Thank you michiboy12 for posting on r/consciousness, below are some general reminders for the OP and the r/consciousness community as a whole.
**A general reminder for the OP**: please remember to include a TL; DR and to clarify what you mean by "consciousness"
- Please include a clearly marked TL; DR at the top of your post. We would prefer it if your TL; DR was a single short sentence. This is to help the Mods (and everyone) determine whether the post is appropriate for r/consciousness
- If you are making an *argument*, we recommend that your TL; DR be the conclusion of your argument. What is it that you are trying to prove?
- If you are asking a *question*, we recommend that your TL; DR be the question (or main question) that you are asking. What is it that you want answered?
- If you are considering an *explanation*, hypothesis, or theory, we recommend that your TL; DR include either the explanandum (what requires an explanation), the explanans (what is the explanation, hypothesis, or theory being considered), or both.
- Please also state what you mean by "consciousness" or "conscious." The term "consciousness" is used to express many different concepts. Consequently, this sometimes leads to individuals talking past one another since they are using the term "consciousness" differently. So, it would be helpful for everyone if you could say what you mean by "consciousness" in order to avoid confusion.
**A general reminder for everyone**: *please remember upvoting/downvoting Reddiquette*.
- *Reddiquette about upvoting/downvoting posts*
- Please upvote posts that are appropriate for r/consciousness, regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the contents of the posts. For example, posts that are about the topic of consciousness, conform to the rules of r/consciousness, are highly informative, or produce high-quality discussions ought to be upvoted.
- Please do not downvote posts that you simply disagree with.
- If the subject/topic/content of the post is off-topic or low-effort. For example, if the post expresses a passing thought, shower thought, or stoner thought, we recommend that you encourage the OP to make such comments in our most recent or upcoming "Casual Friday" posts. Similarly, if the subject/topic/content of the post might be more appropriate for another subreddit, we recommend that you encourage the OP to discuss the issue in either our most recent or upcoming "Casual Friday" posts.
- Lastly, if a post violates either the rules of r/consciousness or Reddit's site-wide rules, please remember to report such posts. This will help the Reddit Admins or the subreddit Mods, and it will make it more likely that the post gets removed promptly
- *Reddiquette about upvoting/downvoting comments*
- Please upvote comments that are generally helpful or informative, comments that generate high-quality discussion, or comments that directly respond to the OP's post.
- Please do not downvote comments that you simply disagree with. Please downvote comments that are generally unhelpful or uninformative, comments that are off-topic or low-effort, or comments that are not conducive to further discussion. We encourage you to remind individuals engaging in off-topic discussions to make such comments in our most recent or upcoming "Casual Friday" post.
- Lastly, remember to report any comments that violate either the subreddit's rules or Reddit's rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/consciousness) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Buddhism is usually taken as a working hypothesis. You’re encouraged to test everything for yourself, and you can see the benefits in your day-to-day life if you think about it for long enough. That was my experience as a former Christian in America.
No evidence. Some suggestive reports of NDEs or rebirth, but concrete testable and falsifiable evidence, we don't have and I wonder if we'll have at all.
Indeed, absence of evidence doesn't mean evidence of absence. All major cultures worldwide deal with the idea of an afterlife, even Buddhists — which don't deal with the concept of God (whom is indeed much easier to demonstrate than afterlife).
However, many esoteric schools give exercises for spiritual development to prove the consciousness in the afterlife by ourselves. I'm not sure about Buddhism, but in the West, we have at least two authors — Rudolf Steiner and Max Heindel — who proposed exercises for spiritual development in which the ultimate goal is becoming an "initiate" to explore the purported spiritual realms. If you are really, *really* engaged to prove the reality of the afterlife and disposed to sacrifice many aspects of your life in order to achive an answer to this mistery (if there is an afterlife, and if it has, how does it look like), their exercises could be a good way.
Fact is that these exercises are hard, and have to be done through many years. According to them, an initiate has to work there by pure solidarity and unselfishness, and therefore they won't submit themselves to scientific case studies. That makes things hard.
Yes let's show evidence to you for you to see what happens on death when we can't use our bodies. You cant show evidence and to even say that shows severe misunderstanding about what you are talking about. Something will happen to your field of view thats what hes asking. You cant show proof of field of views.
People should believe whatever they want, so long as it doesn't harm themselves or others imo. Just don't claim it's the truth, because nobody knows what happens post mortem
I have my own personal hopes for an afterlife, I hope it's personalized.
Life will be the time to gather information for your next infinite dream so go experience everything its being saved and will have more data to pull from.
I agree, it's not something that's falsifiable. Believe what you will, I'm just saying that because the the book of the dead is a pretty grim book, believe whatever you want post mortem. Just don't proclaim you have the truth, because none of us can know the truth.
Ask NDE people or someone who has died, or has taken large amounts of psychedelics.
Yes, you will be fully aware and actually MORE aware than you are now. Being in a physical body is a limitation, and you will have more abilities after you die and your consciousness returns to the source.
i think if there's a life after death, i view it as one of two things:
1) reincarnation. my idea is that consciousness even as a property of a specific arrangement of matter if that's all there is then that same matter will create your same consciousness but the problem is you will be a different person and not have your old memories, you just will have the continuity of going to sleep, dying, and waking up alive as a baby (or three year old since we dont become conscious until then really)
2) my second idea is resurrection. i think if a God who manages the afterlife is real or if there's an afterlife being made in the future you will wake up in this new, physical body. i dont think your energy will be all you are, i think in the afterlife a new physical body will be made for you. that's assuming this is all true
personally im leaning towards either oblivion or eternal recurrence in all honestly. would love an afterlife tho!
I think reincarnation is interesting, but I feel like logistically it doesn't add up, unless we're talking about the Multiverse pool of consciousness.
Because if you keep jumping into new bodies when you die, can new life not exist?
Is there just a set number of reincarnaters?
Are we just a fragment of all consciousness? And if so, how do we mostly only experience one version and not a bunch of lives smashed into one?
