FREE TAPATALK APP

Blackened Cat · 22nd July 2010, 04:23 PM

Do you think the existence of a soul enduring after death is an objective or subjective idea?

So whether you believe you go to Christian heaven, Mormon heaven, Buddhist rebirth or athiest style material non-existence..... is there an actual objective reality to this?

Can it be determined?

Even if the answer is - nothing... can that be determined?

And if there is life after death, and for example it's a Christian protestant one... can we know in the here and now that this is real?

What can we base any knowledge of an afterlife on?

Sledge · 22nd July 2010, 04:27 PM

Show me the soul, then we'll talk about what happens to it after death.

Complexity · 22nd July 2010, 04:28 PM

There is no evidence of the existence of a soul.

MikeSun5 · 22nd July 2010, 04:28 PM

Best bumper sticker I've ever seen:

"MILITANT AGNOSTIC: I DON'T KNOW AND NEITHER DO YOU."

Olowkow · 22nd July 2010, 04:28 PM

A soul enduring after death isn't necessarily "life after death". What's a soul? What is life when its shell can't interact with the real world? There is a long way to go in defining your terms before you can even think of getting anything but stock answers.

Welcome, by the way.

ETA: Hey guys, we have to quit meeting this way!

tourmaline · 22nd July 2010, 04:44 PM

You are asking if a soul or a place you go after death can be determined. This would be objective if you could determine it -- if you are using "determined" to mean known for a fact and demonstrable for everyone. Otherwise its subjective like someone being dead for a few minutes, getting resuscitated, and saying they saw angles. I dont have anything to site, but i think those kinds of experiences are rare, cant be shown to be real, and can be explained neurologically without evoking the supernatural.

Blackened Cat · 22nd July 2010, 04:44 PM

Thanks for the welcome.

To answer all the question dodgers....you know what I mean...

Then rephrase the question, can we know the buddhist after life exists (if Greek concepts of soul somehow offends).

Is there an objective afterlife reality?

Sledge · 22nd July 2010, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

Thanks for the welcome.

To answer all the question dodgers....you know what I mean...

Then rephrase the question, can we know the buddhist after life exists (if Greek concepts of soul somehow offends).

No one was offended, and no one was dodging the question. If what you said isn't what you meant, the problem lies with your post, not the people responding to it.

Quote:

Is there an objective afterlife reality?

No.

Dancing David · 22nd July 2010, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

Do you think the existence of a soul enduring after death is an objective or subjective idea?

So whether you believe you go to Christian heaven, Mormon heaven, Buddhist rebirth or athiest style material non-existence..... is there an actual objective reality to this?

Can it be determined?

Even if the answer is - nothing... can that be determined?

And if there is life after death, and for example it's a Christian protestant one... can we know in the here and now that this is real?

What can we base any knowledge of an afterlife on?

Could be, no evidence that there is.

Dancing David · 22nd July 2010, 04:52 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

Thanks for the welcome.

To answer all the question dodgers....you know what I mean...

Then rephrase the question, can we know the buddhist after life exists (if Greek concepts of soul somehow offends).

Is there an objective afterlife reality?

Well the buddhist after life is in contradiction to the teachings of thw Alleged Historical Buddha.

Consequences carry, there is no atman.

ETA: So taught the AHB: anatta.

MikeSun5 · 22nd July 2010, 04:53 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

Is there an objective afterlife reality?

If there is, it can't be proven by today's technology. Of course absence of proof is not proof of absence, so logically as it stands right now, we can't know for sure.

All we can do is wager one way or another.

Olowkow · 22nd July 2010, 04:55 PM

Not a question of offending, but the words are just so slippery, "soul", "afterlife", "spirit", etc that they only have meaning for theists, much like "sin". I have no real concept of "sin" in my world. I understand hurting people and breaking the law, and having guilt for what I do wrong, but "sin", this is only relevant if one is a believer. I'm not dodging any questions, I just don't understand a question that is similar to, "can we ever determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" Namely, what the heck is an angel to an atheist?

paximperium · 22nd July 2010, 04:57 PM

What's a soul and what use is it?

Sledge · 22nd July 2010, 04:58 PM

It stops your foot from going right through your shoe?

MikeSun5 · 22nd July 2010, 05:01 PM

Originally Posted by paximperium

What's a soul and what use is it?

An invisible fairy-like thing that lives inside you, which leaves your body when you die and allows admittance to the heaven or (slides down to the hell) of whichever religion you have ascribed to so you can hang out with your dead relatives.

