| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"apostatepat" |
| Date: |
06 Oct 2006 10:53:06 PM |
| Object: |
What happens after we die |
1: "Joe" does not exist.
2: "Joe" is born.
3: "Joe" dies.
4: "Jane" is born.
5: "Jane" dies.
.... ad infinitum.
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
.
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
21 Oct 2006 06:43:02 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 08:53:50 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <1kgkj29blsbb8dnaotll76lq8vb41gst05@4ax.com>
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 08:57:02 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:06:39 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <5lffj2dqsgqv50um3n0vpuvdb86mods5ni@4ax.com>
On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 15:07:13 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 20:13:33 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <hu6bj2po1cqo7snovlfo5kd5tafv4pr1vh@4ax.com>
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 08:17:27 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 10:23:44 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <ikr4j21nnkrk3fcpsmavnai59h72v98teq@4ax.com>
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 07:39:44 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 13:42:06 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <6si2j25oark8eobv080clftr5up4bdkb7r@4ax.com>
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 08:55:04 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 10:03:39 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <vatsi299gsc9dkecjlaucgl1rvjrcm10mm@4ax.com>
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 10:43:03 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
[]
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
1: "Joe" does not exist.
2: "Joe" is born.
3: "Joe" dies.
4: "Jane" is born.
5: "Jane" dies.
... ad infinitum.
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Yeah, and if you've got pixie dust you're most of the way to NeverNever
Land.
I've got some pixie dust in this little bag.
It took ages to find, kill and grind enough pixies to fill it.
Their little high-pitched screams, as the oxy torch fried them, set
the dog off something chronic!
They wanted a steak in the operation.
Pavlov must have rung a Tinkerbell.
The belle of the ball....
Is Peter Pan the ball of the belle?
The ball belle....
Pretty fly, for a light guy.
Enhanced if you're dusted....
That stuff gets up my nose.
It'll bill you later
Never send to know for whom the bill trolls; it rolls for three.
(Apologies to John Donne)
Nose candy
If you snort it in the dunny, does that make it John Candy?
He's dead.
I wondered what the smell was.
I'd better move him out of there.
I'm dying to go too, you know!
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
24 Oct 2006 06:56:39 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 09:13:02 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 08:53:50 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <1kgkj29blsbb8dnaotll76lq8vb41gst05@4ax.com>
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 08:57:02 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
[]
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
1: "Joe" does not exist.
2: "Joe" is born.
3: "Joe" dies.
4: "Jane" is born.
5: "Jane" dies.
... ad infinitum.
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Yeah, and if you've got pixie dust you're most of the way to NeverNever
Land.
I've got some pixie dust in this little bag.
It took ages to find, kill and grind enough pixies to fill it.
Their little high-pitched screams, as the oxy torch fried them, set
the dog off something chronic!
They wanted a steak in the operation.
Pavlov must have rung a Tinkerbell.
The belle of the ball....
Is Peter Pan the ball of the belle?
The ball belle....
Pretty fly, for a light guy.
Enhanced if you're dusted....
That stuff gets up my nose.
It'll bill you later
Never send to know for whom the bill trolls; it rolls for three.
(Apologies to John Donne)
Nose candy
If you snort it in the dunny, does that make it John Candy?
He's dead.
I wondered what the smell was.
I'd better move him out of there.
I'm dying to go too, you know!
Hell, just jump in the hole then.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
24 Oct 2006 08:16:18 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 16:56:39 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <u0atj25lsht6jles1pq7d826jqk19odkk8@4ax.com>
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 09:13:02 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 08:53:50 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <1kgkj29blsbb8dnaotll76lq8vb41gst05@4ax.com>
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 08:57:02 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
[]
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
1: "Joe" does not exist.
2: "Joe" is born.
3: "Joe" dies.
4: "Jane" is born.
5: "Jane" dies.
... ad infinitum.
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Yeah, and if you've got pixie dust you're most of the way to NeverNever
Land.
I've got some pixie dust in this little bag.
It took ages to find, kill and grind enough pixies to fill it.
Their little high-pitched screams, as the oxy torch fried them, set
the dog off something chronic!
They wanted a steak in the operation.
Pavlov must have rung a Tinkerbell.
The belle of the ball....
Is Peter Pan the ball of the belle?
The ball belle....
Pretty fly, for a light guy.
Enhanced if you're dusted....
That stuff gets up my nose.
It'll bill you later
Never send to know for whom the bill trolls; it rolls for three.
(Apologies to John Donne)
Nose candy
If you snort it in the dunny, does that make it John Candy?
He's dead.
I wondered what the smell was.
I'd better move him out of there.
I'm dying to go too, you know!
Hell, just jump in the hole then.
He's blocking the entrance to the "Highway to Hell".