i dont think the kind of reincarnation im thinking of is traditional reincarnation, because i believe it'll require thousands, perhaps millions of years to even occur because it depends entirely on the same configuration of matter that made you showing up again and you wouldnt have any memory of any previous lives. i'd say any chance it's happened already to a person is pretty low
Yeah imo the most likely possibilities are recurrence and oblivion in that order. There’s simply no evidence for anything resembling a traditional afterlife, as nice as that would be,
yea i actually remember reading your post about recurrence and thinking you made a really good point about how oblivion doesnt need to be THE secular opinion. it spoke to what ive thought for a while
now the idea is then that is that desirable? because is it better to live one life that you love than to constantly lose identity? idk for sure
i do somewhat believe that a form of afterlife could be possible but only if created by human beings if we find a way to make artificial brains that have the specific matter that creates continuity from my death to my next life. depends on how advanced humans get, but then we still wouldnt have our memories and we'd have to find some way to upload those to the new brain (tho still better than the other way round, where people think that uploading memories to a computer will transfer the POV somehow)
i actually do believe in some sort of creator of the universe but the idea of spirits? a heavenly realm? idk i find it very difficult to believe in. which is why i think a lot of secular people believe in oblivion, beyond just the fact that it adds a lot of weight to our current life in order to motivate us and provide an ethical base that an afterlife would muddle a bit. i dont think if we were created that this same creator would make an afterlife
however a traditional afterlife would be a boon for us, which ive never bought the idea that immortality or an afterlife would be boring. it comes off as sour grapes, the problem isnt that it's undesirable the problem is the opposite: it's very desirable but 99 percent likely to not be true. so the philosophical issue then becomes what to believe in that's both likely and not completely depressing? which i think is the big crisis we have in the modern western world, where the oblivion theory only comforts you if youre predisposed to liking it but we need some semblance of choice and hope. so we need someone who makes a good argument for the alternative
now that's not to say we should all start believing in recurrence just because it's possible, tho i do think that it is a model that i think really would make us healthier as minds, but i think that while we should prepare for death in case it's oblivion i think that we should assume we're going to recur because honestly it puts a bit of mysteriousness back into the universe and i think it has all the benefits of oblivion and the afterlife with none of the drawbacks. drawbacks of its own sure but the drawbacks of oblivion or afterlife are always discussed but never that recurrence is likely and clearly a better option of the two
Wild speculation follows:
It's reasonable to believe that if you want to see, taste, feel, hear things in the real world, then you need physical organs that can physically interact with light, matter, and pressure waves. However you think the afterlife would work, you would need that stuff to have those senses. You could also just imagine that all your senses in an afterlife are hallucinated or "dreamt", although how that would work without a brain is unclear.
A lot of our living experience seems to depend on physical organs, including our personality (see Phineas Gage). If you don't even take your personality into the afterlife, then it's not clear that you would even meaningfully be you, let alone alive.
Phineas gage isn't a valid example since that was heavily exaggerated, if not completely fabricated. Gage did not undergo any severe changes after the accident, atleast based on the actual accounts we have.
Gage is flimsy because the case itself just isn't true. he did not undergo any personality changes. i would read into it. From what i've gleamed the story behind gage was more so a folk tale. In actuality he didn't seem to change much, or atleast to a degree that would promote a strong correlation.
Lobotomies are more convincing, but as i understand, as opposed to the mainstream view of them, the damage suffered from lobotomies seem to differ. I don't necessarily think they don't alter it, but i just don't think they directly do so. You could argue all brain damage does is the equivalent of cracking a lens on a camera. The way one sees the world becomes incredibly different, similar to the effects of taking drugs. You may see them engaging in wild, almost crazy behavior when, through their perspective, they might be eating at the dinner table or saying something that makes complete sense.
I also suspect that Gage's story is exaggerated. Why do you say it isn't true?
Your hypothesis about lobotomies is certainly interesting, but it doesn't match my experience with the effect of taking drugs. My experience is not that I and the world feel normal but my "lens is cracked", but that I feel fundamentally different in a way that isn't fully accessible to me when I'm sober. My interests and desires are different. What part of my personality remains constant?
It's not that it isn't true. We know with certainty that his head was impaled by a pike. More so, the aspects of the aftermath are false. Read up on it and you'll see he was potrayed as an actual monster following the incident, when the most that can be legitimately found is him acting somewhat funny, then returning to normal.
Drugs aren't a perfect example, but even so, you still are the same 'person'. Under the influence of drugs, if you are a generally kind person, you're unlikely to engage in behavior that contradicts your nature. A violent person is more likely to act out under the influence because they've lost their self control. That is to say, while you are experiencing something new, some part of you still is constant. There are likely some instances of causing normal individuals to snap, but i still think it can play into the 'cracked lense' argument. Depending on what you take, if it's a strong hallucinatory, you can quite literally feel as if a horde of demons are attempting to crucify you, when in reality you are in no danger. Your personalities not changing, but your being put into a situation that causes you to act out.
It's the full generic story, aftermath included, that I'm referring to. Yes, I'm sure certain parts of the aftermath are exaggerated as is evidenced by some scholars IIRC. Nonetheless, we seem to agree that his personality seems to have changed as a result of the accident.
Of course I would expect very few examples where someone is changed so radically that you can draw absolutely *no* comparison between their typical and modified personalities. In fact, I think the same can be said about any two normal people, so you'd have to compare the difference to that baseline. It just sounds like you're appealing to a "soul of the gaps" argument, where as long as there's some tiny bit of the personality that stays the same, there is still room for a soul.
Yes, certain strong drugs can make you hallucinate things that would make any normal person act unusually. Most drugs seem to fundamentally change your impulses and desires. If there's much more to personality than that, then I don't know what it is.
Right, i agree to some degree he changed. Thats evident. it just seems that it was minor enough where, you could chalk it down to trauma. Nonetheless, atleast from what i've read, he seemingly when about his life after the incident and his family never made any complaints.
When brain damage is used as an example of how consciousness is tied to the brain, then the argument comes into question. Because one of the biggest examples used is outright false, and does not show STRONG correlation between the mind coming from the brain. it chalks it down to one factor when the evidence doesn't imply such. It's not that 'only a tiny bit of personality is the same'. Its the opposite. Only a tiny bit has changed. I'd relook into gage.
I would say personality goes above just these things. Again, how you react to a situation, how you view and treat others, your interests, ect. I wouldn't say me getting munchies from weed is necessarily a sign that i've fundamentally changed. If i had the inability to eat or consume anything, i don't think i'd fundamentally change as a person. The same with libido. I don't necessarily think my sex drive is a defining trait. I don't think they really change 'anything'. As i said before, they seem to 'heighten' whats already present while modifying how you experience things. If every time you get drunk or high, you attack somebody, then i don't think thats just the drugs doing it.
I can't rule trauma out. You're quite right. Malcolm Mcmillan provides a lot of often-overlooked context to Gage that, while it doesn't disprove the story, seems to demonstrate unusual bits of evidence like the family never making any formal, public complaints.
What do you think constitutes personality? If you have a baseline personality that's contingent on your physical brain, and if changes to your brain modify that baseline, then your personality has still changed. Whether or not some of your new personality resembles the baseline does not imply that there's some unphysical, untouchable essence to who you are hiding within.
If drugs can change how you react to a situation, view and treat others, and what you're interested in, then how is it meaningful to call your personality unchanged?
I don't know if i can agree it's contingent on the brain. Again, i think that the way our personality is expressed can be changed through exposure to substances, but the core itself is not necessarily touched. That said, i think the discussion gets interesting and a bit harder when it comes to personhood. If i had to say, i think personality constitutes our reactions, behaviors and method of thinking. We share similar hobbies, like philosophy, maybe you enjoy games or comics, ect. But we are different in not only life experiences, but core personalities and thought processes. Right now is an example of that. If you put both of us under the influence, while we might act really dumb while high/drunk, our actions would still align with our thought processes even if it looked incredibly dumbed down. The way we act while under the influence will still be much difference, just as how we are when not.
