[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43328443']"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.[/QUOTE]
I may be weak-spirited but I like to think I'm not totally deluded!
Just because there is not proof at the present doesn't rule out the possibility of an afterlife. In the past people believed that diseases were caused by evil spirits, and that the sun orbited the earth, but times and beliefs change. A great strength of the religious perspective of life is that it has barely changed at all with the enormous development of science since the two do not overlap or contradict.
Using your line of reasoning all the belief that the physical, immediately discernible universe is all that exists is similarly invalid, since how are we to trust our senses? Surely an all-powerful being would be able to obscure his existence from us if he so wished, the real question is why, not how.
A positive claim is only supported by evidence. Evidence must be observed or measured and then scrutinized to form a hypothesis. Then the hypothesis is further tested until there is substantial evidence supporting the hypothesis after which the hypothesis is transformed to be called a theory. At this stage, the notion must have so much evidence to be called a theory that the evidence must be overwhelming and irrefutable.
This is why many ignorant people point to the theory of evolution as a theory and try to use that whole "theory" term to try undermining the proof of evolution.
It is entirely irrational and illogical and unreasonable to claim or believe that there is an afterlife based on no evidence whatsoever. The claim of evil spirits is just as irrational, illogical, unreasonable, and deluded as the claim of an afterlife.
You can WISH that there's an afterlife until you're blue in the face, but no amount of belief can make something a fact. Remember that. Think about it. Ponder it. Don't just read the words and move on to the next argument. Stop and ponder... think. REALLY think about that statement about fact. It doesn't matter how hard you believe. Without evidence, history proves that man is always wrong about any and every hypothesis we've ever had without evidence.
So are you.
Senses can be measured. They can be observed using medical equipment, to a point. It doesn't matter what an all-powerful being can do because it's a tautology. Here's a link to explain it, embedded in a page that helps debunk the Anthropic Principle: [url]http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle#Tautology[/url]
The why question is completely irrelevant because it is entirely subjective.
[video=youtube;LSZ_fsG5uMg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSZ_fsG5uMg[/video]
[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43328582']A positive claim is only supported by evidence. Evidence must be observed or measured and then scrutinized to form a hypothesis. Then the hypothesis is further tested until there is substantial evidence supporting the hypothesis after which the hypothesis is transformed to be called a theory. At this stage, the notion must have so much evidence to be called a theory that the evidence must be overwhelming and irrefutable.
This is why many ignorant people point to the theory of evolution as a theory and try to use that whole "theory" term to try undermining the proof of evolution.
It is entirely irrational and illogical and unreasonable to claim or believe that there is an afterlife based on no evidence whatsoever. The claim of evil spirits is just as irrational, illogical, unreasonable, and deluded as the claim of an afterlife.
You can WISH that there's an afterlife until you're blue in the face, but no amount of belief can make something a fact. Remember that. Think about it. Ponder it. Don't just read the words and move on to the next argument. Stop and ponder... think. REALLY think about that statement about fact. It doesn't matter how hard you believe. Without evidence, history proves that man is always wrong about any and every hypothesis we've ever had without evidence.
So are you.
Senses can be measured. They can be observed using medical equipment, to a point. It doesn't matter what an all-powerful being can do because it's a tautology. Here's a link to explain it, embedded in a page that helps debunk the Anthropic Principle: [url]http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle#Tautology[/url]
The why question is completely irrelevant because it is entirely subjective.
[video=youtube;LSZ_fsG5uMg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSZ_fsG5uMg[/video][/QUOTE]
I don't think you can blame anyone for seeing the 'why' question as important rather than irrelevant, it takes a particular type of character to dismiss the whole issue and I think it is mr. Dawkins' weakness that he cannot comprehend that people might take their own stance on an as yet unanswered question. It appears from that video that all he wants to do is stamp out philosophical investigation in favour of a doubt in all but the empirically provable which is one very particular (and extreme I might add) opinion.
