Suppose that your soul could survive death. But suppose at death it loses all memory of its past life, and all memories of who and what you were are completely erased from your soul. Suppose, also, that all personality traits, beliefs, desires, preferences, and all other conscious qualities are erased. Will you still exist after death?
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....
I believe that nothing exists independently from we perceiving it.
I had a similar thread a while ago.
At the instant of birth, you have no memory of a past life, nor who or what you will be. You still exist.
That's not a philosophy question.
Can you still fart?
If so remember Renee DesFartes maxim:
"I stink therefore I am."
Ummmmmmmm...ever hear of the immaterial body vs the material body
Dualists:human beings are composed of two radically different substances:
1.Physical/material body: they are tangible, extended in space and time
2. Nonphysical immaterial substances: ex:psychie, soul, mind...intangible, not extended in space or time
the soul is very much discussed in philosophy.
bty wrote:
I believe that nothing exists independently from we perceiving it.
So other planets didnt exist until we found them? What if you and I have a different perception of something? What about the infinite number of thing yet to be perceived? Just the a couple weeks ago a scientist accidently discovered a way to make salt water burn. I dont think anyone could have perceived this was ever possible until it happened, but does that mean it was impossible before it happened?
Augustine wrote: Suppose that your soul could survive death. But suppose at death it loses all memory of its past life, and all memories of who and what you were are completely erased from your soul. Suppose, also, that all personality traits, beliefs, desires, preferences, and all other conscious qualities are erased. Will you still exist after death?
Hell, I don't know.
I'm taking "soul" as a hypothetical here, so you're gonna need to tell us what else it encompasses beyond the things you posit will be "erased" upon death. In other words, what's left in this little scenario of yours?
Personally I'd rather keep it simple: death, by the definition I understand, is the end of "me" and therefore no, I will not exist after death.
Except as a bunch of l-run posts which none of my survivors will even know were my aliases. Assuming those threads aren't all plunked by moderators before then.
Hay, what if that's what the Mayans meant, ending their calendar in 2012 and all - by that year, the moderators will be killing threads faster than they're started on this board. It's really the end of l-run, not the larger world.
Or maybe the board dies in 2012 when wejo changes to modern software and we all quit.
You know those Mayans weren't stoopid, they're on to something for sure. It's just - what??
When you destory the computer does it still store the information? Unless it gets transferred somewhere else its gone?
The information is stored on the hard drive so it is not distroyed. Even if it is damaged odds are parts of it can be recovered. Anything you are working on is lost because in is stored in RAM and it is always cleared unless it is saved. There is a outside chance depending on how the computer is distroyed that some information can be burned into the screen that is why we use screen savers but this is less likely with newer lcd screens. A computer is a lot like a car in that it has many parts that make the machine work. Just becasue it doesnt work doesnt mean all of the parts are useless.
Thanks for that:) Hence the word "destroyed" instead of broken...
The analogy being if there is no information transferred when someone dies then how can the person still exist. The question is whether this information is in fact transferred or not?
"Many Lives, Many Masters" ia an interesting read which could validate this theory but whether there is any truth in what the book says I have no idea.
bump
bty wrote:
I believe that nothing exists independently from we perceiving it.
Truth. What is it but a strategy to allow for independent concepts in an "objective" world. I find truths, observations and formation of the noun that encapsulates the observation a necessary strategy to enjoy and differentiate life.
To questions, concepts, observation are all artifacts of subjectivity. The " I think therefore I am." might seem logical on one level; however, the way I see it, the final reduction is that subjectivity allows for existence as out there. One can not prove a negative, so out there is by nature
a logical fallacy.
I think, therefore there is an illusion of an I that thinks. A subjective I is not the same as an objective I in an absolute sense.
I can not prove the existence of anything other than that perception is true. Beyond that, how can I know anything.
This thought used to bother me, because this idea negates everyone and everything including "I am". It negates all whom I love and leaves a vacuity of nihilism and despair. It
prevents the notion that there is something larger than this encapsulated- is ness. I thought I was in hell as there is so much pain in life and that for all things there is a futility.
Is-ness is not oblivion( no- perception) and is obvious. I ask how can oblivion exist infinitely if there is now no oblivion. Oblivion has been interrupted, but oblivion assumes that subjective is-ness can not be perceived. Now it is and then what after this life? infinite oblivion. This
seems wrong as is-ness has been allowed to be, or should I say a default of a subjective universe?
So it used to bother me because I thought I was in hell, acting the part of Sisyphus, acting out life, gaining knowledge till death and for what? To restart this process life after life, infinitum.
It bothered me to the point I became devastated to the depths of despair that I never thought possible.
