afterlife

@raven phil,

I found that post rather hard to follow...

Anyway, I think that our mind could be a spirit, of some sort. Maybe it isn't, but it's possible.

I'm leaning towards (but not completely subscribing too) the idea that our soul, body, mind, or whatever you call it does not live on past death. I can't really be sure at all, though. However, I believe that absence of a life affter death might not be at all that bad. Think about it; freedom from all of the pains of life (sort of a Buddhist nirvana-like thing I have goin' here, Wink

)

I obviously do not take a strong side of belief on this, but I'm putting this out for consideration. It seems likely enough. But you never know Wink

.

@BassPlayer,

I agree. There is a lulling sense with death, the loss of perceivance, the breaking of reality with actuality, the ending of causality

@raven phil,

raven wrote:

metaphysics how many of you have seen spirits ?

When I first started studying philosophy, I was in the book store paroozing the philosophy section, looked over and saw a section title Metaphysics, and started salavating. I thought to myself, "a whole fricken' section to metaphysics!!".

Much to my surprise, all of the books dealt with witchcraft, mediums, and ghosts. Is this the sort of metaphysics you are refering to?

@de Silentio,

I don't believe in the supernatural in terms of what u r refering to, in fact I don't believe metaphysics should have anything to do with that sort of thing. Is metaphysics not the study of principles and the effect they have on the universe. There is no proof that such beings exist therefore why construe them with explaining events and the universe. It is a frivolous, childish concept.

@de Silentio,

Don't get me wrong though, I believe in a transcendence that governs the existence and morality of God and what it stands for. I also believe in the soul, but not a spirit. I don't believe that at any point there is an incorporeal part to the living that coexists with it. It is to me, an illusion created by transcendence, however humanity would be insane with it.

@BassPlayer,

are you sitting on the fence here ?
either you believe death is the end ?
or we continue?
which is it for you.
depending on how this thread evolves i shall disclose my own thoughts further on
thanks for your thoughts
much peace

@raven phil,

raven wrote:

are you sitting on the fence here ?
either you believe death is the end ?
or we continue?
which is it for you.
depending on how this thread evolves i shall disclose my own thoughts further on
thanks for your thoughts
much peace

When you close your eye's you see black, when a dead man close's his eye's how can he see black, when a man born with no eye's look's into the sky will he see black?

Will the dead man and the man with no eye's see the same?

To prove or disprove, only one thing is truely for sure...
Only the living will care...

@No0ne,

No0ne wrote:

When you close your eye's you see black, when a dead man close's his eye's how can he see black, when a man born with no eye's look's into the sky will he see black?

Will the dead man and the man with no eye's see the same?

To prove or disprove, only one thing is truely for sure...
Only the living will care...

the dead do not see through the eyes of the physical if they did they would not be dead
and yet they see
define sight .........is sight only through the eyes or is sight another form of seeing the world .
also have you ever died and yet still seen yet your eyes are closed ?

@de Silentio,

NO sounds like the book store just lumped them all together for get the books what does death mean to you or dindeed is there a death and do you continue? or is that it? your thought
much peace

@Holiday20310401,

Holiday20310401 wrote:

Don't get me wrong though, I believe in a transcendence that governs the existence and morality of God and what it stands for. I also believe in the soul, but not a spirit. I don't believe that at any point there is an incorporeal part to the living that coexists with it. It is to me, an illusion created by transcendence, however humanity would be insane with it.

you say you belive in the soul but no the spirit whats the difference? Smile

@raven phil,

raven wrote:

are you sitting on the fence here ?
either you believe death is the end ?
or we continue?
which is it for you.
depending on how this thread evolves i shall disclose my own thoughts further on
thanks for your thoughts
much peace

It is never the end for an entity (the soul). I just feel that reality is only one phase in the time of the soul. The ability to perceive, the construsion of reality with actuality is where we stand now. And after that, when we die, we do not perceive; it is just that simple, the transcendence is not to have meaning but simply be part of cause of the soul's survival, I am speaking in retrospect of the fence, the aspect of death vs. life but there is no fence in the soul, it is infinite. Irrelevant to take a side on whether we continue or not. What happens will happen, inevitable.

Time is infinite. Living is the allowing for fundamental and material to have potential both ways. When that potential is cut off, death, nothingness; it can't be assumed that the material is destroyed or the fundamental, unless they rely on each other for existence. Wait.... I just realized... I believe now that they do rely on each other.
It is hard to grasp, because of how irrelevant it seems based on how when there is no perception, there is loss of reality where fundamental and material are allowed to hold meaning. Obviously, there is no other form where there is meaning of the soul; unless of course 'transcendence'. And since time is infinite then all the parts that make up the everything (universe just doesn't express it enough) would be infinite, regardless of change. Sad

@raven phil,

raven wrote:

you say you belive in the soul but no the spirit whats the difference?

