Existence after death?

[WildHorse]

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: loic2003
Really? lets take a quick look at it:

you die and rot. It's like before you were born.... remember that? no? exactly. You don't float to some magic land, or are reborn... your brain stops functioning and you have no further thoughts or feelings. That's why you should lead a productive life and not waste it praying, fighting or any other activity that generally detracts from a useful life.

You die and rot... pretty testable, that one... just use your nose.
Your brain stops functioning and you have no further thoughts or feelings: Grab yourself a corpse and do a brain activity scan on it. You'll find there is infact no mental activity ie no thoughts and if you prod it, it won't respond ie no feelngs... pretty easily testible IMO. Not really sure from where your thought came from, I fear it may have formed rectally...

You're an idiot and a bigot. Kindly don't abuse science for your petty prejudices. Can you test that "you don't float to some magic land, or are reborn"? No. Can you observe it? No. Can you name one war actually caused by religion? No. Most of the charities and half the schools in the world are operated by religions and you say that isn't productive? STFU. I don't care much for religion but I do care that science isn't abused and turned into a religion itself by bigoted idiots like you.

You can not prove that there is or is not a god. Believing that god does not exist because there is no "evidence" for it is as retarded as believing that god does exist because of the "evidence" that he does.

There is absolutely zero way to prove either one *beyond a shadow of a doubt*. Even if there was a booming voice in the sky claiming to be god, that made mountains shake at will, it still wouldnt be sufficient to prove that it is actually god speaking and not some super technologically advanced race of aliens.

Some might consider that juvenile, but if you're really claiming to be scientific, then you should understand better than anyone that science can't prove anything in the first place anyway.

It is one thing to say that a ball of matter will act in a certain way based on the laws of physics, but it is completely and utterly out of sciences domain to say why.

 

[meltdown75]

same people, same debates.

don't you guys ever tire of this ******?

 

[flyfish]

After the resurrection, you get your own plant/solar system/galaxy.
Which one you get depends on how good you were.
We will populate the stars.

 

[loic2003]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: loic2003
Really? lets take a quick look at it:

you die and rot. It's like before you were born.... remember that? no? exactly. You don't float to some magic land, or are reborn... your brain stops functioning and you have no further thoughts or feelings. That's why you should lead a productive life and not waste it praying, fighting or any other activity that generally detracts from a useful life.

You die and rot... pretty testable, that one... just use your nose.
Your brain stops functioning and you have no further thoughts or feelings: Grab yourself a corpse and do a brain activity scan on it. You'll find there is infact no mental activity ie no thoughts and if you prod it, it won't respond ie no feelngs... pretty easily testible IMO. Not really sure from where your thought came from, I fear it may have formed rectally...

You're an idiot and a bigot. Kindly don't abuse science for your petty prejudices. Can you test that "you don't float to some magic land, or are reborn"? No. Can you observe it? No. Can you name one war actually caused by religion? No. Most of the charities and half the schools in the world are operated by religions and you say that isn't productive? STFU. I don't care much for religion but I do care that science isn't abused and turned into a religion itself by bigoted idiots like you.

now now, be careful that your tears don't short out your keyboard!

I'd ask you to be rational and logical, but it would seem this is somewhat of a challege to you, given your penchant for what are little more than fairytales to ease the nerves of mortals.

As for testing floating up to some magical land, I'd say that a fairly good test would be the fact that there is not one shred of evidence to support this theory, there is no way of observing it, no feedback from any 'souls' that have completed the floating process and no real scientific backing behind the theory. Similarly, if I were to tell you that you actually float to a paradise where a giant goose dressed in a tutu sings songs to you for eternity, you'd likely think I was talking sh!t, and you'd be right as there's nothing to back this idea up. If, however, this idea was indoctrinated for generation after generation, you'd likely be singing praise right now for the giant goose there. It is my hope that at some stage, the human race with break from the shackles that are religion and embrace intelligent thought. I fear this will take many generations of pathetic violence before we evolve to such a state.