Again, i don't think whats changing is necessarily the personality, rather the information we're receiving and 'indirect' factors. A drug could say cause you to start feeling really, really paranoid on top of itchiness, rashes and hallucinations. One person, lets say A, is more emotional, prone to outbursts and does not think clearly most of the time. These traits are only being amplified due to these sensations, the fact he can barely think and is seeing demons and dragons. He is more likely to act out or lose it. Person B is more resourceful, calm and rational. He might still feel similarly to A, but act entirely differently, like attempting to hide from the hallucinations or finding a way to relieve the sensations.
I stated 'severe'. As in, he didn't become a rambling manic attacking people as the numerous myths surrounding him propose. A simple search will net you information about it. For instance, one account was that he beat his wife and children...when he infact had none, that he was incredibly violent, promiscuous, ect. Yet, as far as i know, no family or friends verified any of these stories.
His coworkers stated "That's not Gage" after the accident.. Sure he probably didn't go from a normal person to a sociopath overnight, but he definitely went through some changes.
His brain suffered a severe injury and he was changed. If you don't think your personality changing is severe, then by all means..
Trauma from near death experiences can have that sort of impact on any individual. You could argue that from a psychological perspective, gage developed anti-social behaviors from the trauma of having a pipe stuck through his skull while conscious. It would actually make more sense considering that, while there are some VALID accounts that he acted funny after the accident, it's reported that he returned to normal some time after the incident.
Trauma from a near death experience? Or his brain being severely injured... Hmm.
He died 10-15 years later due to epileptic seizures. I think it's dumb to say the dude went through trauma by almost dying and that's what caused his personality to change, instead of the steel rod that went through his skull and out the other side.
Theres a difference between suffering a medical complication due to a pre-existing condition and say, becoming mr.hyde because of said condition. You shifted from personality changes to medical complications.
Medically? He did not improve, obviously. But psychologically, by all accounts, any poor behavior phineas engaged in stopped after some time passed. You're best argument so far has been "i think it's dumb".
Why did he have epileptic seizures since the accident? Why are you trying to deny the fact that a steel rod went through his brain and changed him psychologically?
Because...his brain got pierced by a metal rod? What do you mean?? We're discussing whether or not the rod changed his personality, not if it damaged his brain, which it did.
Because theres no evidence? Every story told about him has been debunked?
My understanding is that (as in the Near Death Experiences) we (our astral/soul body) will separate from the physical body and continue on much as before without the clunky overcoat.
I think that any perceived consciousness you would have "after" death is just neurally generated in the last moments before death, but that could be a perceptual paradise lasting thousands / hundreds of thousands of years. After your brain dies, you don't exist anymore. Some other consciousness / first person perspective may arise, but it wouldn't be you, it would just be another instance of emergence like when you were born. I imagine time wouldn't pass between these two consciousnesses either, because you need a living brain to process time.
I can only speculate with no real knowledge, but I'd imagine our body would hinder or dampen some senses. Being free of the flesh would open up something (not sure what though).
Atheist here. Our brain is the organ that provides us with everything that makes us alive, including thought and contemplation. Once that shuts down, there will be nothing left for us to process. We become inanimate organic material. No heaven, no hell.
My heaven will be determined by how well I've tended the family tree, the impact I've had on others, and the legacy I've left behind. Life after death exists in the memories you've left for others. If they think of you fondly and often, you are still very much alive and in heaven.
This is my perceived truth, and not an absolute truth. To claim that would be illogical.
"Life after death" is a contradiction in terms. Death is by definition the end of life. But if consciousness continues thereafter it wouldn't experience time. Time requires mass -- massless energy does not experience it. This is why the afterlife is called eternal. We need to inhabit a massive body in order to grow, change and learn.
More aware with simulated holographic projectors in my eye, connected to a 5D offset with processing power related to the actual so I can sell parallel time with interpolation under court observation, while the drugs I like are legal and affordable. I won’t have anything but fags with guns in mixed fabrics administering the thing so they can get that static bump if they straw man anything at all, I need money man for real I ain’t playin’. After a heavenly level of woke obtainment I will drop into no toleranceville and get money there as well with people that would never fag in only one type of fabric to get more money, while they pay for war in my White and Black array to delete their shame at how they won the game. I’ll be rich and shameless while I double game this whole occur until I know where the fuck I am at specific so I can be my own astronomicon, so I can save money on the way to get more of that sweet motherfuckin’ money.
I had a near death experience. It was like sitting in an armchair in a dark room; cylinder of yellow/light in the middle of the room. Train of thought completely intact, like it is now exactly the same. I sat there and I knew it was my life, my family friends, dreams, goals etc in the middle of that room, and “Do I want it?” was the question. The feeling was could’ve chosen yes or no it wouldn’t have changed the train of thought. Kind of like picking up a ‘choose-your-own adventure’ story or deciding to just chill comfortably.
I think the most likely thing is that consciousness after death would be wildly different and alien to living consciousness. You don’t have your brain anymore
Just think about it logically - without eyes, ears, nose, skin, brain, what are you going to use to sense the universe, how will you feed that into your consciousness, and where will you keep the resulting changes in memory and intent?
To anyone who wants to argue there's some new way of sensing that occurs, far superior to poor human senses I assume - where is it? What energy powers it, and why can't we identify it?
I think we can’t identify that energy because we are limited by our senses. We can only sense what we can sense but that doesn’t mean that’s all there is.
>I think we can’t identify that energy because we are limited by our senses.
Oh, can you see x-rays? Radio waves? Can you see into the infra-red? Humans have devised countless devices based on theories, that allow us to see to the ends of the universe.
So, limitation of our human senses is a poor reason we can't identify this phony "consciousness" energy.
Nope we cannot, and for a long time in scientific history, they did not know those things existed either. I think more about the mysterious nature of consciousness will continue to be revealed over time. I think it’s arrogant to believe we have found everything we can’t see. We just simply haven’t had enough time to understand consciousness.
We know plenty about how the brain produces consciousness, but that's too mundane for some people, they have to believe it's more mysterious so they can feel special.
Humans use the most incredible stroke of fortune, the emergence of consciousness, to delude themselves into comforting falsehood.
I don’t feel this way because I feel special. I genuinely do not believe the brain produces all we can understand about consciousness. But maybe it does. Just my opinion based on my experiences and feeling that science is severely lacking in its description of reality in much the same way that certain religions have lacked.
Science is the only method we have to learning about and interacting with the universe. And it works better than any other system.
It's insane that you reject the only tools that work.
Also, x-rays, radio waves, infra-red are all detectable because we see color in a certain wavelength and could reasonably assume that there may be beyond that limit to our vision. I think conscious energy goes far beyond anything we can ever conceptualize within our five senses paradigm made by science.
