Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
Bling

What happens when you die?

123 posts in this topic

Sophisticated... yes, very sophisticated.... LOL

That is the problem with being to short to see over the steering wheel. You don't realize how bad you are at driving😘

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing real or not real about your beleifs, and if you cant hold the argument of why something is "mumbojumbo" then you are simply guilty of unvaried bias, which is fine if you state your position as a matter of opinion, but in the end that is all it is, and rather a fallacious and uninformed one at that.

I lost interest in debating with you when you told me to provide you with evidence that there is no awareness after brain death, that's why I did not continue with arguing as to why it was "mumbojumbo". I can't take you seriously when you're going to attempt to argue that we can still maintain awareness after our brains have completely died. :\

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I lost interest in debating with you when you told me to provide you with evidence that there is no awareness after brain death, that's why I did not continue with arguing as to why it was "mumbojumbo". I can't take you seriously when you're going to attempt to argue that we can still maintain awareness after our brains have completely died. :\

That is the debate there silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is not a single shred of evidence that NDEs are anything other than they apear to be. I'll challenge you to find it.

How droll. I stated my opinions and you challenge me to prove them. Unlike you, I am not set on proving anything about consciousness after death, primarily because I am not emotionally invested in the idea of an afterlife. If you believe you have all the answers--and you clearly do--then you are the one who is required to provide evidence, but that is not the purpose of this thread. Not many people are going to take you seriously if you keep demanding that people prove a negative.

Edited by Cybele

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How droll. I stated my opinions and you challenge me to prove them. Unlike you, I am not set on proving anything about consciousness after death, primarily because I am not emotionally invested in the idea of an afterlife. If you believe you have all the answers--and you clearly do--then you are the one who is required to provide evidence. Not many people are going to take you seriously if you keep demanding that people prove a negative.

I'm not demanding anything of the sort.

"I am not emotionally invested in the idea of an afterlife. "----yet you take the time to post about it.

The evidence has been provided. Its the illogical rubbuttles and bias unscientific "explanations" that I pick apart. This is not asking Somone to proov a negative. The phenomenon exists I don't have to proove that; it's a fact. I can look critically at the attempted explanations and they do not hold up to scrutiny... And no one offers a counter argument to that scrutiny. That is how arguments are held correct? To write things off because someone gets creative dosn't seem very prudent.

Typical

1) NDEs exist ( whatever their nature)

2) skeptic gives reason why that nature might be benine

3) believer shows with simple logic and/or completely within the realms of science that that reason is completely baseless.

4) skeptic cries fowl, says that believer dosnt understand logic or science ( usually while using fallacies) and does not offer a counter argument to the scrutiny of the "explanation"

It's silly.. The skeptic is the one supposed to be able to follow it through. After all, they base their opinions in evidence right? I'm not sure why they hold onto arguments when they have been utterly defeated.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i recomend the movie "the void"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not demanding anything of the sort.

"I am not emotionally invested in the idea of an afterlife. "----yet you take the time to post about it.

I posted in a thread asking what happens when you die. I am emotionally invested, and interested, in death and the process of dying, not in heaven or hell.

The evidence has been provided. Its the illogical rubbuttles and bias unscientific "explanations" that I pick apart. This is not asking Somone to proov a negative. The phenomenon exists I don't have to proove that; it's a fact. I can look critically at the attempted explanations and they do not hold up to scrutiny... And no one offers a counter argument to that scrutiny. That is how arguments are held correct? To write things off because someone gets creative dosn't seem very prudent.

I see no point in bringing evidence into a conversation where two sides have such diametrically opposed philosophical views that each side will interpret whatever evidence arises in favor of their own beliefs. I used to be more actively engaged in such topics; I now believe such conversation is fruitless. Naturalism, materialism, spiritualism, they are all philosophies. I don't believe one is inherently superior; they're all subjective beliefs.

Pointing out logical flaws is another thing entirely. You seem to be far from immune from them, as the below shows.

Typical

1) NDEs exist ( whatever their nature)

2) skeptic gives reason why that nature might be benine

3) believer shows with simple logic and/or completely within the realms of science that that reason is completely baseless.

4) skeptic cries fowl, says that believer dosnt understand logic or science ( usually while using fallacies) and does not offer a counter argument to the scrutiny of the "explanation"

It's silly.. The skeptic is the one supposed to be able to follow it through. After all, they base their opinions in evidence right? I'm not sure why they hold onto arguments when they have been utterly defeated.

Yes Seeker. This is a perfectly accurate, unbiased representation of all such conversations on UM and elsewhere. What a productive contribution. :rolleyes:

The OP can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe they hoped for this thread to be a means of sharing opinions, not further bickering. There's already plenty of the latter on this sub-section.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted in a thread asking what happens when you die. I am emotionally invested, and interested, in death and the process of dying, not in heaven or hell.

I see no point in bringing evidence into a conversation where two sides have such diametrically opposed philosophical views that each side will interpret whatever evidence arises in favor of their own beliefs. I used to be more actively engaged in such topics; I now believe such conversation is fruitless. Naturalism, materialism, spiritualism, they are all philosophies. I don't believe one is inherently superior; they're all subjective beliefs.

Pointing out logical flaws is another thing entirely. You seem to be far from immune from them, as the below shows.

Yes Seeker. This is a perfectly accurate, unbiased representation of all such conversations on UM and elsewhere. What a productive contribution. :rolleyes:

The OP can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe they hoped for this thread to be a means of sharing opinions, not further bickering. There's already plenty of the latter on this sub-section.