Religion is outdated. It was formed when we knew little (and lets not forget, used heavily to control the population). As we have developed, religions have faded (for example, we no longer feel we need to make a sacrifice to the god of sun in order for the sun to rise the following day, nor do we believe that lightning is Thor, the god of thunder striking his hammer), and I feel that as we develop intellectualy, the rest of the religions will perish like the rest.

Granted, many charities are religion-based (which I personally do feel is morally questionable) and I'm sure lots of religious people do great things. However, there are many, many non-religious folk who do great things without the need to have a religion-spreading agenda associated with it. Further, it is undeniable that religion is the cause for many atrocities around the world today.

I'd not mind religion being out there if it was kept to a small personal level (on par with what you choose to watch on TV), but unfortunately it often interferes with logical thought and important decisions. In essence, religion should be kept very seperate from this. GWB spouting claptrap about his god when talking of the iraq war, for example, troubled me hugely.

I don't think I'm abusing science at all here. I think i'm just a fan of logic, and free thought.

Think about it, without religion there would be good people and there would be bad people. With religion, however, good people will do bad things [unashamedly ripped from dawkins].

Back on topic here: until there's any kind of evidence to support life after death, I'm going to stick with my theory that the idea of life after death is a story to help people accept the inevitable, but is just that - a story. We really do die and it all ends there. As I said above, it's like before you were born: nothingness.

/thread.

 

[TheSlamma]

there is none, so live it up now as best you can!

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: loic2003

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: loic2003
Really? lets take a quick look at it:

you die and rot. It's like before you were born.... remember that? no? exactly. You don't float to some magic land, or are reborn... your brain stops functioning and you have no further thoughts or feelings. That's why you should lead a productive life and not waste it praying, fighting or any other activity that generally detracts from a useful life.

You die and rot... pretty testable, that one... just use your nose.
Your brain stops functioning and you have no further thoughts or feelings: Grab yourself a corpse and do a brain activity scan on it. You'll find there is infact no mental activity ie no thoughts and if you prod it, it won't respond ie no feelngs... pretty easily testible IMO. Not really sure from where your thought came from, I fear it may have formed rectally...

You're an idiot and a bigot. Kindly don't abuse science for your petty prejudices. Can you test that "you don't float to some magic land, or are reborn"? No. Can you observe it? No. Can you name one war actually caused by religion? No. Most of the charities and half the schools in the world are operated by religions and you say that isn't productive? STFU. I don't care much for religion but I do care that science isn't abused and turned into a religion itself by bigoted idiots like you.

now now, be careful that your tears don't short out your keyboard!

I'd ask you to be rational and logical, but it would seem this is somewhat of a challege to you, given your penchant for what are little more than fairytales to ease the nerves of mortals.

As for testing floating up to some magical land, I'd say that a fairly good test would be the fact that there is not one shred of evidence to support this theory, there is no way of observing it, no feedback from any 'souls' that have completed the floating process and no real scientific backing behind the theory. Similarly, if I were to tell you that you actually float to a paradise where a giant goose dressed in a tutu sings songs to you for eternity, you'd likely think I was talking sh!t, and you'd be right as there's nothing to back this idea up. If, however, this idea was indoctrinated for generation after generation, you'd likely be singing praise right now for the giant goose there. It is my hope that at some stage, the human race with break from the shackles that are religion and embrace intelligent thought. I fear this will take many generations of pathetic violence before we evolve to such a state.

Religion is outdated. It was formed when we knew little (and lets not forget, used heavily to control the population). As we have developed, religions have faded (for example, we no longer feel we need to make a sacrifice to the god of sun in order for the sun to rise the following day, nor do we believe that lightning is Thor, the god of thunder striking his hammer), and I feel that as we develop intellectualy, the rest of the religions will perish like the rest.

