[QUOTE=AbeX300;43142324]I'm not really sure if this counts as life after death, and this is probably a selfish way of thinking about it, but I like to think of it as Groundhog Day.
The moment that you die, you are instantly warped [b]all[/b] the way back to when you first gain conscious. You retain [b]every[/b] bit of memory that you had on the previous life, so it's time-traveling-reincarnation. But this is where the selfish (and confusing) part comes into play; I have another belief that we all live in our own parallel universes, and since this would be mine, only I would have the GD-effect. Right now I made this post, but maybe when the reset happens, I might never make this post while the rest of the posts on here remain [b]exactly[/b] the same (unless said posts involve replying to this one).[/QUOTE]
So, no possibility of the same big Ol' Universe that we all live, and die, in?
[editline]11th December 2013[/editline]
No who am I kidding, that's way too boring to be true. To just simply die one after another? Pft, there's gotta be something more to it than that. (/sarcasm)
[QUOTE=AbeX300;43142324]I'm not really sure if this counts as life after death, and this is probably a selfish way of thinking about it, but I like to think of it as Groundhog Day.
The moment that you die, you are instantly warped [b]all[/b] the way back to when you first gain conscious. You retain [b]every[/b] bit of memory that you had on the previous life, so it's time-traveling-reincarnation. But this is where the selfish (and confusing) part comes into play; I have another belief that we all live in our own parallel universes, and since this would be mine, only I would have the GD-effect. Right now I made this post, but maybe when the reset happens, I might never make this post while the rest of the posts on here remain [b]exactly[/b] the same (unless said posts involve replying to this one).
It's also possible that I'm just some person in someone else's parallel universe; that person might reply to this as "That's the weirdest belief I've heard" the first time, but when he gets his life reset and goes up to this point, I will act [b]exactly[/b] the same as before, even making this post, and he'll instead reply with "I kinda have that same belief as well...". It could be [b]anyone[/b], really; maybe it's Jookia and he doesn't allow profile comments because in his previous life, it just kept getting filled up with spam comments, which then led to spam PMs [i]afterwards[/i] concerning closing profile commenting. Maybe it's Autumn who was previously one of the most ruthless moderators of FacePunch and even got banned, eventually, for that reason, but after his first reset, learned from his mistakes. It could even be garry who might not even have made Garry's Mod before his first, few, or multiple resets, and instead was someone who worked as an employee at Nintendo!
But at the same time, there is also a [b]very[/b] slim chance of mishap that someone else out there possess the same ability, so once both of us are dead, the reset happens at a point where whoever's age of consciousness is later (so if person A gained conscious at age 6, and person B gained conscious at age 5, both of them reset to age 6).
[u]Summary:[/u] Parallel universes, Groundhog Day, either I'm in my own parallel universe or someone else's (and me not being aware of the latter), also possible to have someone else in the same universe get the GD-effect.
It left a bad taste in my mouth and confused me just explaining it, but at the same time, I'm really oddly interested in this kind of topic, so... :v:[/QUOTE]
That's cool and all but what makes you think it's true?
I would like to, so I live my life as glorious as I can. You know I like to think the afterlife is like an infinite lucid dream where you can be linked to all the people and creatures of the past, and the funny thing about it is you can learn all the things about the universe that you just couldn't find being a human.
I've noticed that a lot of people "like to think" things. Is this lingo for "I'm just wishful thinking?"
I also like to think humans will live on as a species till the end of Time itself, but I ain't gonna be around to see that. It takes a believer.
I'm just curious Bat-shit, would you [I]want[/I] an afterlife to exist?
The answer depends on what the nature of our consciousness really is, which we are yet to understand.
The answer could simply be that we just cease to exist as before we were born, but as we humans have discovered through science, nature usually has a vastly superior imagination to human beings, thus the answers to such questions could be things we haven't as of yet been able to conceive.
[QUOTE=xZippy;43157146]I'm just curious Bat-shit, would you [I]want[/I] an afterlife to exist?[/QUOTE]
I don't even know. Pretty hard to answer actually, because I don't really believe in it.
But maybe, yeah. It would however be incredibly mind-blowing (for a while anyway) to come to learn that you are in afterlife.. and that you are dead.
It would practically change everything, and I wouldn't mind afterlife existing (how could I?), yet it wouldn't change anything for the everyday life of the living so.. it's fucked up alright.
