Eternal unconsciousness and religious belief

[John D. Brey]

“Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”
― H.L. Mencken, A Mencken Chrestomathy

. . . David warns us in the Psalm not to indulge in excessive joys. It is not given to the righteous to experience so much joy in this life. . . In this world only the wicked experience true joy.​

​

Rabbi Isaiah Horowitz, Shney Luchot Habrit, vol. 2, p. 723.​

John

 

[GoodAttention]

. . . David warns us in the Psalm not to indulge in excessive joys. It is not given to the righteous to experience so much joy in this life. . . In this world only the wicked experience true joy.​

​

Rabbi Isaiah Horowitz, Shney Luchot Habrit, vol. 2, p. 723.​

John

Lucille Désirée Ball is truly the most wicked of us all..

 

[John D. Brey]

Most of us have an example of it, anyway, in anesthesia for surgery. There you are lying on a bed, awaiting the onset of the anesthesia. You feel the start of unconsciousness, then suddenly (to you) you are awake on a different bed in a different room and someone is talking to you about how well the surgery went. What was the intervening time like? Nothing. Zip. Nada. You weren't aware of it. Doesn't seem too frightening to me.

The anesthesia's affect doesn't stop the heart, or brain, from functioning. It merely stops you from experiencing what's happening. When the anesthesia wears off, you're none the worse for the experience.

There's reason to believe that when the heart stops, and the brain dies, something different from anesthesia occurs. Which is to say that whatever the mind or soul is, it's not threatened by anesthesia. It doesn't have to fight back, or find a new home.

Take NDE's for example. A person can be placed under anesthesia and experience nothing. But if they die while under the anesthesia many report experiencing their soul or mind leaving their body. When they were just under anesthesia they experienced the complete cessation of conscious experience. But when their heart stops, and the brain starts to die, anesthesia or no, they start experiencing something akin to consciousness again.



John

 

[Jimmy]

TLDR: Does the idea of "eternal unconsciousness" upon death disturb or frighten you? If you are religious, have you allowed yourself to ponder the possibility that we could be eternally unconscious once we die? Is it possible that this possibility is frightening enough to help you believe in an afterlife via religion/spirituality?

I am no longer religious. So, I have a lot less to post about on this site than I once did... I figure I can still pose my thoughts in the lens of questioning religion.

Perhaps it is fear that can keep an individual in their religious beliefs. So I ask, "Have you considered eternal unconsciousness?".

When I was religious, the idea frightened me. However, I did not fret much, for I believed in heaven. So I did not ponder it at all.

I wonder if you, as a religious individual, have pondered the idea/possibility of eternal unconsciousness upon death? Perhaps if you allow yourself to ponder the possibility, you might find yourself disturbed. Perhaps this is telling. What does it tell? Perhaps you would know best.

I make this OP because I want people to question and inspect the foundations of their religious beliefs. That is how I can contribute to the discourse here, now that I am not religious personally. But I would still like to contribute.

I believe once you dead you dead. I believe I’ll be raised in glory when Jesus returns.

 

[John D. Brey]

Lucille Désirée Ball is truly the most wicked of us all..

She might wanna stick to unleavened bread Pesach or no Pesach.



John

 

[Quagmire]

I like what my friend Ken used to say about this: "I can't imagine going on forever, and I can't imagine not going on forever, and both scenarios scare the **** out of me".

 

[GoodAttention]

She might wanna stick to unleavened bread Pesach or no Pesach.



John

She was born into the Baptist church!

Where Christ had already leavened..

 

[1213]

Not why I want to contribute to the site, but I will share that the idea of eternal unconsciousness disturbs me. It used to frighten me dearly, but I'm more at peace with it now. Just makes me uneasy

Sorry to hear that. Do you know why it makes you uneasy?

 

[Alien826]

The incomparable Terry Gross interviewed a brain surgeon (Theodore Schwartz) just last week. As he pointed out, yes, our consciousness is solely the result of neurons firing in the brain. And yet, as experiments have shown, the conscious part of our existence is like a guppy swimming in the ocean of a much larger entity some call Mind.

What experiments? (More a request for information than a challenge.)

Yes, I realize guppies are freshwater fish and are not found in the ocean.

Analogies are allowed some departure from strict accuracy. After all they are just a way of making the subject more understandable. And, contrary to some people's apparent beliefs (not yours I'm sure) they don't add anything to the likelihood of the the accuracy of the said subject. The fact that mustard seeds are tiny and grow to form large plants doesn't support the notion that the kingdom of god behaves similarly.