Granted, many charities are religion-based (which I personally do feel is morally questionable) and I'm sure lots of religious people do great things. However, there are many, many non-religious folk who do great things without the need to have a religion-spreading agenda associated with it. Further, it is undeniable that religion is the cause for many atrocities around the world today.

I'd not mind religion being out there if it was kept to a small personal level (on par with what you choose to watch on TV), but unfortunately it often interferes with logical thought and important decisions. In essence, religion should be kept very seperate from this. GWB spouting claptrap about his god when talking of the iraq war, for example, troubled me hugely.

I don't think I'm abusing science at all here. I think i'm just a fan of logic, and free thought.

Think about it, without religion there would be good people and there would be bad people. With religion, however, good people will do bad things [unashamedly ripped from dawkins].

Back on topic here: until there's any kind of evidence to support life after death, I'm going to stick with my theory that the idea of life after death is a story to help people accept the inevitable, but is just that - a story. We really do die and it all ends there. As I said above, it's like before you were born: nothingness.

/thread.

While I do agree with what much of what youve said, what kind of evidence are looking for?

If you actually have the free-thinking brain you claim have, youd realize that youre assumption that there is or is not life after death is just as much an assumption as anyone elses.

Dont spout off about evidence and try to use science to prop up a fallacious argument that in reality "science" has no way of even touching.

 

[tec699]

You guys have just shown why the road to heaven is narrow and you ALL will be rotting in HELL while I sit next to and worship GOD when I die.

:|

 

[loic2003]

Originally posted by: BD2003
While I do agree with what much of what youve said, what kind of evidence are looking for?

If you actually have the free-thinking brain you claim have, youd realize that youre assumption that there is or is not life after death is just as much an assumption as anyone elses.

Dont spout off about evidence and try to use science to prop up a fallacious argument that in reality "science" has no way of even touching.

What evidence do you feel gives us all the accepted idea that the tooth fairy, dragons and santa don't exist? How about a total lack of any supporting evidence?

Originally posted by: tec699
You guys have just shown why the road to heaven is narrow and you ALL will be rotting in HELL while I sit next to and worship GOD when I die.

I love this one (assuming you're not just joking). Let us assume that the whole christian god idea isn't a story hacked together to strike fear into the population in order to control them, for this example. Lets assume the the bible is 'gospel truth' for want of a better phrase.

So why does a god demand that we worship him? Why would he punish his own children who he supposedly loves? How egotistical can you get? Also, since this god supposedly knows everything, why would he create us with the built in doubt and demand for evidence? It's like he's purposefully trying to trick us and he gladly sends his own into 'hell'. It's sick... the entire religion is based upon fear and threats. no thanks....

The way I see it, I'll use my own intelligence to decide what is good or bad. I don't need some aged book to guide me. I feel I have sufficient intelligence to live a good life. Maybe 2000 years ago when education levels were poor, a religion may have been a good idea in order to guide the ignorant into living a healthy, peaceful life. I don't need that crap.

 

[BD2003]

What evidence do you feel gives us all the accepted idea that the tooth fairy, dragons and santa don't exist? How about a total lack of any supporting evidence?

Just as much, but the issue is a bit different. The tooth fairy, dragons, and santa are not supposed to be precursors to existence. Those are all cute and all but the idea of whether or not there is a "higher power" is a bit more important than to just trivialize it like that.

Besides, one could make a case that a human being could actually have a chance at determining whether those do exist. It would be damn near impossible in reality, but theoretically possible.

For humans to determine what happens after death is quite a bit different, since it would require a dead person to come back to life, for one thing.

Originally posted by: tec699
You guys have just shown why the road to heaven is narrow and you ALL will be rotting in HELL while I sit next to and worship GOD when I die.

I love this one (assuming you're not just joking). Let us assume that the whole christian god idea isn't a story hacked together to strike fear into the population in order to control them, for this example. Lets assume the the bible is 'gospel truth' for want of a better phrase.