Again I may be responding a bit thickly and naively but I hope you can have patience with me.
The "why" question is subjective. That's why it doesn't matter.
How do you not understand this?
It doesn't matter what stance people take. People can be wrong. People are almost always wrong without evidence to base their conclusion on. What people believe is irrelevant. All that matters is what can be proven true.
The "why" question is entirely irrelevant.
[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43329059']The "why" question is subjective. That's why it doesn't matter.
How do you not understand this?
It doesn't matter what stance people take. People can be wrong. People are almost always wrong without evidence to base their conclusion on. What people believe is irrelevant. All that matters is what can be proven true.
The "why" question is entirely irrelevant.[/QUOTE]
The entire human is experience is subjective, do you really expect everyone to consider their existence as irrelevant and meaningless then?
[QUOTE=jobizzle;43329098]The entire human is experience is subjective, do you really expect everyone to consider their existence as irrelevant and meaningless then?[/QUOTE]
It may be disheartening to weak-spirited deluded people, but that's exactly what it is.
It is up to everyone on earth, individually, to determine the point of their life and the things in their life that are meaningful to them.
Weak-minded people, like children hearing for the first time that Santa isn't real, reject the notion and have a greatly negative emotional reaction to such a sentiment. When they're adults, they learn to deal with reality. Those who cling desperately to the notion of an afterlife are basically being intellectually childish, are lying to themselves, and are [I]preventing [/I]themselves from maturing intellectually.
Paul, in the Bible, said that as a child he thought as a child and spoke as a child. As an adult, he put away childish things. The people who cling to religion and afterlife in adulthood are no different than an adult refusing to believe that Santa isn't real.
[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43329150']It may be disheartening to weak-spirited deluded people, but that's exactly what it is.
It is up to everyone on earth, individually, to determine the point of their life and the things in their life that are meaningful to them.
Weak-minded people, like children hearing for the first time that Santa isn't real, reject the notion and have a greatly negative emotional reaction to such a sentiment. When they're adults, they learn to deal with reality. Those who cling desperately to the notion of an afterlife are basically being intellectually childish, are lying to themselves, and are [I]preventing [/I]themselves from maturing intellectually.
Paul, in the Bible, said that as a child he thought as a child and spoke as a child. As an adult, he put away childish things. The people who cling to religion and afterlife in adulthood are no different than an adult refusing to believe that Santa isn't real.[/QUOTE]
Why do you think Paul believed in the afterlife then?
I'm just curious, it seems quite arrogant to me (and I don't mean to offend) that you consider a great number of people throughout the course of human history to be the intellectual equivalent of deluded children when they just might surpass you in knowledge, wisdom and understanding of life. I know this is only a futile appeal to authority, but you ought to consider it all the same.
Paul was a weak-spirited, weak-minded deluded religiotard. That's why he believed in an afterlife.
There are greatly intelligent people in the scientific community who, for unknown irrational reasons, completely throw away their rational, logical, reasonable-thinking minds in favor of religion. They hold entirely scientific, entirely rational opinions about the world until it comes to religion when they fling their rationale out the window for some reason and that reason is most likely simply where they were raised.
If you were raised in India, you would most likely be Hindu and be arguing this from a Hindu belief system point of view. If you were raised in Afghanistan, you would be Muslim and would be arguing this from an Islamic point of view.
The vast majority of the time, the biggest deciding factor for one's "chosen" religion comes down simply to where they were born and raised. Then, combined with the human's evolved tendency to listen to and believe their parents, you have a generation-to-generation of irrational vomit from parent's mouth to child's brain.
It is a very difficult task to admit to one's self that they have lived a lie and to sluff off the oppressive chains of religion. Most people are simply not that strong. They're comfortable living the lie because they are not willing to admit to themselves that they're wrong. It's hubris, it's arrogance, it's fear, it's a comfort zone.