...and it weighs 21 grams.

Loss Leader · 22nd July 2010, 05:01 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

Is there an objective afterlife reality?

Really, you could put any word in place of "afterlife" and have the same question. Is there an objective afterlife realty? There's no evidence of one. Is there an objective Peyton Manning reality? There is evidence (some of it in Tennessee) that Peyton Manning exists. Is there an objective Iranian nuclear weapon reality? There is some evidence of one but some evidence that there is not.

In all cases, we are making deductions based on the evidence of our senses. And in all cases, the evidence of our senses is in some ways equivocal.

At its heart, you may be asking, "Is there an objective reality?" That question has no satisfactory answer. Each of us has no evidence that anything exists outside of our individual selves or that we existed in any moment but the present. I tend to think the answer is yes. Reality is consistent and boring (where as dreams are shifting and exciting). But some would disagree.

Are you asking about the existence of an objective reality? Or are you assuming that there is a measurable and definable objective reality and just asking if the afterlife exists within it?

Blackened Cat · 22nd July 2010, 05:07 PM

Originally Posted by Olowkow

"can we ever determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"

That's a perfectly valid philosophical question and is akin to what I was asking.

I don't have any agenda to push, just asking a question.

paximperium · 22nd July 2010, 05:10 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

That's a perfectly valid philosophical question and is akin to what I was asking.

I don't have any agenda to push, just asking a question.

But first you need to actually define the terms you are using. In philosophical discussion, semantics and definitions really matter. We don't don't know what you mean with a "soul".

If you can define it, we can at least start with that issue.

Olowkow · 22nd July 2010, 05:13 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

That's a perfectly valid philosophical question and is akin to what I was asking.

I don't have any agenda to push, just asking a question.

If one cannot define "angel", I'm going to have to say, "no", it cannot be determined how many can dance on the head of a pin, though I can certainly define a pin, and tell you the surface area.

I would have to know how much space they take up, and how much they weigh before I can even begin to say that it can or cannot be determined. Then, I can say, well, I don't have enough information yet, or yes, I can now attempt to determine how many can dance, providing your definition of angel states that they are able to dance.

Blackened Cat · 22nd July 2010, 05:16 PM

Originally Posted by Loss Leader

Are you asking about the existence of an objective reality? Or are you assuming that there is a measurable and definable objective reality and just asking if the afterlife exists within it?

Yeah that is part of my current pondering. I may not have spelled that out well in the OP.

phantomb · 22nd July 2010, 06:21 PM

Things that we say are objectively known can always be tested for accuracy by either side in a debate, because knowledge is demonstrable and measurable. The afterlife is an idea that lacks supporting evidence because nothing about it is testable, and the whole thing is centred around a handful of assumptions which themselves are based on nothing. Consequently, the afterlife is not an objective idea and we currently cannot base claimed knowledge about it on anything.

Loss Leader · 22nd July 2010, 06:31 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

Originally Posted by Loss Leader

Are you asking about the existence of an objective reality? Or are you assuming that there is a measurable and definable objective reality and just asking if the afterlife exists within it?

Yeah that is part of my current pondering. I may not have spelled that out well in the OP.

Well, um, which one? I asked an either/ or question. Are you asking if objective reality exists OR are you assuming that objective reality exists? Pick one or the other.

Blackened Cat · 22nd July 2010, 06:34 PM

Originally Posted by Loss Leader

Well, um, which one? I asked an either/ or question. Are you asking if objective reality exists OR are you assuming that objective reality exists? Pick one or the other.

First one. "If objective reality exists" It's something I'm questioning at the moment.

Eric D · 22nd July 2010, 07:30 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

Do you think the existence of a soul enduring after death is an objective or subjective idea?

So whether you believe you go to Christian heaven, Mormon heaven, Buddhist rebirth or athiest style material non-existence..... is there an actual objective reality to this?

Can it be determined?

Even if the answer is - nothing... can that be determined?

And if there is life after death, and for example it's a Christian protestant one... can we know in the here and now that this is real?

What can we base any knowledge of an afterlife on?

There is no knowledge of an afterlife at all. If there was this kind of knowledge, it would have to be based on evidence.

Loss Leader · 22nd July 2010, 07:43 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

First one. "If objective reality exists" It's something I'm questioning at the moment.