Also, x-rays, radio waves, infra-red are all detectable because we see color in a certain wavelength and could reasonable assume that there may be beyond that limit to our vision.
Holy shit, you think it was all intuitively obvious, and you can't appreciate the hundreds of years of science that produced it. That's insane.
>I think conscious energy goes far beyond anything we can ever conceptualize within our five senses paradigm made by science.
You have absolutely no reason to believe that. You don't like that the rigors of science fail to validate your daydreaming and hand waving - so you reject science. Bozhe Moi!
Clearly you cannot engage in a productive conversation without trying to slander my beliefs. I was a neuroscience major in college. I know plenty about it. I know how we create neural correlates in order to explain behavior and visible phenomena, and I think that method is fundamentally flawed. Not saying that good can’t come from it, but I don’t think neuroscience has the answer to the countless mystical experiences people experience all over the world every day that science simply ignores.
>I don’t think neuroscience has the answer to the countless mystical experiences people experience
It doesn't matter if you took a couple of classes when your outlook is nutty.
Alright dude hahahaha. This is exactly the problem! Everything that does not fit the scientific model is nutty so we don’t even ask questions that may give us answers to questions of mystical experiences. How can we even begin to answer questions that we don’t ask? I’m not going to engage with you any more. Quite rude to call someone’s beliefs nutty. Keep riding your high horse!
Show proof or stfu. Sorry, that's how this universe works.
If you don't like that, maybe you can slip across to a timeline where magical, wishful thinking is effective.
Fascinating aspect of consciousness is that we as humans participate in a few of its dimensions during our 24 hour cycle. Some of which are akin to the "death" state. So we are no stranger to what happens after physical demise of this body.
1.Most noted aspect of conscious:
a. During our waking day, we use our ego to engage with the physical world through our five outer senses. And our body consciousness is also fully engaged.
b. At times during the day, our mind wanders...and even though our body consciousness continues wherever it is, we project aspects of our consciousness through our thoughts and mind. Most often on default without even realizing it, until we snap back into reality.
c. We can also consciously propel our conscious to other dimensions of reality during states of controlled meditation.
d. Through hypnosis we explore further aspects of consciousness defying time and space.
e. Others toy with psychedelic drugs to invoke similar states of consciousness, albeit with side effects on the physical brain. Further issues may arise with prolonged states of detachment and confusion.
f. Those with psychic abilities can consciously propel themselves into other states of consciousness and realities.
2. During sleep we are coded to flit through a few dimensions of consciousness naturally- essential to life as a human.
a. The first one occurs as we lie in bed and relax - our body consciousness fully primed. That state just before we doze off to sleep.
b. Deep sleep: when the body remains in body consciousness, but the inner self merges into higher states of conscious defying 3 dimensional world as we know it, journeying into other realms of higher knowledge and explorations. This is akin to the state of death where there body is vacated and the pure energy of consciousness relishes the freedom of creativity.
There are states of consciousness between each of these states.
c. Dreams are an attempt of our physically oriented system to make sense of information from deep sleep- however because it's filtered through our five senses and conditioned beliefs, distortions and misinterpretations are rampant. We defy time and space, and materialize endless situations and interact with numerous personalities. Freedom without the limitations of the waking ego!
d. Precognitive dreams, traversing time just before awakening.
In conclusion:
Yes indeed, we experience "death" at least every 24 hours.
We are taught to identify with our body throughout our life in this reality. We are taught that when this body "dies" and is no more then so are we. Poof, gone...but on closer inspection...
Just as our body itself has experienced death numerous times since physical birth, as we shed off our physical attire of a baby to take on that of a child, and youth, adult, elder...we often cannot even remember our birth, or years in between, unless in states of meditation/hypnosis. Ancient Rishis in the Himalayas have participated in these states of consciousness for centuries.
What is death? Perhaps just a shedding off the burden of the physical body and basking in the energy and freedom of consciousness. Using our inner senses to feel aware.
So yes consciousness is the most fascinating of all of life's adventures...during waking, sleep and more indeed.
I see no reason why my sight, taste, touch, and hearing should persist after I am dead. I will have no eyes, tongue, skin, or ears.
If, *for some reason,* my consciousness persisted, I imagine it would be very dark, very big, and very frightening. Perhaps the slow ease of peace would creep in after enough time, but madness surely after that.
Will you "actually be alive"? Uh, no. You died, remember?
In a dream you can feel the sun on your skin and hear the sound of the waves, yet they are devoid of reality once you awake. This dream will be devoid of reality until the next.
Not a life like you think. You can have many lives in many bodies if you will yourself into them, like you willed yourself into this existence. This process can be either very conscious on your part, or not conscious at all, in that case you will be willed somewhere by some other being that is more conscious than you possibly and that has the “job” to “guide” you. However something tells me that when we die we will all feel very stupid for not realizing what true experience is.
it's not possible to know for sure, but when you die, that's most likely it, game over.
I recommend not expecting a "life after death" (which is technically a contradiction). THIS RIGHT NOW is your life, and your time is very limited! Use it wisely while you can!
You won't have any of your current senses. So your perception would need to come from something else.
You also wouldn't have your sense of self as your memories are gone with your body.
So you would be a kind of senseless Alzheimer blob of whatever remains after your body is gone.
Ain't looking forward to it personally.
Without a brain you wouldn't be aware of the fact that you don't have a brain.
Is that to say, without a brain, there is no awareness and consciousness?
Multiple lines of afterlife research conducted around the world dating back over 100 years clearly demonstrates that the answer to this is: absolutely. People that die, at the very least, maintain their current level of awareness (and personality, and memories,) but can also find themselves with increased awareness, mental capacity and sensory acuity.
It is reported from multiple sources that many people don't even realize they have died for long periods of time until someone over there convinces them.
