What do you think there is after death?

[Enigma]

So my room is sentient because I'm inside of it?

[pert -5]

The universe as a sentient being; I think it's a fascinating theory.  It may not necessarily be valid or testable but I have no doubt that our universe (or multiverse or metaverse) works in ways that our brains cannot even begin to comprehend.

"For I am divided for love’s sake, for the chance of union." (AL I:29)

In our existence there is a seer and a thing seen.  That is indisputable (try it!!!).  Their coition is what we call experience.

[voodoo scientist]

The universe as a sentient being; I think it's a fascinating theory.  It may not necessarily be valid or testable but I have no doubt that our universe (or multiverse or metaverse) works in ways that our brains cannot even begin to comprehend.

"For I am divided for love’s sake, for the chance of union." (AL I:29)

In our existence there is a seer and a thing seen.  That is indisputable (try it!!!).  Their coition is what we call experience.

That is either nonsense or a tautology.

In our experience, there is a seer and a thing seen (something can't see or be seen without being in a human-experience context). In our existence there is, as far as we know today, matter and energy. You also make the assumption that the cohesive self is genuinely reflected in existence, as opposed to simply in our experience - something can't be seen unless there is a cohesive entity to see it. As far as we know today, we are a collection of individual cells that simply happen to be cooperating because of the rules they operate by.

[pert -5]

That is either nonsense or a tautology.

In our experience, there is a seer and a thing seen (something can't see or be seen without being in a human-experience context). In our existence there is, as far as we know today, matter and energy.

My good voodoo scientist, matter IS energy.  Have you been doing your physics homework?

You also make the assumption that the cohesive self is genuinely reflected in existence, as opposed to simply in our experience - something can't be seen unless there is a cohesive entity to see it. As far as we know today, we are a collection of individual cells that simply happen to be cooperating because of the rules they operate by.

They are cooperating in harmony to create that complicated amalgamation that we call existence.  Haphazard happenstance?  Perhaps.

Anyway, I'm not anthropomorphosizing any "cohesive entity."  It simply is what it is.  If it's not then you need not respond because everything is on its side and slanted....  

[voodoo scientist]

Physics isn't really my field and I don't care to argue the point. Does it make any difference to the point I'm making if there's matter and energy or just energy? Not really.

Cells are not "cooperating in harmony" for any reason, be that baking a cake or creating the complicated amalgation that we call existence. They're not even cooperating in the agentic sense you imply. They're living their little cellular lives, and in doing so, they happen to affect and be affected by other cells living their little cellular lives. One convenient, perhaps badly chosen word for this is cooperation. There's really nothing literally cooperative or harmonic about it unless you perceive it from an experiential point of view as a cohesive entity and, indeed, anthromorphosize the cells into moral agents.

However, the fact that you're wrong about this side point doesn't change the fact that it's a side point. I would like to return to my original criticism of your claim that it's "indisputable" that "what we call experience is the coition of a seer and a seen thing" and see a response to that.

[pert -5]

Physics isn't really my field and I don't care to argue the point. Does it make any difference to the point I'm making if there's matter and energy or just energy? Not really.

I agree.  That's just me being an asshole.

I would like to return to my original criticism of your claim that it's "indisputable" that "what we call experience is the coition of a seer and a seen thing" and see a response to that.

OK.  One error on my part is that instead of "see," which holds connotations related to sight, I should have used the word "perceive."  There is a perceiver and a thing perceived, and their coupling creates our experience.  Experience is an event that occurs in relation to an awareness.   So we have the awareness and the thing that it is aware of.

[S. Earl Martin]

If a tree falls in the forest and no one can hear it does it make a sound?

[pert -5]

I see that question asked a lot and people think it is such a deep topic.  But really, it just isn't.  Yes, the waves which our ears translate into sound are produced whether there is an observer or not.  The sound waves are objective rather than subjective.

[S. Earl Martin]

Yes, but the point is can you prove that it makes a sound. It is actually a rhetorical question. Logic dictates that the sound is always going to happen weather anyone can hear it or even if a device is recording it. However because someone or something is there it possibly alters the circumstances.
An attempt at humor!

As far as life after death. I have detailed my beliefs and they haven't changed. (Note: Who believes in God post).

[NataEames]

I always wondered about the tree, and about schrodinger's cat. There's really no way to prove that something happened in a certain way unless you were there or there is too much evidence. A tree could have slowly fallen on a bush and then on the ground, almost silently, we'll never know.

Or maybe I've just had too much to drink

[voodoo scientist]

OK.  One error on my part is that instead of "see," which holds connotations related to sight, I should have used the word "perceive."  There is a perceiver and a thing perceived, and their coupling creates our experience.  Experience is an event that occurs in relation to an awareness.   So we have the awareness and the thing that it is aware of.

That's the exact same problem. A perceiver, like a seer (who is a perceiver anyway), requires a cohesive entity. The 'one error' is your basic idea: it is very easy to dispute, as I just did, that what we call existence (calling it 'experience' before was a brainfart on my part, as your claim listed existence) is the coition of a perceiver and a perceived thing. Aside from my previous posts which I assume you still have in mind, existence happens regardless of whether any cohesive entity perceives and interprets it or not, and secondly, perception and experience itself is a part of existence if you don't subscribe to the theory of a soul.

However, even if you had said experience instead of existence, which I suspect might have been the content of your next reply, it is still clear-cut false. While experience does have a perceiver and a perceived object, it also has cognition, metacognition, attributions, biases, physical characteristics and a host of other factors that play into generating the complicated amalgation that we call experience.

You seem like an educated or at least thoughtful fella, but this is not a tenable position for you to take.

Edit: Also, if a tree falls in the woods, it produces the existential phenomenon known as 'sound waves.' When sound waves enter our ears, the soundwaves are interpreted into the experiential phenomenon known as 'sound.' Is it really that hard to keep the two separate?

[iig0tem]

This question will NEVER be answered. BUt... this is just a random thought at an attempt of creativity so please don't be harsh on me!..but....: Maybe  we go into an eternal "trip" or "limbo" seconds before death because of the serotonin being released in the brain... this experience is similar to that of a DMT trip(DMT releases mass amounts of seretonin)... And given that the brain is the last organ to shut down upon death, it may be possible that in that short amount of time after our heart stops and stops sending oxygen to the brain, our brain could be going beserk and taking our consciousness into a whole new "death level".... A level that takes us into a continuum of our soul.... and then conception occurs all over again. having no recollection of our past.... maybe this is why we have collective archetypes, behaviors, symbols, consciousness, etc... Our little soul is the only survivor of time.

[Outsider]

This question will NEVER be answered.

Why do you make that assumption? Science has made fantastic discoveries over the past thousand years.

[iig0tem]

This question will NEVER be answered.

Why do you make that assumption? Science has made fantastic discoveries over the past thousand years.

Fantastic, observable, & objective discoveries... WHen is the last time a subjective discovery was made and actually accepted mainstream?

[jbarefield74]

I think there is no such thing as after death. We are only given one life to spend. We shouldn't waste it.