Well, good luck with that. There's no answer. There's just an endless debate that goes something like this:

Realist: The universe exists because I have gathered evidence of its existence.
Anti-Realist: But all of that evidence was gathered by your senses.
Realist: So?
Anti-Realist: Your senses could be lying to you.
Realist: So, what? Nothing exists?
Anti-Realist: Things exist as constructs in our minds.
Realist: So, our minds must exist.
Anti-Realist: Well, mine does. Yours, I'm not so sure about.
Realist: You're a jerk.
Anti-Realist: And you're an idiot.
Realist: Well, at least I'm an idiot who exists!
Anti-Realist: Not for long!
[Huge sissy slapfight ensues. Non-philosophy majors laugh, have lives, and get laid.]

StrangeLoop · 22nd July 2010, 07:51 PM

It makes as much sense to posit a daisy afterlife or a chrysanthemum afterlife. We esteem ourselves too highly.

John Jones · 22nd July 2010, 08:19 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

Yeah that is part of my current pondering. I may not have spelled that out well in the OP.

That was an either/or question.

ETA: Nevermind. I see this has been addressed already.

Complexity · 22nd July 2010, 08:22 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

Thanks for the welcome.

To answer all the question dodgers....you know what I mean...

Then rephrase the question, can we know the buddhist after life exists (if Greek concepts of soul somehow offends).

Is there an objective afterlife reality?

No, and no.

Complexity · 22nd July 2010, 08:25 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

That's a perfectly valid philosophical question and is akin to what I was asking.

Must disagree - I don't think that "Can we ever determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" is either valid or philosophical.

It assumes something for which there is no evidence.

It is also insulting to the intellect.

Complexity · 22nd July 2010, 08:27 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

First one. "If objective reality exists" It's something I'm questioning at the moment.

Yes, I think there is an objective reality.

I do not think that we will every understand any aspect of it perfectly.

The best we can hope for is incrementally better models of reality that serve us well as we can muster.

These we get from science.

It may be that none of our brains will ever be able to imagine, let alone apprehend, many aspects of it. We won't know this, of course.

Maia · 22nd July 2010, 08:48 PM

The best answer I've ever found to this is probably in John Shelby Spong's latest book. (But then, isn't everything?)

Blackened Cat · 22nd July 2010, 09:47 PM

Originally Posted by Loss Leader

Well, good luck with that. There's no answer. There's just an endless debate that goes something like this:

Do you have a belief either way? Which side would you take?

I tend to veer towards Objective reality existing.

Blackened Cat · 22nd July 2010, 09:49 PM

Originally Posted by StrangeLoop

It makes as much sense to posit a daisy afterlife or a chrysanthemum afterlife. We esteem ourselves too highly.

So when approaching religious questions or philosophical questions...is it better to evaluate or explore them, or instead just accept them? or discard them?

Blackened Cat · 22nd July 2010, 09:58 PM

Originally Posted by Complexity

Must disagree - I don't think that "Can we ever determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" is either valid or philosophical.

It assumes something for which there is no evidence.

It is also insulting to the intellect.

Are all theoretically situations insulting?

If I pose a maths question that starts "If Suzie took the number 2 bus to.."

Would I then be questioned over the existence of Suzie or the number 2 bus? If I could not prove that Suzie exists, and that Suzie took the bus on that day... would I have insulted the intellect?

Can you define what an insult to intellect would be? Can you prove that the intellect does in fact exist? and is not over inflated? And why would 'the' intellect has so little grace as not to be able to withstand the smallest of slights? Is the intellect that inexperienced in life? Was the intellect sheltered?

Is there an end to the endless dissecting of questions in order to escape confronting of their basis?

Blackened Cat · 22nd July 2010, 09:59 PM

Originally Posted by Complexity

These we get from science.

Is science the only way to understand objective and expperience reality?

Lukraak_Sisser · 22nd July 2010, 10:53 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

Is science the only way to understand objective and expperience reality?

Science is the only way we can gather and interpret data about out reality objectively. Its also the only known way with which to predict things about our reality.
However it has nothing to do with experiencing reality, that is something our brain does.

As for an afterlife, no scientific experiment has ever shown anything to prove it exists. So if it does our best current methods are unable to interact with it making the whole question philosophical.

If an intangible soul that does not interact with matter in any way truly exists, you'd best hope there is an afterlife to go to though, otherwise each time someone dies they'll be stuck in empty space watching the earth and the entire solar system rush away from them at high speed.

Maia · 22nd July 2010, 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

Is science the only way to understand objective and expperience reality?

Y'all know what's going to happen if this keeps up, right?

Oh, come on. You KNOW what's going to happen.