So why does a god demand that we worship him? Why would he punish his own children who he supposedly loves? How egotistical can you get? Also, since this god supposedly knows everything, why would he create us with the built in doubt and demand for evidence? It's like he's purposefully trying to trick us and he gladly sends his own into 'hell'. It's sick... the entire religion is based upon fear and threats. no thanks....

The way I see it, I'll use my own intelligence to decide what is good or bad. I don't need some aged book to guide me. I feel I have sufficient intelligence to live a good life. Maybe 2000 years ago when education levels were poor, a religion may have been a good idea in order to guide the ignorant into living a healthy, peaceful life. I don't need that crap.[/quote]

Even though I think it was pretty obvious he was joking, I agree with you.

I personally think its pretty damn obvious that there isnt a guy in the sky thats watching us.

But why ANYTHING exists, what the nature of consciousness is, what *I* really am etc, is something that NO ONE can claim to know without filtering it through their ass.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: loic2003

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: loic2003
Really? lets take a quick look at it:

you die and rot. It's like before you were born.... remember that? no? exactly. You don't float to some magic land, or are reborn... your brain stops functioning and you have no further thoughts or feelings. That's why you should lead a productive life and not waste it praying, fighting or any other activity that generally detracts from a useful life.

You die and rot... pretty testable, that one... just use your nose.
Your brain stops functioning and you have no further thoughts or feelings: Grab yourself a corpse and do a brain activity scan on it. You'll find there is infact no mental activity ie no thoughts and if you prod it, it won't respond ie no feelngs... pretty easily testible IMO. Not really sure from where your thought came from, I fear it may have formed rectally...

You're an idiot and a bigot. Kindly don't abuse science for your petty prejudices. Can you test that "you don't float to some magic land, or are reborn"? No. Can you observe it? No. Can you name one war actually caused by religion? No. Most of the charities and half the schools in the world are operated by religions and you say that isn't productive? STFU. I don't care much for religion but I do care that science isn't abused and turned into a religion itself by bigoted idiots like you.

now now, be careful that your tears don't short out your keyboard!

I'd ask you to be rational and logical, but it would seem this is somewhat of a challege to you, given your penchant for what are little more than fairytales to ease the nerves of mortals.

As for testing floating up to some magical land, I'd say that a fairly good test would be the fact that there is not one shred of evidence to support this theory, there is no way of observing it, no feedback from any 'souls' that have completed the floating process and no real scientific backing behind the theory. Similarly, if I were to tell you that you actually float to a paradise where a giant goose dressed in a tutu sings songs to you for eternity, you'd likely think I was talking sh!t, and you'd be right as there's nothing to back this idea up. If, however, this idea was indoctrinated for generation after generation, you'd likely be singing praise right now for the giant goose there. It is my hope that at some stage, the human race with break from the shackles that are religion and embrace intelligent thought. I fear this will take many generations of pathetic violence before we evolve to such a state.

Religion is outdated. It was formed when we knew little (and lets not forget, used heavily to control the population). As we have developed, religions have faded (for example, we no longer feel we need to make a sacrifice to the god of sun in order for the sun to rise the following day, nor do we believe that lightning is Thor, the god of thunder striking his hammer), and I feel that as we develop intellectualy, the rest of the religions will perish like the rest.

Granted, many charities are religion-based (which I personally do feel is morally questionable) and I'm sure lots of religious people do great things. However, there are many, many non-religious folk who do great things without the need to have a religion-spreading agenda associated with it. Further, it is undeniable that religion is the cause for many atrocities around the world today.

I'd not mind religion being out there if it was kept to a small personal level (on par with what you choose to watch on TV), but unfortunately it often interferes with logical thought and important decisions. In essence, religion should be kept very seperate from this. GWB spouting claptrap about his god when talking of the iraq war, for example, troubled me hugely.

I don't think I'm abusing science at all here. I think i'm just a fan of logic, and free thought.