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
26 Oct 2006 01:35:51 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 10:46:18 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 16:56:39 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <u0atj25lsht6jles1pq7d826jqk19odkk8@4ax.com>
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 09:13:02 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 08:53:50 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <1kgkj29blsbb8dnaotll76lq8vb41gst05@4ax.com>
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 08:57:02 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
[]
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
1: "Joe" does not exist.
2: "Joe" is born.
3: "Joe" dies.
4: "Jane" is born.
5: "Jane" dies.
... ad infinitum.
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Yeah, and if you've got pixie dust you're most of the way to NeverNever
Land.
I've got some pixie dust in this little bag.
It took ages to find, kill and grind enough pixies to fill it.
Their little high-pitched screams, as the oxy torch fried them, set
the dog off something chronic!
They wanted a steak in the operation.
Pavlov must have rung a Tinkerbell.
The belle of the ball....
Is Peter Pan the ball of the belle?
The ball belle....
Pretty fly, for a light guy.
Enhanced if you're dusted....
That stuff gets up my nose.
It'll bill you later
Never send to know for whom the bill trolls; it rolls for three.
(Apologies to John Donne)
Nose candy
If you snort it in the dunny, does that make it John Candy?
He's dead.
I wondered what the smell was.
I'd better move him out of there.
I'm dying to go too, you know!
Hell, just jump in the hole then.
He's blocking the entrance to the "Highway to Hell".
Give the AC a shot 'o DC.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
26 Oct 2006 08:22:05 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 11:35:51 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <nvv1k21v90l24oia95d7r8npa46ecdusak@4ax.com>
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 10:46:18 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 16:56:39 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <u0atj25lsht6jles1pq7d826jqk19odkk8@4ax.com>
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 09:13:02 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 08:53:50 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <1kgkj29blsbb8dnaotll76lq8vb41gst05@4ax.com>
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 08:57:02 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
[]
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
1: "Joe" does not exist.
2: "Joe" is born.
3: "Joe" dies.
4: "Jane" is born.
5: "Jane" dies.
... ad infinitum.
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Yeah, and if you've got pixie dust you're most of the way to NeverNever
Land.
I've got some pixie dust in this little bag.
It took ages to find, kill and grind enough pixies to fill it.
Their little high-pitched screams, as the oxy torch fried them, set
the dog off something chronic!
They wanted a steak in the operation.
Pavlov must have rung a Tinkerbell.
The belle of the ball....
Is Peter Pan the ball of the belle?
The ball belle....
Pretty fly, for a light guy.
Enhanced if you're dusted....
That stuff gets up my nose.
It'll bill you later
Never send to know for whom the bill trolls; it rolls for three.
(Apologies to John Donne)
Nose candy
If you snort it in the dunny, does that make it John Candy?
He's dead.
I wondered what the smell was.
I'd better move him out of there.
I'm dying to go too, you know!
Hell, just jump in the hole then.
He's blocking the entrance to the "Highway to Hell".
Give the AC a shot 'o DC.
OK.
<Attaches electrodes>
*ZAP*
Oh dear, cancel the JC will...
Has anyone got a tissue?
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
27 Oct 2006 06:54:53 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 10:52:05 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
[]
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
1: "Joe" does not exist.
2: "Joe" is born.
3: "Joe" dies.
4: "Jane" is born.
5: "Jane" dies.
... ad infinitum.
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Yeah, and if you've got pixie dust you're most of the way to NeverNever
Land.
I've got some pixie dust in this little bag.
It took ages to find, kill and grind enough pixies to fill it.
Their little high-pitched screams, as the oxy torch fried them, set
the dog off something chronic!
They wanted a steak in the operation.
Pavlov must have rung a Tinkerbell.
The belle of the ball....
Is Peter Pan the ball of the belle?
The ball belle....
Pretty fly, for a light guy.
Enhanced if you're dusted....
That stuff gets up my nose.
It'll bill you later
Never send to know for whom the bill trolls; it rolls for three.
(Apologies to John Donne)
Nose candy
If you snort it in the dunny, does that make it John Candy?
He's dead.
I wondered what the smell was.
I'd better move him out of there.
I'm dying to go too, you know!
Hell, just jump in the hole then.
He's blocking the entrance to the "Highway to Hell".
Give the AC a shot 'o DC.
OK.
<Attaches electrodes>
*ZAP*
Oh dear, cancel the JC will...
Has anyone got a tissue?
Will fetal do?
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
27 Oct 2006 09:07:59 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 16:54:53 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <h175k21v8dsdaj0eaqtcr6j212jd72ceun@4ax.com>
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 10:52:05 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
[]
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
1: "Joe" does not exist.
2: "Joe" is born.
3: "Joe" dies.