I'm going to bring in Stephen Jay Gould... and NOMA... I WILL bring up NOMA. It'll happen. We will go there, if need be.

(hands out key lime tarts for everyone to help with the discussion. I just finished making some. They're so cute. However, these are virtual key lime tarts, because the real ones... let's just say that they're not going to last very long.)

lionking · 22nd July 2010, 11:04 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

Is science the only way to understand objective and expperience reality?

Do you think there are other ways? How about answering a question instead of "just asking".

Akhenaten · 22nd July 2010, 11:39 PM

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

Do you think the existence of a soul enduring after death is an objective or subjective idea?

Objective.

Ba (not humbug)

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

So whether you believe you go to Christian heaven, Mormon heaven, Buddhist rebirth or athiest style material non-existence..... is there an actual objective reality to this?

No. These things you speak of are at best just make-believe and at worst, heresy. There is only the Tuat.

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

Can it be determined?

Yes. Ask Hathor

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

Even if the answer is - nothing... can that be determined?

Yes. Ask Anubis.

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

And if there is life after death, and for example it's a Christian protestant one... can we know in the here and now that this is real?

What's a Christian? What's he protesting about? Is this anything to do with those reedcutters?

Originally Posted by Blackened Cat

What can we base any knowledge of an afterlife on?

The Book of Spells of Going Forth By Day, sometimes referred to as the Book of the Dead.

Try Amazon.

Soapy Sam · 22nd July 2010, 11:50 PM

"What's a key lime tart", asked Sam, instantly recognising the sole interesting thing in the thread, "and can they be air freighted to Kazakhstan?"

Look- Either we exist, or we don't. If we don't, then let's concentrate on imagining more beer.
If we do exist (and by heck it feels like it in the mornings) then it looks like life is actually a chemical process and awareness is too. When the process stops, the candle flame doesn't go anywhere. The burning of wax just stops. The flame WAS the burning of wax. That's what burning of wax looks like.

Of course we can't test for life after death, but as in Monty Python's Great Debate on the question, all the dead people stand silent.

My bet is that being dead is a lot like not having been born.
ETA- Unless you manage to be fossilised.

22nd July 2010, 04:23 PM	#1
Blackened Cat Scholar Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 52	Life or no-life after death - Is it an Objective reality? Do you think the existence of a soul enduring after death is an objective or subjective idea? So whether you believe you go to Christian heaven, Mormon heaven, Buddhist rebirth or athiest style material non-existence..... is there an actual objective reality to this? Can it be determined? Even if the answer is - nothing... can that be determined? And if there is life after death, and for example it's a Christian protestant one... can we know in the here and now that this is real? What can we base any knowledge of an afterlife on?
Blackened Cat Scholar Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 52

22nd July 2010, 04:27 PM	#2
Sledge Grammaton Cleric Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Swingin' on a star Posts: 7,123	Show me the soul, then we'll talk about what happens to it after death.
	__________________ "The perfect haiku would have just two syllables: Airwolf" ~ Ernest Cline "Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop" ~ Dara O'Briain.

22nd July 2010, 04:28 PM	#3
Complexity The Woo Whisperer Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Minnesota, USA Posts: 9,263	There is no evidence of the existence of a soul.
	__________________ "It is a great nuisance that knowledge can only be acquired by hard work." - W. Somerset Maugham "Thought is subversive and revolutionary, destructive and terrible; thought is merciless to privilege, established intuititions, and comfortable habit. Thought looks into the pit of hell and is not afraid. Thought is great and swift and free, the light of the world, and the chief glory of man." - Bertrand Russell

22nd July 2010, 04:28 PM	#4
MikeSun5 Trigger Happy Pacifist, Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Florida, USA Posts: 1,877	Best bumper sticker I've ever seen: "MILITANT AGNOSTIC: I DON'T KNOW AND NEITHER DO YOU."
	__________________ I always wondered if those WWJD bracelets worked, so I bought one. Well later, I was on a plane and this little kid was kicking my seat repeatedly, while his sister sang along with her walkman and their mother just sat there. I almost turned around and went off, and then I caught sight of my bracelet. What would Jesus do? So I lit them on fire and sent them all to Hell. --Daniel Tosh

22nd July 2010, 04:28 PM	#5
Olowkow Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 4,926	A soul enduring after death isn't necessarily "life after death". What's a soul? What is life when its shell can't interact with the real world? There is a long way to go in defining your terms before you can even think of getting anything but stock answers. Welcome, by the way. ETA: Hey guys, we have to quit meeting this way!
Olowkow Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 4,926	__________________ Our remedies oft in ourselves do lie, which we ascribe to heaven. --Shakespeare Last edited by Olowkow; 22nd July 2010 at 04:32 PM.