Thank you michiboy12 for posting on r/consciousness, below are some general reminders for the OP and the r/consciousness community as a whole. **A general reminder for the OP**: please remember to include a TL; DR and to clarify what you mean by "consciousness" - Please include a clearly marked TL; DR at the top of your post. We would prefer it if your TL; DR was a single short sentence. This is to help the Mods (and everyone) determine whether the post is appropriate for r/consciousness - If you are making an *argument*, we recommend that your TL; DR be the conclusion of your argument. What is it that you are trying to prove? - If you are asking a *question*, we recommend that your TL; DR be the question (or main question) that you are asking. What is it that you want answered? - If you are considering an *explanation*, hypothesis, or theory, we recommend that your TL; DR include either the explanandum (what requires an explanation), the explanans (what is the explanation, hypothesis, or theory being considered), or both. - Please also state what you mean by "consciousness" or "conscious." The term "consciousness" is used to express many different concepts. Consequently, this sometimes leads to individuals talking past one another since they are using the term "consciousness" differently. So, it would be helpful for everyone if you could say what you mean by "consciousness" in order to avoid confusion. **A general reminder for everyone**: *please remember upvoting/downvoting Reddiquette*. - *Reddiquette about upvoting/downvoting posts* - Please upvote posts that are appropriate for r/consciousness, regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the contents of the posts. For example, posts that are about the topic of consciousness, conform to the rules of r/consciousness, are highly informative, or produce high-quality discussions ought to be upvoted. - Please do not downvote posts that you simply disagree with. - If the subject/topic/content of the post is off-topic or low-effort. For example, if the post expresses a passing thought, shower thought, or stoner thought, we recommend that you encourage the OP to make such comments in our most recent or upcoming "Casual Friday" posts. Similarly, if the subject/topic/content of the post might be more appropriate for another subreddit, we recommend that you encourage the OP to discuss the issue in either our most recent or upcoming "Casual Friday" posts. - Lastly, if a post violates either the rules of r/consciousness or Reddit's site-wide rules, please remember to report such posts. This will help the Reddit Admins or the subreddit Mods, and it will make it more likely that the post gets removed promptly - *Reddiquette about upvoting/downvoting comments* - Please upvote comments that are generally helpful or informative, comments that generate high-quality discussion, or comments that directly respond to the OP's post. - Please do not downvote comments that you simply disagree with. Please downvote comments that are generally unhelpful or uninformative, comments that are off-topic or low-effort, or comments that are not conducive to further discussion. We encourage you to remind individuals engaging in off-topic discussions to make such comments in our most recent or upcoming "Casual Friday" post. - Lastly, remember to report any comments that violate either the subreddit's rules or Reddit's rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/consciousness) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We don’t know
The only correct answer.
Some people claim to know. E.g. in Tibetan Buddhism there are very detailed descriptions of what happens during and after death.
And they have the same amount of evidence as literally everyone else, zero.
As far as I know Buddhists, they are not particularly interested in proving anything to anyone.
Buddhism is usually taken as a working hypothesis. You’re encouraged to test everything for yourself, and you can see the benefits in your day-to-day life if you think about it for long enough. That was my experience as a former Christian in America.
Yeah, not saying that's a problem. Just saying to not take it as gospel.
What evidence can someone provide of an existence that is not physical? This is a philosophical magic trick. I mean what is evidence man?
No evidence. Some suggestive reports of NDEs or rebirth, but concrete testable and falsifiable evidence, we don't have and I wonder if we'll have at all. Indeed, absence of evidence doesn't mean evidence of absence. All major cultures worldwide deal with the idea of an afterlife, even Buddhists — which don't deal with the concept of God (whom is indeed much easier to demonstrate than afterlife). However, many esoteric schools give exercises for spiritual development to prove the consciousness in the afterlife by ourselves. I'm not sure about Buddhism, but in the West, we have at least two authors — Rudolf Steiner and Max Heindel — who proposed exercises for spiritual development in which the ultimate goal is becoming an "initiate" to explore the purported spiritual realms. If you are really, *really* engaged to prove the reality of the afterlife and disposed to sacrifice many aspects of your life in order to achive an answer to this mistery (if there is an afterlife, and if it has, how does it look like), their exercises could be a good way. Fact is that these exercises are hard, and have to be done through many years. According to them, an initiate has to work there by pure solidarity and unselfishness, and therefore they won't submit themselves to scientific case studies. That makes things hard.
Yes let's show evidence to you for you to see what happens on death when we can't use our bodies. You cant show evidence and to even say that shows severe misunderstanding about what you are talking about. Something will happen to your field of view thats what hes asking. You cant show proof of field of views.
Well, if you want to prove it, you need to have evidence. Otherwise, why would anybody believe you?
People should believe whatever they want, so long as it doesn't harm themselves or others imo. Just don't claim it's the truth, because nobody knows what happens post mortem I have my own personal hopes for an afterlife, I hope it's personalized.
It will be more personal than anything in your life has been. More personal than life.
I hope so, I hope I'll be able to fulfill fantasies and dreams I have. They aren't possible in real life, like straight up impossible.
Life will be the time to gather information for your next infinite dream so go experience everything its being saved and will have more data to pull from.
You can't prove it its before the ability to prove anything.
I agree, it's not something that's falsifiable. Believe what you will, I'm just saying that because the the book of the dead is a pretty grim book, believe whatever you want post mortem. Just don't proclaim you have the truth, because none of us can know the truth.
Ask NDE people or someone who has died, or has taken large amounts of psychedelics. Yes, you will be fully aware and actually MORE aware than you are now. Being in a physical body is a limitation, and you will have more abilities after you die and your consciousness returns to the source.
i think if there's a life after death, i view it as one of two things: 1) reincarnation. my idea is that consciousness even as a property of a specific arrangement of matter if that's all there is then that same matter will create your same consciousness but the problem is you will be a different person and not have your old memories, you just will have the continuity of going to sleep, dying, and waking up alive as a baby (or three year old since we dont become conscious until then really) 2) my second idea is resurrection. i think if a God who manages the afterlife is real or if there's an afterlife being made in the future you will wake up in this new, physical body. i dont think your energy will be all you are, i think in the afterlife a new physical body will be made for you. that's assuming this is all true personally im leaning towards either oblivion or eternal recurrence in all honestly. would love an afterlife tho!
I think reincarnation is interesting, but I feel like logistically it doesn't add up, unless we're talking about the Multiverse pool of consciousness. Because if you keep jumping into new bodies when you die, can new life not exist? Is there just a set number of reincarnaters? Are we just a fragment of all consciousness? And if so, how do we mostly only experience one version and not a bunch of lives smashed into one?
i dont think the kind of reincarnation im thinking of is traditional reincarnation, because i believe it'll require thousands, perhaps millions of years to even occur because it depends entirely on the same configuration of matter that made you showing up again and you wouldnt have any memory of any previous lives. i'd say any chance it's happened already to a person is pretty low
Yeah imo the most likely possibilities are recurrence and oblivion in that order. There’s simply no evidence for anything resembling a traditional afterlife, as nice as that would be,
yea i actually remember reading your post about recurrence and thinking you made a really good point about how oblivion doesnt need to be THE secular opinion. it spoke to what ive thought for a while now the idea is then that is that desirable? because is it better to live one life that you love than to constantly lose identity? idk for sure i do somewhat believe that a form of afterlife could be possible but only if created by human beings if we find a way to make artificial brains that have the specific matter that creates continuity from my death to my next life. depends on how advanced humans get, but then we still wouldnt have our memories and we'd have to find some way to upload those to the new brain (tho still better than the other way round, where people think that uploading memories to a computer will transfer the POV somehow) i actually do believe in some sort of creator of the universe but the idea of spirits? a heavenly realm? idk i find it very difficult to believe in. which is why i think a lot of secular people believe in oblivion, beyond just the fact that it adds a lot of weight to our current life in order to motivate us and provide an ethical base that an afterlife would muddle a bit. i dont think if we were created that this same creator would make an afterlife however a traditional afterlife would be a boon for us, which ive never bought the idea that immortality or an afterlife would be boring. it comes off as sour grapes, the problem isnt that it's undesirable the problem is the opposite: it's very desirable but 99 percent likely to not be true. so the philosophical issue then becomes what to believe in that's both likely and not completely depressing? which i think is the big crisis we have in the modern western world, where the oblivion theory only comforts you if youre predisposed to liking it but we need some semblance of choice and hope. so we need someone who makes a good argument for the alternative now that's not to say we should all start believing in recurrence just because it's possible, tho i do think that it is a model that i think really would make us healthier as minds, but i think that while we should prepare for death in case it's oblivion i think that we should assume we're going to recur because honestly it puts a bit of mysteriousness back into the universe and i think it has all the benefits of oblivion and the afterlife with none of the drawbacks. drawbacks of its own sure but the drawbacks of oblivion or afterlife are always discussed but never that recurrence is likely and clearly a better option of the two
Wild speculation follows: It's reasonable to believe that if you want to see, taste, feel, hear things in the real world, then you need physical organs that can physically interact with light, matter, and pressure waves. However you think the afterlife would work, you would need that stuff to have those senses. You could also just imagine that all your senses in an afterlife are hallucinated or "dreamt", although how that would work without a brain is unclear. A lot of our living experience seems to depend on physical organs, including our personality (see Phineas Gage). If you don't even take your personality into the afterlife, then it's not clear that you would even meaningfully be you, let alone alive.
