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
I think when we die our consciousness stops.

And our brain function stops.

We, as a single life form stop being alive.

But this begs the question, what is the spark that is life? From the very beginning we are a bunch of cells, unable to think, and totally dependent on our mother for sustenance. At some point perhaps some way before birth we might become a little aware, and then when we are born and the umbilical cord is cut we also take our first steps toward independent life.

We are then more than a bunch of organs, we are alive, give a medical professor all the organs required for a human being, they might be able to connect them all together but they won't be able to make the collection of organs come alive. Something else is happening here.
 
I think when we die our consciousness stops.

And our brain function stops.

We, as a single life form stop being alive.

But this begs the question, what is the spark that is life? From the very beginning we are a bunch of cells, unable to think, and totally dependent on our mother for sustenance. At some point perhaps some way before birth we might become a little aware, and then when we are born and the umbilical cord is cut we also take our first steps toward independent life.

We are then more than a bunch of organs, we are alive, give a medical professor all the organs required for a human being, they might be able to connect them all together but they won't be able to make the collection of organs come alive. Something else is happening here.

It isn’t actually. If you could as you put it connect all the organs together correctly you would end up with an alive human being. Why would you not?
 
It isn’t actually. If you could as you put it connect all the organs together correctly you would end up with an alive human being. Why would you not?
It might be possible, and is increasingly possible but not yet possible to connect all the organs together, perhaps even start a healthy heart, but the brain and its consciousness, what state would that have? How could it be in a fit state to manage the bodily organs even let alone exhibit a potential maturity. Could it indeed be restarted? has one ever survived more than a little while of stem death?

Perhaps with our increasing knowledge of stem cells it might be possible at some point to grow a brain, an empty one though most probably, which might present its own challenges.

Rich men have long wondered if they could be frozen and perhaps reintroduced in a young body later .. never happened yet AFAICT.
 
Chemistry. We're just walking meatbags of chemical reactions which continue until we die.
What causes the chemistry to start, in the beginning, and to stop at the end. And the end is often instant, an animal shot through the heart (human too) collapses immediately, they are dead before their body hits the ground. Brain death is also I believe instant.
 
There’s nothing disappointing or dull about being munched by earthworms. Noble creatures without whom there’d not be much going on at all.
Charles Darwin at the end of his life was obsessed by the humble earthworm, kept them around the living room to observe & published his big book on The Action Of Worms shortly before he died.
 
There’s nothing disappointing or dull about being munched by earthworms. Noble creatures without whom there’d not be much going on at all.
Charles Darwin at the end of his life was obsessed by the humble earthworm, kept them around the living room to observe & published his big book on The Action Of Worms shortly before he died.
you have to wonder how they got on in the americas before their first earthworms arrived with the spanish
 
In one of Ian M Banks's books, humans going on dangerous expeditions, mountain climbing for example visit a service which grows a clone of them and takes an image of the contents of their brains.

If they die on their expedition their memories (and all contents of their brains) are implanted into the clone which is then started up and thus they have a form of immortality.
 
In one of Ian M Banks's books, humans going on dangerous expeditions, mountain climbing for example visit a service which grows a clone of them and takes an image of the contents of their brains.

If they die on their expedition their memories (and all contents of their brains) are implanted into the clone which is then started up and thus they have a form of immortality.
Microsoft have yet to release Windows 666.
 
In one of Ian M Banks's books, humans going on dangerous expeditions, mountain climbing for example visit a service which grows a clone of them and takes an image of the contents of their brains.

If they die on their expedition their memories (and all contents of their brains) are implanted into the clone which is then started up and thus they have a form of immortality.
Yes (assuming for the sake of argument this is possible) but that wouldn't be them but a slightly out of date copy of them which would have no knowledge of the fate of the original who would now be lost forever.
Unless there really is such a thing as a soul then we end when we die and (for most of us) completely forgotten after the last person who knows us dies.
There were two or three hundred million people around at the same time as Julius Caesar, how many of them are remembered today a few hundred at very most.
 
