:smirk:

Just pointing out the facts, that's all :)

Sure. I only speak of an intuition or vague idea, but nothing beyond that.

Sure. I only speak of an intuition or vague idea, but nothing beyond that. — Manuel

Fair enough. I don't see any contradiction with that at all.

We could just ask someone with cotard's delusion what it is like to be dead.

:up:

We could just ask someone with cotard's delusion what it is like to be dead — Nils Loc

I wonder how Cotard delusion patients make sense of the contradiction inherent in their condition.

Last I checked the logic of the aforementioned delusion goes like this:

1. Impossible/improbable that any person could've survived such a horrible accident (this delusion is allegedly more common among accident survivors)

Ergo,

2. I (the sole survivor) must be dead/can't be alive!

Ergo,

3. I am dead! (Cotard delusion)

I wonder how Cotard delusion patients make sense of the contradiction inherent in their condition. — TheMadFool

It's not a contradiction if they are in the afterlife. :P

It's not a contradiction if they are in the afterlife. :P — Nils Loc

Afterlife adjustment issues, eh?! :smile:

From personal experience, it takes some getting used to, myself being a patient of Cotard delusion! :lol:

Sure. — Banno

Did he ever say anything about death?

Yes. Roughly what I paraphrased. But from your comments I doubt you are open to it.

Do have the actual source info? I looked into my copy of "A Wittgenstein Dictionary" trying to find what he actually said about death. Nothing. Non-existence. Maybe that was what he intended to say. Nothing.

Tractatus, 6.4

:up:

"6.4311 Death is not an event of life. Death is not lived through." - T.

Can we, has anyone, conceived of nonexistence/death? — TheMadFool

It's impossible to conceive of death, nothingness, or unconsciousness. The mind tends to visualize them as total blackness or total whiteness. Neither of which are them.

It's impossible to conceive of death, nothingness, or unconsciousness. The mind tends to visualize them as total blackness or total whiteness. Neither of which are them — hope

I see. For me, it's like :point:

To conceive is to exist, though. It'd be an oxymoron to conceive of nonexistence. I disagree that you or Sam Harris have ever conceived of anything but that which exists. You've conceived of others' ignorance, yes, but not of your or their own personal lack of cognizance...!

Death is a total cease of the being and being as an existence in this world, which includes the being's conception, perception and all the mental activities for good. Without the mental activity, it would be illogical to suggest that the being can conceive anything.

Without the mental activity, it would be illogical to suggest that the being can conceive anything. — Corvus

Agreed. This is one of the most important debates inside philosophy. Not having awareness after death is an issue that even scares me a bit. How unfair it seems that after a life where you read and study a lot of things, then disappear in The cosmos... probably this is why is so worthy do a lot of things before death.
Another interesting fact is the wish of many people of “becoming” a tree afterwards. Their bodies are buried in a field with a seed and then, a pretty tree born in it. It is a beautiful act really.

There might be afterlife, who knows? When we philosophise and read many books, and make us wiser, we might be back to the earth with wiser minds, newly born bodies but without any memory of the previous lives. Sure, this idea is from pure insight and faith, but there is no proof to say, it is wrong. Therefore it is true. :D

Sure, this idea is from pure insight and faith, but there is no proof to say, it is wrong. Therefore it is true. :D — Corvus

:up: completely. I also think that is a pretty beautiful way of thinking.

completely. I also think that is a pretty beautiful way of thinking. — javi2541997

and Philosophy is the coolest subject in the universe. :)

and Philosophy is the coolest subject in the universe. :) — Corvus

Of course it is! :100: this is why I always respect Philosophy teachers and PhD’s a lot. They expend a lot of time teaching to us the right path to learn and read philosophy.

Update For Those Interested

Assuredly there are ways of conceiving death, many have offered their own methods and I'm grateful.

Nevertheless, the mind fails to conceive death proper.

What else can the mind not conceive of?

Answer: Impossibilities like square circles and the like, contradictions to be precise.

So, is death impossible? Are we immortal?

@Wayfarer :point: Zen koans as meditations on death.

What else can the mind not conceive of?

Answer: Impossibilities like square circles and the like, contradictions to be precise. — TheMadFool

You just used "impossibilities" and "contradictions" in a sentence. Thus, Fool, they're conceived.

You just used "impossibilities" and "contradictions" in a sentence. Thus, Fool, they're conceived. — 180 Proof

:chin: You're right but not completely. The words "impossible" and "contradiction" are different from the words "possible" and "noncontradiction."

When I think about possible and noncontradiction, I can imagine them in my mind e.g. an eagle soaring in the sky (possible) and a pig rolling in the mud while a goat bleats nearby (noncontradiction).

Yet, when I mull over impossibilities and contradictions, I can't imagine them. A square circle (impossible, can't imagine). A ball that's both all white and not all white (contradiction, can't imagine).

'Failure of imagination' is a not a persuasive argument. :roll:

The artist, by nature, pushes the boundaries of the possible using faer favorite tool, the imagination.

All the impossible objects that appear in this pair of videos aren't actual i.e. they are, in Roger Penrose's own words, "illusions". Nevertheless, kudos to Penrose and artists, M. C. Escher being one, for letting us a take a peek into the world of the impossible through their work. It's about perspective is what I gathered from the videos.

I want to run something by you though. Did you notice that the impossible objects e.g. the weird Penrose triangle and the ascending-descending staircase (the way up is also the way down :chin: ) can be drawn in 2D but are impossible to construct in 3D? What does that mean? Taking away a dimension, to my reckoning, removes a restriction and that's why a 2D flat plane can hold an impossible 3D object. Paradox that, no? Most people's intuitions would tell them that increasing the number of dimensions of space should translate into more objects being possible, the added dimension providing an extra degree of freedom.

Thanks a ton for the videos. G'day!

P. S. How might I use the same technique as Roger Penrose (perspective) to conceive of Thanatos?

If being alive is being consciously aware, then we are 'dead' every night, being miraculously reborn upon awakening. We've got the moment and no more.
It's not death we should fear but the pain that might come before.

"A man who has learned how to die has unlearned how to be a slave....I am now ready to leave, regretting nothing except life itself....Death is the origin of another life....is it reasonable to fear for so long something which lasts for so short a time?"
~Montaigne, "To Philosophize is to Learn how to Die"