Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

What happens after you die? (Sam Harris, Bill Nye, Michio Kaku, & more)

#1
C C Offline
If you're a blunt extinctivist -- as well as a believer in simple or uncomplicated presentism -- then of course the answer is Michael Shermer's. Although I'd refine that to not even being a presentation of nothingness, silence, etc. Since the latter would still be a form of blank manifestation, as well as systematic recognition that such emptiness "was there". 

Though it has zilch to do with preferring it over other fantastic (but unlikely) options, my pick would be the view that Michelle Thaller expresses. I was a little amazed that it was the first one, or even included at all. Even if you had a magical information copy of your lifetime identity whisking off to new adventures elsewhere, your original "worm" of co-existing body differences or temporal developments would remain.

OTOH, few possibilities could be ruled out if the world was akin to a video game, or a metaverse conference where everybody forgot that they were in a virtual meeting. But a prior-in-rank level responsible for this one is allowed to be radically different (i.e., not that Matrix stuff involving computer simulators). Since otherwise recursively explaining _X_ with a repeat of the nature of _X_ opens the door to Matryoshka dolls all the way up.

- - - - - - 

https://youtu.be/ipiewC3QP-k

Is there life after death? (Sam Harris, Bill Nye, Michio Kaku, & more)

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/ipiewC3QP-k
Reply
#2
Magical Realist Offline
I get Sam Harris's point about a belief in an afterlife being opposed to the natural healthy acceptance of death as "goneness". It seems one cannot authentically go thru the 5 stages of grief unless one really encounters the loss of the deceased. OTOH believing they still exist and are somewhere out there may be part of the healing process--a consoling fiction like most all aspects of religion. I personally trod the agnostic borderline between afterlife and extinction, taking a wait and see approach that seems to me most in line with the impenetrable mystery of it all.
Reply
#3
stryder Offline
I'm more for the understanding that technologically we could if we so wished attempt to extend beyond the reach of death.

However due to the costs, peoples beliefs and not being able to see any results until later, Mankind is more likely to not take up the opportunity.

We will therefore all be swallowed by oblivion. (Although mankind being inspired to do something about it might steal us from oblivions clutches)
Reply
#4
Zinjanthropos Offline
Good to see scientists stumble through that one. No different than all of us. Don't think there's anything anyone can do experimentally. Nice to know I've shared some of same thoughts as some famous folk. Thaller's take is one.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  What Happens When We Reach the Limits of Science? C C 4 981 Dec 8, 2017 09:27 PM
Last Post: Syne



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)