22nd July 2010, 04:44 PM	#6
tourmaline Critical Thinker Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 349	You are asking if a soul or a place you go after death can be determined. This would be objective if you could determine it -- if you are using "determined" to mean known for a fact and demonstrable for everyone. Otherwise its subjective like someone being dead for a few minutes, getting resuscitated, and saying they saw angles. I dont have anything to site, but i think those kinds of experiences are rare, cant be shown to be real, and can be explained neurologically without evoking the supernatural.
	__________________ "It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." -- Carl Sagan "Madam, you are ugly. In the morning, I shall be sober" -- Winston Churchill

22nd July 2010, 04:50 PM	#8
Sledge Grammaton Cleric Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Swingin' on a star Posts: 7,123	Originally Posted by Blackened Cat Thanks for the welcome. To answer all the question dodgers....you know what I mean... Then rephrase the question, can we know the buddhist after life exists (if Greek concepts of soul somehow offends). No one was offended, and no one was dodging the question. If what you said isn't what you meant, the problem lies with your post, not the people responding to it. Quote: Is there an objective afterlife reality? No.
	__________________ "The perfect haiku would have just two syllables: Airwolf" ~ Ernest Cline "Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop" ~ Dara O'Briain.

22nd July 2010, 04:50 PM	#9
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 34,921	Originally Posted by Blackened Cat Do you think the existence of a soul enduring after death is an objective or subjective idea? So whether you believe you go to Christian heaven, Mormon heaven, Buddhist rebirth or athiest style material non-existence..... is there an actual objective reality to this? Can it be determined? Even if the answer is - nothing... can that be determined? And if there is life after death, and for example it's a Christian protestant one... can we know in the here and now that this is real? What can we base any knowledge of an afterlife on? Could be, no evidence that there is.
	__________________ Hell, dynamiting fish in a barrel is more challenging. - Ladewig I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager

22nd July 2010, 04:52 PM	#10
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 34,921	Originally Posted by Blackened Cat Thanks for the welcome. To answer all the question dodgers....you know what I mean... Then rephrase the question, can we know the buddhist after life exists (if Greek concepts of soul somehow offends). Is there an objective afterlife reality? Well the buddhist after life is in contradiction to the teachings of thw Alleged Historical Buddha. Consequences carry, there is no atman. ETA: So taught the AHB: anatta.
	__________________ Hell, dynamiting fish in a barrel is more challenging. - Ladewig I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager

22nd July 2010, 04:53 PM	#11
MikeSun5 Trigger Happy Pacifist, Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Florida, USA Posts: 1,877	Originally Posted by Blackened Cat Is there an objective afterlife reality? If there is, it can't be proven by today's technology. Of course absence of proof is not proof of absence, so logically as it stands right now, we can't know for sure. All we can do is wager one way or another.
	__________________ I always wondered if those WWJD bracelets worked, so I bought one. Well later, I was on a plane and this little kid was kicking my seat repeatedly, while his sister sang along with her walkman and their mother just sat there. I almost turned around and went off, and then I caught sight of my bracelet. What would Jesus do? So I lit them on fire and sent them all to Hell. --Daniel Tosh

22nd July 2010, 04:55 PM	#12
Olowkow Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 4,926	Not a question of offending, but the words are just so slippery, "soul", "afterlife", "spirit", etc that they only have meaning for theists, much like "sin". I have no real concept of "sin" in my world. I understand hurting people and breaking the law, and having guilt for what I do wrong, but "sin", this is only relevant if one is a believer. I'm not dodging any questions, I just don't understand a question that is similar to, "can we ever determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" Namely, what the heck is an angel to an atheist?
Olowkow Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 4,926	__________________ Our remedies oft in ourselves do lie, which we ascribe to heaven. --Shakespeare Last edited by Olowkow; 22nd July 2010 at 04:57 PM.

22nd July 2010, 04:57 PM	#13
paximperium Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2008 Location: Silicon Valley-Stuck between Google and Apple Posts: 10,727	What's a soul and what use is it?
	__________________ "The method of science is tried and true. It is not perfect, it's just the best we have. And to abandon it with its skeptical protocols is the pathway to a dark age." -Carl Sagan "They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance."-Terry Pratchett

22nd July 2010, 04:58 PM	#14
Sledge Grammaton Cleric Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Swingin' on a star Posts: 7,123	It stops your foot from going right through your shoe?
	__________________ "The perfect haiku would have just two syllables: Airwolf" ~ Ernest Cline "Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop" ~ Dara O'Briain.