Think about it, without religion there would be good people and there would be bad people. With religion, however, good people will do bad things [unashamedly ripped from dawkins].

Back on topic here: until there's any kind of evidence to support life after death, I'm going to stick with my theory that the idea of life after death is a story to help people accept the inevitable, but is just that - a story. We really do die and it all ends there. As I said above, it's like before you were born: nothingness.

/thread.

While I do agree with what much of what youve said, what kind of evidence are looking for?

If you actually have the free-thinking brain you claim have, youd realize that youre assumption that there is or is not life after death is just as much an assumption as anyone elses.

Dont spout off about evidence and try to use science to prop up a fallacious argument that in reality "science" has no way of even touching.

Thank you. I seriously cannot stand his type of psuedo-intellectual psuedo-scientific bullsh!t. It's basically close-minded crap held together with bad logic and fake science for the purpose of furthering a political agenda. There is no scientific proof for or against existence or life after death. It's just not even in the scientific realm.

 

[upsciLLion]

If I have to share Heaven with people like you all, I hope there is no afterlife.

 

[theMan]

who cares.

 

[Agnostos Insania]

Originally posted by: Vic
Thank you. I seriously cannot stand his type of psuedo-intellectual psuedo-scientific bullsh!t. It's basically close-minded crap held together with bad logic and fake science for the purpose of furthering a political agenda. There is no scientific proof for or against existence or life after death. It's just not even in the scientific realm.

The burden of proof is on the "afterlife believers". It's perhaps not a scientific realm directly, but all our knowledge paints a distinct picture. Science has its own fields describing life and matter, and they point towards us not living happily ever after.
I just honestly cannot see how I could exist without the many organs and brain functions that give me existence itself. Science is the way of this universe, so I guess we could exist somewhere else without our bodies, but... Ah forget it.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Agnostos Insania

Originally posted by: Vic
Thank you. I seriously cannot stand his type of psuedo-intellectual psuedo-scientific bullsh!t. It's basically close-minded crap held together with bad logic and fake science for the purpose of furthering a political agenda. There is no scientific proof for or against existence or life after death. It's just not even in the scientific realm.

The burden of proof is on the "afterlife believers". It's perhaps not a scientific realm directly, but all our knowledge paints a distinct picture. Science has its own fields describing life and matter, and they point towards us not living happily ever after.
I just honestly cannot see how I could exist without the many organs and brain functions that give me existence itself. Science is the way of this universe, so I guess we could exist somewhere else without our bodies, but... Ah forget it.

"Burden" of proof is irrelevent. There is no scientifically valid proof period. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. What remains is freedom of belief. This is where the pseudo-scientific close-minded authoritarians seek to abuse science for the sake of CONTROL and the propagation of their own belief system. To eradicate the freedom of belief for those beliefs that they do not themselves believe in. And in this fashion, loic2003 is every bit as bad as the worst fundamentalist seeking to legislate their own belief system. That's what this issue is about, sorry if you can't understand it.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: Agnostos Insania

Originally posted by: Vic
Thank you. I seriously cannot stand his type of psuedo-intellectual psuedo-scientific bullsh!t. It's basically close-minded crap held together with bad logic and fake science for the purpose of furthering a political agenda. There is no scientific proof for or against existence or life after death. It's just not even in the scientific realm.

The burden of proof is on the "afterlife believers". It's perhaps not a scientific realm directly, but all our knowledge paints a distinct picture. Science has its own fields describing life and matter, and they point towards us not living happily ever after.
I just honestly cannot see how I could exist without the many organs and brain functions that give me existence itself. Science is the way of this universe, so I guess we could exist somewhere else without our bodies, but... Ah forget it.

It isnt a court case. There is no "burden of proof". If I have heard any single thing simple minded in this thread, that is it.

