After Death, the documentary (translation, protestant, Christianity, Christian)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Summary: We genuinely have no idea if there is an afterlife or what happens after we die and there is no solid conclusive evidence that shows there is really an afterlife BUT there are, although rare, data that there is a POSSIBILITY that "something" may exist. Religion is something people do to better their lives and do good for people and society, with the exception of using religion to cause harm and danger upon others.
I saw this documentary today "After Death," which is very good. It highlights several people who had near death experiences before they were resuscitated. Many people saw the light and one person felt "oceans of love," while a few others experienced darkness and hell.
Raymond Moody, physician and author, is also featured. He wrote the book "Life After Life" in 1975. Other authors of NDE books were also featured. It's well worth watching for those on the fence about the life after death subject. This movie makes the case that there definitely is more to this life than this one.
Nothing that is experienced before death, no matter how seemingly suggestive of an afterlife, can serve as proof of the existence of an afterlife. I shouldn't have to explain why. The human imagination does a bit too much work in attempting to extrapolate the significance of these NDEs. All we know is that people are capable of having extremely trippy (for lack of a better word) experiences when close to death. Says zero about what is experienced when actually dead. As an atheist who defers to science and logic on this and every other question, I am compelled to believe that consciousness is entirely a product of brain activity and that once we've experienced brain death (from which no human has ever 'recovered), we're done, permanently. No afterlife for a biological machine built by nature to experience only one life in this universe. I'm open to being proven wrong, but notice that I use the word 'proven'. In the absence of any such proof, proof that from within my logically coherent worldview is definitionally impossible for any human to provide, I'll continue in my firm but not fully rigid disbelief in an afterlife 'for broken down computers', as Stephen Hawking once put it
Nothing that is experienced before death, no matter how seemingly suggestive of an afterlife, can serve as proof of the existence of an afterlife. I shouldn't have to explain why. The human imagination does a bit too much work in attempting to extrapolate the significance of these NDEs. All we know is that people are capable of having extremely trippy (for lack of a better word) experiences when close to death. Says zero about what is experienced when actually dead. As an atheist who defers to science and logic on this and every other question, I am compelled to believe that consciousness is entirely a product of brain activity and that once we've experienced brain death (from which no human has ever 'recovered), we're done, permanently. No afterlife for a biological machine built by nature to experience only one life in this universe. I'm open to being proven wrong, but notice that I use the word 'proven'. In the absence of any such proof, proof that from within my logically coherent worldview is definitionally impossible for any human to provide, I'll continue in my firm but not fully rigid disbelief in an afterlife 'for broken down computers', as Stephen Hawking once put it
Stephen, like most mathematicians (not all of us) considered our consciousness as a product of computation completely ignoring the fact that it is the result of LIFE which a computer does not have! A computer can mimic our conscious output but it has no life and will never be intelligent (artificially or otherwise without life).
As an atheist who defers to science and logic on this and every other question, I am compelled to believe that consciousness is entirely a product of brain activity and that once we've experienced brain death (from which no human has ever 'recovered), we're done, permanently.
Another graduate of the LearnMe Academy of Epistemology? That's the beauty of my rather broader epistemology. It doesn't "compel" me to believe anything. I let it point me where it will. The veritable mountain of experiential and even scientific evidence "suggestive" of survival, together with the inability of neuroscience to provide even a plausible materialistic explanation for consciousness, points me toward a conviction in survival.
As an atheist who defers to science and logic on this and every other question, I am compelled to believe that consciousness is entirely a product of brain activity and that once we've experienced brain death (from which no human has ever 'recovered), we're done, permanently.
You seem aware that it is a product of brain activity, but then you make the same mistake most neuroscientists do and assume it IS the brain activity. It is NOT. The "product" is the resonant composite of the entire neural synaptic output of the brain that exists at the level of quanta (as a pure BEC, IMO). It is a separate entity ("fruit") from the physical body and brain ("plant") that produces it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by O'Darby
Another graduate of the LearnMe Academy of Epistemology? That's the beauty of my rather broader epistemology. It doesn't "compel" me to believe anything. I let it point me where it will. The veritable mountain of experiential and even scientific evidence "suggestive" of survival, together the inability of neuroscience to provide even a plausible materialistic explanation for consciousness, points me toward a conviction in survival.
LearnMe's graduates simply do not have the interest, intellectual rigor, or chops to even contemplate what is not practically "real" as they see it.
Another graduate of the LearnMe Academy of Epistemology? That's the beauty of my rather broader epistemology. It doesn't "compel" me to believe anything. I let it point me where it will.
Your epistemology is so broad it allows everything, and therefore answers nothing. It also relies on ignoring evidence you do not like, the sign of a crank's epistemology.
Quote:
Originally Posted by O'Darby
The veritable mountain of experiential and even scientific evidence "suggestive" of survival, together with the inability of neuroscience to provide even a plausible materialistic explanation for consciousness, points me toward a conviction in survival.