22nd July 2010, 05:01 PM	#15
MikeSun5 Trigger Happy Pacifist, Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Florida, USA Posts: 1,877	Originally Posted by paximperium What's a soul and what use is it? An invisible fairy-like thing that lives inside you, which leaves your body when you die and allows admittance to the heaven or (slides down to the hell) of whichever religion you have ascribed to so you can hang out with your dead relatives. ...and it weighs 21 grams.
	__________________ I always wondered if those WWJD bracelets worked, so I bought one. Well later, I was on a plane and this little kid was kicking my seat repeatedly, while his sister sang along with her walkman and their mother just sat there. I almost turned around and went off, and then I caught sight of my bracelet. What would Jesus do? So I lit them on fire and sent them all to Hell. --Daniel Tosh

22nd July 2010, 05:01 PM	#16
Loss Leader Opinionated Jerk Moderator Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: New York Posts: 11,892	Originally Posted by Blackened Cat Is there an objective afterlife reality? Really, you could put any word in place of "afterlife" and have the same question. Is there an objective afterlife realty? There's no evidence of one. Is there an objective Peyton Manning reality? There is evidence (some of it in Tennessee) that Peyton Manning exists. Is there an objective Iranian nuclear weapon reality? There is some evidence of one but some evidence that there is not. In all cases, we are making deductions based on the evidence of our senses. And in all cases, the evidence of our senses is in some ways equivocal. At its heart, you may be asking, "Is there an objective reality?" That question has no satisfactory answer. Each of us has no evidence that anything exists outside of our individual selves or that we existed in any moment but the present. I tend to think the answer is yes. Reality is consistent and boring (where as dreams are shifting and exciting). But some would disagree. Are you asking about the existence of an objective reality? Or are you assuming that there is a measurable and definable objective reality and just asking if the afterlife exists within it?
	__________________ Follow me on Twitter! @LossLeader This force is receiving all the right to vote through the use of magic. - Miernik Wieslaw <NEW> VOTE FOR ME JUST BECAUSE <NEW>

22nd July 2010, 05:07 PM	#17
Blackened Cat Scholar Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 52	Originally Posted by Olowkow "can we ever determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" That's a perfectly valid philosophical question and is akin to what I was asking. I don't have any agenda to push, just asking a question.
Blackened Cat Scholar Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 52

22nd July 2010, 05:10 PM	#18
paximperium Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2008 Location: Silicon Valley-Stuck between Google and Apple Posts: 10,727	Originally Posted by Blackened Cat That's a perfectly valid philosophical question and is akin to what I was asking. I don't have any agenda to push, just asking a question. But first you need to actually define the terms you are using. In philosophical discussion, semantics and definitions really matter. We don't don't know what you mean with a "soul". If you can define it, we can at least start with that issue.
	__________________ "The method of science is tried and true. It is not perfect, it's just the best we have. And to abandon it with its skeptical protocols is the pathway to a dark age." -Carl Sagan "They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance."-Terry Pratchett

22nd July 2010, 05:13 PM	#19
Olowkow Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 4,926	Originally Posted by Blackened Cat That's a perfectly valid philosophical question and is akin to what I was asking. I don't have any agenda to push, just asking a question. If one cannot define "angel", I'm going to have to say, "no", it cannot be determined how many can dance on the head of a pin, though I can certainly define a pin, and tell you the surface area. I would have to know how much space they take up, and how much they weigh before I can even begin to say that it can or cannot be determined. Then, I can say, well, I don't have enough information yet, or yes, I can now attempt to determine how many can dance, providing your definition of angel states that they are able to dance.
Olowkow Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 4,926	__________________ Our remedies oft in ourselves do lie, which we ascribe to heaven. --Shakespeare

22nd July 2010, 05:16 PM	#20
Blackened Cat Scholar Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 52	Originally Posted by Loss Leader Are you asking about the existence of an objective reality? Or are you assuming that there is a measurable and definable objective reality and just asking if the afterlife exists within it? Yeah that is part of my current pondering. I may not have spelled that out well in the OP.
Blackened Cat Scholar Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 52

22nd July 2010, 06:21 PM	#21
phantomb Muse Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Canada Posts: 567	Things that we say are objectively known can always be tested for accuracy by either side in a debate, because knowledge is demonstrable and measurable. The afterlife is an idea that lacks supporting evidence because nothing about it is testable, and the whole thing is centred around a handful of assumptions which themselves are based on nothing. Consequently, the afterlife is not an objective idea and we currently cannot base claimed knowledge about it on anything.

