Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

What do you think happens after death?

What do you think happens after death?

  • Nothing. We just die.

    Votes: 126 77.8%
  • We get reincarnated.

    Votes: 5 3.1%
  • We go to heaven or hell.

    Votes: 4 2.5%
  • We become part of a wider consciousness.

    Votes: 20 12.3%
  • Other, if so, what?

    Votes: 7 4.3%

  • Total voters
    162
What's it about?

That would be really impossible to explain in one post but there is a thread here about it..


Just if you do decide to watch it, ignore the thread above... 😁

It's unbelievably complex and brilliant.

Eta. Every scene and every word is significant though...so it takes some concentration...especially season 3.
 
Last edited:
Thread has got me thinking about a song a mate of mine wrote when he made the decision to divorce his first wife. It’s utterly achingly beautiful and I think I have the only remaining copy on a hard drive that I’m not sure how to access.

So much stuff just gets lost.

I dunno…. it’s like tears in rain.

Not even sure what I’m trying to say tbh.
 
I'm sort of hoping it's extinction, since even after death I'm still going to want to carve the faces of some I've known in this life.
 
I don't know what happens after death I know that I will find out in due course but I hope not to find out too soon.

I had a joke with my dad that if it was possible to come back after death that he would come back and tell me so. No news yet so I guess it is impossible.

You won’t find out (probably) as there will be no you to find things out, unless there is some kind of afterlife in which there is continuity of consciousness (as implied by eg the Christian one). But there probably isn’t.
 
The situation in which we live.

What does "excessive freedom" mean in a practical sense? Should our freedom be curtailed in some way?
No, it's not as crude as that.

What Kierkegaard was talking about was our own anxiety around the freedom to choose - for example, we can stand on the edge of a cliff, where we might have the freedom to throw ourselves off, or not. His argument was that, when we have the freedom to do something, it comes with the anxiety (he used the word "dread") of such a responsibility; on the flip side, that anxiety also tells us that we have that freedom, and he argued that we should cherish the fact that we even have that choice, and use it to move us from a place of simply doing things because we can, and instead become aware of the power of our freedom to choose.

Were you to have been able to offer a rather less glib definition of the "human condition", it might have been possible to relate the foregoing to it.
 
What Kierkegaard was talking about was our own anxiety around the freedom to choose - for example, we can stand on the edge of a cliff, where we might have the freedom to throw ourselves off, or not. His argument was that, when we have the freedom to do something, it comes with the anxiety (he used the word "dread") of such a responsibility; on the flip side, that anxiety also tells us that we have that freedom, and he argued that we should cherish the fact that we even have that choice, and use it to move us from a place of simply doing things because we can, and instead become aware of the power of our freedom to choose.
So we can make choices and this makes us anxious. I don't see the "excess" here. Most choices for most people are severely curtailed by circumstances.
 
If I get kierkegaard's point, I can imagine there will be more anxiety with the subjective sense of free will and choice than more instinctual behaviour or earlier societies with more cohesive cultures and social roles.
 
If I get kierkegaard's point, I can imagine there will be more anxiety with the subjective sense of free will and choice than more instinctual behaviour or earlier societies with more cohesive cultures and social roles.
I think his point was that the anxiety is inevitable (see also "existential angst"), but that the way to manage this is to bring our choices and free will into conscious awareness. Even in more restrictive cultures, there is always the choice to conform or not on an individual basis, after all.
 
I think his point was that the anxiety is inevitable (see also "existential angst"), but that the way to manage this is to bring our choices and free will into conscious awareness. Even in more restrictive cultures, there is always the choice to conform or not on an individual basis, after all.
I see, maybe mine is a different point then but always thought there was some mileage in it.
 
I see, maybe mine is a different point then but always thought there was some mileage in it.
I think it's going to affect the locus and depth of the anxiety, and probably shift it to different groups within the society, but I regard the idea of Kierkegaardian despair as a given - indeed, Irvin Yalom regards freedom, and its associated despair, as one of the four existential givens (the others being, appositely to this thread, death, meaninglessness, and isolation).
 
If you really want to know then ...
The entry you link to is a series of abstract (and hardly uncontentious) assertions about free will.

Also, are you are aware that this is the basis for the Landmark Forum, a three-day (in my opinion quite nutty) self-help course. The conclusion of the course is that you are completely free to choose to be whoever you want to be. Do you agree with this? If so, who have you chosen to be?
 
Back
Top Bottom