But similarly, Mind is a spiritual entity not really found swimming in the conscious thoughts except where the Mind has become incarnate in the beliefs of the righteous (1 Cor. 2:16). As the sperm whale evolved from something as small as a guppy, faith in Christ Jesus evolved from the amoeba of incarnate Mind. Those few who have it in the measure of a mustard sea have moved mountains.

Yes, there a lots of ideas kicking around about this kind of thing and, I have to admit, some evidence that might support it. My answer to your post about NDEs will expand on this.

 

[Alien826]

. . . David warns us in the Psalm not to indulge in excessive joys. It is not given to the righteous to experience so much joy in this life. . . In this world only the wicked experience true joy.​

​

Rabbi Isaiah Horowitz, Shney Luchot Habrit, vol. 2, p. 723.​

John

Oh c'mon. There's nothing inherently bad about happiness. Nor is being miserable all the time particularly holy.

 

[Alien826]

The anesthesia's affect doesn't stop the heart, or brain, from functioning. It merely stops you from experiencing what's happening. When the anesthesia wears off, you're none the worse for the experience.

There's reason to believe that when the heart stops, and the brain dies, something different from anesthesia occurs. Which is to say that whatever the mind or soul is, it's not threatened by anesthesia. It doesn't have to fight back, or find a new home.

Take NDE's for example. A person can be placed under anesthesia and experience nothing. But if they die while under the anesthesia many report experiencing their soul or mind leaving their body. When they were just under anesthesia they experienced the complete cessation of conscious experience. But when their heart stops, and the brain starts to die, anesthesia or no, they start experiencing something akin to consciousness again.



John

How can you, or anyone know what a dead brain feels or thinks. It's dead. That's why the "N" in NDE stands for "near". I'm sure there has never been an example of a permanently dead person reporting anything.

That said, I think there is something here to be thought about. IF an NDE experience truly reports things that can be verifiably shown that the subject could not have already known, and IF the consciousness of the subject as evidenced by brain function is total, then there's a question to be answered. But, the question is, can a totally unconscious brain still be aware of things outside itself? Not can a totally dead brain be so aware?

From my other reply, and about shared consciousness and other interesting ideas, I think there are tantalizing shreds of evidence that might point in that direction. Most people know the experience when you think about someone and then the phone rings and it's him/her. Intuition can sometimes be difficult to explain. What sometimes causes crowds of people to behave in ways that an individual member of the crowd would not. I'll add though that my personal experience has shown that the human mind has incredible ability to fool itself.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Does the idea of "eternal unconsciousness" upon death disturb or frighten you?

No. I imagine the time after death will be a lot like the tie before birth.

"David warns us in the Psalm not to indulge in excessive joys. It is not given to the righteous to experience so much joy in this life. . . In this world only the wicked experience true joy."

How dismal and pointless. And how typical of many Abrahamic clergy.

Coming from a zealous Abrahamist, I understand that as a message that you are not to think about what you want or enjoy and turn your attention to obedience to the church (or synagogue in the case of the Rabbi you quoted) and to devote your life and resources to promoting its agenda, which is to spread its message, and help it accrue wealth and societal hegemony. So, forget that vacation and give more to the church, and if you don't, you're being an immoral hedonist.

There's nothing inherently bad about happiness.

Agreed. Joy, pleasure, happiness, contentment, and satisfaction are things to pursue, not avoid. They are not found with selfish or impetuous hedonism. Wisdom is the knowledge that brings one to such a place, whereas intelligence is knowledge of how to achieve immediate goals such as accumulating wealth.

Long term satisfaction includes love - both giving it and receiving it. Love is expressed by promoting the welfare of others, which is the opposite of selfish, but rewards the one being of service or being kind or charitable.

Live an upright life, be fair, be a friend, be kind, be a good citizen and neighbor, be an asset to your community, seek beauty and serenity, have humble tastes, and you'll probably be happy. And anybody that tries to disparage you for seeking such a life instead of one of abstinence, austerity, strict rules for you follow, service to his cause, or suffering is not your friend.

I'm going to introduce two politicians, but the following is not political. It's about the pursuit of happiness, and a contrast between wisdom and foolish choices, as well as a practical example of my point:

The face of joy today is Kamala. The one with no joy is her opponent. Look at what each pursues. Kamala has been people centered and driven by public service, whereas he is the selfish hedonist. Both are wealthy. Both are privileged. But that's where the similarity ends, and why one exudes joy, but the other is miserable.

 

[Kathryn]

I believe our subconscious is eternal, but it does not stay in unconscious limbo eternally. I believe the person we each see ourselves as will be limited to this one life. However, there is more to us than this ego, this personality that we see as who we are.