4: "Jane" is born.
5: "Jane" dies.
... ad infinitum.
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Yeah, and if you've got pixie dust you're most of the way to NeverNever
Land.
I've got some pixie dust in this little bag.
It took ages to find, kill and grind enough pixies to fill it.
Their little high-pitched screams, as the oxy torch fried them, set
the dog off something chronic!
They wanted a steak in the operation.
Pavlov must have rung a Tinkerbell.
The belle of the ball....
Is Peter Pan the ball of the belle?
The ball belle....
Pretty fly, for a light guy.
Enhanced if you're dusted....
That stuff gets up my nose.
It'll bill you later
Never send to know for whom the bill trolls; it rolls for three.
(Apologies to John Donne)
Nose candy
If you snort it in the dunny, does that make it John Candy?
He's dead.
I wondered what the smell was.
I'd better move him out of there.
I'm dying to go too, you know!
Hell, just jump in the hole then.
He's blocking the entrance to the "Highway to Hell".
Give the AC a shot 'o DC.
OK.
<Attaches electrodes>
*ZAP*
Oh dear, cancel the JC will...
Has anyone got a tissue?
Will fetal do?
I'll have to suggest that to the Kleenex corporation as the name for a
new range of tissues!
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
29 Oct 2006 04:56:06 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 11:37:59 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 16:54:53 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <h175k21v8dsdaj0eaqtcr6j212jd72ceun@4ax.com>
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 10:52:05 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
[]
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
1: "Joe" does not exist.
2: "Joe" is born.
3: "Joe" dies.
4: "Jane" is born.
5: "Jane" dies.
... ad infinitum.
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Yeah, and if you've got pixie dust you're most of the way to NeverNever
Land.
I've got some pixie dust in this little bag.
It took ages to find, kill and grind enough pixies to fill it.
Their little high-pitched screams, as the oxy torch fried them, set
the dog off something chronic!
They wanted a steak in the operation.
Pavlov must have rung a Tinkerbell.
The belle of the ball....
Is Peter Pan the ball of the belle?
The ball belle....
Pretty fly, for a light guy.
Enhanced if you're dusted....
That stuff gets up my nose.
It'll bill you later
Never send to know for whom the bill trolls; it rolls for three.
(Apologies to John Donne)
Nose candy
If you snort it in the dunny, does that make it John Candy?
He's dead.
I wondered what the smell was.
I'd better move him out of there.
I'm dying to go too, you know!
Hell, just jump in the hole then.
He's blocking the entrance to the "Highway to Hell".
Give the AC a shot 'o DC.
OK.
<Attaches electrodes>
*ZAP*
Oh dear, cancel the JC will...
Has anyone got a tissue?
Will fetal do?
I'll have to suggest that to the Kleenex corporation as the name for a
new range of tissues!
Now there's an issue.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
08 Oct 2006 01:32:11 AM |
|
|
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <1160193186.314054.309700@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>
1: "Joe" does not exist.
2: "Joe" is born.
3: "Joe" dies.
4: "Jane" is born.
5: "Jane" dies.
... ad infinitum.
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Reincarnation is simply another example of juvenile wishful thinking.
This is so obvious that I cannot understand how normal people would
waste any time worrying about it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
14 Oct 2006 05:01:48 PM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Reincarnation is simply another example of juvenile wishful thinking.
This is so obvious that I cannot understand how normal people would
waste any time worrying about it.
Why is it obvious? You cannot be sure about this. Perhaps some part of
consciousness survives. The question is: How can one falsify that
consciousness survives?
Or the other way round: How can one falsify that no consciousness
survives?
Does the Popperian method work here? Can the Popperian method work with
such things like consciousness or love?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
14 Oct 2006 05:09:46 PM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1160863308.303284.189050@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
Michael Gray wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y
think?
Reincarnation is simply another example of juvenile wishful thinking.
This is so obvious that I cannot understand how normal people would
waste any time worrying about it.
Why is it obvious? You cannot be sure about this. Perhaps some part of
consciousness survives. The question is: How can one falsify that
consciousness survives?
Why would one need to? With no evidence at all *for* such a
proposition, there is no need to falisify it. It falls because it is
unsupported.
Or the other way round: How can one falsify that no consciousness
survives?
Why would one need to? With no evidence at all *for* such a
proposition, there is no need to falisify it. It falls because it is
unsupported.
--
Enkidu AA#2165
http://www.thoughts.leaddogs.org/
EAC Chaplain and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA
Creationists make it sound as though a "theory" is something you dreamt
up after being drunk all night.
-- Isaac Asimov (attributed: source unknown)
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
15 Oct 2006 09:04:02 AM |
|
|
Enkidu wrote:
usenet_trash@yahoo.de wrote in
news:1160863308.303284.189050@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
Michael Gray wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y
think?
