What Happens After Death? Exploring the Possibilities of an Afterlife

[mgiddy911]

Personally I'm more interested in what happens before death. How we live our lives quite probably determines the quality of any possible events thereafter.

Blueplanetbob and yourself have pointed out that it's how one lives one's life that quite possibly determines what happens next. This is verified by observing the nature of sequence and consequence as it is presented to us by nature during life.

Of course, so far, our brains are only capable of perceiving life as a series of sequences and so, our death will seem to be, naturally, the next step in that sequence. If, during life, one is able to transcend the accepted and ingrained idea that everything must take place in sequence, one may be able to avoid the hum-drum type of death everyone else experiences. One may be able to experience death while they live, and visa versa. This could be viewed as a form of immortality. Hypothetically speaking.

I quite fully agree that no matter how we look at things, our brain is forced into looking at things in a more linear way than possibly it all really occurs. We see life as one directional time wise. And as far as we know we are born, we do things, and we die, I would like ot believe that it is these thigns we do that affects our next life, however I would make no predictions as to whether life continues linearly, that is to say I don't think that one will be born again to a new life in a time period right after the one they died in. Again this is just somehting I like to believe, if for no other reason than I feel better when I do good things because I feel like it will pay off in the long run at some point or another.

 

[nannoh]

Death as a "thing" does not exist, thus nothing can "happen" either before or after that which does not exist--the OP question lacks meaning.

So all these doctors and coroners and other professionals who declare "the time of death" of an individual are talking about an event that does not exist or take place?

I think the officials are talking about the time of transition of a living organism from living to not-living. Animate to inanimate. This transition has been termed "death" in western culture. The question asks, "what happens" after this transition.

The question only lacks meaning because there is little to no account of what the state of "not living" is like. Asking a rock what its like to "not live" doesn't lack meaning; its a legitimate question; but the answer will not be given (by a rock or a cadaver) and so the question may be seen as futile.

However, we, as the living, are able to observe what happens after death. We see decomposition.

For instance a team of historians has unearthed Beethoven's grave in Germany and they found him there erasing all of his original manuscripts. They asked what he was doing and he replied that he was "decomposing".

 

[PIT2]

I agree with your last sentence to a point. That point is it trying to extend what happens in the moments leading up to death, shouldn't be used as an indication of what happens afterwards

Why not an indication? I agree that it isn't proof, but it is evidence.

I know our disagreement is based on the initial assumption of whether the brain produces consciousness, but I have not yet been convinced that it doesn't. (but I applaud your efforts for trying as hard as you do to convince people ofthe opposite)

U say that u haven't been convinced the brain doesn't produce consciousness, but have u been convinced that it does?

 

[PIT2]

Why would you remeber anything in the first place if your brain shuts down? That doesn't make sense to me.

I agree that it doesn't make sense, but it is what happens. Peoples minds seem to become much clearer, their perceptions more vivid and their memories much better, all at the moment when u would least expect it to happen: when the brain is shutting down or may even have stopped functioning altogether.

For instance, people describe seeing all new colors, blind people describe seeing again, people remember their entire lifes, some describe 360 degree vision, they describe the most intense emotions they ever had (their normal lifes apparently pale in comparison to those experiences and are 'less real') and a clarity of thinking that they believe allows them to understand the entire universe. Pretty amazing stuff for a brain that is shortcircuiting. Imagine Windows95 turning into Vista when lightning overloads the powergrid.

 

[RVBuckeye]

U say that u haven't been convinced the brain doesn't produce consciousness, but have u been convinced that it does?

It's more likely than not, for sure. I've read practically every one of your arguments on this forum so I know your doubts on the issue. Has it been completely explained yet? NO. But a living brain seems to me to factor in pretty heavily, don't you think?

 

[fournier17]

this brings me to my next topic about Catholicism, I am catholic but I don't get why people think that is God is so good and just and kind, then why would be be so mean to condem anyone that dosn't believe in him or catholicism to hell? QUOTE] I was raised as a Catholic, and I have had similar qeustions about Catholicism. What also seems unfair about God sending people to heaven or hell, is that some populations have a higher chance of going to heaven then others. We as humans and our behaviors(which determine our ulitimate fate after death
according to Catholicism) are a product of the enviroment, and our genes.
Which we do not choose, we have to work with the hand of cards life deals us. People who are born into low socioeconomic familys have a higher chance of sining and commiting crimes then someone who is born into a finacialy stable family. Which therefore means someone who comes from a low socioeconomic family will have a higher chance of going to hell then someone from a finacialy stable family. This seems totaly unfair since this would mean we are predestined to go to hell or heaven. Why would god even create a soul to predestine it to hell. Seems pretty sadistic to me.

 

[fournier17]

And to answer the OP original qeustion, I think what happens immediatly after death depends on your defination of death. If you define death as no brain activity then there's nothing. Blackness. I don't believe in reincarnation, or in life after death. As to the reason why we are here. Like a previous poster has stated, it is to learn everything we can about the universe around us. If there is no god then the intelligent creatures that inhabit this universe our the conciousness of the universe.

 

[PIT2]

It's more likely than not, for sure. I've read practically every one of your arguments on this forum so I know your doubts on the issue. Has it been completely explained yet? NO. But a living brain seems to me to factor in pretty heavily, don't you think?

