The notion of any post death existence is generally scoffed at by Western materialist types, but is it really so absurd? — Inyenzi
The notion of any post death existence is generally scoffed at by Western materialist types, but is it really so absurd? — Inyenzi
S
10k
The notion of any post death existence is generally scoffed at by Western materialist types, but is it really so absurd? — Inyenzi
Yes, because there isn't a shred of credible evidence in its favour. Only fools take seriously such presumed possibilities. It falls under the same group as a million and one other such presumed possibilities. Why spend your time on this particular one, as opposed to, say, one involving spaghetti? — S
You don't exist as a person, as something conscious, etc. prior to conception, by the way. — Terrapin Station
You don't exist as a person, as something conscious, etc. prior to conception, by the way. — Terrapin Station
Yes, because there isn't a shred of credible evidence in its favour. — S
Yes, because there isn't a shred of credible evidence in its favour. — S
why would not "consciously perceiving and feeling" once again arise? — Inyenzi
Why are pre-birth and post-death non-being differing in their 'results'? — Inyenzi
Why are we treating pre-birth non-consciousness as non-eternal, — Inyenzi
How do you know this? — Andrew4Handel
I think coming into existence as a conscious entity from nothing and ending up as one specific person at one specific location is puzzling. — Andrew4Handel
Just the same way we know any and everything we know. Based on observation of the world. — Terrapin Station
You can't observe someone else's consciousness. — Andrew4Handel
Yes. It is utterly bizarre to exist at all — Inyenzi
You observe it from a third-person perspective, exactly as you observe every single other thing in the world that's not yourself. — Terrapin Station
Victim to one of the classic blunders.Just the same way we know any and everything we know. Based on observation of the world. — Terrapin Station
You observe it from a third-person perspective, exactly as you observe every single other thing in the world that's not yourself. — Terrapin Station
If someone is having a dream I cannot observe that. — Andrew4Handel
I find it quite easy to imagine consciousness to be separate from the body based on preexistent phenomena.
For example it could be like CD which you can slot into different computers. Your mind could inhabit different bodies. — Andrew4Handel
You're confusing observing something first-person with observing it third-person. Which is why I just pointed out the distinction. We observe someone having a dream with neuroimaging equipment, via their behavior, etc. — Terrapin Station
Observing someone or something is always first person. — Andrew4Handel
CDs aren't different than the physical item that you slot into your computer. So you're confusing yourself by not having that part clear. — Terrapin Station
The issue is not about whether something is physical or not but about whether (A) can be detached from (B.) — Andrew4Handel
Wow. No. Didn't they teach you this distinction in school? First person is when you are the thing in question. Third person is when it's something other than yourself. — Terrapin Station
No properties can be detached from the material stuff/relations/processes in question. That was the point — Terrapin Station
You are always present in your experiences. — Andrew4Handel
The third person is a Literary device. — Andrew4Handel
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.