Reincarnation is simply another example of juvenile wishful thinking.
This is so obvious that I cannot understand how normal people would
waste any time worrying about it.
Why is it obvious? You cannot be sure about this. Perhaps some part of
consciousness survives. The question is: How can one falsify that
consciousness survives?
Why would one need to? With no evidence at all *for* such a
proposition, there is no need to falisify it. It falls because it is
unsupported.
There is evidence which can be interpreted to support such a claim.
For instance:
http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu/internet/psychiatric/stevensonres.cfm
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1930491115
http://iands.org/
Or the other way round: How can one falsify that no consciousness
survives?
Why would one need to? With no evidence at all *for* such a
proposition, there is no need to falisify it. It falls because it is
unsupported.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
15 Oct 2006 09:13:49 AM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1160921042.868222.280860@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Enkidu wrote:
wrote in
news:1160863308.303284.189050@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
Michael Gray wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat"
<apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com> wrote:
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing"
for each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y
think?
Reincarnation is simply another example of juvenile wishful
thinking. This is so obvious that I cannot understand how normal
people would waste any time worrying about it.
Why is it obvious? You cannot be sure about this. Perhaps some part
of consciousness survives. The question is: How can one falsify
that consciousness survives?
Why would one need to? With no evidence at all *for* such a
proposition, there is no need to falisify it. It falls because it is
unsupported.
There is evidence which can be interpreted to support such a claim.
For instance:
http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu/internet/psychiatric/stevensonres.
cfm http://www.amazon.com/dp/1930491115
http://iands.org/
Well, the links you provided offer no evidence, they only suggest that
somebody has evidence that suggests that such things might be possible.
Pretty weak. You didn't provide any actual evidence.
--
Enkidu AA#2165
http://www.thoughts.leaddogs.org/
EAC Chaplain and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA
Lighthouses are more helpful than churches.
-- Benjamin Franklin
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
15 Oct 2006 09:30:58 AM |
|
|
Enkidu wrote:
usenet_trash@yahoo.de wrote in
news:1160921042.868222.280860@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Enkidu wrote:
usenet_trash@yahoo.de wrote in
news:1160863308.303284.189050@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
Michael Gray wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat"
<apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com> wrote:
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing"
for each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y
think?
Reincarnation is simply another example of juvenile wishful
thinking. This is so obvious that I cannot understand how normal
people would waste any time worrying about it.
Why is it obvious? You cannot be sure about this. Perhaps some part
of consciousness survives. The question is: How can one falsify
that consciousness survives?
Why would one need to? With no evidence at all *for* such a
proposition, there is no need to falisify it. It falls because it is
unsupported.
There is evidence which can be interpreted to support such a claim.
For instance:
http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu/internet/psychiatric/stevensonres.
cfm http://www.amazon.com/dp/1930491115
http://iands.org/
Well, the links you provided offer no evidence, they only suggest that
somebody has evidence that suggests that such things might be possible.
Pretty weak. You didn't provide any actual evidence.
Of course it is evidence. I do not say that it proves or disproves
something (no evidence does) but it is evidence which demands a closer
look.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
15 Oct 2006 09:37:23 AM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1160922658.538633.143450@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Enkidu wrote:
wrote in
news:1160921042.868222.280860@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Enkidu wrote:
wrote in
news:1160863308.303284.189050@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
Michael Gray wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat"
<apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com> wrote:
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't
"nothing" for each of us after we die... suppose life is a set
of soulless reincarnations; no connection between rounds of
consciousness. Y think?
Reincarnation is simply another example of juvenile wishful
thinking. This is so obvious that I cannot understand how
normal people would waste any time worrying about it.
Why is it obvious? You cannot be sure about this. Perhaps some
part of consciousness survives. The question is: How can one
falsify that consciousness survives?
Why would one need to? With no evidence at all *for* such a
proposition, there is no need to falisify it. It falls because it
is unsupported.
There is evidence which can be interpreted to support such a claim.
For instance:
http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu/internet/psychiatric/stevensonr
es. cfm
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1930491115
http://iands.org/
Well, the links you provided offer no evidence, they only suggest
that somebody has evidence that suggests that such things might be
possible. Pretty weak. You didn't provide any actual evidence.
Of course it is evidence. I do not say that it proves or disproves
something (no evidence does) but it is evidence which demands a closer
look.
The sites you refered to *did not* give detailed evidence of anything.
* The first is a list of publications.
* The second is an advertisement for a book.
* The third is an advertisement for a "conference".
Any or all of these might or might not contain evidence, but *you* have
not presented any evidence of any kind.
