Life or no-life after death - Is it an Objective reality?

Blackened Cat

Scholar
B
Joined
Jul 21, 2010
Messages
50
Do you think the existence of a soul enduring after death is an objective or subjective idea?

So whether you believe you go to Christian heaven, Mormon heaven, Buddhist rebirth or athiest style material non-existence..... is there an actual objective reality to this?

Can it be determined?

Even if the answer is - nothing... can that be determined?

And if there is life after death, and for example it's a Christian protestant one... can we know in the here and now that this is real?

What can we base any knowledge of an afterlife on?
 
Show me the soul, then we'll talk about what happens to it after death.
 
Best bumper sticker I've ever seen:

"MILITANT AGNOSTIC: I DON'T KNOW AND NEITHER DO YOU."
 
A soul enduring after death isn't necessarily "life after death". What's a soul? What is life when its shell can't interact with the real world? There is a long way to go in defining your terms before you can even think of getting anything but stock answers.

Welcome, by the way.


ETA: Hey guys, we have to quit meeting this way!:D
 
Last edited:
You are asking if a soul or a place you go after death can be determined. This would be objective if you could determine it -- if you are using "determined" to mean known for a fact and demonstrable for everyone. Otherwise its subjective like someone being dead for a few minutes, getting resuscitated, and saying they saw angles. I dont have anything to site, but i think those kinds of experiences are rare, cant be shown to be real, and can be explained neurologically without evoking the supernatural.
 
Thanks for the welcome.


To answer all the question dodgers....you know what I mean...

Then rephrase the question, can we know the buddhist after life exists (if Greek concepts of soul somehow offends).

Is there an objective afterlife reality?
 
Blackened Cat said:
Thanks for the welcome.


To answer all the question dodgers....you know what I mean...

Then rephrase the question, can we know the buddhist after life exists (if Greek concepts of soul somehow offends).
Click to expand...
No one was offended, and no one was dodging the question. If what you said isn't what you meant, the problem lies with your post, not the people responding to it.
Is there an objective afterlife reality?
Click to expand...
No.
 
Blackened Cat said:
Do you think the existence of a soul enduring after death is an objective or subjective idea?

So whether you believe you go to Christian heaven, Mormon heaven, Buddhist rebirth or athiest style material non-existence..... is there an actual objective reality to this?

Can it be determined?

Even if the answer is - nothing... can that be determined?

And if there is life after death, and for example it's a Christian protestant one... can we know in the here and now that this is real?

What can we base any knowledge of an afterlife on?
Click to expand...


Could be, no evidence that there is.
 
Blackened Cat said:
Thanks for the welcome.


To answer all the question dodgers....you know what I mean...

Then rephrase the question, can we know the buddhist after life exists (if Greek concepts of soul somehow offends).

Is there an objective afterlife reality?
Click to expand...

Well the buddhist after life is in contradiction to the teachings of thw Alleged Historical Buddha.

Consequences carry, there is no atman.

ETA: So taught the AHB: anatta.
 
Not a question of offending, but the words are just so slippery, "soul", "afterlife", "spirit", etc that they only have meaning for theists, much like "sin". I have no real concept of "sin" in my world. I understand hurting people and breaking the law, and having guilt for what I do wrong, but "sin", this is only relevant if one is a believer. I'm not dodging any questions, I just don't understand a question that is similar to, "can we ever determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" Namely, what the heck is an angel to an atheist?
 
Last edited:
paximperium said:
What's a soul and what use is it?
Click to expand...

An invisible fairy-like thing that lives inside you, which leaves your body when you die and allows admittance to the heaven or (slides down to the hell) of whichever religion you have ascribed to so you can hang out with your dead relatives.

...and it weighs 21 grams.
 
Blackened Cat said:
Is there an objective afterlife reality?
Click to expand...


Really, you could put any word in place of "afterlife" and have the same question. Is there an objective afterlife realty? There's no evidence of one. Is there an objective Peyton Manning reality? There is evidence (some of it in Tennessee) that Peyton Manning exists. Is there an objective Iranian nuclear weapon reality? There is some evidence of one but some evidence that there is not.

In all cases, we are making deductions based on the evidence of our senses. And in all cases, the evidence of our senses is in some ways equivocal.

At its heart, you may be asking, "Is there an objective reality?" That question has no satisfactory answer. Each of us has no evidence that anything exists outside of our individual selves or that we existed in any moment but the present. I tend to think the answer is yes. Reality is consistent and boring (where as dreams are shifting and exciting). But some would disagree.