Clearly, there is a very strong connection between our mind and body. But that gap is not totally bridged yet. There is so much that we do not understand (arguably can never understand) about consciousness, that before you can reasonably ask whether or not we exist after we die, we first need to understand why "we" (as in our conscious minds) exist while we LIVE. Not to mention we don't truely understand what "we" are to begin with, so asking why is even getting ahead of ourselves.

The plain and simple fact is that in this day and age, there is almost no one that can say without bs-ing (through faith or pseudo-science) that they even know where to begin to answer that question. We need another 50-100+ years of biopsychology before we can even make some reasonable headway on it. I think we will get there eventually, but right now neuroscience is back where astronomy was 50 years ago.

 

[loic2003]

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: Agnostos Insania

Originally posted by: Vic
Thank you. I seriously cannot stand his type of psuedo-intellectual psuedo-scientific bullsh!t. It's basically close-minded crap held together with bad logic and fake science for the purpose of furthering a political agenda. There is no scientific proof for or against existence or life after death. It's just not even in the scientific realm.

The burden of proof is on the "afterlife believers". It's perhaps not a scientific realm directly, but all our knowledge paints a distinct picture. Science has its own fields describing life and matter, and they point towards us not living happily ever after.
I just honestly cannot see how I could exist without the many organs and brain functions that give me existence itself. Science is the way of this universe, so I guess we could exist somewhere else without our bodies, but... Ah forget it.

It isnt a court case. There is no "burden of proof". If I have heard any single thing simple minded in this thread, that is it.

Clearly, there is a very strong connection between our mind and body. But that gap is not totally bridged yet. There is so much that we do not understand (arguably can never understand) about consciousness, that before you can reasonably ask whether or not we exist after we die, we first need to understand why "we" (as in our conscious minds) exist while we LIVE. Not to mention we don't truely understand what "we" are to begin with, so asking why is even getting ahead of ourselves.

The plain and simple fact is that in this day and age, there is almost no one that can say without bs-ing (through faith or pseudo-science) that they even know where to begin to answer that question. We need another 50-100+ years of biopsychology before we can even make some reasonable headway on it. I think we will get there eventually, but right now neuroscience is back where astronomy was 50 years ago.

See this I still disagree with. You're basically saying "we don't understand everything therefore someone/something else does". This is a backwards way of thinking IMO. The universe is hugely complex, yet we do know a fantastical amount about it. Of course there are vast areas we know little about, but to me this seems like a weak reason to believe in a higher being.

I think that we are totally dependant on our bodies to exists, and we do not have a soul or whatever. For example, check out someoen who has a mental illness: parkinsons for example. Their personality completely changes and they act like a different person.

vic, I'm open to persuasion, but I do require positive physical evidence... even just a small amount. Being ignorant of some aspect of science is not a reason to believe in a god IMO.


At the end of the day, we've totally lucked out. We happen to be alive on this planet that is perfectly situated in the solar system. Of course people are going to think that some higher power has created this all for us, but it simply hasn't.

 

[Agnostos Insania]

Originally posted by: Vic
"Burden" of proof is irrelevent. There is no scientifically valid proof period. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. What remains is freedom of belief. This is where the pseudo-scientific close-minded authoritarians seek to abuse science for the sake of CONTROL and the propagation of their own belief system.

Pseudo-scientific close-minded Authoritarians? When has science actually controlled anything? If anything science has helped free us from control I'd say. You seem to have issues with the scientific community in general. Why is that?

To eradicate the freedom of belief for those beliefs that they do not themselves believe in. And in this fashion, loic2003 is every bit as bad as the worst fundamentalist seeking to legislate their own belief system.

I can see your point, but science isn't "Think this way or you're against us", science is just... science. It sounds mean to say religion has outlived its purpose, but it's in science's nature to go against preconceived notions and do its best to explain things uhh... scientifically. If it goes against religion, it can't be helped.

That's what this issue is about, sorry if you can't understand it.

Somehow I'll manage. Seriously though, I understand what you're saying but I disagree. Science has its crackpots, but they're looked down upon.