I said it was typical. At least from my perspective. It's happening now... You are avoiding the object of the arguments themselves.

And I think This fits well within a skeptic vs spirituality topic entitled "what happen s when you die."

I'll be ok with your opinion, but do not claim it is built upon more logic and science than another unless you prepared to follow through and show why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pam Reynolds.

I certainly am not.

Well she doesn't have a brain now. What cognitive tests were performed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be ok with your opinion, but do not claim it is built upon more logic and science than another unless you prepared to follow through and show why.

Okay. This is why I prefaced it as my opinion. Belief in a spiritual realm or the absence thereof can never be built on science, but that's a whole other topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said it was typical. At least from my perspective. It's happening now... You are avoiding the object of the arguments themselves.

I've seen no substantive arguments from you in this thread. Only criticisms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay. This is why I prefaced it as my opinion. Belief in a spiritual realm or the absence thereof can never be built on science, but that's a whole other topic.

No.... It can't. That's why it is impossible to have a conversation with the fundis, but it can be built on reason.

Edited by Seeker79

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen no substantive arguments from you in this thread. Only criticisms.

Because its all ready been hashed out in other threads ---- unchallenged by the way. But I am happy to repeat myself if Somone wants to go through it all again. I'm sure I'll be better the sixth time.

Edited by Seeker79

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well she doesn't have a brain now. What cognitive tests were performed?

Her brain and was cooled to 60 degrees and her blood drained from her body. it's a procedure developed mimicking victims that have fallen through ice and are clinically dead for relatively long periods of time. What to you think the results of cognitive tests would have revealed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Her brain and was cooled to 60 degrees and her blood drained from her body. it's a procedure developed mimicking victims that have fallen through ice and are clinically dead for relatively long periods of time. What to you think the results of cognitive tests would have revealed?

Nothing. And so we are back to "Can you give an example of awareness without a brain?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing. And so we are back to "Can you give an example of awareness without a brain?"

No I can't. The brain might very well be a receiver of conciousness. Without it totally there is no reception. in the end. There must be a memory of an event regardless of where or how the information was obtained. But a brain cooled to 60 degrees but still able to accurately describe latter the object that cut into its skull... Hints that awareness does not need an electrically active brain. Just a bit ;)

Edited by Seeker79

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read this article - Are NDE's Real, Illusions, or Hallucinations? - http://www.horizonresearch.org/main_page.php?cat_id=223

To sum up the entire article ..- Because we are limited by our own senses and perceptions, the truth about NDE's can only be proven ( real or not ) by objective scientific tests and experiments

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read this article - Are NDE's Real, Illusions, or Hallucinations? - http://www.horizonresearch.org/main_page.php?cat_id=223

To sum up the entire article ..- Because we are limited by our own senses and perceptions, the truth about NDE's can only be proven ( real or not ) by objective scientific tests and experiments

There are some very objective tests being proposed to test if people can actually look down at themselves during these experiences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read this article - Are NDE's Real, Illusions, or Hallucinations? - http://www.horizonre....php?cat_id=223

To sum up the entire article ..- Because we are limited by our own senses and perceptions, the truth about NDE's can only be proven ( real or not ) by objective scientific tests and experiments

That's assuming that our senses and perceptions are interpretations of the 'real world' (this physical one), as opposed to the latter. Something scientific experiments and tests can't possibly figure out, unless we're all missing something we will find out later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some very objective tests being proposed to test if people can actually look down at themselves during these experiences.

Interesting.. Can you give me more info on these tests being done? ...Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting.. Can you give me more info on these tests being done? ...Cheers

http://www.nourfoundation.com/events/Beyond-the-Mind-Body-Problem/The-Human-Consciousness-Project/the-AWARE-study.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's assuming that our senses and perceptions are interpretations of the 'real world' (this physical one), as opposed to the latter. Something scientific experiments and tests can't possibly figure out, unless we're all missing something we will find out later.

Yes. It can only test the portions of the experiences that seemed to be based in this world. The rest can never be known on an empirical level... But certainly a statistical or deductive. And defiantly known on an experiential and personal level.

Edited by Seeker79

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NDE's, real or not I don't care that much about simply because the believers and disbelievers of them will always have their points - Science can prove it/ Science cannot prove it and quite frankly, those arguments are futile from the moment they start because each side has already made up their minds on what they are siding with. My primary interest in NDE's isn't if they are real or not, it's their content.

Seeker linked me to a site that had NDE's from all kinds of people - Hindu's, Christian's, Gay people etc. Now we all know that NDE's vary in culture as in which Gods/Goddesses are seen, one that was weird was a woman seeing someone (her daughter I think) morphing into a mermaid, and another was the tale of a Native American seeing his father and Grandfather calling him from the clouds.

Let's assume for a moment that NDE's are in fact real, the question is, why is their content different for each culture and belief? Why are some so wacky (The mermaid?) Perhaps, if they are real, and there is an after life, the widely varying accounts point to either all or most gods and goddesses being real, or none of them being real and there being something else that we don't know about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing. And that is why we have religion because the majority of humans cannot accept death as being final.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing. And that is why we have religion because the majority of humans cannot accept death as being final.

You know, I agree with that - the part about people being afraid of non-existence. Why? No one will know they're dead so it won't matter, personally I hope that is what death is, that would be amazing. But of course, people can't fathom non-existence because they want to see their loved ones or all that other corny stuff, but whatever.

Edited by Sean93

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.