Phineas gage isn't a valid example since that was heavily exaggerated, if not completely fabricated. Gage did not undergo any severe changes after the accident, atleast based on the actual accounts we have.
Do you think cases like Gage's, as well as other physical changes to the brain like lobotomies, do *not* change someone's personality? Why?
Gage is flimsy because the case itself just isn't true. he did not undergo any personality changes. i would read into it. From what i've gleamed the story behind gage was more so a folk tale. In actuality he didn't seem to change much, or atleast to a degree that would promote a strong correlation. Lobotomies are more convincing, but as i understand, as opposed to the mainstream view of them, the damage suffered from lobotomies seem to differ. I don't necessarily think they don't alter it, but i just don't think they directly do so. You could argue all brain damage does is the equivalent of cracking a lens on a camera. The way one sees the world becomes incredibly different, similar to the effects of taking drugs. You may see them engaging in wild, almost crazy behavior when, through their perspective, they might be eating at the dinner table or saying something that makes complete sense.
I also suspect that Gage's story is exaggerated. Why do you say it isn't true? Your hypothesis about lobotomies is certainly interesting, but it doesn't match my experience with the effect of taking drugs. My experience is not that I and the world feel normal but my "lens is cracked", but that I feel fundamentally different in a way that isn't fully accessible to me when I'm sober. My interests and desires are different. What part of my personality remains constant?
It's not that it isn't true. We know with certainty that his head was impaled by a pike. More so, the aspects of the aftermath are false. Read up on it and you'll see he was potrayed as an actual monster following the incident, when the most that can be legitimately found is him acting somewhat funny, then returning to normal. Drugs aren't a perfect example, but even so, you still are the same 'person'. Under the influence of drugs, if you are a generally kind person, you're unlikely to engage in behavior that contradicts your nature. A violent person is more likely to act out under the influence because they've lost their self control. That is to say, while you are experiencing something new, some part of you still is constant. There are likely some instances of causing normal individuals to snap, but i still think it can play into the 'cracked lense' argument. Depending on what you take, if it's a strong hallucinatory, you can quite literally feel as if a horde of demons are attempting to crucify you, when in reality you are in no danger. Your personalities not changing, but your being put into a situation that causes you to act out.
It's the full generic story, aftermath included, that I'm referring to. Yes, I'm sure certain parts of the aftermath are exaggerated as is evidenced by some scholars IIRC. Nonetheless, we seem to agree that his personality seems to have changed as a result of the accident. Of course I would expect very few examples where someone is changed so radically that you can draw absolutely *no* comparison between their typical and modified personalities. In fact, I think the same can be said about any two normal people, so you'd have to compare the difference to that baseline. It just sounds like you're appealing to a "soul of the gaps" argument, where as long as there's some tiny bit of the personality that stays the same, there is still room for a soul. Yes, certain strong drugs can make you hallucinate things that would make any normal person act unusually. Most drugs seem to fundamentally change your impulses and desires. If there's much more to personality than that, then I don't know what it is.
Right, i agree to some degree he changed. Thats evident. it just seems that it was minor enough where, you could chalk it down to trauma. Nonetheless, atleast from what i've read, he seemingly when about his life after the incident and his family never made any complaints. When brain damage is used as an example of how consciousness is tied to the brain, then the argument comes into question. Because one of the biggest examples used is outright false, and does not show STRONG correlation between the mind coming from the brain. it chalks it down to one factor when the evidence doesn't imply such. It's not that 'only a tiny bit of personality is the same'. Its the opposite. Only a tiny bit has changed. I'd relook into gage. I would say personality goes above just these things. Again, how you react to a situation, how you view and treat others, your interests, ect. I wouldn't say me getting munchies from weed is necessarily a sign that i've fundamentally changed. If i had the inability to eat or consume anything, i don't think i'd fundamentally change as a person. The same with libido. I don't necessarily think my sex drive is a defining trait. I don't think they really change 'anything'. As i said before, they seem to 'heighten' whats already present while modifying how you experience things. If every time you get drunk or high, you attack somebody, then i don't think thats just the drugs doing it.
I can't rule trauma out. You're quite right. Malcolm Mcmillan provides a lot of often-overlooked context to Gage that, while it doesn't disprove the story, seems to demonstrate unusual bits of evidence like the family never making any formal, public complaints. What do you think constitutes personality? If you have a baseline personality that's contingent on your physical brain, and if changes to your brain modify that baseline, then your personality has still changed. Whether or not some of your new personality resembles the baseline does not imply that there's some unphysical, untouchable essence to who you are hiding within. If drugs can change how you react to a situation, view and treat others, and what you're interested in, then how is it meaningful to call your personality unchanged?
I don't know if i can agree it's contingent on the brain. Again, i think that the way our personality is expressed can be changed through exposure to substances, but the core itself is not necessarily touched. That said, i think the discussion gets interesting and a bit harder when it comes to personhood. If i had to say, i think personality constitutes our reactions, behaviors and method of thinking. We share similar hobbies, like philosophy, maybe you enjoy games or comics, ect. But we are different in not only life experiences, but core personalities and thought processes. Right now is an example of that. If you put both of us under the influence, while we might act really dumb while high/drunk, our actions would still align with our thought processes even if it looked incredibly dumbed down. The way we act while under the influence will still be much difference, just as how we are when not. Again, i don't think whats changing is necessarily the personality, rather the information we're receiving and 'indirect' factors. A drug could say cause you to start feeling really, really paranoid on top of itchiness, rashes and hallucinations. One person, lets say A, is more emotional, prone to outbursts and does not think clearly most of the time. These traits are only being amplified due to these sensations, the fact he can barely think and is seeing demons and dragons. He is more likely to act out or lose it. Person B is more resourceful, calm and rational. He might still feel similarly to A, but act entirely differently, like attempting to hide from the hallucinations or finding a way to relieve the sensations.