Originally posted by: BD2003
It isnt a court case. There is no "burden of proof". If I have heard any single thing simple minded in this thread, that is it.

Reply without the condescending manner (typical of AT people for some reason) and I'll give you a true reply.

 

[BD2003]

See this I still disagree with. You're basically saying "we don't understand everything therefore someone/something else does". This is a backwards way of thinking IMO. The universe is hugely complex, yet we do know a fantastical amount about it. Of course there are vast areas we know little about, but to me this seems like a weak reason to believe in a higher being.

When did I ever say that? I never said one way or another that I professed belief in a higher being. What I "believe" right now is that I dont HAVE TO take a stance. I am perfectly comfortable with living with that level of doubt, that there may be, there may not be, or we may be so misleaded that asking whether or not there is or isnt a higher power isnt the right question to ask. We know a lot about the physical universe, but the more we figure out, the more questions we have. We may understand how the universe progressed after the big bang, etc - but that doesnt even begin to explain why there is a universe in the first place.

I'm well aware of the anthropic principle that its a necessity for the universe to exist and support life in order for us to be here to ask that very question, but that is no reason to cop out at that point with that understanding.

I think that we are totally dependant on our bodies to exists, and we do not have a soul or whatever. For example, check out someoen who has a mental illness: parkinsons for example. Their personality completely changes and they act like a different person.

The brain is most obviously the seat of the mind. No brain = no mind (as far as human beings go at least). And obviously processes in the brain are what control the mind etc. I'm not going to go as far as to say there is something supernatural, but I'm not going to go as far as to say that there isnt (assuming one can use the word supernatural and others will not automatically connect that with the idea of a higher power). All the science and rational logic in the world (or at least where we are at now) can NOT explain why I (as in my conscious mind) exist. Why there are brains - thats just physics, evolution and a few billion years. But why I (my soul etc, terrible word with too many connotations but the best I can think of) is "inside" my brain to "view" all of the possibly completely deterministic things that I do is still the magic question. Which is why I will continue to say that there is no point on asking whether "we" exist after death when we dont understand completely where "we" comes from. Neuroscience can explain a lot, but it cant explain it all. (yet)

vic, I'm open to persuasion, but I do require positive physical evidence... even just a small amount. Being ignorant of some aspect of science is not a reason to believe in a god IMO.

I too, require physical evidence. But only in application to physical phenomena. Our brains are absolutely physical phenomena. Our minds, which are self evidently NOT a physical phenomena (for now, perhaps), are a different story.

At the end of the day, we've totally lucked out. We happen to be alive on this planet that is perfectly situated in the solar system. Of course people are going to think that some higher power has created this all for us, but it simply hasn't.

I agree to the extent that there is most likely not a big old man in the sky that created us for his own reasons. But as to why ANYTHING exists, thats still beyond us.

Reply without the condescending manner (typical of AT people for some reason) and I'll give you a true reply.

Pot, meet kettle. :roll:

 

[Agnostos Insania]

Originally posted by: BD2003

Reply without the condescending manner (typical of AT people for some reason) and I'll give you a true reply.

Pot, meet kettle. :roll:

Please point out where I'm condescending upon anyone.

EDIT: What's the right way to say that? "condescending on, being condescending..."

 

[BD2003]

Wrong button.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: Agnostos Insania

Originally posted by: BD2003

Reply without the condescending manner (typical of AT people for some reason) and I'll give you a true reply.

Pot, meet kettle. :roll:

Please point out where I'm condescending upon anyone.

I think it speaks for itself.

 

[Agnostos Insania]

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: Agnostos Insania
Please point out where I'm condescending upon anyone.

I think it speaks for itself.

Don't avoid the question. Please point it out to me, I'm not being facetious. I've had a habit of being conscending in my past and I've been trying to eliminate it.

 

[Ready]

you become a vagina after you die

 

[upsciLLion]

Originally posted by: Ready
you become a vagina after you die

We're all fvcked.