No not really. The distinction between brain-producing-consciousness and something-else-doing-it, is too subtle to be proven by experiment or empirical observation (except that the brain-does-it idea could be falsified, and the other one could be known through direct experience(which NDE'rs say they did)). This is why all the arguments against NDE being real, arent really arguments based on empirical observation: they are arguments based on interpretation of the empirical observations.

For instance, people often state that a lack of oxygen in the brain causes parts of the NDE, and that this proves these parts of the NDE were produced by the brain. However, in reality this still only demonstrates interaction between brain and NDE. Who is to say that lack of oxygen doesn't allow consciousness to access (get a glimpse of)that part of reality which everyone accesses upon fullblown death? Materialism based theory may dictate that it has to be just neurons, but direct experience by the people who have NDE's tells them it is utterly real.

The same is true for the OBE aspect, and all other aspects which are supposedly 'explained'. The only way in which they are explained is by assumption, not by empirical observation. This assumption is of course the same as usual:

Interaction between brain and consciousness equals brain = consciousness.

Looking at other parts of nature, we can see that this isn't an obvious conclusion at all, and should not be believed with any less skepticism than other options.

 

[RVBuckeye]

PIT2,

If I go to a hospital for major surgery, I would receive anesthesia, and lose conciousness. If I took a right hook to the head, I might lose conciousness. If I took LSD, or some other chemical, my conscious experience would be severly altered. I could have an OBE by lucid dreaming, or (as in my case) a head injury. Just from a laymans approach of this anecdotal evidence would lead someone with a little sense to believe the brain is a necessary component of conscious experience.

Now if you ask me how does this happen? What's so special about a neuron? I couldn't tell you. I usually tend to compare it with fire. Fire is the effect produced when you have the right mixture of combustible materials in the presence of some oxidizing agent. Why couldn't consciousness be a similar phenomenon? Exactly what the ingredients are and how they interact admittedly needs further explanation. (this might very well be a flawed analogy, so if someone could explain its' flaws, please feel free to do so)

 

[PIT2]

Just from a laymans approach of this anecdotal evidence would lead someone with a little sense to believe the brain is a necessary component of conscious experience.

It could also mean that the brain restricts conscious perception. People during nde and other types of experiences often describe feeling their consciousness expand/dissolve into a larger presence.

I usually tend to compare it with fire. Fire is the effect produced when you have the right mixture of combustible materials in the presence of some oxidizing agent. Why couldn't consciousness be a similar phenomenon? Exactly what the ingredients are and how they interact admittedly needs further explanation. (this might very well be a flawed analogy, so if someone could explain its' flaws, please feel free to do so)

Maybe, but what element of fire isn't present outside of fire?

 

[fedorfan]

Sometimes I've seriously thought about committing suicide just for the sake of seeing what's on the other side and I don't know why I don't go through with it. Whats the point of having this great mind if it leaves us with more questions than answers? Id be more satisfied with a less intelligent brain because it doesn't leave you as puzzled, you got to worry more about surviving and getting food than where you came from and what other universes are out there. All we can do is ponder though until we get there, I hope there is an afterlife but I am not counting on it at all because it just doesn't seem like there will be. I don't know but everytime I look at science it says there will be but there's so many contradictions in it yet it doesn't have to be logical to us does it? Either way it won't matter because there is so many things that could happen so I am gone stop worrying about it so much. I am gone try to protect the world that I am on because the mind that I have tells me that that's the right thing to do. I am not sure if there is a creator either and am not really caring anymore, maybe well find out when we die, maybe we wont.

 

[delirium]

suicide isn't a desicion it's a runaway ticket , that in my point of view cost too much ... altough i liked what Blueplanetbob said . what if really we are here to collect information and learn , after we die , that information go somewhere and we reincarnate into a new shell to collect more information ... that make us simpy a harvesters of information and experience , and i don't find myself much more of a container for experience .

 

[Office_Shredder]

Maybe, but what element of fire isn't present outside of fire?

That's the point, fire isn't made of anything special, it just as the right ingredients

 

[PIT2]

That's the point, fire isn't made of anything special, it just as the right ingredients

If fire is the ingredients, then why isn't consciousness?

 

[fedorfan]

"Our terrors and our darkness of mind
Must be dispelled, then, not by sunshine's rays,
Not by those shining arrows of the light,
But by insight into nature, and a scheme
Of systematic contemplation"-Lucretius.
The notion of a jealous vengeful God I believe is a conceit of the three monotheistic religions-Christianity, Judiasm and Islam, which all share one common root-all originated in the desert. Life is tough in the desert where there is nothing-hence, the jealous vengeful God? One likes to think what would have happened in the Western world if the roman emperor Constantine had never converted. But then Islam would have come along and converted everyone with the sword anyway, I suppose.

Yeah, good point.

 

[jaynebeal]

if there were nothing after death..what would be the point of having an oobe? or an nde?...it would be a pointless venture for the mind/soul to be able to leave the body if it just disintegrated into nothing at the point of death. I cite the flatlanders dimension theory...if your only perception is of horizontal existence then you will have no knowledge of a vertical dimension and will postulate that it cannot exist even though there are other beings in the vertical dimension that probably think the same thing about your horizontal one...I think that death is just th moving to a new state of being in a different dimension...possibly overlaid on our own...hence interactive ghosty experiences...just because you can't see it..doesn't mean it's not there!