--
Enkidu AA#2165
http://www.thoughts.leaddogs.org/
EAC Chaplain and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA
If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it's still a foolish thing.
-- Bertrand Russell
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
17 Oct 2006 07:41:36 AM |
|
|
Enkidu wrote:
usenet_trash@yahoo.de wrote in
news:1160922658.538633.143450@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Enkidu wrote:
usenet_trash@yahoo.de wrote in
news:1160921042.868222.280860@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Enkidu wrote:
usenet_trash@yahoo.de wrote in
news:1160863308.303284.189050@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
Michael Gray wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat"
<apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com> wrote:
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't
"nothing" for each of us after we die... suppose life is a set
of soulless reincarnations; no connection between rounds of
consciousness. Y think?
Reincarnation is simply another example of juvenile wishful
thinking. This is so obvious that I cannot understand how
normal people would waste any time worrying about it.
Why is it obvious? You cannot be sure about this. Perhaps some
part of consciousness survives. The question is: How can one
falsify that consciousness survives?
Why would one need to? With no evidence at all *for* such a
proposition, there is no need to falisify it. It falls because it
is unsupported.
There is evidence which can be interpreted to support such a claim.
For instance:
http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu/internet/psychiatric/stevensonres.cfm
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1930491115
http://iands.org/
Well, the links you provided offer no evidence, they only suggest
that somebody has evidence that suggests that such things might be
possible. Pretty weak. You didn't provide any actual evidence.
Of course it is evidence. I do not say that it proves or disproves
something (no evidence does) but it is evidence which demands a closer look.
The sites you refered to *did not* give detailed evidence of anything.
* The first is a list of publications.
* The second is an advertisement for a book.
* The third is an advertisement for a "conference".
Almost. The third is the website of the International Association for
Near-Death Studies. That they plan a conference is just a coincidence.
Any or all of these might or might not contain evidence, but *you* have
not presented any evidence of any kind.
Ah ok, now I understand. Actually we share the same opinion and it was
just a misunderstanding.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
15 Oct 2006 05:44:32 PM |
|
|
On 15 Oct 2006 07:30:58 -0700, wrote:
- Refer: <1160922658.538633.143450@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
Enkidu wrote:
wrote in
news:1160921042.868222.280860@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Enkidu wrote:
wrote in
news:1160863308.303284.189050@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
Michael Gray wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat"
<apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com> wrote:
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing"
for each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y
think?
Reincarnation is simply another example of juvenile wishful
thinking. This is so obvious that I cannot understand how normal
people would waste any time worrying about it.
Why is it obvious? You cannot be sure about this. Perhaps some part
of consciousness survives. The question is: How can one falsify
that consciousness survives?
Why would one need to? With no evidence at all *for* such a
proposition, there is no need to falisify it. It falls because it is
unsupported.
There is evidence which can be interpreted to support such a claim.
For instance:
http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu/internet/psychiatric/stevensonres.
cfm http://www.amazon.com/dp/1930491115
http://iands.org/
Well, the links you provided offer no evidence, they only suggest that
somebody has evidence that suggests that such things might be possible.
Pretty weak. You didn't provide any actual evidence.
Of course it is evidence. I do not say that it proves or disproves
something (no evidence does) but it is evidence which demands a closer
look.
It is not evidence, no matter how often you repeat it.
And folks HAVE taken a closer look.
It always turns out that there is a boring this-world explanation.
Like ESP, re-incarnation suffers severely from the "shyness effect".
This in itself is an almost iron-clad pointer to its bogosity.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
15 Oct 2006 05:42:34 PM |
|
|
On 15 Oct 2006 07:04:02 -0700, wrote:
- Refer: <1160921042.868222.280860@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Enkidu wrote:
wrote in
news:1160863308.303284.189050@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
Michael Gray wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y
think?
Reincarnation is simply another example of juvenile wishful thinking.
This is so obvious that I cannot understand how normal people would
waste any time worrying about it.
Why is it obvious? You cannot be sure about this. Perhaps some part of
consciousness survives. The question is: How can one falsify that
consciousness survives?
Why would one need to? With no evidence at all *for* such a
proposition, there is no need to falisify it. It falls because it is
unsupported.
There is evidence which can be interpreted to support such a claim.
For instance:
http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu/internet/psychiatric/stevensonres.cfm
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1930491115
http://iands.org/
:
None of this is real evidence.
The cases are simply explained using dreary science.
I note that you say "can be interpreted...".
Crop circles "can be interpreted" to be rock-solid evidence of alien
visitations.
Cut out the sophoristic crap, will you?
I could show you more convincing "evidence" that conjuring is real
"magic".
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "apostatepat" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
14 Oct 2006 05:30:06 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Michael Gray wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Reincarnation is simply another example of juvenile wishful thinking.
