It is just so strange that this thread popped up out of the blue again, when I was in the middle of reading and writing on current threads. The threads themselves seem to have life after death. — Jack Cummins
I am aware of one problem with what you are saying, 'When we are asleep, thinking ceases', because it clearly doesn't. When we are asleep, dreaming, thinking is present. The narrator consciousness and ego remain. In most instances, we remain aware of identity. In dreams we remain in the 'I' consciousness, rather than just immersed in a sea of images — Jack Cummins
we cannot be sure that the near death experiences don't point to something significant which may come after death. — Jack Cummins
Surely if their consciousness exist somewhere in some form, they would have (tried to) contacted us? — Corvus
However, "consciousness after the death of consciousness" makes no sense whatsoever except as wishful thinking. — 180 Proof
Not necessarily. Maybe some of them try but fail to establish contact except through dreams and visions, etc. that, unfortunately, can be explained away as imagination.
Also, they may go into a state of sleep, be reborn or otherwise be engaged in activities or experiences that impede contact with the living. — Apollodorus
Ah, that "disembodied consciousness" chimera again. — 180 Proof
But the concept of "consciousness" seems imply inherently, if it exists, then it would make contact, communicate and interact. — Corvus
When consciousness is asleep or in dreams without its presiding bodies, would it be meaningful to even call it consciousness? — Corvus
:smirk:... how does non-consciousness arise from consciousness (e.g. sleep, auto-pilot habit) and yield consciousness again (e.g. waking-up, novelty)? — 180 Proof
:up:When we die - we die. An eternal nothingness. The "eternal anaesthetic" in Larkin's words. — BigThoughtDropper
There's no reason to think there is any, for either. — Banno
I can conceive of a synthetic mind-substrate extension of the organic mind-substrate whereby the continuity of self-aware personal identity (i.e. "consciousness") is, in effect, transferred from the latter to the former without being interrupted by – prior to – irreversible organic mind-substrate (brain)-death. However, "consciousness after the death of consciousness" makes no sense whatsoever except as wishful thinking. After all, "consciousness" (or life) is like a flame and, no doubt, a flame does not go anywhere else when it goes out. — 180 Proof
"I" "don't" "have" "to" "provide" "evidence". "I'm" "not" "on" "trial" "here" ☆■□《》○ — The Opposite
What happens to consciousness when we die?
What happens to consciousness when we sleep? — Banno
Unless I'm missing something else, this is confused, Fool. "An electrical energy pattern" IS "a physical pattern".Consciousnesscan'tbe a physical pattern like ocean waves are of water ... Ergo, consciousness is, my best guess, an electrical energy pattern that's generated in the gigantic neuronal network the brain is. — TheMadFool
Yes. The 'connectome' is the target. I speculate on such a scenario here. (Scroll down this barely one page thread for a couple of brief, clarifying, replies).is it possible ... [to] extract such neuronal patterns and adapt them to artificial brains, in a sense making consciousness immortal?
This would show nonreductive physicalism (to which I subscribe, hence my scenario linked above) to be more useful methodologically than the alternatives as a functionalist description of 'mind is what CNS-brains do'.Second question, if consciousness can be transferred, an idea you seem to take seriously enough, what's the status of physicalism?
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.