1) Except neuroscience does provide a plausible materialistic explanation for consciousness. And this is supported by neural networks reproducing aspects of consciousness, something a disembodied soul can not explain.
2) Your conviction in survival is not able to provide even a plausible explanation for consciousness, so you must logically also reject your god of the gaps argument.
So instead of simply dismissing the valid tools of science and logic, perhaps you should start providing the evidence for your claims instead of simply asserting you have evidence.
You seem aware that it is a product of brain activity, but then you make the same mistake most neuroscientists do and assume it IS the brain activity.
Must we explain this once again? All the evidence points to consciousness being a product of the brain. If you want to argue for a third option, provide the evidence for that option, AND that evidence must explain consciousness better than the more simple idea of it being a set of processes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
It is NOT. The "product" is the resonant composite of the entire neural synaptic output of the brain that exists at the level of quanta (as a pure BEC, IMO). It is a separate entity ("fruit") from the physical body and brain ("plant") that produces it.
Lol, "It is NOT" but "IMO". You know it is not because you have an opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
LearnMe's graduates simply do not have the interest, intellectual rigor, or chops to even contemplate what is not practically "real" as they see it.
Yes, we see your intellectual rigor oft in the science forum.
What actually boggles me is when atheists say "these NDEs are <<bleep>>*. all religious crap. proof that there's no fantasy afterlife" as well when Christians say "NDEs are proof that God is real. Glory to God!"
I'm right in the middle. I find this topic very interesting. A lot of data has been collected over the years but nothing really conclusive, at least from what I have seen.
I'd love to see a case study that says: out of 1,000 NDEs that were studied, 70% had a "no experience" NDE, and 30% had an experience. "No experience" NDEs occurred approx 3 hrs after the patients died with no brain activity detected. 90% of the "no experience" NDEs patients describes seeing absolutely nothing while being dead. 40% of the "no experiene" NDE patients identified as a Christian.
See the amount of detail there? That's called filling in the holes and gaps. Minimizing the amount of questions that can be asked.
I am one atheist that wouldn't say "these NDEs are bleep." I prefer your simple assessment that there is nothing really there that is "really conclusive."
And yes, considering the data that has been collected here and there is always interesting, but of course limited because not all that many people have NDEs in the first place and many who do are reluctant to share them. I mean how many people actually come that close to dying but don't and live to tell about it? Of all the people I know, I think I know two or three people who can claim such an experience. Neither has suggested any sort of NDE other than what you might call a close call with death. Otherwise, no experience like others who claim something more along the lines of the phenomena referred to below.
"The near-death experience is an experience reported by people who have come close to dying in a medical or non-medical setting. The aspect of trauma, and physical crises, is also recognized as an indicator for the phenomenon. Five percent of the adult American population have had an NDE, according to Linda J. Griffith and Bruce Greyson. Surveys conducted in the US, Australia and Germany suggest that 4 to 15% of the population have had NDEs, according to IANDS. Researchers study the role of physiological, psychological and transcendental factors associated with the NDE. These dimensions are also the basis for the three major explanatory models for the NDE." -- Wikipedia
Nothing that is experienced before death, no matter how seemingly suggestive of an afterlife, can serve as proof of the existence of an afterlife. I shouldn't have to explain why. The human imagination does a bit too much work in attempting to extrapolate the significance of these NDEs. All we know is that people are capable of having extremely trippy (for lack of a better word) experiences when close to death. Says zero about what is experienced when actually dead. As an atheist who defers to science and logic on this and every other question, I am compelled to believe that consciousness is entirely a product of brain activity and that once we've experienced brain death (from which no human has ever 'recovered), we're done, permanently. No afterlife for a biological machine built by nature to experience only one life in this universe. I'm open to being proven wrong, but notice that I use the word 'proven'. In the absence of any such proof, proof that from within my logically coherent worldview is definitionally impossible for any human to provide, I'll continue in my firm but not fully rigid disbelief in an afterlife 'for broken down computers', as Stephen Hawking once put it
I'm with you and your assessments along these lines that I consider more astute than average for this forum, and to elaborate further, I think we have plenty to consider when it comes to what happens to so many people who experience trauma of different sorts. We have all kinds of evidence, research and study having to do with how profoundly people can be affected by traumatic experiences. Plenty enough to keep so many therapists busy trying to help these people with their mental states that become altogether "hard to explain" other than by way of what trauma of this sort can do to us. Mentally. Soldiers who come away after combat with PTSD is another example. So many dealing with altered "realities" due to extreme trauma, but we don't jump to the conclusion that their "visions" are proof of anything other than what is more commonly addressed as a mental disorder. As vidid and real as these alter-experiences may be, we generally don't jump to the conclusion there is more going on in these cases, but when it comes to NDEs (and all our fascination with the possibility of an afterlife), these sorts of experiences are seen as different by many who tend to enjoy more imaginative freedom than scientists and professionals generally think prudent.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
