Sure there is a difference but my point was about memory, plus even doctors don’t really understand how anaesthesia works on consciousness so it’s a moot point.
Seraphim23
JoinedPosts by Seraphim23
-
65
Life after death OR Consciousness after death?
by Space Madness inare we conscious after death?
if we don't understand why and how consciousness exsist now, how do we know it doesn't continue after death?
can consciousness survive the death of the body?
-
-
-
21
VIOLATING the 3 Classic Laws of thought in order to become SPIRITUAL
by Terry indo you know what a whim means?
it is a violation of cause and effect.
a whim is not connected to an actual logical reason.
-
-
Seraphim23
Well Terry a battle of philosophy I’ll leave to others as I don’t have the time to take you on in the way that would be required.
-
65
Life after death OR Consciousness after death?
by Space Madness inare we conscious after death?
if we don't understand why and how consciousness exsist now, how do we know it doesn't continue after death?
can consciousness survive the death of the body?
-
-
Seraphim23
This depends on what the definition of life really is Terry. Accurate definitions are notoriously hard to get and have a habit of disintegrating the closer one looks at the subject being defined.
-
65
Life after death OR Consciousness after death?
by Space Madness inare we conscious after death?
if we don't understand why and how consciousness exsist now, how do we know it doesn't continue after death?
can consciousness survive the death of the body?
-
-
Seraphim23
Cofty people dream every night but they don’t always recall it, yet at the time of the dream they did experience the dream. The lack of recollection doesn’t prove one was not in fact having experiences via consciousness, although not awake in the conventional sense.
-
21
VIOLATING the 3 Classic Laws of thought in order to become SPIRITUAL
by Terry indo you know what a whim means?
it is a violation of cause and effect.
a whim is not connected to an actual logical reason.
-
-
Seraphim23
The problem Terry for philosophical thinking may be that contradictions are real and not always indicative of wrong thinking. In most cases they are indicative of wrong thinking of course, so such thinking is useful but there may be cases where this is not the case. Thinking by its very nature is limited otherwise one would not need to do it for one would know all things without having to navigate through the thought maze, with its dead ends and paths of promise. Philosophy also in the same way relies on what is known in order to bolster a foundation for it to be more than fantasy. However what is known is going to be limited in the same way thinking itself is. There will always be more to learn or discover even if that knowledge is forever out of reach, but none of this addresses the question of what knowledge or thought actually is because one cannot get outside of its system in order to question it because it’s a path without end.
-
65
Life after death OR Consciousness after death?
by Space Madness inare we conscious after death?
if we don't understand why and how consciousness exsist now, how do we know it doesn't continue after death?
can consciousness survive the death of the body?
-
-
Seraphim23
Interesting account Mum! These things are very much more common than is generally thought. Many don’t talk about their own experiences for fear of ridicule. My aunt Sheila had an interesting experience with a cat believe it or not. When he died at 25 years old, all the clocks in here house stopped. I wasn’t a witness to this but my aunt has never lied to me so I do believe her especially considering my own experiences. There seems to be some kind of interconnection with all beings as far as I can tell from the evidence, and the current of such connections seems to be primarily based on emotion of the positive side of the emotional spectrum in particular. The connection seems to be two way as well, so that if one doesn’t feel anything towards another but the other does, the connection is still active and information can be passed through it.
-
65
Life after death OR Consciousness after death?
by Space Madness inare we conscious after death?
if we don't understand why and how consciousness exsist now, how do we know it doesn't continue after death?
can consciousness survive the death of the body?
-
-
Seraphim23
Twice in my life when relatives have died, certain interesting things happened. The first time many years ago was when my aunt was in hospital and my parents received a phone call late one night. My aunt was already in hospital and quite ill and the phone call was to inform my mother that she might want to come to the hospital because my aunt Tess had taken a turn for the worst, but death was not imminent at this point. After the call my parents had a stressed debate because my mum has agoraphobia and the prospect of traveling to the hospital at a moment’s notice was a bit much for her. A minute or so into this debate I saw a white light flash into view at the end of the hall way. Mum and dad were in the room where the telephone was, so were not in a position to see it. It was a very white light like nothing I had ever seen at that point in my life before and I reasoned that it might mean my aunt had died. Literally two minutes later as you may guess, the phone rang again from the hospital telling my dad that she had died.
