View Single Post
Old 17th August 2015, 04:03 PM   #396
Jodie
Philosopher
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,231
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
This is, in a round-about way, my point. If we presume that life after death can not be detected using our instruments and sensors, then it is much like the situation with my attic, which I have not checked for unicorns for many months. Either an afterlife or a unicorn in my attic could exist, both being beyond my ability to deduce based on what I already know right now. But there is no reason to assume that either exists. The existence of either requires special pleading (they exist, but you can't detect them because they happen to have properties that are special and unlike all the other things that you do know exist in the world). Are they possible in theory- sure. But are they likely enough to be worth considering? I'd say no.

I would also point out that fundamental to the proposal that there is an afterlife is the concept that somehow our consciousness is separable and distinct from the physical and chemical function of the brain. Another example of special pleading. No one proposes that the functions of our kidnys somehow out live us and continue after the kidneys themselves die. Same with our hearts, or livers, or our muscles. When these organs are dead, people accept that the functions of these organs while alive also stop on death. But somehow, some people would like to believe that our brain function, our minds, will outlive our brains. I see no reason to believe that.
Neither do I, but I don't think we stop being when we die.
Jodie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top