Are you asking about the existence of an objective reality? Or are you assuming that there is a measurable and definable objective reality and just asking if the afterlife exists within it?
 
Blackened Cat said:
That's a perfectly valid philosophical question and is akin to what I was asking.

I don't have any agenda to push, just asking a question.
Click to expand...
But first you need to actually define the terms you are using. In philosophical discussion, semantics and definitions really matter. We don't don't know what you mean with a "soul".

If you can define it, we can at least start with that issue.
 
Blackened Cat said:
That's a perfectly valid philosophical question and is akin to what I was asking.

I don't have any agenda to push, just asking a question.
Click to expand...

If one cannot define "angel", I'm going to have to say, "no", it cannot be determined how many can dance on the head of a pin, though I can certainly define a pin, and tell you the surface area.

I would have to know how much space they take up, and how much they weigh before I can even begin to say that it can or cannot be determined. Then, I can say, well, I don't have enough information yet, or yes, I can now attempt to determine how many can dance, providing your definition of angel states that they are able to dance.
 
Loss Leader said:
Are you asking about the existence of an objective reality? Or are you assuming that there is a measurable and definable objective reality and just asking if the afterlife exists within it?
Click to expand...

Yeah that is part of my current pondering. I may not have spelled that out well in the OP.
 
Things that we say are objectively known can always be tested for accuracy by either side in a debate, because knowledge is demonstrable and measurable. The afterlife is an idea that lacks supporting evidence because nothing about it is testable, and the whole thing is centred around a handful of assumptions which themselves are based on nothing. Consequently, the afterlife is not an objective idea and we currently cannot base claimed knowledge about it on anything.
 
Blackened Cat said:
Loss Leader said:
Are you asking about the existence of an objective reality? Or are you assuming that there is a measurable and definable objective reality and just asking if the afterlife exists within it?
Click to expand...
Yeah that is part of my current pondering. I may not have spelled that out well in the OP.
Click to expand...


Well, um, which one? I asked an either/ or question. Are you asking if objective reality exists OR are you assuming that objective reality exists? Pick one or the other.
 
Loss Leader said:
Well, um, which one? I asked an either/ or question. Are you asking if objective reality exists OR are you assuming that objective reality exists? Pick one or the other.
Click to expand...

First one. "If objective reality exists" It's something I'm questioning at the moment.
 
Blackened Cat said:
Do you think the existence of a soul enduring after death is an objective or subjective idea?

So whether you believe you go to Christian heaven, Mormon heaven, Buddhist rebirth or athiest style material non-existence..... is there an actual objective reality to this?

Can it be determined?

Even if the answer is - nothing... can that be determined?

And if there is life after death, and for example it's a Christian protestant one... can we know in the here and now that this is real?

What can we base any knowledge of an afterlife on?
Click to expand...

There is no knowledge of an afterlife at all. If there was this kind of knowledge, it would have to be based on evidence.
 
Blackened Cat said:
First one. "If objective reality exists" It's something I'm questioning at the moment.
Click to expand...


Well, good luck with that. There's no answer. There's just an endless debate that goes something like this:

Realist: The universe exists because I have gathered evidence of its existence.
Anti-Realist: But all of that evidence was gathered by your senses.
Realist: So?
Anti-Realist: Your senses could be lying to you.
Realist: So, what? Nothing exists?
Anti-Realist: Things exist as constructs in our minds.
Realist: So, our minds must exist.
Anti-Realist: Well, mine does. Yours, I'm not so sure about.
Realist: You're a jerk.
Anti-Realist: And you're an idiot.
Realist: Well, at least I'm an idiot who exists!
Anti-Realist: Not for long!
[Huge sissy slapfight ensues. Non-philosophy majors laugh, have lives, and get laid.]
 
Last edited:
It makes as much sense to posit a daisy afterlife or a chrysanthemum afterlife. We esteem ourselves too highly.
 
Blackened Cat said:
Thanks for the welcome.

To answer all the question dodgers....you know what I mean...

Then rephrase the question, can we know the buddhist after life exists (if Greek concepts of soul somehow offends).

Is there an objective afterlife reality?
Click to expand...


No, and no.
 
Blackened Cat said:
That's a perfectly valid philosophical question and is akin to what I was asking.
Click to expand...


Must disagree - I don't think that "Can we ever determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" is either valid or philosophical.

It assumes something for which there is no evidence.

It is also insulting to the intellect.
 