To those who don't believe in an afterlife just because of the lack of proof. How [I]could[/I] there be proof? It's not like someone can invent some sort of afterlife detection machine.
Our current understanding of biology indicates that the brain is responsible for the mind. Once that's rotted away I don't think I'll have a mind. There's no reason to think we should keep our minds after death, so I'm not going to live my life acting like we do.
[QUOTE=xZippy;43176568]To those who don't believe in an afterlife just because of the lack of proof. How [I]could[/I] there be proof? It's not like someone can invent some sort of afterlife detection machine.[/QUOTE]
Why believe in something that contradicts our current understanding of the universe, and that is also unprovable?
[QUOTE=xZippy;43176568]To those who don't believe in an afterlife just because of the lack of proof. How [I]could[/I] there be proof? It's not like someone can invent some sort of afterlife detection machine.[/QUOTE]
I would say it's ultimately more about making the best out of your life rather than worrying about going into the afterlife or not, which is tied to a lot of religious stuff as well. Because either way, you will stay that way as seemingly evident, .. as in you will live and you will die. It's not really a mystery imho.
[QUOTE=xZippy;43176568]To those who don't believe in an afterlife just because of the lack of proof. How [I]could[/I] there be proof? It's not like someone can invent some sort of afterlife detection machine.[/QUOTE]
Because the past 60 years of neuroscience as shown that duality of the mind/body does not exist.
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;43183046]I would say it's ultimately more about making the best out of your life rather than worrying about going into the afterlife or not, which is tied to a lot of religious stuff as well.[/QUOTE]
Making the best out of your life no matter what is a wise thing to go by, but the belief in an afterlife doesn't have to change that.
[QUOTE=Levithan;43184606]Because the past 60 years of neuroscience as shown that duality of the mind/body does not exist.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't call that concrete proof against an afterlife... Because assuming one did exist, it may not follow the mechanics or "rules" of the body and mind as [I]we[/I] know it.
[QUOTE=KlaseR;43120204]no, they don't deserve Hell. Sure, they might deserve some amount of suffering, but not eternal damnation. Literally nobody deserves that.[/QUOTE]
IF souls were eternal once created. Where would you put them all? Would you mix the hitlers in with the saints?
[editline]15th December 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Levithan;43184606]Because the past 60 years of neuroscience as shown that duality of the mind/body does not exist.[/QUOTE]
Not necessarily.
Entertain me this;
The brain can be likened to a radio.
One can know all of the workings of the radio, how sound is produced, how the variation of the dials produces different outputs, and how it all runs on electricity. Though if you had no concept of radio waves you couldn't fully explain the radio, despite your knowing of its internal functions. You could poke and prod the radio and say "Voila! If I shock the radio in this certain way it produces this certain response." but you couldn't say this radio's intelligence has been ascertained. Even though your experiments are producing standard results, the fact remains that all you are doing is tapping into different radio waves and altering them. This may be easier to conceive of if you picture a time traveling radio that lands right around the enlightenment, allowing old scientists to study it.
In this way the brain can be likened to a radio, in that it is an argument for duality. We know the workings of the brain, we know how to poke and prod it to produce anger or fear, and we can even predict what the final output will be given the electric signals prior. What we possibly aren't accounting for is this strange source of intelligence. This phenomenological spark which we call consciousness. It may be this, like radio waves, that is the missing piece in a seemingly finished puzzle.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43188760]IF souls were eternal once created. Where would you put them all? Would you mix the hitlers in with the saints?[/QUOTE]
You're the same guy that I rebuted in another thread, then never responded. So I'll humour you here.
First of all I'm going to respond to your question: We already have this problem on Earth actually. We solve it quite well: People free roam and get to do what they want, but if they've done really terrible things, they go to jail. Note that in jail we don't torture people for eternity, we hold them and punish them for a length relative to their crimes.
Secondly I'm going to explain how your answer makes you a terrible person: KlaseR, the person you were replying to, was stating that nobody deserves eternal damnation. You didn't rebut that, and instead talked about how you need to separate the 'hitlers' and the saints. So you've either avoided the question, or worse: You actually think eternal damnation is the correct way of approaching this problem.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43188760]Not necessarily.
Entertain me this;
The brain can be likened to a radio.[/QUOTE]
The brain can't be likened to a radio. It implies there's some form of transmission. The brain is a closed system, and every part has been identified as having a function.
Further, when a radio's damaged, we get a weaker signal. But with brain damage, we have complete personality and logical thinking changes. This stirs quite a pot of problems. Do psychopaths go to hell for earthly crimes? It's not the soul's fault is it? What about the reverse, what about people who do good because of brain damage, but their soul intends bad? Do they go to heaven?
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43188760]One can know all of the workings of the radio, how sound is produced, how the variation of the dials produces different outputs, and how it all runs on electricity. Though if you had no concept of radio waves you couldn't fully explain the radio, despite your knowing of its internal functions. You could poke and prod the radio and say "Voila! If I shock the radio in this certain way it produces this certain response." but you couldn't say this radio's intelligence has been ascertained. Even though your experiments are producing standard results, the fact remains that all you are doing is tapping into different radio waves and altering them. This may be easier to conceive of if you picture a time traveling radio that lands right around the enlightenment, allowing old scientists to study it.
In this way the brain can be likened to a radio, in that it is an argument for duality. We know the workings of the brain, we know how to poke and prod it to produce anger or fear, and we can even predict what the final output will be given the electric signals prior. What we possibly aren't accounting for is this strange source of intelligence. This phenomenological spark which we call consciousness. It may be this, like radio waves, that is the missing piece in a seemingly finished puzzle.[/QUOTE]
Argument from ignorance.
[QUOTE=xZippy;43188652]Making the best out of your life no matter what is a wise thing to go by, but the belief in an afterlife doesn't have to change that.[/QUOTE]
Indeed it doesn't. And the belief in an afterlife doesn't change the fact that you will live and you will die, just like another piece of light bulb. Simple as that.
Also, by all means and logic, don't you think the word afterlife just translates to death?
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43188760]IF souls were eternal once created. Where would you put them all? Would you mix the hitlers in with the saints?
[editline]15th December 2013[/editline]
Not necessarily.
Entertain me this;
The brain can be likened to a radio.
One can know all of the workings of the radio, how sound is produced, how the variation of the dials produces different outputs, and how it all runs on electricity. Though if you had no concept of radio waves you couldn't fully explain the radio, despite your knowing of its internal functions. You could poke and prod the radio and say "Voila! If I shock the radio in this certain way it produces this certain response." but you couldn't say this radio's intelligence has been ascertained. Even though your experiments are producing standard results, the fact remains that all you are doing is tapping into different radio waves and altering them. This may be easier to conceive of if you picture a time traveling radio that lands right around the enlightenment, allowing old scientists to study it.
In this way the brain can be likened to a radio, in that it is an argument for duality. We know the workings of the brain, we know how to poke and prod it to produce anger or fear, and we can even predict what the final output will be given the electric signals prior. What we possibly aren't accounting for is this strange source of intelligence. This phenomenological spark which we call consciousness. It may be this, like radio waves, that is the missing piece in a seemingly finished puzzle.[/QUOTE]
this isn't a good analogy as you can't really make a functioning radio without some basic understanding of the radio waves.
accounting for intelligence is beyond us right now. It however should follow that out of everything we once believed to be magic, that none of it is/was. I don't see it as a different thing with the mind or brain just because it again seems that much out of our logical reach of understanding.
Pretty foolish to build your argument off of that anyway. In the next 50 years our knowledge of neuroscience will be pretty amazing.
[QUOTE=Jookia;43189281]You're the same guy that I rebuted in another thread, then never responded. So I'll humour you here.
First of all I'm going to respond to your question: We already have this problem on Earth actually. We solve it quite well: People free roam and get to do what they want, but if they've done really terrible things, they go to jail. Note that in jail we don't torture people for eternity, we hold them and punish them for a length relative to their crimes.
[/quote]
So you would release Hitler back into society after being incarcerated for an equitable amount of time. How long would that be? 10 years? 50 years? 100 years? 1000 years? Do you think he'll be a better person for it? How do you redeem someone like him? Again you are humoring me that souls are eternal, not conceding.
[quote]
Secondly I'm going to explain how your answer makes you a terrible person: KlaseR, the person you were replying to, was stating that nobody deserves eternal damnation. You didn't rebut that, and instead talked about how you need to separate the 'hitlers' and the saints. So you've either avoided the question, or worse: You actually think eternal damnation is the correct way of approaching this problem.
[/quote] People love throwing the word eternal damnation around like they know exactly what it means. For all I know it could be non-existence, or just segregation with all the other dickheads. It doesn't have to mean being tortured in boiling excrement or whatever idea you have picked up from Dante's inferno and the likes. In the grand scheme of things this all hinges on life after death. With the trans-humanists making advances it may soon become an issue for our earthy lives as well. How should we treat immortal murderers?
[quote]
The brain can't be likened to a radio. It implies there's some form of transmission. The brain is a closed system, and every part has been identified as having a function.
Further, when a radio's damaged, we get a weaker signal. But with brain damage, we have complete personality and logical thinking changes. This stirs quite a pot of problems. Do psychopaths go to hell for earthly crimes? It's not the soul's fault is it? What about the reverse, what about people who do good because of brain damage, but their soul intends bad? Do they go to heaven?
Argument from ignorance.[/QUOTE]
The same could be said for a radio, let me explain and please bear with me before you take your high seat again.
If I were to place a fully working radio in the 1600s as well as allow there to be at least one broadcast for which it can pick up. The people studying the radio would be utterly convinced of their knowledge of the entire system even though they have no concept of Radio waves. They would be convinced that this system they have before them is a source of intellence and that if they reverse engineer it they will get the exact same results.
Imagine they do rebuild this time-travelling radio. Low and behold, just as predicted, it starts spouting that one radio station once it is turned on. Surely we have disproved the duality of a radio they would say.
Also if personalities are like radio stations and emotions are like the bass/volume etc. nobs. Then there is no reason your damage analogy cannot hold up with the radio. Radios don't always lose signal when they get damaged, similarly brains don't always lose consiciousness when damaged, as you said.
Now to address your amazing conundrum;
I don't decide, and so from my point of view, I try not to worry about who and what and how. I figure things will go the way that they should, and if fear of my Aluahim makes me a better person for nothing, then I guess that's just the way it will be. I feel as though you want me to start badmouthing sinners or something. I'm a sinner, though I constantly struggle with it. I know Organized religion and tradition has created something of a farce out of the scriptures, but if you actually listen with your ears you will find that what it is actually about is love. Unconditional love that may be accepted or rejected. One can either accept that love and live in peace, or continue to make excuses about why he isn't good enough or the rules are too hard or that unconditional love is impossible.
All in all, planning for immortality does wonders for ethics. Soon even you atheists will have to entertain this thought, for the abomination of technological immortality is around the corner.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43193526]So you would release Hitler back into society after being incarcerated for an equitable amount of time. How long would that be? 10 years? 50 years? 100 years? 1000 years? Do you think he'll be a better person for it? How do you redeem someone like him? Again you are humoring me that souls are eternal, not conceding.[/QUOTE]
I don't know how long I would incarcerate Hitler for. I can't know the, it'd require me to be omniscient, like some type of god, to know of all the crimes.
Would he be a better person? Would it redeem him? Maybe not, maybe it'd make him not do it again. Maybe he'd end up just painting and designing things to his hearts content. He'd not have the opportunity to do it again, that's for sure. He was an ill man in extreme circumstances.
Punishing finite crimes for infinite time doesn't make sense, it provides motive to do worse crimes as the punishment is identical.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43193526]People love throwing the word eternal damnation around like they know exactly what it means. For all I know it could be non-existence, or just segregation with all the other dickheads. It doesn't have to mean being tortured in boiling excrement or whatever idea you have picked up from Dante's inferno and the likes. In the grand scheme of things this all hinges on life after death.[/QUOTE]
Eternal damnation is eternal, and includes some form of damnation I presume. That's enough for me to know it's terrible.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43193526]With the trans-humanists making advances it may soon become an issue for our earthy lives as well. How should we treat immortal murderers?[/QUOTE]
Rehabilition, jail, not letting them be in the same circumstances as before.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43193526]The same could be said for a radio, let me explain and please bear with me before you take your high seat again.
If I were to place a fully working radio in the 1600s as well as allow there to be at least one broadcast for which it can pick up. The people studying the radio would be utterly convinced of there knowledge of the entire system even though they have no concept of Radio waves. They would be convinced that this system they have before them is a source of intellence and that if they reverse engineer it they will get the exact same results.
