Wouldn't it be that because you are now thinking about death and applying the concept "none" to death, it looks as if it is something that doesn't exist or some state which is non state? — Corvus

Correct. Death doesn’t exist. It is an illusion. It is not a real state.

because it is indeed none existence which has no quality or property. None existence means none existence, nothing less or more. — Corvus

So then we agree.

@Corvus

If we were to say that some experiential properties of the consciousness are the ability to; see, hear, taste, smell, touch and compile memories. Then the termination of this consciousness suffers a severe lack of all these properties.

For death as a condition to be unique to the individual then it must possess a distinguishing property, but what properties can death be said to have regarding the consciousness, if not none at all?

Due to illogical attributes of the none as the property of none existence, you come to the wrong conclusion that all death are same. I feel that it doesn't make sense. — Corvus

Feelings don’t hold any weight. If you feel that the state of death is unique and different for all life forms, I’d love to hear why this is so?

@Corvus

Correct, we are not dealing with “something”, we are dealing with a lack thereof.

Extract from another site:

“ Assumption: An object has no properties.

I can think of that object as an object with the property that it has no properties, but this is a contradiction to my assumption. Hence all thinkable objects must have at least one property.

On the other hand I can think of an object that has no properties, but then this object will have a property: "The property of not having any properties".

Before matter existed the universe only had energy. Thus it had no material properties; none.

@Corvus

This is a pointless discussion of semantics. In the case of something that cannot be sensed in any capacity then it has neither a primary or secondary quality in which case I describe the total of properties with the adverb “none”.

Or you could say that the primary quality is that it lacks any tangible quality. A void. An absence.

Please do a quick Google of the word none. It is a pronoun, but also an adverb.

@Corvus

It is also an adverb.

@Corvus

Not really. If they share a lack of properties then that in itself can be the only “property” that they share.

The subjectivity of the experience?

@Corvus

A non existent apple has the same properties of a non existent banana, which is none. Non existent things share the fact that they have no properties.

How can you say whether something is identical or non identical or wet or dry, when non existent? — Corvus

I’m not sure that you have the same definition of non-existence as me. Non-existence is a not a state with different properties or characteristics, in fact, it has none. It is just a human construct to identify that something doesn’t exist, it is uniform for everything.

Something that doesn’t exist has no properties, it is not wet nor dry.

I said you cannot say they are identical when something is non existent. — Corvus

That makes no sense. If the universe didn’t exist, then everything would be in an identical state. Matter would be no different to energy or space if they did not exist. If I don’t exist and you don’t exist, then we are in the same identical state; non existence.

No no, not just remembering. The whole lot. Consciousness covers all mental activities I would think.
You can become unconscious too, if you were hit on the head for sure. — Corvus

So you’re saying there is no mental activity in the womb? If consciousness began at the age of 2 or 3, the baby would fail to survive upon exiting the womb.

Non-existence is the same for every death? I don't know. I cannot imagine what non-existence or death would be, not having experienced personally. I am sure you have not either. — Corvus

You cannot experience death. It is by definition a complete lack of experience and thus yes, I have already “experienced” it. It came before me and I am very aware of that nothingness.

Apple and death are not even apple and oranges. Categorical mistake. — Corvus

No mistake. A lack of an apple is comparative to a lack of humans. You cannot say that something exists in a state of non existence.

I am not sure about that either. I believe that the consciousness emerges from a human being when it is about 2-3 years after birth. Before that, it has instinctive perception, but not consciousness loaded with intelligence. Human consciousness is a function emerged and evolved from brain. When a human being gets old, his consciousness gets dim and cloudy. I have witnessed it in real life before. — Corvus

I watched two little brothers develop. Babies are conscious. They are not endowed with superior intelligence but they do in fact compile memories and can respond to them. That’s how they acquire language, that’s how they feed, thats how they learn their parents’ faces.

You seem to be suggesting that a conscious being is one that relies on its ability to remember. I have been blackout drunk before where there were hours I could not recall, but everyone had recalled me being conscious and talking and living normally. Just because I didn’t remember anything doesn’t mean I wasn’t conscious.

I was meaning if something is non-existence, you don't know if they are the same, or different in essence. You can only tell how the existence got into the absence. But once they are non-existence, you cannot tell they are identical or not in essence. — Corvus

Something cannot be in non-existence. Non-existence is just a human construct to describe a lack of something. It doesn’t actually exist within reality,

Once something ceases to exist it does not exist in a state of non-existence, it does not exist at all. Especially the consciousness. Non-existence is the same for every death, it is not unique nor individual.

You wouldn’t say that a lack of apples suggests that there are apples existing in a realm of non-existence.

What I have concluded based on my existence and the preceding absence is that life forms from conscious non-existence. And thus when I look to death, I expect a similar event to transpire.

How can you say they are "essentially identical", when they are absent? — Corvus

I do not understand your question. I am saying that any absence is the same as any other absence.

The absence preceding me is the same as the absence preceding you. The preceding time periods are not part of our timelines. Our timelines commence in the womb where the consciousness is developed.

It is perhaps important to note that I want nothing more than an enduring state of eternal conscious non-existence, but so long as life can emerge from this condition, I am sadly troubled by my own thoughts.

How will life still emerge? What is the motions of life? Could you elaborate? — Corvus

Life emerges from an absence and death forms this requirement. Life will march on and thrive regardless of death.

It seems we are so eager to conclude that we are an individual and totally unique phenomenon, but death is encompassing, universal, a void that is the same for you or for me, the same state shared by literally everything that has died. An absence, and we already that absence precedes formation.