The idea of an afterlife is a solution to the problem of "where does individuality go?" Individuality does not exist, so discussing a problem that assumes it does will lead nowhere.
Are you saying that the consciousness I experience could not be described as an individual experience or that my experiences are not unique to me?
As we slip into death, time ceases to exist. Because if the mind cannot perceive events anymore, time loses all meaning. But the existence of your body is still the same, and during an infinite amount of time, there are limitless events. The matter of your body joins the ecosystem and drifts around the universe until gravity reassembles the energy that was once your body. This, I call reincarnation.
...which has absolutely zero basis in reality, so what have you witnessed that you were able to draw that conclusion from?
[QUOTE=Memnoth;43406432]As we slip into death, time ceases to exist. Because if the mind cannot perceive events anymore, time loses all meaning. But the existence of your body is still the same, and during an infinite amount of time, there are limitless events. The matter of your body joins the ecosystem and drifts around the universe until gravity reassembles the energy that was once your body. This, I call reincarnation.[/QUOTE]
The issue with this is that your stream of consciousness is severed in the process, so you experience nothing of what you described.
[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43388688']Are you saying that the consciousness I experience could not be described as an individual experience or that my experiences are not unique to me?[/QUOTE]
I believe that consciousness is a constant that grants the brain a sense of continuity, and that this constant is the same for everyone. I also believe that there is no impenetrable "personal universe", so any experience can be perfectly replicated from one person to another somehow.
It just has to be true because everything in the universe operates on the same logic. Nothing is "sacred" or "divine" and beyond human understanding.
[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43409614']...which has absolutely zero basis in reality, so what have you witnessed that you were able to draw that conclusion from?[/QUOTE]
1. "The law of conservation of energy.
This states that energy can be neither created nor destroyed. However, energy can change forms, and energy can flow from one place to another. The total energy of an isolated system remains the same."
2. Have you ever experienced the oblivion of a blackout? Time loses its perspective when nothing is perceiving the universe.
3. As the matter of your body slowly rots into the ground, the energy is changing form, from cells to dirt. If it changes form and flows with the natural movements of the universe for long enough, it will be reassembled as a life-form by coincidence, as a result from chance and time.
The conclusions mostly came from inside my head.
[QUOTE=Audio-Surfer;43410114]I believe that consciousness is a constant that grants the brain a sense of continuity, and that this constant is the same for everyone. I also believe that there is no impenetrable "personal universe", so any experience can be perfectly replicated from one person to another somehow.
It just has to be true because everything in the universe operates on the same logic. Nothing is "sacred" or "divine" and beyond human understanding.[/QUOTE]
Without evidence to support anything you just said, your assertions are completely irrational and illogical.
Basically, there's no [I]reason[/I] to believe what you believe. What you believe is no more valid than someone else's making up some other sort of make-believe and calling it true. It's no different than believing in the tooth fairy or the moon spirit or the sun god Ra.
[editline]3rd January 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Memnoth;43410266]1. "The law of conservation of energy.
This states that energy can be neither created nor destroyed. However, energy can change forms, and energy can flow from one place to another. The total energy of an isolated system remains the same."[/quote]
You don't know that the universe is an isolated system. Your conclusion is flawed.
[quote]2. Have you ever experienced the oblivion of a blackout? Time loses its perspective when nothing is perceiving the universe. [/quote]
Do you remember what you experienced before you were born? Yeah, neither does anyone else. If anything, that'll be what it's like when you're dead. You simply do not exist any longer.
[quote]3. As the matter of your body slowly rots into the ground, the energy is changing form, from cells to dirt. If it changes form and flows with the natural movements of the universe for long enough, it will be reassembled as a life-form by coincidence, as a result from chance and time. [/quote]
Your consciousness is the result of an elaborate system of nervous tissues. When those break down, the foundation upon which your consciousness is formed ceases to function. Your consciousness no longer functions. There is absolutely no reason to believe otherwise.