22nd July 2010, 06:31 PM	#22
Loss Leader Opinionated Jerk Moderator Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: New York Posts: 11,892	Originally Posted by Blackened Cat Originally Posted by Loss Leader Are you asking about the existence of an objective reality? Or are you assuming that there is a measurable and definable objective reality and just asking if the afterlife exists within it? Yeah that is part of my current pondering. I may not have spelled that out well in the OP. Well, um, which one? I asked an either/ or question. Are you asking if objective reality exists OR are you assuming that objective reality exists? Pick one or the other.
	__________________ Follow me on Twitter! @LossLeader This force is receiving all the right to vote through the use of magic. - Miernik Wieslaw <NEW> VOTE FOR ME JUST BECAUSE <NEW>

22nd July 2010, 06:34 PM	#23
Blackened Cat Scholar Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 52	Originally Posted by Loss Leader Well, um, which one? I asked an either/ or question. Are you asking if objective reality exists OR are you assuming that objective reality exists? Pick one or the other. First one. "If objective reality exists" It's something I'm questioning at the moment.
Blackened Cat Scholar Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 52

22nd July 2010, 07:30 PM	#24
Eric D Critical Thinker Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 476	Originally Posted by Blackened Cat Do you think the existence of a soul enduring after death is an objective or subjective idea? So whether you believe you go to Christian heaven, Mormon heaven, Buddhist rebirth or athiest style material non-existence..... is there an actual objective reality to this? Can it be determined? Even if the answer is - nothing... can that be determined? And if there is life after death, and for example it's a Christian protestant one... can we know in the here and now that this is real? What can we base any knowledge of an afterlife on? There is no knowledge of an afterlife at all. If there was this kind of knowledge, it would have to be based on evidence.
Eric D Critical Thinker Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 476

22nd July 2010, 07:43 PM	#25
Loss Leader Opinionated Jerk Moderator Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: New York Posts: 11,892	Originally Posted by Blackened Cat First one. "If objective reality exists" It's something I'm questioning at the moment. Well, good luck with that. There's no answer. There's just an endless debate that goes something like this: Realist: The universe exists because I have gathered evidence of its existence. Anti-Realist: But all of that evidence was gathered by your senses. Realist: So? Anti-Realist: Your senses could be lying to you. Realist: So, what? Nothing exists? Anti-Realist: Things exist as constructs in our minds. Realist: So, our minds must exist. Anti-Realist: Well, mine does. Yours, I'm not so sure about. Realist: You're a jerk. Anti-Realist: And you're an idiot. Realist: Well, at least I'm an idiot who exists! Anti-Realist: Not for long! [Huge sissy slapfight ensues. Non-philosophy majors laugh, have lives, and get laid.]
	__________________ Follow me on Twitter! @LossLeader This force is receiving all the right to vote through the use of magic. - Miernik Wieslaw <NEW> VOTE FOR ME JUST BECAUSE <NEW> Last edited by Loss Leader; 22nd July 2010 at 07:45 PM.

22nd July 2010, 07:51 PM	#26
StrangeLoop Student Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 45	It makes as much sense to posit a daisy afterlife or a chrysanthemum afterlife. We esteem ourselves too highly.
StrangeLoop Student Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 45

22nd July 2010, 08:19 PM	#27
John Jones Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 3,827	Originally Posted by Blackened Cat Yeah that is part of my current pondering. I may not have spelled that out well in the OP. That was an either/or question. ETA: Nevermind. I see this has been addressed already.
John Jones Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 3,827	Last edited by John Jones; 22nd July 2010 at 08:20 PM.

22nd July 2010, 08:22 PM	#28
Complexity The Woo Whisperer Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Minnesota, USA Posts: 9,263	Originally Posted by Blackened Cat Thanks for the welcome. To answer all the question dodgers....you know what I mean... Then rephrase the question, can we know the buddhist after life exists (if Greek concepts of soul somehow offends). Is there an objective afterlife reality? No, and no.
	__________________ "It is a great nuisance that knowledge can only be acquired by hard work." - W. Somerset Maugham "Thought is subversive and revolutionary, destructive and terrible; thought is merciless to privilege, established intuititions, and comfortable habit. Thought looks into the pit of hell and is not afraid. Thought is great and swift and free, the light of the world, and the chief glory of man." - Bertrand Russell

