- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Constraints on the aferlife
Posted on 4/9/14 at 11:37 pm to SpidermanTUba
Posted on 4/9/14 at 11:37 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
IF there is an afterlife, you will enter it cleaned of all memories you have made in your life.
I am way too lazy to look it up but I believe that I remember reading at some point that some interpretations of "heaven" actually operate under that philosophy.
Nothing to do with the brain, it's just how God rolls in that particular scenario.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 11:37 pm to Tigerlaff
quote:
My family, for instance, taught me that everyone gets a mansion and riches in Heaven.
Is that Jehovah's Witness?
Posted on 4/9/14 at 11:38 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:Is this something to do with fertility?
afertlife
quote:That doesn't make you an atheist.
I'm an atheist in the strictest sense of not having a theism - I neither believe in an aferlife or disbelieve in one, as there is no scientific evidence either way.
You're an agnostic.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 11:38 pm to SpidermanTUba
Uh, you'd be Agnostic...
Posted on 4/9/14 at 11:40 pm to northshorebamaman
Nope. Just a bunch of Methodists who don't know what their own Church teaches.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 11:43 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
hints of something out there that is beyond our mind's capability to comprehend.
Hints? The vastness of what are mind can't comprehend isn't subtle, its made blatantly obvious - for instance - as soon as any of us try to contemplate what happens to our personhoods post-mortem.
Unknown knowledge isn't God, though.
This post was edited on 4/9/14 at 11:44 pm
Posted on 4/9/14 at 11:45 pm to SpidermanTUba
frick it. You asked a serious question so I will give you a serious start of an answer.
You're sort of missing the point here. People believe in an afterlife because the very existence of your own subjective experience is clear evidence that there is more than physical laws involved in the operation of the universe.
You can get bogged down arguing about the definition of nature, but whatever you call it, your subjective experience is ruled by laws that are simply not observable. I think this is Roger Penrose's position on the matter fwiw.
Thus, there is evidence for an afterlife, which even the ancient philosophers like Socrates and Aristotle acknowledged, and the very subject you are raising was discussed a lot in medieval philosophy, most notably by Aquinas. So if you want to read how other people have answered the question, pretty much all roads will eventually lead back to Aquinas.
Google "aquinas disembodied memory" and you will get lots of links (like LINK) that discuss thought on what kind of memory disembodied souls are logically allowed to have in between the time of the second resurrection. Generally, medieval philosophers focused on whether and what types of memories were formally associated with the intellect, because the intellect was thought to survive physical death, even though there was no chance for using its union with the physical body to learn new things and have new memories.
quote:
I do presume that if there is an aferlife it follows the laws of nature, yes.
I don't think that's unreasonable.
You're sort of missing the point here. People believe in an afterlife because the very existence of your own subjective experience is clear evidence that there is more than physical laws involved in the operation of the universe.
You can get bogged down arguing about the definition of nature, but whatever you call it, your subjective experience is ruled by laws that are simply not observable. I think this is Roger Penrose's position on the matter fwiw.
Thus, there is evidence for an afterlife, which even the ancient philosophers like Socrates and Aristotle acknowledged, and the very subject you are raising was discussed a lot in medieval philosophy, most notably by Aquinas. So if you want to read how other people have answered the question, pretty much all roads will eventually lead back to Aquinas.
Google "aquinas disembodied memory" and you will get lots of links (like LINK) that discuss thought on what kind of memory disembodied souls are logically allowed to have in between the time of the second resurrection. Generally, medieval philosophers focused on whether and what types of memories were formally associated with the intellect, because the intellect was thought to survive physical death, even though there was no chance for using its union with the physical body to learn new things and have new memories.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 11:45 pm to SpidermanTUba
You're trying too hard in this thread.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 11:48 pm to SpidermanTUba
I can't wait to haunt people. I'm making a list in my brain. I hope it doesn't get erased.
ETA: We don't even know what the hell is all in space. How are we to know if there's an afterlife or not?
ETA: We don't even know what the hell is all in space. How are we to know if there's an afterlife or not?
This post was edited on 4/9/14 at 11:51 pm
Posted on 4/9/14 at 11:52 pm to RummelTiger
quote:
Uh, you'd be Agnostic...
Agnosticism relates to knowledge.
Atheism relates to belief.
I am both an agnostic and a "negative" atheist - (as opposed to a "postive" atheist - who asserts positively there is no God or Gods).
This might explain it better:
LINK
This post was edited on 4/9/14 at 11:55 pm
Posted on 4/9/14 at 11:57 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
I am both an agnostic and a "negative" atheist
siiiiiiigh
Posted on 4/10/14 at 12:03 am to Doc Fenton
quote:
frick it. You asked a serious question so I will give you a serious start of an answer.
Thanks for taking it seriously.
quote:
You're sort of missing the point here. People believe in an afterlife because the very existence of your own subjective experience is clear evidence that there is more than physical laws involved in the operation of the universe.
You can get bogged down arguing about the definition of nature, but whatever you call it, your subjective experience is ruled by laws that are simply not observable. I think this is Roger Penrose's position on the matter fwiw.
Thus, there is evidence for an afterlife, which even the ancient philosophers like Socrates and Aristotle acknowledged,
The fact humans have subjective experience isn't evidence of an aferlife. That's an absurd argument.
We have subjective experience...therefore there is an aferlife.
Come on man!
This post was edited on 4/10/14 at 12:05 am
Posted on 4/10/14 at 12:04 am to RummelTiger
So religion threads are verboten, but atheism threads are OK?
:tnbhoy:
:tnbhoy:
Posted on 4/10/14 at 12:06 am to Tigerlaff
quote:
I've always thought some people's versions of the afterlife were ridiculous. My family, for instance, taught me that everyone gets a mansion and riches in Heaven. As if materialistic bull shite is the final goal...
The 101 virgins if you suicide bomb is a pretty diabolical version to preach to the simpleminded and disenfranchised.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 12:09 am to fightin tigers
It's a class they have to take. Required.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 12:10 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:
The fact humans have subjective experience isn't evidence of an aferlife.
It very clearly IS evidence.
quote:
That's an absurd argument.
evidence =/= argument
It's not the full argument of course, but it is generally accepted as the basic starting point.
quote:
We have subjective experience...therefore there is an aferlife.
There is a chain of arguments here that I'm leaving out, and in any case, it's not possible to prove them with purely rational analysis, which is fine because rationality is just an abstract category that we create to model the truth, and as I'm sure you realize, all models are inaccurate.
In other words, no matter how you slice it, the full argument will always involve emotion and motivation. There's no way to get around that.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 12:12 am to Kafka
You take that after Virgins 101.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 12:14 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:
Thoughts?
Any conclusion you have come to, is just a guess.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News