I mean that there should be fundamentals that govern individual entities, like morality. The collage of humanity causes a unified immortality of fundamentals, and the individuals have a part of it, the soul. I do not believe that the soul is this spirit, an incorporeal, separated essence that influences the mind. It is an illusion of the material's complexity.
For example. Compare humans to a primitive animal. We are intellectually superior to them, we can conceive more fundamentals than them which is seen through how our life is governed by such things more, like morality, emotions, etc. Animals that are primitive do not have the material, brain, to allow fundamentals to have as much influence upon themselves and as a species. They have a soul but it's fundamental expanse is smaller due to material, not this incorporeal sense. When I refer to spirit I speak of the soul being self reliant. Smile

@Holiday20310401,

nice reply but your still toe dipping can we not put this in one sentence?
that being yes we do continue
i still find your response vague nebulous your dancing around the question what is the difference between soul and spirit? i see your point with animals but can you just answer the reason why your believe in one but not the other when i feel they are the same thing

thanks for your thoughts:)
much peace

@raven phil,

raven wrote:

nice reply but your still toe dipping can we not put this in one sentence?
that being yes we do continue
or no we dont simple no need to explain bleck and white will suffice
thanks for your thoughts:)
much peace

I'm sorry I would rather go into detail and come to concise conclusions later. :rolleyes:
I give a lot of information, and because I am new I would rather display all my reasoning so that people can determine the flaws to it, who are more experience. I learn from it and they learn from the expanse of info. Half way through a rant, somebody may decide to deviate from my opinion and come across a gradient and sensible path of finding the truth, then they also learn.
:cool:

@Holiday20310401,

Borders has a large 'Metaphysics' section which amounts to a 'New Age' section. Metaphysics has been adopted by many New Age exponents because Metaphysics cannot be properly defined and because metaphysics is so abstract - an easy target. So the word was adopted to add credibility to silly books and to silly people who like to call themselves metaphysicians.

Seriously, if someone is a self described metaphysician, run away. The philosopher will just call himself a philosopher, or a student of philosophy.

@Didymos Thomas,

If I ever see a metaphysician I'll keep that in mind. I think it is still important to try to correlate the living with the universe.

@raven phil,

raven wrote:

nice reply but your still toe dipping can we not put this in one sentence?
that being yes we do continue
i still find your response vague nebulous your dancing around the question what is the difference between soul and spirit? i see your point with animals but can you just answer the reason why your believe in one but not the other when i feel they are the same thing

thanks for your thoughts:)
much peace

1 sentence?

The diffrence of soul and spirt is the diffrence you say, therefore you make the diffrence, even tho there trully might not be a spirt or soul or a diffrence.

1 sentence?

The start after the end called death, only those's that that say god has said what is there, or what another has said answer's that, for only there word's are there proof.

1 sentence?

Truely no one know's what's after the end called death...

To answer your other question's that you posted in reply to my first post...

Sight, can be the thought of light, or the action of obsorbing light...

Example.
Are eye's take in light, and turn it into a form that are brain's can take to create the picture that we see, and for are mind's to perceive and the very action of perceiveing perception.

Therefore are brain's can make there own light, as if like a dream
Therefore a blind man must make his own, for he has not his eye's

So therefore a dead man can not create his own light nor can he see light..

So therefore after your flesh is dead, there is only one logical and intelectualy know outcome, you will see and feel and be in allway's oppisite than when you had a brain, had eye's, and flesh, for you no longer will have such.

Or it could be said that you will have such a body after your flesh die's, yet that would be jumping to conclution's with no logical thought...

For what we can say is, if you have no flesh and you still exist, you would not see as you see when you have eye's, for that would be no lie...

Each are only 1 sentence ^.^ injoy... (so if you dont like what religious figure's have defined as your life after death, this small fact is what you can count on..)

@No0ne,

"Food For Thought".
"Signing Off" from life doesn't mean you are allowed to leave the table until every one at it has finished. That is just common manners.

Reincarnation is not simply a Hindu concept. Jesus implied that to take off this is to consume my life. Bread and wine, was he also wheat and grape while he lived. When you have finished drinking and washing, will you clean the water for the next person to drink or are you going to just allow the processes of the universe to exclude you from its data banks.

Grow a thought, not a list of computations. Of course there is an afterlife. You as a human being can barely account for the uses of the products that existance has brought you and life is yet to be complete until you can account for your fill. After this I don't know, or I am not saying.

@urangutan,

Though I'd love to believe in an elysium or heaven, I'm more inclined to believe that when we die, that's it. Our conscious being just becomes nothing. We are lifeforms, just like any other, despite being more intelligent. I don't think that this added intelligence lends to us being any different than an ant that gets crushed beneath our feet as we walk to our daily jobs.

So, no, I don't believe in spirits.

Philosophy Forum

afterlife

Quick Links

My Account

able2know