Neuroscience hasn't explained jack, and consciousness relying on a brain means jack when that brain is subject to nin-linear time, as has been proven to be the case.

We don't even know what matter, time, or the brain are, so save your certainty for the feeble minded.

Yes, it is probably unlikely that time reversal could happen as a real possibility because it would involve the reverse chains of causality. It would sort of mean that the injury of the car crash would have to then happen backwards with the crash being later. However, the book was well written and as far as the memory aspects that is more complex because it involves aspects of knowledge being outside of time, from the perspective of eternity. That would make sense in terms of precognitive experiences because it would be about people being able to perceive beyond 3 dimensional world experience. — Jack Cummins

All interpretation of experience it seems is done in consciousness. Causality is a schema we have interpreted or perceived through consciousness.

I think idealism or the idea that reality is a big mind or collection of minds and mental events allows for far more flexibility than an assumption of materialism. I say this taking in mind dreams.

In dreams it is clearly an all mental experience because I assume we are asleep and any experience we have is being created by the brain/mind. So this says to me that anything we can experience in dreams is independent of immediate perception of an external world or external causes. So things like colour and causation and sound etc in dreams are purely mental at that point.

We could then view a dream like a cartoon and in cartoon there can be time and causal reversal. So for example a dropped cup that shattered in reverse would be bits of ceramic or glass on a floor randomly lifting into the air and rearranging into cup object. We might need a causal explanation for this or if it is like the dream world it might just be another mental event and mental events need a different explanation than physical causality models.

I think therefore that what is impossible or even inexplicable in a physical world model might be far more explicable in a mental world model including consciousness itself.

Just rambling.

Argument from ignorance. — Garrett Travers

So is the argument for no afterlife.

Just as there are Platonists and Kantians, that doesn't mean it's any less foolish. — Garrett Travers

I didn't say that. They exist. So solipsism and idealism do exist. Materialism looks foolish from their perspective.

No, they do not. Only men and women with moral codes that lead them in the right direction, or the wrong one. — Garrett Travers

They don't have right and wrong directions. That's you projecting.

This sentence says "No. Yes." — Garrett Travers

Yes. No!

So is the argument for no afterlife. — Schootz1

No... No it is isn't. That's an assertion without evidence for itself.

Materialism looks foolish from their perspective. — Schootz1

It would to fools. However, solipsists contradict their own perspective by having an opinion at all, and by existing.

They don't have right and wrong directions. — Schootz1

That's a direction.

Yes. No! — Schootz1

Don't know what you're on about.

"Is anything ruled out?"

Ruled out by what?

In chess, it is ruled out by the rules of the game that a bishop can move from a black square to a white square or vice-versa.

In language, it is ruled out that up can be down.

But if reality decides that the world is round and folks on opposite sides of it point up in opposite directions, language had better learn to accommodate this inconvenient fact.

In general, the rules of science are descriptive not prescriptive. This means that they do not rule anything out, but merely describe the fact that some things do not happen.

"Cows do not lay eggs." This is a generalised observation, not a rule. Here is another generalised observation: "Reality is not ruled by thoughts or words." Traditionally, it was supposed that God said stuff, and it was so. Sometimes when a tyrant says stuff, it is so, but even Canute proverbially could not rule the tides. To suppose that words can rule things in or out is magical thinking. Conform your thoughts to the way things are, and be ruled by that.

Having said that, there is much also to be said for that kind of magical thinking that is called 'design and planning'. An engineer designs a non-existent bridge, and builders realise his ideas. Many of mankind's magical imaginings have been realised in this way - I myself have a magic mirror that enables me to see and speak to my daughter on the other side of the world, and send messages to philosophers that I have never even met. My daughter put on wings and flew seven times seven leagues; and so on.