Imagine they do rebuild this time-travelling radio. Low and behold, just as predicted, it starts spouting that one radio station once it is turned on. Surely we have disproved the duality of a radio they would say.[/QUOTE]
Argument from ignorance.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43193526]Also if personalities are like radio stations and emotions are like the bass/volume etc. nobs. Then there is no reason your damage analogy cannot hold up with the radio. Radios don't always lose signal when they get damaged, similarly brains don't always lose consiciousness when damaged, as you said. [/QUOTE]
I did not say that you lose consciousness when damaged, please don't misrepresent me. Even with your knobs, the argument is still completely flawed: With brain damage, the effects affect the personality, decision making, the logical structures of the brain. This would be the equivalent of a damaged radio affecting the station, or having its playback DIVERGE from the received broadcast.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43193526]Now to address your amazing conundrum;
I don't decide, and so from my point of view, I try not to worry about who and what and how. I figure things will go the way that they should, and if fear of my Aluahim makes me a better person for nothing, then I guess that's just the way it will be. I feel as though you want me to start badmouthing sinners or something. I'm a sinner, though I constantly struggle with it. I know Organized religion and tradition has created something of a farce out of the scriptures, but if you actually listen with your ears you will find that what it is actually about is love. Unconditional love that may be accepted or rejected. One can either accept that love and live in peace, or continue to make excuses about why he isn't good enough or the rules are too hard or that unconditional love is impossible.
All in all, planning for immortality does wonders for ethics. Soon even you atheists will have to entertain this thought, for the abomination of technological immortality is around the corner.[/QUOTE]
That didn't answer my conundrum, so I'll state it again: Do psychopaths go to hell for earthly crimes? It's not the soul's fault is it? What about the reverse, what about people who do good because of brain damage, but their soul intends bad? Do they go to heaven?
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43193526]So you would release Hitler back into society after being incarcerated for an equitable amount of time. How long would that be? 10 years? 50 years? 100 years? 1000 years? Do you think he'll be a better person for it? How do you redeem someone like him? Again you are humoring me that souls are eternal, not conceding.
People love throwing the word eternal damnation around like they know exactly what it means. For all I know it could be non-existence, or just segregation with all the other dickheads. It doesn't have to mean being tortured in boiling excrement or whatever idea you have picked up from Dante's inferno and the likes. In the grand scheme of things this all hinges on life after death. With the trans-humanists making advances it may soon become an issue for our earthy lives as well. How should we treat immortal murderers?
The same could be said for a radio, let me explain and please bear with me before you take your high seat again.
If I were to place a fully working radio in the 1600s as well as allow there to be at least one broadcast for which it can pick up. The people studying the radio would be utterly convinced of their knowledge of the entire system even though they have no concept of Radio waves. They would be convinced that this system they have before them is a source of intellence and that if they reverse engineer it they will get the exact same results.
Imagine they do rebuild this time-travelling radio. Low and behold, just as predicted, it starts spouting that one radio station once it is turned on. Surely we have disproved the duality of a radio they would say.
Also if personalities are like radio stations and emotions are like the bass/volume etc. nobs. Then there is no reason your damage analogy cannot hold up with the radio. Radios don't always lose signal when they get damaged, similarly brains don't always lose consiciousness when damaged, as you said.
Now to address your amazing conundrum;
I don't decide, and so from my point of view, I try not to worry about who and what and how. I figure things will go the way that they should, and if fear of my Aluahim makes me a better person for nothing, then I guess that's just the way it will be. I feel as though you want me to start badmouthing sinners or something. I'm a sinner, though I constantly struggle with it. I know Organized religion and tradition has created something of a farce out of the scriptures, but if you actually listen with your ears you will find that what it is actually about is love. Unconditional love that may be accepted or rejected. One can either accept that love and live in peace, or continue to make excuses about why he isn't good enough or the rules are too hard or that unconditional love is impossible.
All in all, planning for immortality does wonders for ethics. Soon even you atheists will have to entertain this thought, for the abomination of technological immortality is around the corner.[/QUOTE]
Alright, but if those people waited long enough they might actually figure out what radio waves are by using science. This argument is just the god of the gaps. We don't understand the brain, god did it.
[QUOTE=Jookia;43194404]I don't know how long I would incarcerate Hitler for. I can't know the, it'd require me to be omniscient, like some type of god, to know of all the crimes.
