Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 142920	2016-10-09 01:37:00	Life After Life	Roscoe (6288)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1427162	2016-10-11 20:51:00	Einstein was smarter than us but I don't think he had any Idea what happened after death either. What is the real situation when we die? Since this is a question of reality, we can consult the expert in reality, Einstein. Einstein said that we shouldn't go by how things appear to an observer but follow the logic. I have a computer consisting of various parts. If I store the parts in different boxes, has the computer gone out of existence? No. It is still the same logical machine, even to members of my family. I can reassemble it and it will be just like it was. If I throw the computer out and it ends up scattered in a rubbish tip, has it gone out of existence? To the rest of the family, yes. To me, no. The logical situation is similar to having the parts in different boxes at home. (But now it will be a lot harder to reassemble.) It would be very difficult to 'reassemble' a dead person, but the situation is the same as with the computer in the tip, so long as someone remembers how it goes. The existence of a thing is not a matter of how it appears but whether it is logically possible for the thing to contribute to the logic of some world. The computer in the tip remains in existence, in a logical sense, because it is indeed logically possible for it to be reassembled. That logical context is me. When I die, it will be logically impossible for the computer to be reassembled because I'm the only one having a reference to it. Existence is a matter of logical context. It's only when a thing has no possible context that it goes out of existence. When we die, we become like the computer scattered throughout the tip. To all appearances we have gone out of existence. But like the computer we remain in existence unless we can guarantee that some other logical context won't see us as the person we are.	BBCmicro (15761)
1427163	2016-10-11 21:10:00	Depends, if you consider yourself just the physical sum of your parts then yes all your atoms will still exist in the universe and could theoretically be reassembled. If however you consider yourself your consciousness and sum of your memories and experiences it's not quite so simple. Your PC is not self aware or intelligent. If it was running some sort of program that only existed in memory and was unique not just to the hardware but to the conditions existing when it was running then once you shut down the PC the software ceases to exist and can never be recreated. That's more like the Human mind to me, once you are completely gone beyond all possibility of revival then the software no longer exists. And I didn't say logically once. :p	dugimodo (138)
1427164	2016-10-11 21:53:00	Not sure if gone is gone...because death has come to me sort of...in dreams. When we were kids, one of our mates died of leukemia around '72. use to chat to him on the way to school (he was withdrawn from school) - was pale, wearing caps. I forgot about him for over forty years, until about 3 years ago, then about 1.5 years ago. Came "calling" in my dreams. Maybe I was a bit cheeky to him, but feel like I have to visit him at his grave...	kahawai chaser (3545)
1427165	2016-10-11 22:05:00	If however you consider yourself your consciousness and sum of your memories and experiences it's not quite so simple. Don't you think that's a bit unscientific? In science, there's only matter and forces - no mystical quantities like 'consciousness' Personally, I find it sobering to realise that a person is made up of just 4 particles - the up quark, the down quark, the electron, and the neutrino. We can think of them as red, green, yellow, and blue plastic balls like you find at a McDonald's play pit. The balls of each colour are identical. They have no internal structure differentiating one from another. Somehow, these plastic balls are supposed to generate consciousness? I find that far-fetched The alternative approach is to generate consciousness not from matter but from logic. This is partly the way that science is going at present. Reality is generated by mathematical logic rather than being a self-existing 'given' that we stumble across. Some respectable physicists already think that mathematics (a form of logic) is the only thing that self-exists. If you go down that path you arrive at a consistent explanation of the world, part of which I outlined earlier	BBCmicro (15761)
1427166	2016-10-11 22:24:00	Consciousness is something we all know exists, the old "I think therefore I am" statement. Just because science still struggles to quantify and define it doesn't change that. Unless you think a random collection of particles just spontaneously typed out this sentence, I find that far fetched. I don't think many people are talking about anything physical when they discuss life after death, the question then becomes is consciousness something separate from our physical body and can it continue without it. I don't think so myself. As to the 4 particles thing, that's beyond me. I'm not familiar with that theory. I do know there is more than 1 electron in my body though, do you mean 4 particles in total or 4 kinds of particles? My knowledge of physics is sadly out of date and my attempts to read up on current theories doesn't usually last long. I interests me but I struggle with it. I don't think physics can truly answer the question of life after death though, at least not yet.	dugimodo (138)
1427167	2016-10-11 22:26:00	I live my life assuming that there is life for us (and for all other life on the planet) after our physical bodies wear out. In other words, I don't worry about not having all sorts of experiences, and rushing around the world to wherever. There will be time and opportunity in future incarnations, as there has been in previous incarnations. The topic of life after death comes up now and then as we live, talking to people, reading, having experiences, and for me, putting all that together, I am pretty sure that death is not the end. 99% sure. I read a book years ago by Doris Lessing, called "Briefing for a descent into Hell", and I think she had it sorted out. Ostensibly it was about mental disease, but I reckon she was giving us a sample of a life on this planet as viewed from outside. Something to ponder on, I thought. Just one of many things.	rumpty (2863)
1427168	2016-10-12 01:49:00	Consciousness is something we all know exists, While I agree with you (and Rumpty and other thoughtful commenters) it is unscientific to talk of consciousness and mystical experiences . Science deals in reality - stuff that can be proved, like matter and forces . The choice is between science and religion, the latter being defined broadly as 'not science' . A lot of people pooh pooh the idea of religion and tell us they're firmly on the science side . But then they start talking about consciousness, life-after-life, personal mystical experiences, and so on . In other words, they show they're on the religion side . This is inconsistent of them . They should decide what side they're on and why . Personally I think the religion side is more consistent and provides more-convincing explanations than the science side . However, it is necessary to get the religion right - prune it of all the absurdities and superstition and get the logic right	BBCmicro (15761)
1 2 3 4 5