I don’t think one can see another’s spirit or mind because I do not think either exist. — NOS4A2

I suppose that answers the question, then, as I'm not the one to tell you what you should believe or not believe. I'm just simply stating there are other viewpoints to look at when considering the possibilities of the afterlife.

I suppose that answers the question, then, as I'm not the one to tell you what you should believe or not believe. I'm just simply stating there are other viewpoints to look at when considering the possibilities of the afterlife.

They are welcome to their viewpoints. I just wanted to state that I don’t think there is any merit to their beliefs.

There is also the question of Marian apparitions around the world, that says something about afterlife and our own world. The miracle of Fatima, for instance, is the central event of 20th century history. This miracle in particular is fundamental to contemporary political science because, as it speaks of the prediction of war, it is a data of analysis. It cannot be dismissed as a subjective belief.

I am convinced that the Miracle of Fatima is the central event of the 20th century, but it certainly does not enter modern culture. So who’s wrong? Our Lady of Fatima or modern culture? I think one of the two must be right; and the two cannot be at the same time.

When Our Lady, in Fatima, 1917, said that Russia would spread its errors throughout the world, She was not referring only to communism. She said: Russia’s mistakes. Communism was the first step, and now they have invented another, even worse. On the rubble of communist society, the same authors, creators and supporters of communism, want to build another empire, even bigger, on a world scale. But what do they have to offer? Russia’s own corruption and misery. There is not one miracle of Fatima, but an incredible succession of miracles

Do not forget that, in the very prophecy of Fatima, the first thing that Our Lady does is open hell to show it to the children. That is, even before making the prophecy, it already shows what hell is like. The depth, breadth and infinite clarity of what the three children saw in Fatima illuminate the historical process in such a way that everything else we think about is only a shadow...

And yet: so what? "One must imagine Sisyphus happy." :fire: — 180 Proof

Is it "must" because there is no other choice? In other words, if one does not, then we are all doomed? Or, is it a moral imperative? In other words, there is some duty to imagine Sisyphus happy?

Either case seems to fail to me. Sisyphus must be happy because there is no other reality except he current one (and so we must accept the current one). Thus turning what is truly negative into a positive is the only move one can make. But just because that is the only move, doesn't mean that is the ideal or preferred move in the first place.

Is there anyway that every idea of life after death can be correct? — TiredThinker

Given that the details contradict but that there's an overall thematic similarity, I can say that the question is a sensible. Answerable in any satisfactory sense, I don't know. Perhaps this is the correct answer: I/you/we don't know.

Yet, if this question were a game of chance, how would we place our bets? Would we put our money on one possibility and not the other? Considering that there are theists and atheists in significant numbers, it goes without saying that some have made their decision on the matter. Nonetheless, these beliefs are, obviously, giant leaps of faith for both parties involved. It seems then that the truth of the matter is we don't know the truth, as mind-bendingly paradoxical as that sounds. :chin:

:death: :flower:

I understand Camus' "must be happy" as Sisyphus (every human's proxy) deriving dignity from rebelling - striving - against, or opposing, or refusing to be defeated by, or not conforming - reducing oneself - to, "fate" (i.e. "the gods").

The impediment to action advances action. What stands in the way becomes the way. — Marcus Aurelius

Needs must it be hard, since it is so seldom found. How would it be possible, if salvation were ready to our hand, and could without great labour be found, that it should be by almost all men neglected? But all things excellent are as difficult as they are rare. — Benedict de Spinoza

The greatest weight.-- What, if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest loneliness and say to you:

"This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more; and there will be nothing new in it, but every pain and every joy and every thought and sigh and everything unutterably small or great in your life will have to return to you, all in the same succession and sequence - even this spider and this moonlight between the trees, and even this moment and I myself. The eternal hourglass of existence is turned upside down again and again, and you with it, speck of dust!"

Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus?... Or how well disposed would you have to become to yourself and to life to crave nothing more fervently than this ultimate eternal confirmation and seal? — Friedrich Nietzsche

Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus?... Or how well disposed would you have to become to yourself and to life to crave nothing more fervently than this ultimate eternal confirmation and seal? — Friedrich Nietzsche

As I just said in another thread: Contra Nietzsche's maniacal howls, no this universe with its pain is not utopia. Again, maniacal embracing of what already exists isn't philosophy, its simply making do, at its utmost logical conclusion.

If you can't beat em, join em even harder, with more enthusiasm is just not knowing where else to go, and also a not-so-subtle "man-up!" philosophy.. Typical 19th century macho bullshit. How much stache does Nietzsche need.. Drinking his own kool-aid. Keep climbing those alps Nietzsche-pants.