Would he be a better person? Would it redeem him? Maybe not, maybe it'd make him not do it again. Maybe he'd end up just painting and designing things to his hearts content. He'd not have the opportunity to do it again, that's for sure. He was an ill man in extreme circumstances.[/quote]
Well again, we are assuming immortality for this thought experiment. So what you are saying is that you would try to redeem him. That is all well and good, but how do you know whether he won't do it again? Yes we come back to what you said, that you would need to be omniscient to make the right moral call. For that same reason your conundrum is similarly answered. I don't know, but I am confident that whatever the 'right' call is, it will be made.
[quote]
Punishing finite crimes for infinite time doesn't make sense, it provides motive to do worse crimes as the punishment is identical.
[/quote]
Really? Well that might be true if forgiveness wasn't in the mix. I would argue that if one assumes he is damned then he will do worse crimes as you say, but similarly being damned is more of an attitude than a rubber stamp. To do worse crimes is to not want to be good, it is an act of selfishness which perhaps can't be translated in terms you can empathize with. In case you didn't know, assuming you are saved or assuming you are damned are sins as well. In this way also can it be illustrated that without consequence one would not be restricted to commit those crimes at all.
[quote]
Eternal damnation is eternal, and includes some form of damnation I presume. That's enough for me to know it's terrible.
[/quote]
What if damnation simply means being utterly removed from the Aluahim you so vehemently deny? Wouldn't it be great? I mean surely you wouldn't care either way? For me on the other hand that would be worse than annihilation, a state of despair.
[quote]
Rehabilition, jail, not letting them be in the same circumstances as before.
[/quote] Ah, so you think that not putting people in circumstances where they might 'sin' (something that is wrong) is a good thing? Well that is kind of a major theme in the bible. Not putting yourself in a position where you would be tempted to sin.
[quote]
Argument from ignorance.
[/quote]
Perhaps, but it still speaks to the feasibility of the mind/body duality in the face of the scientists knowing what all the parts do. I would say that the radio analogy does so better than simply saying we don't know, because seemingly, and according to most of you, we do.
[quote]
I did not say that you lose consciousness when damaged, please don't misrepresent me. Even with your knobs, the argument is still completely flawed: With brain damage, the effects affect the personality, decision making, the logical structures of the brain. This would be the equivalent of a damaged radio affecting the station, or having its playback DIVERGE from the received broadcast.[/QUOTE]
To fully elaborate my example would require multiple radiostations from which the divergense of information can be drawn from. If you beat the radio, it would start picking up random signals from two frequencies over, it's behaviour would change. I don't see how this causes a problem.
[quote]
That didn't answer my conundrum, so I'll state it again: Do psychopaths go to hell for earthly crimes? It's not the soul's fault is it? What about the reverse, what about people who do good because of brain damage, but their soul intends bad? Do they go to heaven?[/QUOTE]
Let me answer that by quoting you.
[quote]I can't know the, it'd require me to be omniscient, like some type of god, to know of all the crimes.[/quote]
I'm not the source of the rules, nor the judge of the rules. And so I can't know.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43194776]Well again, we are assuming immortality for this thought experiment. So what you are saying is that you would try to redeem him. That is all well and good, but how do you know whether he won't do it again? Yes we come back to what you said, that you would need to be omniscient to make the right moral call. For that same reason your conundrum is similarly answered. I don't know, but I am confident that whatever the 'right' call is, it will be made.[/QUOTE]
This isn't how you debate.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43194776]Really? Well that might be true if forgiveness wasn't in the mix. I would argue that if one assumes he is damned then he will do worse crimes as you say, but similarly being damned is more of an attitude than a rubber stamp. To do worse crimes is to not want to be good, it is an act of selfishness which perhaps can't be translated in terms you can empathize with. In case you didn't know, assuming you are saved or assuming you are damned are sins as well. In this way also can it be illustrated that without consequence one would not be restricted to commit those crimes at all.[/QUOTE]
Let me put it another way: If I sin, I go to hell. Am I on the same level as your friend Hitler? Why do I share the same punishment?
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43194776]What if damnation simply means being utterly removed from the Aluahim you so vehemently deny? Wouldn't it be great? I mean surely you wouldn't care either way? For me on the other hand that would be worse than annihilation, a state of despair.[/QUOTE]
Please don't involve me personally in your arguments. This is a debate, not a personal attack.