Yes (assuming for the sake of argument this is possible) but that wouldn't be them but a slightly out of date copy of them which would have no knowledge of the fate of the original who would now be lost forever.
Yes, that would be the case. Better perhaps than to disappear completely, they live long lives in Banks's books.
Unless there really is such a thing as a soul then we end when we die and (for most of us) completely forgotten after the last person who knows us dies.
I am not sure infamy is desirable. As to a soul, I think there are arguments.
There were two or three hundred million people around at the same time as Julius Caesar, how many of them are remembered today a few hundred at very most.
Again with this infamy business, does it matter that anyone remembers you?

I know a family who bury their dead with wooden gravestones which rot away to nothing. In about the same time that people forget about them. I like the idea.
 
The soul. Where did that come from? The present assumption is that successful life began only once on Earth. We share a part of our DNA with all other animals, insects and plants. If we are the only ones to have souls, why did that happen? If all other animals, insects and plants do have a soul, why did that happen? The only answers to these questions which accept the existence of the soul are religious, and either deny most empirical evidence relating to history, archaeology, geography, geology, biology, physics and cosmology, or rely on completely unprovable divine intervention.
To sum up. The soul - no thanks. Soul Music - yes please.
 
What, then, is "I"? I don't believe in a soul, but I believe in an "I". I believe that's what we're really interested in knowing - what happens to "me" when I die. "I" know what happens to the body after death, do I even know what happens to "me" while I sleep?
 
My understanding of a soul, according to the woo people I spoke to, is it is a life force, and that every living thing has one and they are all connected.
 
Last edited:
My understanding of a soul, according to the woo people I spoke to, is it is a life force, and that every living things has one and they are all connected.
So that will include every blade of grass, every bacterium, every ant? If someone believes that then they are at least consistent, but who really actually does believe that? And why go to all the intellectual effort to create an explanation for all that unnecessary unprovable complexity?
 
So that will include every blade of grass, every bacterium, every ant? If someone believes that then they are at least consistent,
Yes, that is my understanding. Every living thing has a life force.
but who really actually does believe that?
It was a faith healer who explained their view. I am not religious, I don't believe there is a god, but what I do believe is that there are things science has yet to explain.
And why go to all the intellectual effort to create an explanation for all that unnecessary unprovable complexity?
 
After all, Science can't yet even explain how birds are able to migrate thousands of miles and return to the same spot. Small birds like our Robin can do this.
 
On the Banks's immortality. Yes you died on that mountain and don't know any more about it, but your wife and kids get their husband and father back, albeit missing some very recent memories.
 
After all, Science can't yet even explain how birds are able to migrate thousands of miles and return to the same spot. Small birds like our Robin can do this.
There may or may not be explanations of bird migration. But we can observe migration of birds, insects, land and sea mammals etc and attempt to explain it and with enough effort may be successful. Or not. Ditto for everything else in the universe.

That's different from inventing unverifiable concepts and insisting on their veracity.
 
The most terrifying possibility is Nietzsche's "time is a flat circle" idea. Everything we have done or will do, we will do over and over and over again—forever. We are trapped in endless repetition, but unaware of being trapped. Stephen King uses the idea to end his Dark Tower series. I sure hope Nietzsche was wrong.
 
There may or may not be explanations of bird migration. But we can observe migration of birds, insects, land and sea mammals etc and attempt to explain it and with enough effort may be successful. Or not. Ditto for everything else in the universe.
At the moment a theory is that a liquid in bird's eyes is itself magnetic, and so they can almost see the earth's magnetic lines.
That's different from inventing unverifiable concepts and insisting on their veracity.
Well I am not doing that. I am just suggesting there might be things that science has yet to describe or explain, which may in time be explained.
 
At the moment a theory is that a liquid in bird's eyes is itself magnetic, and so they can almost see the earth's magnetic lines.

Well I am not doing that. I am just suggesting there might be things that science has yet to describe or explain, which may in time be explained.
You're not inventing the unverifiable, but your woo mate is. Sure, science has yet to explain all manner of things, but the soul is not one of them. Neither is Satan or Santa Claus or ghosts or demons.
 
Back
Top Bottom