The initial absence of life is unexperienced, non-progressed, un-lived state of absence, whereas the absence after death is non-existence of lived, experience expired and came to an end, therefore perished absence. There is a clear difference in 2 non-existences. — Corvus

That is very hopeful, but the consciousness is absent in both cases, marking them as essentially identical. The state proceeding death is still non-being, unexperienced. The absences are the same, but you are trying to attribute a difference based on preceding events without actually considering death for what it is, which is nothing.

The first absence has no historicity, the 2nd does have it. — Corvus

History doesn’t matter to death, for death is nothing, it doesn’t even really exist, it’s just a way for the living to describe a state where life isn’t. But of course life is all there is to experience.

Even if death as an absence proceeds a life, this says nothing about the associated consciousness, which is not present at either state of non-existence.

If one absence is temporary why are we so desperate to conclude that the second absence is eternal? Death of the individual is and always will be permanent, but conscious non-existence was temporary and I assume will remain so despite death.

and the eternal absence (once departed, eternally non returnable). — Corvus

I’m not implying that the dead return in any capacity, they are indeed removed irrevocably from reality.

Logically and scientifically the departed consciousness will never return, hence the eternal absence, unless you then come up with some esoteric belief or religious faith to negate that physical evidence and conclusion. — Corvus

The departed consciousness will never return, but life will still emerge, one’s death does not impede the motions of life. Given that the initial absence was conquered by the emergence of life, the absence after death should be navigated by a similar motion.

I am still yet to find a convincing argument as to why death is different to the initial absence of life. People are very eager to defend this idea that conscious non-existence is eternal, when we know from our own existence that this is seemingly untrue.

Many believe in “reincarnation for this or similar ideas. — Benj96

My postulate is similar to reincarnation for sure because it posits a cyclical motion of absence then formation, but I do not go as far as a sense of continuity, especially not for the individual.

If you believe in replacement rather than continuity then there’s nothing intriguing about this as we know from science in a mechanical sense that we are recycled materially at least. — Benj96

My idea is certainly more inclined to rely on science rather than hope and faith. However if the individual can be replaced by another individual, and life is all that can be experienced, then may exist a sequence of consciousnesses, though bearing no relation to anything it succeeds or replaced.

Religions would have their versions of the scenario on deaths, but without supporting evidence. — Corvus

I fear that there will never be any empirical evidence other than the sound observation that the dead lack a consciousness.

My question is whether death is not in fact individual but universal. A condition to which all life is returned and from which it may form.

The problem with death is that, the dead never tell us how they are doing. — Corvus

I’m not overly concerned about the dead, my concern is with the emergence of life.

But that made me laugh.

But if I had to make just a single guess about it, I'd speculate that consciousness and the experience (or illusion?) of time are inexplicably linked. — Hermeticus

I would agree. Time may just be a human construct and perhaps holds no actual bearing over these motions through space.

In all honesty it was three years ago when I stopped feeling the progressive pressure of time, so I’d say I’m closer to my goal than I’ve ever been.

I expect death may answer that riddle for me.

That's what I believe, but the simple fact is we just don't know. But to speak of "endings" and "beginnings" as though they are the sole means of imagining reality would be disingenuous. — theRiddler

I agree with this sentiment. I perceive time to be so much more than an additional dimension of space. Science encourages us to search for answers so that we can design more accurate questions.

I fear that our understanding of time is not only limited but limits our understanding of reality.

To transcend time is my ultimate goal.

How can you live vicariously through (?) those surfacing (after you are dead?)? — Prishon

Because they will be the cynosure of their own existence, as I was. I feel that the line between self and all other is very blurred.

In 100 years from now there will not a single person be alive that lives now. — Prishon

I understand this fact, certainly. But I live vicariously through those that will surface and that bothers me greatly, for surely there is much suffering in life.

You think you will resurface after death? — Prishon

No, of course not. I just think I’ll be replaced.

What in that view makes it negative? — Prishon

My thoughts on death in particular frustrate me to no end because I’d prefer non existence to be eternal and peaceful, but I can’t see this being the case given that I even surfaced in the first place.

Maybe because I have a clear worldview now. Do you have one? A clear wirldview? — Prishon

I have a very clear worldview, I’ve recorded many of my postulations and theories as well as the initial foundations that enabled them. But my worldview isn’t something I admire, it’s fairly realistic and doesn’t offer much in the ways of positivity.

I mean before answering. Im not implying you bother me! — Prishon

No worries, I didn’t infer that :)

Are you still jumped by it? — Prishon

The depression? Yeah, it’s pretty persistent. Only reading reduces its severity.

I layed in bed for years in my whole life. The depression is now gone forever, I hope... — Prishon

What alleviated the depression for you?

Now the problem is: why doesnt my smiley smile? — Prishon

I would say that in essence it does smile. A smile is a curved line, can be expressed (not intentionally) by many things, including an emoticon or a waveform.

But what if this physical process has no content? No magical content? — Prishon

Without magic life becomes a lot harsher and less desirable I suppose. Believing in such things is great for the individual in healthy doses. Faith for example empowers so many, so who are we to discredit the potency of their convictions?

I always wished that I subscribed to ideas that make my life easier and more comfortable, but the sciences aren’t always here to make life easier, just more honest.

I use a phone too. Select the text you wanna quote and tap the quote button right uo. I had the same problem. Like that the one you react to gets notified. — Prishon

I worked it out! Thanks.

@TheMadFool

It sounds like a very hopeful experiment, but I doubt it’ll succeed much more than that? Mind you I’ve never heard about such ventures.

@Prishon

The feeling of funniness is a chemical and neurological reaction in the mind. As science would support. As someone with depression I am subject to these chemical reactions and they manipulate the entire shade of my experience, unfortunately. I wish I were more spiritual, but it’s wasted on me.

And also, I still cannot work out how to quote…