This is so obvious that I cannot understand how normal people would
waste any time worrying about it.
Why is it obvious? You cannot be sure about this. Perhaps some part of
consciousness survives. The question is: How can one falsify that
consciousness survives?
It can't be falsified. Our births prove that there was "nothing" before
consciousness. When we die, there will be nothing again. There is no
good reason to think that the process wouldn't repeat, i.e. born into a
new bodily system from "nothing."
Or the other way round: How can one falsify that no consciousness
survives?
Does the Popperian method work here? Can the Popperian method work with
such things like consciousness or love?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
14 Oct 2006 06:18:10 PM |
|
|
On 14 Oct 2006 15:01:48 -0700, wrote:
- Refer: <1160863308.303284.189050@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Reincarnation is simply another example of juvenile wishful thinking.
This is so obvious that I cannot understand how normal people would
waste any time worrying about it.
Why is it obvious? You cannot be sure about this. Perhaps some part of
consciousness survives. The question is: How can one falsify that
consciousness survives?
Or the other way round: How can one falsify that no consciousness
survives?
Does the Popperian method work here? Can the Popperian method work with
such things like consciousness or love?
In all of recorded history, there has been not even the slightest
scrap of evidence in support of re-incarnation.
That alone is enough to set a sane persons "*****" alarm ringing.
Coupled with the clear fact the world's population has undergone a
dramatic increase, and you run into the fantastic problem of where are
all these "extra" souls coming from?
No, it's patent ***** from end-to-end, and I don't have to prove
that it is not.
It is incumbent upon the people who say it is, (or even "might be"),
to come up with some form of evidence to support their infantile
assertion.
.
|
|
|
| User: "apostatepat" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
14 Oct 2006 07:33:55 PM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
On 14 Oct 2006 15:01:48 -0700, wrote:
- Refer: <1160863308.303284.189050@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Reincarnation is simply another example of juvenile wishful thinking.
This is so obvious that I cannot understand how normal people would
waste any time worrying about it.
Why is it obvious? You cannot be sure about this. Perhaps some part of
consciousness survives. The question is: How can one falsify that
consciousness survives?
Or the other way round: How can one falsify that no consciousness
survives?
Does the Popperian method work here? Can the Popperian method work with
such things like consciousness or love?
In all of recorded history, there has been not even the slightest
scrap of evidence in support of re-incarnation.
That alone is enough to set a sane persons "*****" alarm ringing.
If you read the thread closely, the term reincarnation has been
scrapped for "consciousness" or "awareness."
You were "aware" at birth, weren't you? Nothing preceded your birth.
When you cease to exist, you will be in the same spot as before you
were born. "You" are nonexistent as a living entity. From this
nonexistence can spring existence, plus awareness. It happened before,
didn't it?
Coupled with the clear fact the world's population has undergone a
dramatic increase, and you run into the fantastic problem of where are
all these "extra" souls coming from?
The proposition does not assume a soul.
No, it's patent ***** from end-to-end, and I don't have to prove
that it is not.
It is incumbent upon the people who say it is, (or even "might be"),
to come up with some form of evidence to support their infantile
assertion.
The evidence is that you came out of nothing, "you", your aware being,
everything. Have you ever wondered why you exist *as* your particular
body? Why do you see things from your vantage point and not someone
else's? Once your brain dies, this vantage point will cease. But with
the birth of a new creature, *you* could assume 'its' vantage point.
The whole point to remember is that *you* is defined as "awareness or
consciousness."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
14 Oct 2006 09:10:43 PM |
|
|
On 14 Oct 2006 17:33:55 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <1160872435.161787.72050@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
On 14 Oct 2006 15:01:48 -0700, wrote:
- Refer: <1160863308.303284.189050@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Reincarnation is simply another example of juvenile wishful thinking.
This is so obvious that I cannot understand how normal people would
waste any time worrying about it.
Why is it obvious? You cannot be sure about this. Perhaps some part of
consciousness survives. The question is: How can one falsify that
consciousness survives?
Or the other way round: How can one falsify that no consciousness
survives?
Does the Popperian method work here? Can the Popperian method work with
such things like consciousness or love?
In all of recorded history, there has been not even the slightest
scrap of evidence in support of re-incarnation.
That alone is enough to set a sane persons "*****" alarm ringing.
If you read the thread closely, the term reincarnation has been
scrapped for "consciousness" or "awareness."
The recorded evidence does not support that claim:
You wrote:
"... suppose life is a set of soulless
"reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y
think?"
You were "aware" at birth, weren't you? Nothing preceded your birth.
When you cease to exist, you will be in the same spot as before you
were born. "You" are nonexistent as a living entity. From this
nonexistence can spring existence, plus awareness. It happened before,
didn't it?