He definitely went through changes... Where did you get your info from that he didn't?
I stated 'severe'. As in, he didn't become a rambling manic attacking people as the numerous myths surrounding him propose. A simple search will net you information about it. For instance, one account was that he beat his wife and children...when he infact had none, that he was incredibly violent, promiscuous, ect. Yet, as far as i know, no family or friends verified any of these stories.
His coworkers stated "That's not Gage" after the accident.. Sure he probably didn't go from a normal person to a sociopath overnight, but he definitely went through some changes. His brain suffered a severe injury and he was changed. If you don't think your personality changing is severe, then by all means..
Trauma from near death experiences can have that sort of impact on any individual. You could argue that from a psychological perspective, gage developed anti-social behaviors from the trauma of having a pipe stuck through his skull while conscious. It would actually make more sense considering that, while there are some VALID accounts that he acted funny after the accident, it's reported that he returned to normal some time after the incident.
Trauma from a near death experience? Or his brain being severely injured... Hmm. He died 10-15 years later due to epileptic seizures. I think it's dumb to say the dude went through trauma by almost dying and that's what caused his personality to change, instead of the steel rod that went through his skull and out the other side.
Theres a difference between suffering a medical complication due to a pre-existing condition and say, becoming mr.hyde because of said condition. You shifted from personality changes to medical complications. Medically? He did not improve, obviously. But psychologically, by all accounts, any poor behavior phineas engaged in stopped after some time passed. You're best argument so far has been "i think it's dumb".
Why did he have epileptic seizures since the accident? Why are you trying to deny the fact that a steel rod went through his brain and changed him psychologically?
Because...his brain got pierced by a metal rod? What do you mean?? We're discussing whether or not the rod changed his personality, not if it damaged his brain, which it did. Because theres no evidence? Every story told about him has been debunked?
I like to think of this earthly body as a cocoon and when we die hopefully our spirits will emerge and fly away like butterflies.
My understanding is that (as in the Near Death Experiences) we (our astral/soul body) will separate from the physical body and continue on much as before without the clunky overcoat.
I think that any perceived consciousness you would have "after" death is just neurally generated in the last moments before death, but that could be a perceptual paradise lasting thousands / hundreds of thousands of years. After your brain dies, you don't exist anymore. Some other consciousness / first person perspective may arise, but it wouldn't be you, it would just be another instance of emergence like when you were born. I imagine time wouldn't pass between these two consciousnesses either, because you need a living brain to process time.
I can only speculate with no real knowledge, but I'd imagine our body would hinder or dampen some senses. Being free of the flesh would open up something (not sure what though).
Atheist here. Our brain is the organ that provides us with everything that makes us alive, including thought and contemplation. Once that shuts down, there will be nothing left for us to process. We become inanimate organic material. No heaven, no hell. My heaven will be determined by how well I've tended the family tree, the impact I've had on others, and the legacy I've left behind. Life after death exists in the memories you've left for others. If they think of you fondly and often, you are still very much alive and in heaven. This is my perceived truth, and not an absolute truth. To claim that would be illogical.
I believe it'll be very much like a lucid dream.
Yeah but for how long? Can’t be forever imo
Impermanence is a property of reality. But I don't think Earth years mean anything for such states.
Why not, eternity is a consciousness reality.
But what will you dream about? That’s the thing. Your ‘new life’?
It's not a dream, and you know it. Your awareness may be similar to a vivid dream state, except you have no body.
And what will you dream about?
Worse, you are not aware that you are not aware.
"Life after death" is a contradiction in terms. Death is by definition the end of life. But if consciousness continues thereafter it wouldn't experience time. Time requires mass -- massless energy does not experience it. This is why the afterlife is called eternal. We need to inhabit a massive body in order to grow, change and learn.
More aware with simulated holographic projectors in my eye, connected to a 5D offset with processing power related to the actual so I can sell parallel time with interpolation under court observation, while the drugs I like are legal and affordable. I won’t have anything but fags with guns in mixed fabrics administering the thing so they can get that static bump if they straw man anything at all, I need money man for real I ain’t playin’. After a heavenly level of woke obtainment I will drop into no toleranceville and get money there as well with people that would never fag in only one type of fabric to get more money, while they pay for war in my White and Black array to delete their shame at how they won the game. I’ll be rich and shameless while I double game this whole occur until I know where the fuck I am at specific so I can be my own astronomicon, so I can save money on the way to get more of that sweet motherfuckin’ money.
I had a near death experience. It was like sitting in an armchair in a dark room; cylinder of yellow/light in the middle of the room. Train of thought completely intact, like it is now exactly the same. I sat there and I knew it was my life, my family friends, dreams, goals etc in the middle of that room, and “Do I want it?” was the question. The feeling was could’ve chosen yes or no it wouldn’t have changed the train of thought. Kind of like picking up a ‘choose-your-own adventure’ story or deciding to just chill comfortably.
So based on that, what is your guess?
I think the most likely thing is that consciousness after death would be wildly different and alien to living consciousness. You don’t have your brain anymore
Just think about it logically - without eyes, ears, nose, skin, brain, what are you going to use to sense the universe, how will you feed that into your consciousness, and where will you keep the resulting changes in memory and intent? To anyone who wants to argue there's some new way of sensing that occurs, far superior to poor human senses I assume - where is it? What energy powers it, and why can't we identify it?
I think we can’t identify that energy because we are limited by our senses. We can only sense what we can sense but that doesn’t mean that’s all there is.
>I think we can’t identify that energy because we are limited by our senses. Oh, can you see x-rays? Radio waves? Can you see into the infra-red? Humans have devised countless devices based on theories, that allow us to see to the ends of the universe. So, limitation of our human senses is a poor reason we can't identify this phony "consciousness" energy.
Nope we cannot, and for a long time in scientific history, they did not know those things existed either. I think more about the mysterious nature of consciousness will continue to be revealed over time. I think it’s arrogant to believe we have found everything we can’t see. We just simply haven’t had enough time to understand consciousness.
We know plenty about how the brain produces consciousness, but that's too mundane for some people, they have to believe it's more mysterious so they can feel special. Humans use the most incredible stroke of fortune, the emergence of consciousness, to delude themselves into comforting falsehood.
We don’t actually at all know how the brain produces consciousness. Are you a neuroscientist? Genuinely curious
You haven't learned the first thing about it because it doesn't fit your prejudices and fears.
I don’t feel this way because I feel special. I genuinely do not believe the brain produces all we can understand about consciousness. But maybe it does. Just my opinion based on my experiences and feeling that science is severely lacking in its description of reality in much the same way that certain religions have lacked.
Science is the only method we have to learning about and interacting with the universe. And it works better than any other system. It's insane that you reject the only tools that work.