22nd July 2010, 08:25 PM	#29
Complexity The Woo Whisperer Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Minnesota, USA Posts: 9,263	Originally Posted by Blackened Cat That's a perfectly valid philosophical question and is akin to what I was asking. Must disagree - I don't think that "Can we ever determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" is either valid or philosophical. It assumes something for which there is no evidence. It is also insulting to the intellect.
	__________________ "It is a great nuisance that knowledge can only be acquired by hard work." - W. Somerset Maugham "Thought is subversive and revolutionary, destructive and terrible; thought is merciless to privilege, established intuititions, and comfortable habit. Thought looks into the pit of hell and is not afraid. Thought is great and swift and free, the light of the world, and the chief glory of man." - Bertrand Russell Last edited by Complexity; 22nd July 2010 at 08:26 PM.

22nd July 2010, 08:27 PM	#30
Complexity The Woo Whisperer Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Minnesota, USA Posts: 9,263	Originally Posted by Blackened Cat First one. "If objective reality exists" It's something I'm questioning at the moment. Yes, I think there is an objective reality. I do not think that we will every understand any aspect of it perfectly. The best we can hope for is incrementally better models of reality that serve us well as we can muster. These we get from science. It may be that none of our brains will ever be able to imagine, let alone apprehend, many aspects of it. We won't know this, of course.
	__________________ "It is a great nuisance that knowledge can only be acquired by hard work." - W. Somerset Maugham "Thought is subversive and revolutionary, destructive and terrible; thought is merciless to privilege, established intuititions, and comfortable habit. Thought looks into the pit of hell and is not afraid. Thought is great and swift and free, the light of the world, and the chief glory of man." - Bertrand Russell Last edited by Complexity; 22nd July 2010 at 08:32 PM.

22nd July 2010, 08:48 PM	#31
Maia Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 1,261	The best answer I've ever found to this is probably in John Shelby Spong's latest book. (But then, isn't everything?)
	__________________ Satan, aka Precious the Cat-- the Comic! Come and read at Stripgenerator!

22nd July 2010, 09:47 PM	#32
Blackened Cat Scholar Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 52	Originally Posted by Loss Leader Well, good luck with that. There's no answer. There's just an endless debate that goes something like this: Do you have a belief either way? Which side would you take? I tend to veer towards Objective reality existing.
Blackened Cat Scholar Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 52

22nd July 2010, 09:49 PM	#33
Blackened Cat Scholar Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 52	Originally Posted by StrangeLoop It makes as much sense to posit a daisy afterlife or a chrysanthemum afterlife. We esteem ourselves too highly. So when approaching religious questions or philosophical questions...is it better to evaluate or explore them, or instead just accept them? or discard them?
Blackened Cat Scholar Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 52

22nd July 2010, 09:58 PM	#34
Blackened Cat Scholar Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 52	Originally Posted by Complexity Must disagree - I don't think that "Can we ever determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" is either valid or philosophical. It assumes something for which there is no evidence. It is also insulting to the intellect. Are all theoretically situations insulting? If I pose a maths question that starts "If Suzie took the number 2 bus to.." Would I then be questioned over the existence of Suzie or the number 2 bus? If I could not prove that Suzie exists, and that Suzie took the bus on that day... would I have insulted the intellect? Can you define what an insult to intellect would be? Can you prove that the intellect does in fact exist? and is not over inflated? And why would 'the' intellect has so little grace as not to be able to withstand the smallest of slights? Is the intellect that inexperienced in life? Was the intellect sheltered? Is there an end to the endless dissecting of questions in order to escape confronting of their basis?
Blackened Cat Scholar Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 52

22nd July 2010, 09:59 PM	#35
Blackened Cat Scholar Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 52	Originally Posted by Complexity These we get from science. Is science the only way to understand objective and expperience reality?
Blackened Cat Scholar Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 52

22nd July 2010, 10:53 PM	#36
Lukraak_Sisser Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 1,637	Originally Posted by Blackened Cat Is science the only way to understand objective and expperience reality? Science is the only way we can gather and interpret data about out reality objectively. Its also the only known way with which to predict things about our reality. However it has nothing to do with experiencing reality, that is something our brain does. As for an afterlife, no scientific experiment has ever shown anything to prove it exists. So if it does our best current methods are unable to interact with it making the whole question philosophical. If an intangible soul that does not interact with matter in any way truly exists, you'd best hope there is an afterlife to go to though, otherwise each time someone dies they'll be stuck in empty space watching the earth and the entire solar system rush away from them at high speed.