Uncharitable reading to say the least. Taken out of the context of my preamble and absent the other quotes, you evade rather than engage. Ok. Let's talk past each other. :yawn:

No we're not. I know perfectly well what you meant. You said:

I understand Camus' "must be happy" as Sisyphus (every human's proxy) deriving dignity from rebelling - striving - against, or opposing, or refusing to be defeated by, or not conforming - reducing oneself - to, "fate" (i.e. "the gods"). — 180 Proof

I take it to mean that the striving in itself has a higher meaning.

If Camus means "rebellion against the gods" in terms of being against the fate- let's say via pessimism/antinatalism, that's one thing. His thing however, like Nietzsche, is to accept fate, and accept the conditions. Thus rebelling for him, means liking the bads and goods. That I can't get on board with.

... to accept fate, and accept the conditions. Thus rebelling for him, means liking the bads and goods. That I can't get on board with. — schopenhauer1

Tough tits, man. You're already born. Either kill yourself now or carry on defiantly affirming (not helplessly "accepting") your/our pitiless condition. One way, of course, is to refuse to breed; okay, but that's only one way. Amor fati - and stop whinging vacuously about it.

:death: :flower:

Amor fati - and stop whinging vacuously about it. — 180 Proof

See here:

If you can't beat em, join em even harder, with more enthusiasm is just not knowing where else to go, and also a not-so-subtle "man-up!" philosophy.. Typical 19th century macho bullshit. How much stache does Nietzsche need.. Drinking his own kool-aid. Keep climbing those alps Nietzsche-pants. — schopenhauer1

Hello,
I am new here.
I am 71 and it happens that I am a rational man whenever I looked for logical answers (scientific or spiritual) about my being and the world in which I was brought/forced to exist for a certain period of time. I used also the verb ‘forced’ because, to me in the least, the start of my temporary existence has nothing to do with what I may call ‘my will’.

Therefore, one of my crucial questions which I had to find out their answers at the beginning of my life (I mean, soon after being a teenager) was:
“What could happen to me after the death of my living body?”
Fortunately, I had the chance to get its best logical answer. This helped me continue my life in a rather stable balanced way.

Since English is my 3rd language, after French and Arabic, I hope I will succeed, while using my narrow English vocabulary, presenting here what I have in mind about death, 'my' death in the least.

]1] Naturally, the first idea, I had, is that when I will die, my dead body will lose all contacts with ‘time and space’ that define the world/universe in which my living body existed. I will also lose my personal will as well.

[2] Also I used hearing that for a human being to know what will happen to him in the afterlife, he has to die first!

[3] But, based on [1] above, I asked myself: “Didn’t I live the state of being dead?”
I mean; being in a state in which there is a total lack of time/space perception besides losing my will.
This happens, to me in the least, every time I am in a deep sleep.
In other words, if my body dies while being in this state it wouldn’t see any difference.

[4] The obvious next step was the analysis of what happens to me after being in a deep sleep.
I noticed that, sometimes, I find myself existing in what I may call ‘a dream realm’.

[5] And I am brought to live into this realm, also without my will and without knowing exactly how and when my existence in it started.

[6] While I am in this realm, I have the impression as if I really live; till I find out after wake up that it was just a dream.

[7] I also noticed that my dream life reflects, to a great extent, my life in the time/space realm.

[8] After every deep sleep, my living body is programmed to return me back into the time/space realm; till it needs to sleep again.

Conclusion:
{A} To me in the least, whoever or whatever programmed my living body to let me exist (be conscious) in both realms; the time/space and dream ones, is able to let ‘me’ exist in one of them only.
Please note that while I am sure of what I am talking about (being a designer myself), this doesn’t imply that you, the reader, agree on this.

{B} If I will, beyond my will as usual, be born and live in the dream realm after death, my dead body won’t be able to wake up and stop it.

{C} Based on [7] above, the dream realm would be ‘null’ if the person in question didn’t exist/live in the time/space realm first.

{D} Also based on [7], I try my best to live in a way that lets my dreams be as peaceful and joyful as possible. So I have had no reason, at all, to hate, judge or even blame seriously anyone I may meet or know. I even love those who are programmed to play my enemies so that I see them too as friends in my actual dreams and in the possible eternal one... Meanwhile, I missed having nightmares (which I had some when I was a kid due to lack of knowledge).

Wish you all having happy dreams.

Kerim