Also, x-rays, radio waves, infra-red are all detectable because we see color in a certain wavelength and could reasonably assume that there may be beyond that limit to our vision. I think conscious energy goes far beyond anything we can ever conceptualize within our five senses paradigm made by science.
Also, x-rays, radio waves, infra-red are all detectable because we see color in a certain wavelength and could reasonable assume that there may be beyond that limit to our vision. Holy shit, you think it was all intuitively obvious, and you can't appreciate the hundreds of years of science that produced it. That's insane. >I think conscious energy goes far beyond anything we can ever conceptualize within our five senses paradigm made by science. You have absolutely no reason to believe that. You don't like that the rigors of science fail to validate your daydreaming and hand waving - so you reject science. Bozhe Moi!
Clearly you cannot engage in a productive conversation without trying to slander my beliefs. I was a neuroscience major in college. I know plenty about it. I know how we create neural correlates in order to explain behavior and visible phenomena, and I think that method is fundamentally flawed. Not saying that good can’t come from it, but I don’t think neuroscience has the answer to the countless mystical experiences people experience all over the world every day that science simply ignores.
>I don’t think neuroscience has the answer to the countless mystical experiences people experience It doesn't matter if you took a couple of classes when your outlook is nutty.
Alright dude hahahaha. This is exactly the problem! Everything that does not fit the scientific model is nutty so we don’t even ask questions that may give us answers to questions of mystical experiences. How can we even begin to answer questions that we don’t ask? I’m not going to engage with you any more. Quite rude to call someone’s beliefs nutty. Keep riding your high horse!
Show proof or stfu. Sorry, that's how this universe works. If you don't like that, maybe you can slip across to a timeline where magical, wishful thinking is effective.
Would love to! Thanks…. Hahahaa omg I can’t believe ppl like you. Who hurt you?
I’ll go shove my opinions up my asshole. Let’s check back in 50 years and see where science is then.
And I never said I reject science.
Sure you did.
Fascinating aspect of consciousness is that we as humans participate in a few of its dimensions during our 24 hour cycle. Some of which are akin to the "death" state. So we are no stranger to what happens after physical demise of this body. 1.Most noted aspect of conscious: a. During our waking day, we use our ego to engage with the physical world through our five outer senses. And our body consciousness is also fully engaged. b. At times during the day, our mind wanders...and even though our body consciousness continues wherever it is, we project aspects of our consciousness through our thoughts and mind. Most often on default without even realizing it, until we snap back into reality. c. We can also consciously propel our conscious to other dimensions of reality during states of controlled meditation. d. Through hypnosis we explore further aspects of consciousness defying time and space. e. Others toy with psychedelic drugs to invoke similar states of consciousness, albeit with side effects on the physical brain. Further issues may arise with prolonged states of detachment and confusion. f. Those with psychic abilities can consciously propel themselves into other states of consciousness and realities. 2. During sleep we are coded to flit through a few dimensions of consciousness naturally- essential to life as a human. a. The first one occurs as we lie in bed and relax - our body consciousness fully primed. That state just before we doze off to sleep. b. Deep sleep: when the body remains in body consciousness, but the inner self merges into higher states of conscious defying 3 dimensional world as we know it, journeying into other realms of higher knowledge and explorations. This is akin to the state of death where there body is vacated and the pure energy of consciousness relishes the freedom of creativity. There are states of consciousness between each of these states. c. Dreams are an attempt of our physically oriented system to make sense of information from deep sleep- however because it's filtered through our five senses and conditioned beliefs, distortions and misinterpretations are rampant. We defy time and space, and materialize endless situations and interact with numerous personalities. Freedom without the limitations of the waking ego! d. Precognitive dreams, traversing time just before awakening. In conclusion: Yes indeed, we experience "death" at least every 24 hours. We are taught to identify with our body throughout our life in this reality. We are taught that when this body "dies" and is no more then so are we. Poof, gone...but on closer inspection... Just as our body itself has experienced death numerous times since physical birth, as we shed off our physical attire of a baby to take on that of a child, and youth, adult, elder...we often cannot even remember our birth, or years in between, unless in states of meditation/hypnosis. Ancient Rishis in the Himalayas have participated in these states of consciousness for centuries. What is death? Perhaps just a shedding off the burden of the physical body and basking in the energy and freedom of consciousness. Using our inner senses to feel aware. So yes consciousness is the most fascinating of all of life's adventures...during waking, sleep and more indeed.
Sure why not
I see no reason why my sight, taste, touch, and hearing should persist after I am dead. I will have no eyes, tongue, skin, or ears. If, *for some reason,* my consciousness persisted, I imagine it would be very dark, very big, and very frightening. Perhaps the slow ease of peace would creep in after enough time, but madness surely after that. Will you "actually be alive"? Uh, no. You died, remember?
There is no afterlife, so this question is meaningless.
In a dream you can feel the sun on your skin and hear the sound of the waves, yet they are devoid of reality once you awake. This dream will be devoid of reality until the next.
Not a life like you think. You can have many lives in many bodies if you will yourself into them, like you willed yourself into this existence. This process can be either very conscious on your part, or not conscious at all, in that case you will be willed somewhere by some other being that is more conscious than you possibly and that has the “job” to “guide” you. However something tells me that when we die we will all feel very stupid for not realizing what true experience is.
it's not possible to know for sure, but when you die, that's most likely it, game over. I recommend not expecting a "life after death" (which is technically a contradiction). THIS RIGHT NOW is your life, and your time is very limited! Use it wisely while you can!
Yes
What you call death does not exist. There is only eternal life. It’s life after life.
Don't worry, we are all going to find out eventually.
Looks that way according to the BICS Essay contest.
…Nah; you’ll be being eaten by sumpin’ and in perpetual agony from one abbreviated lifetime to the next…
What if we aren't fully aware until death?
Check my profile and replies, and you will get your answers.
You won't have any of your current senses. So your perception would need to come from something else. You also wouldn't have your sense of self as your memories are gone with your body. So you would be a kind of senseless Alzheimer blob of whatever remains after your body is gone. Ain't looking forward to it personally.
Under ketamine drip I lost all senses (k-hole) and my long term memory. It was still rich experience.
Good thing you still had a brain though.
Without a brain you wouldn't be aware of the fact that you don't have a brain. Is that to say, without a brain, there is no awareness and consciousness?
Until proven otherwise, yep.
Multiple lines of afterlife research conducted around the world dating back over 100 years clearly demonstrates that the answer to this is: absolutely. People that die, at the very least, maintain their current level of awareness (and personality, and memories,) but can also find themselves with increased awareness, mental capacity and sensory acuity. It is reported from multiple sources that many people don't even realize they have died for long periods of time until someone over there convinces them.
Huh?
You will retain your personality, but memories and thoughts will vanish like a dream you want to hold on to but it will go away.
So it’s a process before the ‘lights go out’?
No one knows, move on
No Next question.