QuantumTheory

Dear friends,

As agnostics how do you feel about the philosophical and spiritual belief in a human soul and an afterlife? Many of you would have your opinions on this question. This is your opportunity to let yourself be heard and to learn from other people's perspectives.

I hope this discussion will be worthwile to you, QuantumTheory.

__________________
"I do not know what I may appear to the world, but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me".

Isaac Newton 1643-1727

to_hobbes

Most branches of Buddhism reject the concept of the soul because you are always changing, and the definition of the soul is the part of you that never changes. If no part of you is ever "unchanging", how can there be a soul?

I like this point of view, especially because it is consistent with the scientific attitude that anything that is undetectable is not worth considering until it can be detected in some way.

The biggest problem is, there is no clear definition on what is the soul, any more than there is a clear definition on what is God. So my opinion is (of course) the agnostic one: I don't know if it exists, and I will never know, and I'm fine with that.

I like to say, "Come back when you have a clear definition of what the soul is, it might be worth talking about it then."

__________________
---

(By the way, it's all in your head.)

xxkayxx

Personally, it was only recently that i started to believe in this really, but i think its all a somewhat delusional way for people to feel better about dying, and for them to think that what they go through here on earth, is all worth it in the end. It's another belief of mine that the majority of people wouldnt be able to function if they didnt have these beliefs of an afterlife. But what people choose to believe in is their choice. Religion has its way of guiding people and setting standards, which i think someof which are helpful, but i dont think you should have to have a religion to have morals. People need to learn to be able to separate the two. Not saying any arent able, but from what i've seen, highly religious people seem to base their whole being, and center their whole lives around their religion. I was a christian for some time, and in that time period i realized i started to disvalue my life, since i figured well , if theres such a great place after i die, then what is the point in going through all this crap? Now i realize that my life has a time limit, so i should just do what i feel is right and live life to the fullest i guess.

__________________
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing

to_hobbes

I saw "No Country for Old Men" yesterday, and if you don't believe in the afterlife, that movie is really sad. One of the characters and his wife dies, and I would like to see them re-united in heaven. And I've seen other movies which made me feel the same way, so I can definitely relate to the desire for an afterlife.

But I also don't like the idea of an afterlife. Living for eternity? Even if it was in a state of perfect bliss, I think I would get tired of it eventually and just want to experience pure nothingness. Not feeling anything, not even feeling the passing of time; that would be more blissful, I would think.

My mom tried to tell me, if you are in heaven, then you never get tired of it. But how is that possible unless your mind is continuously "refreshed" to make you forget what you have experienced and renew the feeling of blissfulness. After infinite time, your mind would have been refreshed so many times that you wouldn't even be yourself anymore. Then, would you really exist in heaven, or would it be some "thing" that just felt good?

__________________
---

(By the way, it's all in your head.)

xxkayxx

Hmm, this is why I've always questioned whether a heaven could even exist, as in a place of "bliss". Besides the part which you explained about how you would have to forget the passage of time, which would dehumanize you in some way, in order for there to be "bliss", i'm thinking you would also have to not be able to feel angry, jealous, sad, which would just make you less and less yourself, so it would almsot be like not even you, but a robot. I'd rather just have nothingness too, than have to go to heaven. It's not such a great place if you really think about it.Well, its either that way, or heaven is so great our human minds cant possibly see it for all its worth?? Based on my logic though, i just cant even imagine such a place actually existing any more than little pink elephants on the moon ^^

__________________
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing

to_hobbes

I can't imagine it either, which is why there is probably no way you could retain any human traits and still live for eternity. Of course, I'm sure heaven (if it exists) is better than hell (if that exists). Pink elephants would be nice to

Devolving into a robot that does nothing but feel good... reminds me of that Hedonism-bot from Futurama who is programmed to do nothing but drink wine and enjoy himself all the time.

Whatever. To me, both heaven and hell is on earth in this lifetime, but we can use our wits to try and avoid the hellish parts. And after this life, it's like finally disappearing from heaven.

__________________
---

(By the way, it's all in your head.)

xxkayxx

It kinda reminds me of the characters in The Giver, except besides not feeling pain, they also dont feel happiness. In my opinion, if more people DIDN'T believe in an afterlife, I think they would cherish their lives on earth more and possibly be more conscience about their decisions and its effects on them and the others around them. Not saying it's going to work for everyone, but it definately did for me.

__________________
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing

romansh

QT
What are your defintions of the human soul and after life?
What is the evidence for such things?

I think these would be 'better' questions.

but to answer your question:
I feel, the whole notion is nonsensical without any evidence to debate.

__________________
There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. ........... Douglas Adams

Nick Treklis

Do I believe in a soul as defined by the religion of Christianity? Absolutely not. Same goes for an after life. My definition of a soul is something that one possesses when he becomes enlightened about the true nature of Ultimate Reality. With that said the vast majority of the human species is rather soulless. As for the term after life, it doesn't make much sense to begin with. If life continues after the death of our body then how is the cessation of bodily functions any more significant than your body's composition changing on any other given day? The fact of the matter is that it wouldn't be so there would be no point in calling it an after life, you could simply call it life. Otherwise we should start calling any moment in the future an after life, e.g. life after today, life after me turning 50, life after me running a marathon, life after me being diagnosed with cancer, etc. etc.

shadowind

i think the word soul is missused, i don't think of it as a literal thing, but as a representation of a person beyound their day to day actions and looks and such. so no, i think we're chemical machines, and when we die its the end to our awareness.

__________________
remember "for mere impulse of appetite is slavery, while obedience to a law which we prescirbe to oursleves is liberty"-rousseau: the concept of the general will "if we can not reconcile all opions, then let us endeavour to unite all hearts."-?"to be is to be perceived"-? "‘We can be as honest as we are ignorant. If we are, when asked what is beyond the horizon of the known, we must say that we do not know’-Robert G. Ingersoll