The second experience was a little different but the timing element was the same which to me shows that brain chemistry is not the explanation here, as I was not dying but my relative was. In both cases I was nowhere near the dying relative when they died and in the second case I didn’t even know that my relative had any health issues at all. Make of this what you will, but I know what I experienced.
-
69
Calling all materialists and non-materialists
by willmarite inread this comment by bertrand russell:.
that man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving; that his origin, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and his beliefs, are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms; that no fire, no heroism, no intensity of thought or feeling, can preserve an individual life beyond the grave; that all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness of human genius, are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system; and the whole temple of mans achievement must inevitably be buried beneath the debris of a universe in ruins all these things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain, that no philosophy that rejects them can hope to stand.
only within the scaffolding of these truths, only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair, can the souls habitation henceforth be safely built.. .
-
-
Seraphim23
Well with respect I could keep this conversation going all year if I wanted to bohm but it’s a fruitless discussion. Much better to agree to disagree I think. Love that girlfriend of yours with all your mind soul and strength. Whatever the point is in doing so you won’t get me arguing with on whether you should. As far as I am concerned I hope you do a good job in doing so.
-
69
Calling all materialists and non-materialists
by willmarite inread this comment by bertrand russell:.
that man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving; that his origin, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and his beliefs, are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms; that no fire, no heroism, no intensity of thought or feeling, can preserve an individual life beyond the grave; that all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness of human genius, are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system; and the whole temple of mans achievement must inevitably be buried beneath the debris of a universe in ruins all these things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain, that no philosophy that rejects them can hope to stand.
only within the scaffolding of these truths, only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair, can the souls habitation henceforth be safely built.. .
-
-
Seraphim23
Logic breaks down when it comes to defining the details of infinity because logic is always finite. The limits of human cognition become apparent. All I can say is that a millisecond is always going to be a percentage of a forever that exists, even if it gets smaller and smaller, whereas a billion billion years is always going to be a zero percentage of an infinity of nothing. Each person has to decide for themselves if truth is real or not and what it might be if it is. You don’t need to win or lose a debate with me to decide what you think is the case about reality. There will always be believers and non-believers while people exist. Nothing here will change that.
-
69
Calling all materialists and non-materialists
by willmarite inread this comment by bertrand russell:.
that man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving; that his origin, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and his beliefs, are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms; that no fire, no heroism, no intensity of thought or feeling, can preserve an individual life beyond the grave; that all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness of human genius, are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system; and the whole temple of mans achievement must inevitably be buried beneath the debris of a universe in ruins all these things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain, that no philosophy that rejects them can hope to stand.
only within the scaffolding of these truths, only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair, can the souls habitation henceforth be safely built.. .
-
-
Seraphim23
Bohm I didn’t really limit love to procreation when talking about the materialist view point because I also mentioned evolutionary purposes. These would be to do with a whole range of things with all of them really subservient to DNA survival. However I would probably say similar things to you about love giving life meaning except for the small fact that such things are meaningless unless love continues on after death. You would say this doesn’t matter. It is going to be up to the individual to decide which view has more merit.
I would say as you guessed that if love disappeared forever even if it had lasted for 100 billion years or a single second then it has no meaning because 100 billion years and a second are the same when measured against infinite nothingness that both will become.
As for explaining in a concrete way what the soul is, or what part of me will continue to exist after my death, that is just as hard as explaining other things that are not made of substance. It’s a material universe and we can only think in terms of material hence the hard problem of consciousness. One can pontificate about the breakdown of logic in reducing everything to a material correlate but what’s the point in that? All that will happen is that the world view one already has will be used as though it were evidence to interpret the data when the data itself is subject to interpretation. A never ending debate will ensue as it always has done. Best to wait until death and then we will both know who is correct. In the meantime assume as though love has meaning and is not an accident without purpose, or that love is its own purpose which is a non-material position of course, but a pragmatic one.