Coupled with the clear fact the world's population has undergone a
dramatic increase, and you run into the fantastic problem of where are
all these "extra" souls coming from?
The proposition does not assume a soul.
No, it's patent ***** from end-to-end, and I don't have to prove
that it is not.
It is incumbent upon the people who say it is, (or even "might be"),
to come up with some form of evidence to support their infantile
assertion.
The evidence is that you came out of nothing, "you", your aware being,
everything. Have you ever wondered why you exist *as* your particular
body? Why do you see things from your vantage point and not someone
else's? Once your brain dies, this vantage point will cease. But with
the birth of a new creature, *you* could assume 'its' vantage point.
The whole point to remember is that *you* is defined as "awareness or
consciousness."
Then it is not defined at all.
Neither is the nebulous term: "you".
At least until these terms are clearly defined, your assertions amount
to no more than hand-waving.
.
|
|
|
| User: "apostatepat" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
15 Oct 2006 01:53:14 PM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
On 14 Oct 2006 17:33:55 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <1160872435.161787.72050@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
On 14 Oct 2006 15:01:48 -0700, wrote:
- Refer: <1160863308.303284.189050@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Reincarnation is simply another example of juvenile wishful thinking.
This is so obvious that I cannot understand how normal people would
waste any time worrying about it.
Why is it obvious? You cannot be sure about this. Perhaps some part of
consciousness survives. The question is: How can one falsify that
consciousness survives?
Or the other way round: How can one falsify that no consciousness
survives?
Does the Popperian method work here? Can the Popperian method work with
such things like consciousness or love?
In all of recorded history, there has been not even the slightest
scrap of evidence in support of re-incarnation.
That alone is enough to set a sane persons "*****" alarm ringing.
If you read the thread closely, the term reincarnation has been
scrapped for "consciousness" or "awareness."
The recorded evidence does not support that claim:
You wrote:
"... suppose life is a set of soulless
"reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y
think?"
But read my response to another poster "This description seems more
suitable than the word "reincarnation." This post and the posts
following expand on the concept and dismiss reincarnation altogether.
(Ref: Post 12)
You were "aware" at birth, weren't you? Nothing preceded your birth.
When you cease to exist, you will be in the same spot as before you
were born. "You" are nonexistent as a living entity. From this
nonexistence can spring existence, plus awareness. It happened before,
didn't it?
Coupled with the clear fact the world's population has undergone a
dramatic increase, and you run into the fantastic problem of where are
all these "extra" souls coming from?
The proposition does not assume a soul.
No, it's patent ***** from end-to-end, and I don't have to prove
that it is not.
It is incumbent upon the people who say it is, (or even "might be"),
to come up with some form of evidence to support their infantile
assertion.
The evidence is that you came out of nothing, "you", your aware being,
everything. Have you ever wondered why you exist *as* your particular
body? Why do you see things from your vantage point and not someone
else's? Once your brain dies, this vantage point will cease. But with
the birth of a new creature, *you* could assume 'its' vantage point.
The whole point to remember is that *you* is defined as "awareness or
consciousness."
Then it is not defined at all.
Yes it is. "Awareness" is the "I-feeling" inside a living creature
body; it could be in the form of a bat, snake, anything that feels, or
sees, hears, etc. This "I-feeling" doesn't have to be articulate, it
can be merely the feeling of seeing/sensing from that body's vantage
point.
Neither is the nebulous term: "you".
"You" is "awareness". It is not "you" as Michael, but the I-feeling
inside Michael.
At least until these terms are clearly defined, your assertions amount
to no more than hand-waving.
Hopefully the above makes it clearer. Keep in mind that the limitations
of English make it very difficult to explain this whole idea, as some
extra 'you' verbiage is needed to make the sentence a coherent whole.
Hopefully the context will illuminate it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
15 Oct 2006 05:46:37 PM |
|
|
On 15 Oct 2006 11:53:14 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <1160938394.658457.327000@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
On 14 Oct 2006 17:33:55 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <1160872435.161787.72050@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
On 14 Oct 2006 15:01:48 -0700, wrote:
- Refer: <1160863308.303284.189050@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Reincarnation is simply another example of juvenile wishful thinking.
This is so obvious that I cannot understand how normal people would
waste any time worrying about it.
Why is it obvious? You cannot be sure about this. Perhaps some part of
consciousness survives. The question is: How can one falsify that
consciousness survives?
Or the other way round: How can one falsify that no consciousness
survives?
Does the Popperian method work here? Can the Popperian method work with
such things like consciousness or love?
In all of recorded history, there has been not even the slightest
scrap of evidence in support of re-incarnation.
That alone is enough to set a sane persons "*****" alarm ringing.
If you read the thread closely, the term reincarnation has been
scrapped for "consciousness" or "awareness."
