better grasp of that, we can move on to the big question mark in the sky! lol

nozzferrahhtoo

mariaalice wrote: »

Why do humans need to believe in life after death that is a much more interesting question?

The comedy writer Terry Pratchett once suggested that "Homo Sapien" meaning "The Wise Ape" was a bad choice of name for our species. He suggested instead it should have been "Pan narrans" meaning "Storytelling Chimpanzee"

He was suggesting that we are a species that, possibly due to the evolution of things like language and imagery in our mental capabilities, is driven by a narrative. We are a meme machine, and we need memes and we produce memes.

So it is possible that an after life, especially one maintained by a designer with some ultimate plan, merely feeds into that need for a narrative.

Sam Harris also did a talk you might find interesting on the role of Death and an After Life in humans and in religion.

osarusan

I can understand why the idea of another afterlife of some kind appeals to people, but no, I don't believe there is life after death.

Life, such as the lives of those who knew me, will simply continue, but I will just be dead.

Why isn't the idea that you are part of the circle of life and will fertilize the earth there will be new growth and eventually your atoms will be released to mingle with all the other atoms, enough for people.

A bit new age but works for me and if there is an afterlife thats cool as well.

MPFGLB

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I would hope that not many people here are operating that way at all. There are of course _some_ who do, but so far it seems pretty cordial. The recommendation I would give, like you do, is that people talking well proven concepts should be afforded every bit the same quantity of respect as those talking unsubstantiated tosh.

Their beliefs should not however. Respect people, not beliefs I would say.

Beliefs deserve, nor require, respect. And do not make the mistake so many make of conflating the merciless unpacking of someone else's truth claims as being an attack on the person who holds those ideas. It is not, despite many people wishing to pretend otherwise.



I am not so sure that statement tells the whole story. It makes it sound like we are all starting from some zero point, and the claim is just 50:50 as to whether it is true or not.

The reality is however that while we do not fully understand things like human consciousness, we can still safely say that 100% of the things we DO know about it at this stage point to an inextricable link to the brain. While 0% of anything we know at this time is even remotely suggestive of any kind of disconnect between the two. So concepts like reincarnation or some "Collective Consciousness" that you suggested, are simply unsubstantiated at this time.

So I would never say it is just as likely, as not. Because... while it may turn out to be real or true... it certainly goes against everything we know and everything we have observed in controlled conditions.

So it is just another one of the MILLIONS of things we can categorize under "Possible I suppose, but not at all likely, credible or remotely substantiated in reality", which I feel tells a much more honest and accurate story than "as likely as any other".



I do not think anyone was chased away, so much as they removed themselves due to their OWN shame when they were asked if they could substantiate anything they said, and were shown to be doing little better than making it up as they went along.

And while there is nothing to celebrate per se in chasing people off a forum, there certainly is something to celebrate in our discourse as a whole when unsubstantiated nonsense raises its head, is confronted intelligently and cordially, and it ends up running for the hills.

Our species has long since matured to the point where we can stop molly coddling beliefs like babies, and we can stand up and directly ask people who make fantastical claims "How do you know that?" or "Have you any reason to think this is true at all?". While personal "idea space" is free and people have every right to their beliefs..... public or species level "idea space" I do not believe should be and we can certainly say without any qualms "No sorry, that move in this space is not one we are warranted to make at this time".

Why should anyone have SHAME in their beliefs which you say are "unsubstantiated nonsense" which "raises its head " on these boards. You chose to put that connotation on their actions and even their beliefs. By the same token everyone going to say mass on Sunday should feel the same way

Sure they cannot be substantiated but I say you cannot 100% dispute either and while I do not support any none 50/50 (other otherwise) theory of likelihood I do not dismiss other beliefs as easily as you seem to do
In fact saying it is not a 50/50 likelihood of any belief like reincarnation which is so far unsubstantiated theory is in its self a 'belief' that I chose not to molly coddle.

In fairness your brand of the truth is every bit as oppressive as any
There is plenty in the language of your post that dismisses people and seems to have full confidence in your ability to dismiss what other believe as if you are part of some debating society where only logic prevails...

in fact saying "Our species has long since matured to the point where we can stop molly coddling beliefs like babies" would suggest a strange and myopic view of what is going on now in the world with fundamental religions

Most religions are based on the belief in life after death. It is a reality that needs debate not dismissing as 'molly coddling"

Lockheed

I was perfectly fine for the millions of years before I was born, and I of course don't remember any of it, so I think the same for the millions of years that will come after my death. I don't believe in a life after death.

Rippington

mariaalice wrote: »

Why isn't the idea that you are part of the circle of life and will fertilize the earth there will be new growth and eventually your atoms will be released to mingle with all the other atoms, enough for people.

A bit new age but works for me and if there is an afterlife thats cool as well.

This make sense to me to .We don't remember life before birth and chances are we wont remember when we die and nothing to say we wont come back as a leaf on a tree , a flower or a weed .