[quote]The conclusions mostly came from inside my head.[/QUOTE]
The Son of Sam truly believed that a dog was telling him to kill people.
Charles Manson truly believes that the Beatles were telling him to kill Sharon Tate and that the race riots were coming.
Just because you conclude something inside your head does not mean that the conclusion is rational, reasonable, or true in any sense of the word.
The whole god damned idea of Life after death is so contradictory anyway because since humans' souls/consciousness go to the afterlife, then do dogs' souls go there as well? Or any animal with a brain? Or do people only go there because they have a more developed brain? It's actually pretty ironic, which is to say stupid..
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;43414185]The whole god damned idea of Life after death is so contradictory anyway because since humans' souls/consciousness go to the afterlife, then do dogs' souls go there as well? Or any animal with a brain? Or do people only go there because they have a more developed brain? It's actually pretty ironic, which is to say stupid..[/QUOTE]
True, it would be a difficult belief to maintain without some impressive cognitive dissonance resolution if you didn't also believe in a religion that granted some special significance to humans.
It's the epitome of arrogance, really, to believe in an afterlife, as if humans are magically different than an amoeba with respect to death. A spirit? A soul? LOL okay.
It's the epitome of arrogance to put any objective or metaphysical value on ourselves in the first place, the concept of an afterlife is just an effect of what amounts to a worldwide philosophical and ideological hugbox concerning the value of human life.
Anthropocentrism has invaded and corrupted philosophy with patronizing jabbering that puts us on a pedestal just for the sake of putting us on a pedestal because we can't or don't want to vie for objectivity if it means being "cold" or "inhuman" or whatever. And it's hypocritical as hell.
The delusions have spread far enough that certain things that are entirely subjective and variable are held as absolute by nearly everyone, existentialists included, except for nihilists and possibly misanthropists.
Well said, the first paragraph.
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;43414185]The whole god damned idea of Life after death is so contradictory anyway because since humans' souls/consciousness go to the afterlife, then do dogs' souls go there as well?[/QUOTE]
What makes that contradictory..? Because it's something that's unknown?
[QUOTE=xZippy;43414918]What makes that contradictory..? Because it's something that's unknown?[/QUOTE]
I don't even see how it's unknown. (Also why did you just cut the already short post in half in the quote? but w/e)
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;43414936]I don't even see how it's unknown. (Also why did you just cut the already short post in half in the quote?)[/QUOTE]
Not knowing if animals and humans share the same afterlife doesn't count as something being contradictory.
[QUOTE=xZippy;43414945]Not knowing if animals and humans share the same afterlife doesn't count as something being contradictory.[/QUOTE]
It isn't really contradictory, more about showing that belief in an afterlife leads to some absurd implications.
Yes that is a good way to put it, what I think I meant
Whether or not I believe in it is irrelevant. Is there? I don't know, but there seems to be no evidence so far, so I hold belief. All I see is testimony, which is useless.
We all can only guess, for now no one knows if 'Life after Death' should be considered true or false.
So my answer is; "I have no idea."
Yea I do, because it sounds so fun
[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43414369']It's the epitome of arrogance, really, to believe in an afterlife, as if humans are magically different than an amoeba with respect to death. A spirit? A soul? LOL okay.[/QUOTE]
Okay, seriously. What is your actual goal in posting here? Even when you're not replying to someone, you state over and over how illogical religion is and how ridiculous it is to believe in an afterlife like it's the ultimate sin.
Are you trying to convince people? Are you hoping someone can convince you otherwise? Is this a method of venting something out for you?
Religion and belief in an afterlife are pretty senseless, but it's not always as horrible as you keep making it out to be. What you're making things sound like, is that atheism is the only correct way of thinking and any form of religion is pure horror. I agree that atheism is loads better than any religion, but there's negatives to both sides.
Some religious people are better people [I]because[/I] of their beliefs. Regardless of how illogical they are, is it so bad if it makes some people make the world a better place because of it?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