After a very long while, I realized nothing is independent or objective or real other than this is-nes. So the thought of hell and futility are merely artifact of is-ness and false. They sure seem real, and it hurts, but it is only that at the moment of belief. I now understand that reality that seems reality is at one moment, now. To have a belief that that the construct in is- ness is not real is a form of inoculation from a hell realm.
I now believe enjoy the good stuff and negate the existential bad as a strategy. Sometimes I despair, but not as much as I used to.
Kind of like watching a movie, I enjoy it, because it entertains. The exception is that the movie that plays out as life seems mailable by some artifact that believes I can shape its outcome sometimes.
That leads to a discussion about control. So control can either exist or not in a subjective sense, but considering the idea of absolute control, or determinism is not absolute and a topic that can not be discussed rationally as it is a paradox when argued as an objective truth.
Is-ness is. Awareness is on illusion and changes always. I am good and then I am bad. I am wise and then I am a fool. I am good looking and then ugly. I think I understand and then I am confused. Life shows itself as inconsistent and then it seems consistent and absolute.
All this thinkiing is making me tired. I better go out for a run and get back into the game. Is-ness is has advantage, 1 - nill, I better play well and keep the edge. There is allot riding on this game.
...and to think some people spend their life in college or other places of study in the hope of reaching the same conclusion...
The plane will take off, even if you have no recollection of it. That is all you need to know.
Yes, I am still here.
Smoke and mirrors wrote:
bty wrote:I believe that nothing exists independently from we perceiving it.
Truth. What is it but a strategy to allow for independent concepts in an "objective" world. I find truths, observations and formation of the noun that encapsulates the observation a necessary strategy to enjoy and differentiate life.
To questions, concepts, observation are all artifacts of subjectivity. The " I think therefore I am." might seem logical on one level; however, the way I see it, the final reduction is that subjectivity allows for existence as out there. One can not prove a negative, so out there is by nature
a logical fallacy.
I think, therefore there is an illusion of an I that thinks. A subjective I is not the same as an objective I in an absolute sense.
I can not prove the existence of anything other than that perception is true. Beyond that, how can I know anything.
This thought used to bother me, because this idea negates everyone and everything including "I am". It negates all whom I love and leaves a vacuity of nihilism and despair. It
prevents the notion that there is something larger than this encapsulated- is ness. I thought I was in hell as there is so much pain in life and that for all things there is a futility.
Is-ness is not oblivion( no- perception) and is obvious. I ask how can oblivion exist infinitely if there is now no oblivion. Oblivion has been interrupted, but oblivion assumes that subjective is-ness can not be perceived. Now it is and then what after this life? infinite oblivion. This
seems wrong as is-ness has been allowed to be, or should I say a default of a subjective universe?
So it used to bother me because I thought I was in hell, acting the part of Sisyphus, acting out life, gaining knowledge till death and for what? To restart this process life after life, infinitum.
It bothered me to the point I became devastated to the depths of despair that I never thought possible.
After a very long while, I realized nothing is independent or objective or real other than this is-nes. So the thought of hell and futility are merely artifact of is-ness and false. They sure seem real, and it hurts, but it is only that at the moment of belief. I now understand that reality that seems reality is at one moment, now. To have a belief that that the construct in is- ness is not real is a form of inoculation from a hell realm.
I now believe enjoy the good stuff and negate the existential bad as a strategy. Sometimes I despair, but not as much as I used to.
Kind of like watching a movie, I enjoy it, because it entertains. The exception is that the movie that plays out as life seems mailable by some artifact that believes I can shape its outcome sometimes.
That leads to a discussion about control. So control can either exist or not in a subjective sense, but considering the idea of absolute control, or determinism is not absolute and a topic that can not be discussed rationally as it is a paradox when argued as an objective truth.
Is-ness is. Awareness is on illusion and changes always. I am good and then I am bad. I am wise and then I am a fool. I am good looking and then ugly. I think I understand and then I am confused. Life shows itself as inconsistent and then it seems consistent and absolute.
All this thinkiing is making me tired. I better go out for a run and get back into the game. Is-ness is has advantage, 1 - nill, I better play well and keep the edge. There is allot riding on this game.
I doubt that professional philosophers would be impressed by this pseudo-intellectual garbage. HS kids trying to be intellectual without having studied the classics is just pathetic. Come back when you have studied "Kritik der reinen Vernunft", "Logische Untersuchungen" and "Sein und Seit". Then we can talk.
No. Philosophy is purely mental masturbation and nothing further. Truth is found in science.
In the fullness of time, Grasshopper:
Everything is Nothing is Everything...