Just as you may remember how you were in 1st grade, the playmates you were drawn to, the curiosity you possessed and how things of that nature changed, grew, and developed over your life (and those of us of a certain age may see significant changes), your subconscious has stored the lessons of life that defined those changes, and, IMB, will continue to change in the next life.

The "you" that you are at the end of your life, imagine that personality in a child in first grade, perhaps in a different economic class, a different country, a different environment and the change and growth another life will add to the subconscious "you."

As Jesus said what you do unto the least of these you do unto me -- think when your interacting with another, it may be your great-grandmother on their next journey. And think, what will you teach them by way of your interaction?

Well, I don't believe in reincarnation but I do believe that Jesus told us to treat people the way we would want to be treated so that's what I try to do.

 

[Trailblazer]

Most of us have an example of it, anyway, in anesthesia for surgery. There you are lying on a bed, awaiting the onset of the anesthesia. You feel the start of unconsciousness, then suddenly (to you) you are awake on a different bed in a different room and someone is talking to you about how well the surgery went. What was the intervening time like? Nothing. Zip. Nada. You weren't aware of it. Doesn't seem too frightening to me.

It might be frightening if you did not wake up. On the other hand if you did not wake up you would never know the difference, unless you died and woke up in another realm of existence. Now that could be truly frightening, depending upon what that real was like.

 

[Trailblazer]

Or, consciousness is a function of the brain. It exists for as long as the brain exists.

I believe that consciousness is a function of the soul and it exists for as long as the soul exists, for all of eternity.
However, the idea that we take our thoughts with us when we die is a scary prospect, which is why I believe what we are thinking is so important.

 

[John D. Brey]

How can you, or anyone know what a dead brain feels or thinks. It's dead. That's why the "N" in NDE stands for "near". I'm sure there has never been an example of a permanently dead person reporting anything.

On the last first, there's a whole testament where a person dead for days retorted a report. On the NDE, the point was that under anesthesia, nothing is experienced. But in some cases where added to the anesthesia is the heart stopping, the heart stopping being something that should enhance the lack of sensation induced by the anesthesia, the opposite occurs: some kind of sensation has been reported.

That said, I think there is something here to be thought about. IF an NDE experience truly reports things that can be verifiably shown that the subject could not have already known, and IF the consciousness of the subject as evidenced by brain function is total, then there's a question to be answered. But, the question is, can a totally unconscious brain still be aware of things outside itself? Not can a totally dead brain be so aware?

In cases I've read about (and fwiw I had my own brief NDE), persons who died in one room of a hospital, reported hearing the doctor talking to relatives in a room far enough away from where the person died to make it impossible that they could have heard the conversation. The doctor and family members confirmed that what the person said they heard is indeed what they had said.

One issue in these stories is the problem of phenomenology. The dead report seeing things from outside their bodies (I saw my body below). But since the kind of sensory experience we experience bodily requires eyeballs, why is the sensation of vision from the disembodied soul precisely what a human eye would see? Why is what's heard what a human ear would register.




John

 

[Alien826]

On the last first, there's a whole testament where a person dead for days retorted a report. On the NDE, the point was that under anesthesia, nothing is experienced. But in some cases where added to the anesthesia is the heart stopping, the heart stopping being something that should enhance the lack of sensation induced by the anesthesia, the opposite occurs: some kind of sensation has been reported.

I repeat, if he survived he was not dead in the sense where we are investigating survival after death. He woke up, so he wasn't permanently dead. To expand these stories into some kind of evidence for an afterlife we need to go into communication with spirits or the like.

In cases I've read about (and fwiw I had my own brief NDE), persons who died in one room of a hospital, reported hearing the doctor talking to relatives in a room far enough away from where the person died to make it impossible that they could have heard the conversation. The doctor and family members confirmed that what the person said they heard is indeed what they had said.

Without trying to be totally dismissive, if someone recovered from an operation or whatever it was, he could expect that people would have been discussing his case with medical staff and the general drift of those conversations. I'd like to hear reports where the doctor said to the relatives, "I'm late because I was playing golf, and by the way I hit a hole in one!" If that was accurately reported, it would be difficult to explain.

One issue in these stories is the problem of phenomenology. The dead report seeing things from outside their bodies (I saw my body below). But since the kind of sensory experience we experience bodily requires eyeballs, why is the sensation of vision from the disembodied soul precisely what a human eye would see? Why is what's heard what a human ear would register.

Good point. It can happen in the imagination of course.