The recorded evidence does not support that claim:
You wrote:
"... suppose life is a set of soulless
"reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y
think?"
But read my response to another poster "This description seems more
suitable than the word "reincarnation." This post and the posts
following expand on the concept and dismiss reincarnation altogether.
(Ref: Post 12)
:
I do not have the time (nor the interest) to have you expect me to
read every post in a thread.
If you explicitly retracted a former solid assertion, and don't tell
me directly about your admission of error, that is hardly my fault,
yet you berate me for your error.
.
|
|
|
| User: "apostatepat" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
15 Oct 2006 08:28:00 PM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
On 15 Oct 2006 11:53:14 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <1160938394.658457.327000@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
On 14 Oct 2006 17:33:55 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <1160872435.161787.72050@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
On 14 Oct 2006 15:01:48 -0700, wrote:
- Refer: <1160863308.303284.189050@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com>
wrote:
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Reincarnation is simply another example of juvenile wishful thinking.
This is so obvious that I cannot understand how normal people would
waste any time worrying about it.
Why is it obvious? You cannot be sure about this. Perhaps some part of
consciousness survives. The question is: How can one falsify that
consciousness survives?
Or the other way round: How can one falsify that no consciousness
survives?
Does the Popperian method work here? Can the Popperian method work with
such things like consciousness or love?
In all of recorded history, there has been not even the slightest
scrap of evidence in support of re-incarnation.
That alone is enough to set a sane persons "*****" alarm ringing.
If you read the thread closely, the term reincarnation has been
scrapped for "consciousness" or "awareness."
The recorded evidence does not support that claim:
You wrote:
"... suppose life is a set of soulless
"reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y
think?"
But read my response to another poster "This description seems more
suitable than the word "reincarnation." This post and the posts
following expand on the concept and dismiss reincarnation altogether.
(Ref: Post 12)
:
I do not have the time (nor the interest) to have you expect me to
read every post in a thread.
The post was pointed out to you with evidence you claim does not exist.
If you don't want to read it, that's your prerogative.
If you explicitly retracted a former solid assertion, and don't tell
me directly about your admission of error, that is hardly my fault,
yet you berate me for your error.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Clover" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
06 Oct 2006 11:10:51 PM |
|
|
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com> wrote:
1: "Joe" does not exist.
2: "Joe" is born.
3: "Joe" dies.
4: "Jane" is born.
5: "Jane" dies.
... ad infinitum.
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
That's somewhat of an interesting way to think of it, though it seems like just
another way to say "We're here and then we die, the end". There are no
connections between minds separated by time any more than there are connections
between minds separated by space. Ultimately, however, we all are the same
"thing".
--
L8r,
Uncle Clover
************************************************
The true mark of a civilized society is that its
citizens know how to hate each other peacefully.
************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
08 Oct 2006 08:05:49 AM |
|
|
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com> wrote:
1: "Joe" does not exist.
2: "Joe" is born.
3: "Joe" dies.
4: "Jane" is born.
5: "Jane" dies.
... ad infinitum.
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Not a chance. Where does joe and jane come from if they did not exist before?
And then why do they not return to there?
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "apostatepat" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
08 Oct 2006 10:26:20 PM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 20:53:06 -0700, "apostatepat" <apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com> wrote:
1: "Joe" does not exist.
2: "Joe" is born.
3: "Joe" dies.
4: "Jane" is born.
5: "Jane" dies.
... ad infinitum.
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
Not a chance. Where does joe and jane come from if they did not exist before?
Their parents.
And then why do they not return to there?
Why do you think?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
06 Oct 2006 11:27:49 PM |
|
|
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet apostatepat
(apostate_yyhh@yahoo.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
1: "Joe" does not exist.
2: "Joe" is born.
3: "Joe" dies.
4: "Jane" is born.
5: "Jane" dies.
... ad infinitum.
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
No. If you look carefully, you'll notice there is a "something" before
that nothing. Enjoy it while you can.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Plonked by Kadaitcha Man
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Richo" |
|
| Title: Re: What happens after we die |
10 Oct 2006 07:34:00 PM |
|
|
apostatepat wrote:
1: "Joe" does not exist.
2: "Joe" is born.
3: "Joe" dies.
4: "Jane" is born.
5: "Jane" dies.
... ad infinitum.
It is an untestable possibility, but maybe there isn't "nothing" for
each of us after we die... suppose life is a set of soulless
reincarnations; no connection between rounds of consciousness. Y think?
The self doesn't survive - and that is all that matters - in an
emotional or religious sense.
The atoms that make up my body will one day be part of a daffodil and a
whale - but nothing of my self will survive - because "self" is a kind
of illusion anyway.
Mark.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
