- Registrado
- 3 de Mayo, 2018
Go being an epicurian it's less stressful this way.
Life After Death - What Happens
- Iniciador del tema The Pink Panther
- Fecha de inicio
-
🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
Probably the same thing happens before we are born.. Our personalities and character only develop throughout the life (which we are afraid to lose by dying) but when we are born we are in kind of a blank state, we can't remember what happened when we were in a womb, our brains were not so developed... Hopefully there is some kind of afterlife.
I have the same condition (MVP is none-to-mild regurgitation also mild tricuspid regurgitation for some reason) and I feel like I'm going to die young even though I'm just 25, I think about death every day now, depressed and anxious. People don't die from this, they simply develop unbearable life conditions - like constant breathlessness, etc, for some people it never progresses this far, for some it does...
BetterFuckChuck
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 8 de Jul, 2022
I believe in God but I also think as a religious person you need to make peace with the idea of non-existence. Read up on the Greek philosophers regarding death and life, before you start to believe in God. The way I see it is this way: life is good, so death must be good. If life is bad, death is also good. If death is bad, life must be good. You have to put some element of faith and trust in God/the Universe to have made life and death this way for a good reason for yourself. If it is non-existence, come to peace with that but hold out hope for more. I dont think religion should be a substitute for overcoming your fears. That being said there's no right or wrong way to cope, we'll all die either way
I do think that there's problems with the oblivion hypothesis that I wish people poked more holes in because I do want people to have more hope. #1 is it assumes physical materialism which cant explain consciousness. #2 is that if consciousness cant experience inexperience why cant it jump-cut to the next experience after death? Tho I get that when it comes to that theory that could be the entire reason why we as minds understand and fear death: we know the paradox that we're not supposed to get no new experiences and it sickens us
I dont think we ever get over death, but I want in all my heart for all of us to have a good death: no pain, no anxiety, and hopefully an afterlife
I do think that there's problems with the oblivion hypothesis that I wish people poked more holes in because I do want people to have more hope. #1 is it assumes physical materialism which cant explain consciousness. #2 is that if consciousness cant experience inexperience why cant it jump-cut to the next experience after death? Tho I get that when it comes to that theory that could be the entire reason why we as minds understand and fear death: we know the paradox that we're not supposed to get no new experiences and it sickens us
I dont think we ever get over death, but I want in all my heart for all of us to have a good death: no pain, no anxiety, and hopefully an afterlife
Fester Chavez
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 18 de Dic, 2019
Your point about not being capable of experiencing inexperience is a fairly integral part of my understanding of life after death.
Although I have managed to poke holes in my own theories in the process. I think when death occurs time itself barely means anything and all that matters is what exists in totality, across all that does exist. If, in totality, you and multitudes of copies of you exist, then your next moment of conscience thought exists just as well in any of these copies as they do in you.
If some copies experience death, Then your conscience still exists in the other copies.
Same is true if some copies diverge too drastically from the conscience you experience as you.
Because some conscience patterns will have more or less copies than others (even if there are infinite copies, they can still be more or less, relative to others), conscience experience itself will, in general, flow toward the patterns that have more copies. This could mean, that if you die in a horrific car crash, it isn't mitigated by you miraculously dodging all the shrapnel, but rather by you not deciding to get into the car or some other seemingly benign divergence from the death path.
Theoretically, this also means you could selectively prune your conscience experience so that the outside world bends to your will, by stubbornly deciding that if something doesn't change, you'll commit suicide. However, it's much more likely that any suicides you insist upon will be mitigated not by changing the world for you, but by you deciding not to do that since its a dumb idea. The clump of selves that decide to prune the universe in such a way is much, much smaller than the clump that decides against it, so you are more likely to find yourself in the larger one.
I have poked holes in my ideas though. If you agree that conscience experience shifts in intensity over time, then you could argue that over the course of a lifepath, death might never occur, but conscience experience could reduce continually until you are practically dead. And then you could take that experience, compact it to a few seconds or however long a more common death might occur, and fit it back into your model, making all deaths as capable of justifying your conscience experience as any other state.
However, my experiencing myself typing this right now, makes such a thought nearly inconceivable. My conscienceness is dwarfed entirely by that which is not-that which is equivalent to my dead conscienceness. And yet I am this, and I am not all of that. So living and death seem like it should not be comparable in that way.
And the fact that phase-changes exist, does make me think this could be the case. The world is not always a continuous spectrum between this-and-that. At certain points things sometimes switch nigh-instantaneously between two states without an in-between.
So, I do have some hope-ish feelings that at some point as conscience reduces there is a switch event that could be called death, beyond which conscience experience is meaningless, and thus you could never meaningfully be experiencing it.
Although I have managed to poke holes in my own theories in the process. I think when death occurs time itself barely means anything and all that matters is what exists in totality, across all that does exist. If, in totality, you and multitudes of copies of you exist, then your next moment of conscience thought exists just as well in any of these copies as they do in you.
If some copies experience death, Then your conscience still exists in the other copies.
Same is true if some copies diverge too drastically from the conscience you experience as you.
Because some conscience patterns will have more or less copies than others (even if there are infinite copies, they can still be more or less, relative to others), conscience experience itself will, in general, flow toward the patterns that have more copies. This could mean, that if you die in a horrific car crash, it isn't mitigated by you miraculously dodging all the shrapnel, but rather by you not deciding to get into the car or some other seemingly benign divergence from the death path.
Theoretically, this also means you could selectively prune your conscience experience so that the outside world bends to your will, by stubbornly deciding that if something doesn't change, you'll commit suicide. However, it's much more likely that any suicides you insist upon will be mitigated not by changing the world for you, but by you deciding not to do that since its a dumb idea. The clump of selves that decide to prune the universe in such a way is much, much smaller than the clump that decides against it, so you are more likely to find yourself in the larger one.
I have poked holes in my ideas though. If you agree that conscience experience shifts in intensity over time, then you could argue that over the course of a lifepath, death might never occur, but conscience experience could reduce continually until you are practically dead. And then you could take that experience, compact it to a few seconds or however long a more common death might occur, and fit it back into your model, making all deaths as capable of justifying your conscience experience as any other state.
However, my experiencing myself typing this right now, makes such a thought nearly inconceivable. My conscienceness is dwarfed entirely by that which is not-that which is equivalent to my dead conscienceness. And yet I am this, and I am not all of that. So living and death seem like it should not be comparable in that way.
And the fact that phase-changes exist, does make me think this could be the case. The world is not always a continuous spectrum between this-and-that. At certain points things sometimes switch nigh-instantaneously between two states without an in-between.
So, I do have some hope-ish feelings that at some point as conscience reduces there is a switch event that could be called death, beyond which conscience experience is meaningless, and thus you could never meaningfully be experiencing it.
- Registrado
- 20 de Abr, 2021
I am convinced an afterlife exists based on eyewitnesses who pass away or see someone pass away. A lot of it is related to religion but each death experience is unique. For those who think eternity is horrifying. The anxiety associated with it becomes a past thing when you're used to it.
- Registrado
- 2 de Ago, 2021
I'd like to add that, pretty much any clinically dead people or near-death experiences are the result of the brain being in a near dream-like state; they are all hallucinations and are as far away from the truth as one can get.
- Registrado
- 4 de Mar, 2019
Demiurge hands wrote this post.