As for the argument itself, I'm assuming eternal damnation is objectively damning.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43194776]Perhaps, but it still speaks to the feasibility of the mind/body duality in the face of the scientists knowing what all the parts do. I would say that the radio analogy does so better than simply saying we don't know, because seemingly, and according to most of you, we do.[/QUOTE]
We know radios use transmitters. We know brains don't.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;43194776]To fully elaborate my example would require multiple radiostations from which the divergense of information can be drawn from. If you beat the radio, it would start picking up random signals from two frequencies over, it's behaviour would change. I don't see how this causes a problem.[/QUOTE]
Your radio analogy is fundamentally flawed, as radios are one-way receivers. I've thought about it a bit, and concluded that the only way to resolve this problem is that souls are two-way (this is demonstrated by the fact that souls react to body stimulus), and that body damage can damage souls.
[QUOTE=Jookia;43195222]
Your radio analogy is fundamentally flawed, as radios are one-way receivers. I've thought about it a bit, and concluded that the only way to resolve this problem is that souls are two-way (this is demonstrated by the fact that souls react to body stimulus), and that body damage can damage souls.[/QUOTE]
If this is the case, then there would have to be a form of interaction that is measurable by some means.
this is the only case I can see a soul existing in, and we just don't have any form of measurement that works for it at the time being. I doubt this however.
Considering that there is no evidence whatsoever of any life after death, I have no reason to believe it.
[editline]21st December 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Jookia;43195222]Your radio analogy is fundamentally flawed, as radios are one-way receivers. I've thought about it a bit, and concluded that the only way to resolve this problem is that souls are two-way (this is demonstrated by the fact that souls react to body stimulus), and that body damage can damage souls.[/QUOTE]
What evidence can you provide to prove that souls even exist in the first place?
Yeh, I believe theres heaven and not heaven, I dont believe in hell. I believe if your a good person, you go to heaven, whether your an atheist or christian or the likes. Being a good person just includes being respectful to other peoples beliefs, and just respect for others in general. If you dont fill those requirements, you just die as an atheist would believe you do, once again, whether your atheist, christian or the likes. I know its an illogical belief, but its just what I do believe
What evidence have you seen to support the claim that heaven exists?
[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43304276']What evidence have you seen to support the claim that heaven exists?[/QUOTE]
I think the most genuine claim is the hope of justice, which matters a lot to a great deal of people.
What I mean is that it seems totally unjust that a good man, by no fault of his own, should suffer and die in this lifetime and have it result in the same fate as the wicked, evil man who enjoys every moment of his life. To me at least it seems rational to assume that there must be some kind of justice beyond that, and something after death, otherwise what is the point of leading the moral life when it leads to suffering and ultimate unhappiness. You cannot blame people for willing that they live in a fair, just universe, even if you cannot find any reason to believe in it yourself, since it is important to many to hold onto the idea that their good deeds are not in vain, that every moment is worth living for some higher goal than earthly satisfaction. Of course you no doubt have you own views on what makes life bearable, just and worth living but I think you would be mistaken to consider any one view more valid than the next when its all so much up for speculation.
[QUOTE=jobizzle;43328387]I think the most genuine claim is the hope of justice, which matters a lot to a great deal of people.
What I mean is that it seems totally unjust that a good man, by no fault of his own, should suffer and die in this lifetime and have it result in the same fate as the wicked, evil man who enjoys every moment of his life. To me at least it seems rational to assume that there must be some kind of justice beyond that, and something after death, otherwise what is the point of leading the moral life when it leads to suffering and ultimate unhappiness. You cannot blame people for willing that they live in a fair, just universe, even if you cannot find any reason to believe in it yourself, since it is important to many to hold onto the idea that their good deeds are not in vain, that every moment is worth living for some higher goal than earthly satisfaction. Of course you no doubt have you own views on what makes life bearable, just and worth living but I think you would be mistaken to consider any one view more valid than the next when its all so much up for speculation.[/QUOTE]
"No amount of belief can make something a fact." -James Randi
Just or not, the universe does not owe you a just life or a just recourse to something terrible that happens to you. Basically, life is a bitch and then you die. All the wishing in the world can't make the concept of an afterlife real.
You can have morals and ethics and meaning and conjure your own reason for life and live an entirely noble and righteous and rich fulfilled life and there STILL wouldn't be any reason to believe in an afterlife.
Those who believe it are weak-spirited and deluded.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