Last edited:
Blackened Cat said:
First one. "If objective reality exists" It's something I'm questioning at the moment.
Click to expand...


Yes, I think there is an objective reality.

I do not think that we will every understand any aspect of it perfectly.

The best we can hope for is incrementally better models of reality that serve us well as we can muster.

These we get from science.

It may be that none of our brains will ever be able to imagine, let alone apprehend, many aspects of it. We won't know this, of course.
 
Last edited:
The best answer I've ever found to this is probably in John Shelby Spong's latest book. (But then, isn't everything?) ;)
 
StrangeLoop said:
It makes as much sense to posit a daisy afterlife or a chrysanthemum afterlife. We esteem ourselves too highly.
Click to expand...

So when approaching religious questions or philosophical questions...is it better to evaluate or explore them, or instead just accept them? or discard them?
 
Complexity said:
Must disagree - I don't think that "Can we ever determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" is either valid or philosophical.

It assumes something for which there is no evidence.

It is also insulting to the intellect.
Click to expand...

Are all theoretically situations insulting?

If I pose a maths question that starts "If Suzie took the number 2 bus to.."

Would I then be questioned over the existence of Suzie or the number 2 bus? If I could not prove that Suzie exists, and that Suzie took the bus on that day... would I have insulted the intellect?

Can you define what an insult to intellect would be? Can you prove that the intellect does in fact exist? and is not over inflated? And why would 'the' intellect has so little grace as not to be able to withstand the smallest of slights? Is the intellect that inexperienced in life? Was the intellect sheltered?

Is there an end to the endless dissecting of questions in order to escape confronting of their basis?
 
Blackened Cat said:
Is science the only way to understand objective and expperience reality?
Click to expand...

Science is the only way we can gather and interpret data about out reality objectively. Its also the only known way with which to predict things about our reality.
However it has nothing to do with experiencing reality, that is something our brain does.

As for an afterlife, no scientific experiment has ever shown anything to prove it exists. So if it does our best current methods are unable to interact with it making the whole question philosophical.

If an intangible soul that does not interact with matter in any way truly exists, you'd best hope there is an afterlife to go to though, otherwise each time someone dies they'll be stuck in empty space watching the earth and the entire solar system rush away from them at high speed.
 
Blackened Cat said:
Is science the only way to understand objective and expperience reality?
Click to expand...



Y'all know what's going to happen if this keeps up, right?

Oh, come on. You KNOW what's going to happen.

I'm going to bring in Stephen Jay Gould... and NOMA... I WILL bring up NOMA. It'll happen. We will go there, if need be. ;)

(hands out key lime tarts for everyone to help with the discussion. I just finished making some. They're so cute. However, these are virtual key lime tarts, because the real ones... let's just say that they're not going to last very long.)
 
Last edited:
Blackened Cat said:
Do you think the existence of a soul enduring after death is an objective or subjective idea?
Click to expand...


Objective.


Ba.jpg


Ba (not humbug)​


Blackened Cat said:
So whether you believe you go to Christian heaven, Mormon heaven, Buddhist rebirth or athiest style material non-existence..... is there an actual objective reality to this?
Click to expand...


No. These things you speak of are at best just make-believe and at worst, heresy. There is only the Tuat.


Blackened Cat said:
Can it be determined?
Click to expand...


Yes. Ask Hathor


Blackened Cat said:
Even if the answer is - nothing... can that be determined?
Click to expand...


Yes. Ask Anubis.


Blackened Cat said:
And if there is life after death, and for example it's a Christian protestant one... can we know in the here and now that this is real?
Click to expand...


What's a Christian? What's he protesting about? Is this anything to do with those reedcutters?


Blackened Cat said:
What can we base any knowledge of an afterlife on?
Click to expand...


The Book of Spells of Going Forth By Day, sometimes referred to as the Book of the Dead.

Try Amazon.
 
"What's a key lime tart", asked Sam, instantly recognising the sole interesting thing in the thread, "and can they be air freighted to Kazakhstan?"

Look- Either we exist, or we don't. If we don't, then let's concentrate on imagining more beer.
If we do exist (and by heck it feels like it in the mornings) then it looks like life is actually a chemical process and awareness is too. When the process stops, the candle flame doesn't go anywhere. The burning of wax just stops. The flame WAS the burning of wax. That's what burning of wax looks like.

Of course we can't test for life after death, but as in Monty Python's Great Debate on the question, all the dead people stand silent.

My bet is that being dead is a lot like not having been born.
ETA- Unless you manage to be fossilised.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom