What happens after death?

Death is just another path, one that we all must take. The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all turns to silver glass, and then you see it. White shores, and beyond, a far green country under a swift sunrise.
At this point does it matter? Accept what you want, and as long as you stick to western values then you need not worry about judgment after death

Why have a family at all? They will only add to your worries, and if you lose them, you will be miserable for the rest of your life.

How do you know it?

Where is the evidence?

I suggest you kill yourself.

But the evidence does not point to what you say. What backs up your claim?

It was a question, not me shilling a way of life.

slide thread. its also empirical. the empyrean is god

Bump

Gandalf backs up my claim, you niggerfaggot. The spoiled bit is the important part. Choose what you want, just don't be a degenerate faggot. Western Values has built a grand civilization (despite its current imperfections), and you do yourself a disservice to stray from them.

But I didn't ask what I should do. I asked what happens after death, and despite your apparent butthurt you have not substantiated your claim of going to a green beach or whatever you said.

What are your opinions on the Holocaust? Please respond with your favorite Hitler may may.

Sad it didn't happen. Will you answer my question now?

Fuck, man. You're legitimately a complete retard.

Nice Hitler may may. You don't belong here, get the fuck out.

But you did gave an answer, you just haven't backed it up yet. Why are you so mad?

That doesn't answer my question though.

I get that this is low energy bait, but what's your purpose here?

My purpose is to obtain an answer to my question. What happens after death?

Can you prove that's your actual reason to be here?
How would one verify an answer?

Consciousness "resides" everywhere, it's a feature of the universe. There's nothing specific to the brain that makes it uniquely able to "host a consciousness", it's atoms and molecules just like your desk. All matter is conscious to some level.

Also, your consciousness bubble is not really a bubble, it interacts imperceptibly with the "outside". There's lots of instances where a death of a close relative can be felt at a distance, which is usually rationalized away with some "scientific" bullshit.

I'm still responding cause goddamn these digit, tho….

I dunno man, I also asked on .pl and /polk/. Do you want a screen?

What is your evidence of conciousness being everywhere? When people lose conciousness, they report as if time simply skipped to when they regained it. Sorta like sleeping without dreams. Thanks to science we know this is because the areas of the brain that govern conciousness simply cease to work.

With brain death those areas stop forever. Isn't it safe to say our conciousness stops forever as well?

The local religion would hold those digits as a sign of divine favor. If such is the case, you should answer my question.

Having a family primes you to self sacrifice and forward thought, which is one of the basis of building a civilization.
Why bother is the attitude of nihilists, which is a rejection of natural law because it gives up on self preservation. If you really think "there's no purpose so why bother?" then practically apply it and kill yourself.
Those who actually care will live on, either genetically or in their imprint on others, while those who don't will be forgotten with nothing to carry on their legacy.

thesun.co.uk/living/2123380/researchers-claim-that-humans-have-souls-which-can-live-on-after-death/

It's not something that can be empirically observed, you retard. It's theoretical at best, and usually falls within quantum space. Even if you believe your edgy shit, this worldview does not lend itself to any positive community efforts since it leads to nihilism which leads to hedonism.

I want reddit to leave with their fedora horse shit.

Not really, actually. This thread reeks of sliding though, and I hope this is more than just a ruse cruise and instead just some faggot hoping to find answers in the only place he unwisely generally finds his answers.

I don't have an opinion myself, but what do you think about out-of-body experiences?
Also, does your question only refer to what happens to YOU after death?

Why care about legacy or civilization if we're all going to die anyway? How we're rembered, genes, any impact will be irrelevant because if you're not concious, you won't be able to observe nor much less care about any of those things. So for all intents and purposes you're stressing yourself out for nothing.

Interesting point of view from Robert Penrose, but the article does not cite any study nor evidence that backs up his claim.

So we're back to square 1.

I had a near death experience from a three story fall. All of my ribs were broken, my spine broken in several places, my lungs collapsed; I couldn't breathe. I was 100% sure I was dying. I saw very bright lights even though it was night time. The strongest emotion I felt was regret; it was stronger than even the pain. I regretted how I'd lived my life. I realized at that moment that a higher consciousness had been communicating with me my entire life, but I willfully ignored it so that I could follow my impulses and lusts. I became terrified because I knew I was about to answer for that: to be judged.

I woke up in the hospital two days later; a neighbor had been smoking a cig outside and heard me fall, and there's literally a hospital nextdoor to my apartment complex. I was lucky. During my 4 month hospital stay, I was up most nights studying religions, sorcery e.g. divination through drug use, the occult, the nature of good and evil. It seems that when you use drugs to contact other consciousness, the entity will often lie to you. It's not reliable. The Rosicrucians got a lot of things right, but their focus on unraveling and analyzing everything seemed to be impractical. I finally settled on fundamentalist Christianity, because it focuses on faith (the most powerful form of contact) and lifestyle. I don't need to know the mysteries of the universe, I'm sure more will become known after death. I just want to minimize the regrets I have when I get there.

The fact that there's no clear demarcation as to where it starts. How many neurons, which kind of structure and so forth.
For example, I believe animals are also conscious to some level. Picture all living things ordered by size\complexity of their nervous system. Where does consciousness start on the scale? Nobody knows. And again, there's no fucking midiclorians, the brain is made of atoms same as anything outside of it.

Pagans used to believe that places had a "spirit". Like a bog, a valley, a hill and so forth. Something you could feel. I see consciousness as a mirror through which you can experience reality and give value to sensations, ideas and so forth.

That's the best I could come up with.

Good sources for starting on that?

It's unknowable user. Humans evolved to perceive a measly three dimensions and a tiny spectrum of light and sound waves. We can only assume that the rest of imperceptible reality would change everything else we assume about what we think we know.

So stop worrying about what can't be known and get back to work at the obvious struggle in front of you of giving your best contribution to the greatness of your race, tribe, and family.

What happened before birth?

You don't die.

That's the problem.
God never sleeps.

I like to think the afterlife is a lot like before I was conceived - nothing to worry about. I would prefer heaven but I doubt it exists.

wew

Near death experiences are caused by brain activity (gamma waves) which sharply rises shortly after cardiac arrest.

google.com/amp/io9.gizmodo.com/a-new-scientific-explanation-for-near-death-experiences-1110395345/amp

So unless you can prove otherwise, your anecdotal evidence is shoddy…

But that's a fallacy user. Just because we don't know where it starts doesn't mean we can't tell what is concious and what isn't. For example, a human brain's conciousness is identifiable by gamma waves. Since a rock has neither a brain nor gamma wave activity, we can safely say it isn't concious.

"It is no stranger to be born twice than to be born once. Everything in nature is resurrection." – Voltaire

I was a wrangler for a few years. Worked with more than one severely retarded kid that would just smash their face as hard as they could any chance they could, and that was their entire existence from young to old. Whatever your overarching religion, worldview, or philosophy, it must apply to everyone who ever existed as well. Consciousness is an illusion, any type of brain damage, no matter how slight, can change your personality and how you utilize your senses and process info coming in all the way to how express it. It can turn your old you into something you don't recognize or even remember.

...

Why did you fall?
Did you jump?

Alan watts
/thread

As far as we know, nothing refutes the claim that chemicals in our are unconcious entities acting by the dictates of the laws of physics. It's the most likely to be real of all current hypothesis.

Why are fedoras so hypocritical?

I don't think it's something anyone can know scientifically, which is why speculation, intuition, mysticism and perhaps drugs are the best we've got. I like to pray and speculate.

Once you see the fabric of the universe, you see why free will only exists through god. Only god decides things.

Everyone else is a limb of god.

Because death isn't irrelevant, and gives purpose to those living even when you pass on.
Those who came before me gave me conscience, and I wouldn't be there without them. I need to pay my respects and carry on their legacy. Why embrace the death cult of nihilism when you can live to pursue the good life? Losing family is painful, I know this first hand, but even worse is being the eternal neet who can never connect with another human.

The study followed the scientific method. How is it conjecture? Why is she not a scientist?

It's so goddamn fun though

But neither does the rock exist outside your perception of it. Reality is defined by perception. For example, there's so much infrared light emanating from a stove that it would blind you, but you just don't see it.

Who knows what we can't detect with our instruments?

You seem to be under the impression that my post was mocking, when it was intended to be celebratory.

I'm a big fan of Steven Anderson, who has a popular following on youtube. He preaches hard against degeneracy, and this appeals to my Holla Forums sensibilities. He's extremely bluepilled on racemixing, but it's OK to disagree with the church in fundamentalist Christianity; it's a very fractious religion. Nobody on earth has it 100% correct.

All experiences are caused by brain activity, the entire human experience is a coherence created by the brain; there are in actuality no solid objects; atoms are mostly composed of empty space. The binary nature of reality is hidden beneath the quantum waves of space and time. The scientific method is a simplification for understanding the world we perceive, not the world which is. But we are all human and it is useless to delve deeply beyond the bounds of what we are built to understand.

This is a question which man has been trying to answer since the dawn of recorded human history. Unfortunately, you will not find empirical evidence of something which cannot be experienced empirically. The good news is, great minds have struggled to answer your question for millennia. Starting with first principles, you can use logic and reason to try to make sense of the universe and your place in it (among other things). Some men walk this road and find God, some find an abyss, and others find everything in-between.

I would leave you with my own observation. I am not aware of any civilization which does not incorporate some form of spiritualism in their culture. Even primitive tribes in the middle of the Pacific Ocean or the far reaches of the Amazon are not entirely atheistic. I believe this is because human beings instinctively know there is more to the human experience than what can be experienced physically. Take the webm provided as an example.

I thought it was celebratory.
Actually I thought it was 50/50. :^)

My VPN changed my IP, but I am the user with the near death experience, btw.

I understand. Please pardon my autism.

Guanine, Cytosine, Thymine, Adenine are just new, slightly more functional names for The Four Archangels, my dude.

But your ancestors are dead, they are incapable of perceiving or caring about whatever respects you pay them. Your leers will die too, and so will you, so you aren't really doing anything.

Why care about a good life at all? All suffering matters as little as does happiness. Everything related to you, as far as you are concerned, is temporary.

So why care.

Except we know more and more about it as time passes. We didnt know about gamma waves before, now we do. And since so far it's the only thing the evidence points out, why not believe it until further evidence proves otherwise?

I agree with all EXCEPT

They are mass, held together by energy.

True, we can only work with the things we percieve via sense or instrument. I'd be silly to believe there is a flying spagetti God who controls all just because it theoretically could exist. Thus, we work with what little we can gather, and right now we've gathered that death is the end of conciousness.

Thanks user, I know the guy, I'll give him a real listen.

CS Lewis talks are fucking great.

Well, we need that magic in our lives.
I've been a hardcore atheist, seeing everything as a result of materialism greatly amplified my depression and my existential angst. That kind of worldview is so incompatible with life that it sucks the beauty out of anything, it's an awful existence to live.

I finally decided I'd had enough and started questioning consciousness and researching religions. There's no fucking way the ultimate truth about reality would make me, its fractal product, miserable. Conversely, the stronger my faith gets now, the better I feel.

But you were "dead" before you were alive, and "new" consciousnesses are emerging all the time.

From everyone's personal experience, life has succeeded death. You were dead before your birth, and now you are alive.

Rationally, there's no reason to discount reincarnation.

That's right. All aspects of reality are binary. The physicist knows that Mass and Energy are two sides of the same equation. The computer scientist optimizes his algorithms with respect to Space, or Time, but never both. A human can be Male or Female. Literally every aspect of reality is divided in two parts.

Both are true, technically. If I remember right the space between electrons and whatnot is more comparable in scale to our solar system than the every day spatial relations that we are used to.
tl;dr: They are mass, held together across *relatively** yawning chasms of empty space, by energy.

That is a fallacy though user. Just because many people believe in something, doesn't mean it's true. The holocaust for example.

Wew lad.

Not even remotely my implication lad.

Well, every new life has a completely new brain. Which would suggest a conciousness is created along with the brain, and then dies with it.

Except for reality, which as far as we know has 4 dimensions.

Then please clarify famalam. I am retarded I know.

No, the brain can be otherwise healthy and functional, and consciousness can be "deactivated" for a time, for example with general anesthesia or deep sleep, only to return to activity.

Furthermore, the human body changes and develops throughout its lifespan, but consciousness retains a continuity.

Why don't consciousnesses die during gaps in continuity?

The point is that materialism is just a dogmatic denial of the subjective in which the mystery of consciousness is hand-waved away. There is no reason why we shouldn't be p-zombies and lack consciousness altogether.

Furthermore there's a huge body of research related to verification of reincarnation accounts that is also hand-waved away by materialists.

Materialists are simply dogmatic zealots who refuse to acknowledge the hard problem of consciousness.

But it's two groups: there are the dimensions we can perceive, the "x, y, z" coordinate axes: 3-dimensional space. Then there is time, "t". Two groups.
Time is not a single dimension, and you can "unfold" additional dimensions from the time axis. A conscious being in the physical world has a perception which can view x-number of axes, all originating from Time. Physicists often produce 3D projections of 4D objects, but its a mind bender because we are only built to understand 4 physical dimensions. However we can garner an understanding of the difference between 3D and 4D by looking at something we can easily understand, 2D vs. 3D, then applying those differences in an analogous way. This YouTube video uses this method to reason up to 10 physical dimensions, all unfolding from "Time", which is really just the way we experience dimensions we cannot perceive.

...

Probably my fault for being a melodramatic occult faggot.
"Matter" and "Spirit" are just density settings on the same scale. Angels as they are known in hermeticism are 100% bound by the same set of cosmic laws as base chemical reactions pun not intended.

Personality transient is horrifically malleable. Consciousness is ineluctable.

meant to say "built to understand 3 physical dimensions"

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_of_memory

lurk more you fucking faggot

Consciousness is an illusion. It's a mechanical function.
It's a seat in a movie theatre, where you think you control the movie or a character in the movie.
But that's the big lie.

Can you explain what the hell you mean with this?

You're a mind control victim, buddy. Your emotions were manipulated with the intention of causing you a trauma that would make you susceptible to converting to fundamentalist Christianity where you could be used by that "higher power."

Some people that you see really are just animals, mortals. When they die, the decomposition of the body will also be the decomposition of the soul. Others can access a higher plane, and can thereby welcome into their bodies an immortal spirit which, in a certain sense, they have always been in the first place.

Woops, was not meant to post that. Was meant to put that in a new tab.
Man i'm tired.

And there's the hand-waving.

I wish.

...

See this user's post, he explains it more plainly than I would

The one thing worse than knowing that death will come, is knowing that you will never sleep.

This view undermines itself–if our brains are just chemicals, there is no reason to believe they can detect the true nature of reality, which means there is no reason to believe that our brains are right about our brains being chemicals.

for

Man, my formatting is fucked tonight.

Angels are differential systems that we do not clearly see.
They exist in a complex algorithm of systems.

wew

ever fall asleep and just wake up? no dreams just black for a split second then you are awake. imagine that nothingness but forever. this is what we know with our current understanding of the cosmos. but do not be scared of something that only happens once yodo!

Do chemicals not also do the same, in their own context?

No, I'm a very well-educated man with several degrees in the sciences who had a significant life event which caused me to reevaluate my priorities. But thanks for your concern.

ever be dead and just wake up? no dreams just black for a split second then you are born. this is what we know with our current understanding of the cosmos.

So we agree?

Here is an even better version of that same video.

We probably did the whole time, yeah.

Not the same guy but I know what he means. Who you take yourself to be is a flux, like a plateau. In order to maintain your present form as you understand yourself to be, you must actively direct energy into your soul in order to maintain that form. Whenever you learn something new and can see more things in the world, you change your personality because you indelibly alter the way you will tend to interact with the world. Think of who "you are" as a spinning top - so long as the top spins, it is the same person. But with this top, when you spin it to a higher frequency, it actually gains new form in higher dimensions.

Do you think you're proposing a contradiction to my claim? The number one evidence is that you really think you met a "higher power" and had a premonition about making a moral choice before a significant life event. You're not that unique or that special. Neither does this contradict your knowledge of Christianity, but you should be aware of how your religious sentiments might be manipulated and perverted by Satan. As you know, Satan was not beyond trying to subvert Christ, and his demons readily admit to Christ's salvific power. It is only sensible they would work to undermine Christianity from within, as they might be doing with you.

Simply educate yourself on mind control. As a Christian, even if you are not a victim, you must recognize your duty to help deliver these children from demonic evil. And if you will not… then who cares what you are either way? As God declares in Revelation, if you are lukewarm you will be spewed out because He does not know you.

www.whale.to/b/springmeier_formula.html

It's more, you're an actor with a role in that movie. But at the end of the day - it's your role and done your way.
There's this tug of war between being the cog in the machine. But does the cog do the work? Or does the machine tell you what to do?

That is because conciousness is governed by a specific part of the brain, not it's entirety. So when we are in deep sleep, it stops because that part of the brain has also stopped. Also, the memories that make us think we are continuous are chemical as well.

Until evidence proves otherwise, all we can work with are three dimensions. There could be a billion and it wouldn't matter if we can't even confirm it by using the scientific method.

Nice fallacy user.

So far, everything we do is based on such an assumption. It is the most likely to be true simply because no better alternative has surfaced.

It's literally all we can work with. We at least know we exist.

It's like being a puppy and the ball thrower at the same time.

If quantum immortality is true, you will subjectively experience living forever.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_suicide_and_immortality

I never claimed I was, in fact, my experience was typical and leads me to believe that we all have the same subroutine which is triggered by a mortal wounding event. I agree with everything else you said, though, and that link looks very interesting. I'll read through it, thanks.

Is anyone else here planning on signing up for cryonics?

That gif makes me legit sleepy.

The game will be whatever the player decides.

Were waiting for you on EndChan come home.

So far, no evidence
There is evidence for death to be the end of conciousness
So it make the most sense to believe that until proven otherwise

Answer my question, then maybe.

But there's no reason any of that should generate a subjective continuity of experience, or subjectivity at all.

Put another way, consider a teleporter that disassembles you into atoms and sends you to a remote destination and re-constructs you.

You would be dead for a time and then either alive again, or still dead.

If the newly teleported you is still "you", then some mysterious identity has transferred, and reincarnation is real.

If the newly teleported you is not still "you", then identity is proved to have a substance beyond the material, because it did not transfer with the material.

So you see, you're just caught. Identity subjectivity is not reducible. It exists independently of the material.

Current information suggests the teleported entity would still be you, with your conciousness, because it was created with the exact same atoms.

But if identity is coordinate with matter, then your identity subjectivity should fade and be replaced as your body ingests and incorporates new matter.

Not necessarily, as long as the matter responsible for conciousness stays the same, the rest doesn't matter.

So if that magic dead brain matter were to end up in the brain matter of a newly born animal, would reincarnation occur?

The thesis of that site is that cannabis prevents mind control, libertine sexuality equals freedom, i.e. polygamy, adultery. Genders should be equal, and the man leading the relationship is a curse on humanity. This entire website is demonic to the core, encourages Weimar-style degeneracy, mind-damaging psychedelic use, and other ridiculous prescriptions and proscriptions.

If I were to attempt to find the crux of my issue with all this, is that, it does not seek to reign in the base desires of a human, but rather engage and amplify them in a way which is anti-moral-establishment. Have you ever had children? Children lie, cheat, and steal by their nature. They do bad without being taught. They require correction in order to learn good behaviors. Human nature should be reigned in, not let loose with unempathetic abandon. I know this with every ounce of my fiber. Thanks for the link, but I think YOU are the one who has been mind controlled by Satan.

The mian thing I'm taking away from your post is that we need to start building teleporters and find out for sure.

As long as the atoms/molecules the conform it stay arranged in the same way… Then yeah. I mean experiments have shown if you put your brain in some other living thing, you will keep your conciousness and still be you on another body.

The point is: what the hell is identity subjectivity, exactly? We are not just humans. I am Human#281E3851A and when I go to sleep, I wake up again as Human#281E3851A in my bed.

When I die, presumably, identifier #281E3851A dies with me. The ID is retired. I, #281E3851A, will never look through the eyes of another lifeform.

But setting that aside, WHAT THE HELL IS #281E3851A, exactly? Where does it reside? Why will it never be re-employed? IS there any real reason to say it will never be recycled when the human body grows and incorporates new matter over its lifespan and the identity retains a continuity?

This is the only answer tbh.
We are unknowing. And as such those who do not wish to fight in this world of eternal struggle do not deserve to see tomorrow.
This life is the only one with any meaning user.
For when you discover it's sheer meaninglessness, you are left with a canvas upon which to paint.
Only the most juvenile of nihilists cannot transcend the void and the shadow to become one with the eternal recurrence and accept it, embracing it and thus becoming the Ubermensch.

ID whatever equals conciouness (if the part of us that perceives shit is what you meant). Conciousness, evidence suggests, is a phenomena caused by or at least related to gamma waves in the brain.

google.com/amp/io9.gizmodo.com/a-new-scientific-explanation-for-near-death-experiences-1110395345/amp

You're still not grasping my point.

Why is it impossible that IDs are recycled?

The fact that their is anything at all leaves questions that we struggle to answer.
If anything we have no perspective at with which to claim anything as absolute.
All roads lead to plato, and truly things are beyond our current grasp.

Read Nos, book of the resurrection. It speaks AT LENGTH about the Aryan soul and how this all works. If you don't read it, you are a disgrace to the Reich! Sieg Hiel!

Correlation =/= causation
Now tell me what a waveform actually is.
Science is only useful for how things function.
It is useless for what things really are and why they are, or why the laws of physics have created a situation where observers can exist and interact in the first place.
We will never solve the hard problems of consiousness and anthropy.

See

Every achievement and discovery of humankind has been based upon the assumption mickey is debating. For that fact alone it is right, or at least less wrong than every other explanation, which for all intents and purposes is the same.

I never said it was impossible. But just because something is possible, doesn't mean it's true.

But just to humor you, it isn't because the part of the brain (which is matter) that governs conciousness stops working forever when you die, and it's components are broken down and absorbed by the earth to be used and distributed for other life processes. Unless every single atom myraculously ends up together again and arranged the same way it was before, you're not getting back your conciousness and might as well not exist.

Another fallacy, since evidence, again, suggest we CAN explain it with the scientific method, see the gamma wave article in my other posts.

Not an argument.

...

So you're claiming that identity subjectivity depends on certain atoms arranged in a certain way.

But the brain is constantly incorporating new material over development and forming new connections.

So, it's just not that. Period.

But, you will insist it is, because you are a materialist zealot.

Hand-waved.

.

You make a very poor assumption about science. There is a reason why metaphysics is so hot debated.

user, we're going in circles here. As I already told you, most brain neurons don't replicate like other cells do. You lose them, your brain gets fucked up permanently.

So that argument is invalid.

google.com/amp/io9.gizmodo.com/a-new-scientific-explanation-for-near-death-experiences-1110395345/amp

Except that's not true.

So, you don't even know what you're talking about. I guess we're done here.

If anything else, I'm grateful this planet was blessed with the ancient Greeks.

Why is it not true?

Since your post was noticably emotional and you seemingly bailed out without explaining why you disagree, I'll just assume you're assmad that you got blown the fuck out.

Feel free to prove me wrong, though. It'd be nice to know there is actual meaning in life.

Good work brother. Do you happen to have a pdf of The Final Battalion by chance? It's the only one of Serrano's epics that I lack.

Negative mein nigger. Have you checked /pdf/?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurogenesis
The adult brain can make new cells and since substances are constantly crossing the blood brain barrier, it's certain the brain is changing in countless other ways as well.

I'm only infuriated because the materialist priesthood refuses to acknowledge the question of identity subjectivity, even in the face of high quality anecdotal evidence like Ian Stevenson's.

It is a PLAIN FACT of existence. Note I'm not talking about some kind of sociocultural identity that can be deconstructed. I am talking about pure, elemental, simple identity: what is the material fact that makes my individuality see through my own eyes rather than someone elses.

What is it? What maintains it? Why is it "impossible" to reimplement it after death?
How can we say that it is not constantly reimplemented? Vague answers and hand-waving are not sufficient.

Well anons, I'm off to sleep now. It's been fun, though it seems my point remains undefeated. Nothing matters at all, we lose our conciousness when we die, effectively ceasing to exist.

Hopefully more compelling arguments will be made (and backed up with sources) while I'm out.

See you tomorrow.

You're just as bad as a creationist, really…

Whatever helps you sleep at night, niggerfaggot.

pfft, user plz. I'm a scientist, I know everything…

Sorry user, but most brain cells do not regenerate. Frontal lobe neurons in particular do NOT regenerate, damage done there is permanent (remember its the frontal lobe which governs conciousness).

Where is your rebuttal so I can demolish it?

That's not relevant to the discussion we've been having this entire thread. So, you're being a faggot yet again, like all fedoras.

you are not your body

you are not your mind

you are not your emotions

What about after death experiences?

Like your present life? You were "nothing," and now you're something.

To claim otherwise would be completely retarded, and yet materialists would have you believe reality is impossible.

How is it not relevant? You are the one who said identity is trascendent because the material objects that govern conciousness are non-continuous, a claim I just proved wrong.

I dont reckon anyone has resurrected from brain death in human history, user.

You're still evading the central point of what identity is and where it resides, because you can't answer it, and even approaching the question undermines your materialism.

So we're at an impasse, I'm afraid.

You seem to be mistaken, I'm not here to argue with you, I'm here to laugh at you and shitpost about greenpills.

user I was trying to debate what happens after death. This is the purpose of the entire thread.

Link related.
bfy.tw/BlaC

So you admit you have no arguments then?

>>>/pdfs/5907

Ok I'm really off this time. Talk you niggas tomorrow, please leave your butthurt or arguments in the form below.

Not much of an argument, because the conclusion is presupposes in the premises. You say that consciousness is determined by matter, but that is just restating your conclusion, and not an argument for accepting it. I can just as easily, and more plausibly, assert that consciousness is fundamentally immaterial and not determined by matter, because it seems to me like something fundamentally different than matter, as different as light is from sound.
If materialism were based on objective reality, it would be conducive to human flourishing. Alas, it is the opposite. Just earlier today the real ultimate POZ of atheism was revealed once more in starkest relief (read the part about the Czech Republic):
dailystormer.com/shock-survey-finds-that-the-more-you-know-about-kikes-the-more-prejudiced-you-are-towards-them/
So…
For more info and a more in-depth investigation, see:
>>>/christian/

The contents are totally different from the original link. There seems to be several publications all claiming that same title and author.

I've been checking off and on for a few months and several anons have requested in that time. Also, not that I rely on jewgle google even gives false 404s for even shity results for this one. It seems it is actively suppressed, and for obvious reasons, I'm quite hesitant to order a physical copy at this time.

Derp nevermind, just organized a bit differently.

That question can be restated as:
What is identity subjectivity and under what conditions is an instance of it reconstructed?

You sound like my uncle which all I know tells me he's a programmer. Literally not one single thing you brought up is even relevant to the book, and the fact you're so triggered is only more evidence of my claim. If you simply thought the thesis of the book were fantastic, you would dismiss it on those grounds. You do not, and it would be impossible for you to have made yourself acquainted with the material so quickly. Ergo my conclusion that you dismiss not because you truly find it abominable, but because you are trying to hide something from yourself. You're so smart and holy, you really have nothing to fear from wading into an intellectual discussion of degeneracy as you perceive it to be.

All of mind control programming is based on taking the natural proclivities of the heart, and extending them. Satan is wily, indeed he was one of the most beautiful and intelligent of the angels before his Fall. Whether a given proclivity is good or evil does not matter, all Satan's power is based on corruption and deception so he will work through apparent works of holiness if it helps him to lead more souls astray. If you close your mind, you shut out the cries for help from innocent children suffering from sins that cry out to heaven for judgment.

You must find it in yourself to contend with the knowledge found in that book, it is of dire importance to the spiritual struggle as it is happening all around you at this very moment. It is your duty as a Christian to test all things for their fruit, and you have not even tried with this entire area of knowledge. What do you think exorcism is? What do you think Jesus and the Apostles were doing? If you want to get a better idea, you MUST read that book. That one book will give you more insight into the spiritual battle as it actually occurs than any other work of Christian theology you might have read, and that's my judgment as someone who once studied for the priesthood yes Catholic but if you're going to let that be a problem then why are you even here. I'm not fucking kidding how important this is for you and everyone. A Christian should have no fear of knowledge, for all truth is God's.

Well according too Andrew Basiago teleportation time travel is possible but would never work because it would literally disintegrate you but that's only if what he says is true to begin with…

My apologies, I'm reading the book and I see that its contents have nothing to do with the hippie-dippie themes of the rest of the site, which is what the source of my complaint was. It's actually a great read so far, a bit unnerving. I may even buy a physical copy.

I'm also a programmer like your uncle.

big if true.

I really like Michael Voris's youtube channel. I was baptized Catholic, went full fedora, but have come back to religion as I previously described. My beliefs are in flux according to my knowledge, anything else is cult behavior.

And this is why atheists don't go door to door. **
:'^) **

georgie was right…

This is the only place I've seen it so far…
amazon.com/Final-Battalion-55-Club/dp/0615949010

Also here's NOS: Book of the resurrection - Miguel Serrano on pdfs

>>>/pdfs/1272
>>>/pdfs/5908

Meaningful thread anchored again. Pure cohencidence

It's basically just a crasser version of /r/The_Donald now.

Witnessing effects in the body during near death does not equate to proving near death experiences are the result of those effects. It presupposes a materialistic viewpoint that the mind is your brain instead of your mind/soul operating your brain and thus your body.

Materialism is a religion.

You're not keeping up man. The conclusion is that all evidence points toward conciousness ending in death, the argument being that studies such as the one I linked in my other posts prove that conciousness IS a brain function that only works as long as the parts of the brain responsible for it work.

So far the only argument I've heard ITT is 'y-you can't completely disprove trascendence so my completely baseless hypothesis is now instantly valid!'

Idk famalam, I'd have to look into it tbqh. Maybe make a thread and dump relevant info there.

Nah fam, there's plenty of evidence for the mind being a result of brain processes, but there is no evidence for a 'soul'.

Spiritualism is a religion.

Yet his point stands in that cause and effect aren't clear, as much as the nature of consciousness isn't clear. Saying that gamma waves are the cause of consciousness is once again ignoring that we do not know what consciousness is, which in return means that you can switch caus and effect, in saying that gamma waves are the product of consciousness, not consciousness itself. You really have to define axiomes to discuss that. If gamma waves are consciousness , even if we ignore that that they would merely be the function of consciousness, and you consider them the mechincal process that creates consciousness, it means that consciousness is in itself a mechanical process and therefore a mere illusion, as the defining term of the human consciousness, the ego embodied with free will, would not exist. So your axiom would be that consciousness has to be mechanic system. From that position it would be materialistc, but it would also mean that you're a merely a highly complexe machine classifying itself as a machine and juding from your former points that seems to be the way you see it. If that is true then speaking of death is just plain wrong, you wouldn't die because you never lived in the first place, your complex system would merely be disassembled, and once it is assembled again the consciousness illusion would continue, there is no conpect such as death for a machine. Your personality would be like a car modell, it doesn't matter if the original car is long gone, as long as the new one is constructed in the same way, it would function the same way.

On a personal side note, I set the axiome that free will exists, albeit not to full extend that is commonly believed in. Therefore I must conclude that consciousness itself isn't a mechanical process, our mind would still work mechanically but the impuls wouldn't be automated but controlled. All of this is of course speculative but I don't think we can in our state of existence, which is being an antromorph being emodied with consciousness and having an ego, we cannot perceive consciousness itself directly for we consist of it, we can perceive it's working in our brain activity and our personallity but to properly classify it, we would need a system far more complex than the human consciousness itself, and so far we don't know any.

This is like saying the stomach alone manages its part in the task of digesting food, independent of the brain that controls it. Assuming we had no way of detecting the brains management of the organ. The lack of detecting something is not proof that your half backed materialistic belief is correct.

Materialism is a religion, and you are a braindead slave to its presuppositions.

You're the one applying insane amounts of mental gymnastics to make your 'muh soul is real because science isn"t perfect xdddd' non-argument sound less retarded.

Assuming shit based on available evidence until more evidence disproves it is how science works. It's how every achievement in human history has been made. So yeah it might not be 100% clear, but in time it will be, and we know more every day.

It is 100% better than just assuming baseless things just because they're possible.

Ypur point? Yes we are 'machines' made of matter, which degrades like any other matter into less usable forms. Therefore we are finite, since we ourselves degrade until the machine is no longer capable of sustaining itself. Some of our matter is then re-absored by the earth and used in the life processes of other life-forms. But some inevitably stays behind and crumbles to dust, while the rest is scattered in the endless different processes it will be subjected to.

You will never be whole again and thus will never live again.

Correction, empirical evidence suggests that brain states are correlated with subjective conscious experiences including the ability to relate such experiences to researchers.
This is something which has been known for longer than we've known about the neuron.

And it has never shaken the people's belief in the existence of life after death until recently when the Jews have sown the idea of materialism into the hearts of the people in their publications.

My point is that if you follow that point of view, there is no real distinction between life and death, you wouldn't call a machine death, if your consciousness is a mere illusion it doesn't matter where it resides, or in which form, it isn't really consciousness. What I'm saying is that your assumption is founded on the axiome that consciousness is matter, which in return means that free will does not exist, which further on means the ego is an illusion and the whole point of asking "what will happen to it when we die?" is obsolete. Also I was never denying that our brain works like a machine, but consciousness is the entity opearting the non automated parts of the machine, so free will, and can therefore not be materialistic or mechanic in nature, this is the axiome that I'm using.

As for the insane "insane amounts of mental gymnastics" the other user has applied, you seem to be the one forgetting your confrimation bias. Your axiom is the materialistc nature of consciousness, saying that consciousness must be gamma waves because they're measured while it's activ is plain and simple confirmation bias. The whole point this entire thread is more or less making, and that you are ignoring, is that the science is not meant to explain the nature of things, but their structure and funciton. By proving that consciousness works through gamma waves, you do not automatically prove that consciousness consists of it nor can you make further funded statements about it's nature.

Doesn't exist.
Simple thought experiment if your consciousness solely comes from your brain then by rebuilding your brain after you die you should come to life again. However if I build two identical brains which one will you be? You can't be both since that would violate causality. So there either exists another substance which determines consciousness or consciousness doesn't exist at all.

Why care about this thread?
I don't want to waste my time arguing with automatons. I know, in the current year, it's considered discrimination against people without souls, but that's pointless.

SOULISTS UNITE!

Nice mental gymnastics, but gamma waves don't lie. Fuck, people lose conciousness when they're in deep sleep. Does that mean they die too? Kek

It is not an illusion, it is a real thing. Just because we are biological machines doesn't mean we can't be concious.

And this is true: there is no such thing as free will. Our toughts and decisions are all pre-determined by our life experiences, which provide information, and our genes, which control how we react to this information. When you're codified to react in a certain way against a variety of stimuli, you're not really making a decision.

And that structor and function does not include a soul in any of it's parts, as far as it is known. You can't know something you can't prove, you can only place blind faith on it and hope some day science can find evidence for it.

I never said conciousness WAS gamma waves. I said the former were proof for the physical nature of conciousness, because physical phenomena are caused by physical things, there is no precedent for anything else. So while gamma waves may not be much, they are a start, and it is certainly more proof than proofwe have for a 'soul'.

The whole thread has been 'you cant prove metaphysical things so just believe shit without any proof because it feels good xddddd'. Holy shit.

I propose people do not lose consciousness when they sleep. Prove me wrong!
Are one effect of consciousness acting on the physical. The absence of gamma waves just shows that there is no consciousness acting on the brain.
Assuming naturalism to prove naturalism. Nice one. Sadly if you believe in quantum fluctuations and or the big bang you must discard your premise. The fundamental forces are non physical things acting on physical things.
Demonstration with some quantum mechanics: =f Where 0 represents a vacuum state aka nothing. E represents the electric field and f is a non zero result. What does it mean? It means the electric field will begin to oscillate even if there is nothing. These oscillations have energy and are therefore matter (this can be derived either via E=mc^2 or via wave particle duality). Therefore out of nothing matter will be created. A non physical thing: the field, creates a physical thing, matter.

Without free will there would be no such thing as an ego that could act independetly, conscioussness is awarenes, and a machine that works in a mechanic function cannot be aware of anything, it simply reacts.

You should consider your confirmation bias, you prove that consciousness must be mechanic due to everything being mechanic, kind of a dead end argument isn't it? Of course you are free to believe whatever you want, but don't fool yourself in stating that it isn't a believe funded on a central axiom that you cannot prove with anything other than "lol empiricism is the one true thing, just forget the sheer extrem limitation of human knowledge and comprehension". You're simply hand waving any sort of metaphysical consideration because you consider it vague, big fucking news, even in our advanced age our understanding of the univerese is still extremly vague, but that is not the point. You're not arguing on the basis of logic, but on empiricism, and empiricism only works on the macro level of existence, which is subjectiv to the viewpoint of humanity. Imagine you had a case study, and only one subject, this is exactly what your working with.

You are not aware of anything that happens during deeps sleep. Time literally just skips until you dream or wake up.

[citation needed AKA prove it faggot]

Has worked well enough for humanity so far. Tell me one thing that has been discovered and proven to be true by assuming 'muh spiritual realm lmao'. Protip: you can't.

The fundamental forces are just as physical as anything else. They are energy.

You don't need free will to be conscious. You are aware of your actions and think you can control them, but the way you react and learn from events has been pre-determined from the moment of your conception by your DNA. It's not that hard to understand.

Nice strawman. I already said for like fifteen times that I believe it is mechanic because the evidence suggests it is mechanic. Until further, better evidence suggests the contrary, no amount of philosophical mental gymnastics will provide a better alternative, because philosophical mental gymnastics simply don't get shit done.

What do you expect me to do? There is no point in engaging in mindless intellectual masturbation about things that do not and have never affected the real world, or at least haven't been proven to. You worship logic and trash empiricism, without realizing they both compliment each other. You use the former to tell what the latter means, you don't just simply isolate one because you're too much of a pussy to accept the eternal death redpill.

Nah you just don't remember being conscious. That is why you think you weren't conscious.

I am trying to show you (4th example now) that I can repalce your unproven hypothesis with my own unproven hypothesis. They are equally good, however in your frame your own hypothesis is the best because it confirms your bias.

No serious scientist assumes naturalism to prove naturalism. A scientist will assume that a part of reality is governed by naturalism to exploit how things behave in relationship to eachother. No scientist has ever discovered how and why things actually work…
You may believe the contrary as a pop-science follower: you may believe that spacetime is actually curved, however sadly all we know for sure is that in the theory we use to describe nature spacetime is curved. Just because a theory describes reality correctly does not mean that the underlying philosophy really manifests itself.

See richard feynman youtube.com/watch?v=5ZRXxozi9zs

They create energy. However in the absence of energy they still exist. This is why the big bang happened.

Just assume you are correct. Materialism is true. So consciousness is fully determined by the atoms that make up your brain.. This means if we put you in a shredder you die. But when we take all those atoms and put them back together, thus rebuilding you. You should be alive again correct? But if I know how to rebuild you then I can just as well put you in the shredder and then build two identical yous. Which one of the two are you? You cannot be both since that would violate causality and materialism. Another possibility is there is a 2nd substance which determines consciousness. This also violates materialism. And the final conclusion is that consciousness does not really exist. You never really existed in the first place. As a result if I rebuilt just a single copy of you you would not feel alive again. This is the only conclusion allowed in materialism and even that is paradoxical.

Nice try, but you don't dream during deep sleep. You should learn what it is because it's when the body rests the most. There are actual scans that prove it, look it up.

Evidence > baseless assumptions. So your argument is invalid.

You may believe the contrary as a pop-science follower: you may believe that spacetime is actually curved, however sadly all we know for sure is that in the theory we use to describe nature spacetime is curved. Just because a theory describes reality correctly does not mean that the underlying philosophy really manifests itself.
Ignorning your No True Scotsman fallacy, philosophy is literally useless as anything but a motivator to advance science. Because 'logic' is limited, and so is human perception, only trough the use of instruments can we expand that perception, not by smoking weed and thinking about souls n' shiet.

Confirmed to be ignorant of basic physics. Energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only transformed.

That's easy, the one you rebuilt. Same way you can build two chairs from the exact same type of wood and they won't be the same chair.

Also

Wew

Yeah in high school… I am a physicist. And yes energy can be created. The big bang is probably the biggest example of that. Then there are quantum fluctuations which allow energy conservation to be violated for a certain amount of time with a certain probability. Technically energy conservation can be violated indefinetly, however the probability of that is incredibly small.

Seems to me you are the one who is ignorant about materialism and physics. Two carbon atoms are identical not unique. Therefore if I build two of you after destroying you. One with your original atoms and one with new but identical atoms you have no way of knowing which is actually you. Unless of course you throw materialism aside and assert that your atoms are special.

Then why are you doing philosophy? You have a correlation experiment and then make all kinds of metaphysical assumptions, like the soul does not exist.

Nor did I assert that. Seriously how dim witted are you? Are you just a shill trying to waste our time? I just said that you are conscious when you are asleep and that you think you are not because you do not remember being conscious since the brain is not active. You are assuming the brain causes consciousness. Scans only prove there are no gamma waves which you assert must be present if consciousness is present. I assert the contrary. If gamma waves are present consciousness is present, however the lack of gamma waves does not imply a lack of concsiouness.

Are you just not aware that you keep assuming what you are trying to prove to prove your statement? Even the jew Feynman called you out on it.

Pick one. In the big bang it was all concentrated in the same place, but it did exist. Anyone who finished high-school should know this.

What does any of that have to do with souls and conciousness? You're grasping at straws at this point.

By that logic all computers, robots, and anything with an AI that was built with the same material have souls. There is also the fact that there is no evidence for souls, yet theire is evidence for conciousness being a brain process. Or is the fact that every single animal that is known to have a conciousness has a brain just (((pure coincidence)))?

Not a correlation experiment, it is literal proof. Read the god-damn article.

Yes, keep getting emotional at your inability to swallow a redpill. Because your feelings were what this was all about in the first place, right?

Then prove it man. Just cite the study you got that from.

And yet unconcious people have no gamma waves.

I don't give a shit about what kikes say. It's hilarious that you try to use them as an appeal to authority. I am not assuming anything, I am merely following what is suggested by study. And just that ONE study I cited, which was a quick google search. What will you do if I find and post more studies with less misinterpretable proof that there is no soul? Will you keep using mental gymnastics to justify your denial of the finite nature of everything or go into chronic depression?

Correction strong memory impressions of subjective conscious experience during sleep are not usually preserved long past entering a state of wakefulness. Seeing that memory as distinct from conscious experience does seem to be a physical phenomena this could simply be due to the type of activity in the brain, and thus is irrelevant to the discussion.

This has nothing to do with the postulate of the transcendental ego. Simply measuring certain frequencies of activity in the brain which generate the physical representations of a near death experience does not demonstrate that there is no such thing as consciousness as distinct from the body.

You should really lurk on /philosophy/ for a couple years before posting on topics like this.