What Happens When You Die?

[godnotgod]

Death is the problem. It is still an unknown whether we fear it or not, even for those who wish for it.

We fear it because it is an unknown, so fear is the issue, not death.

But why is death a problem? Everyone is subject to it, so what's the big deal? Could it be because we imagine a self that dies? Without a self, there is no death.

Such fear causes what is known as Metaphysical Anxiety, further causing us to create fantasies about an afterlife.

So it's acceptable to go around murdering as many people as you can, which can only be justified by not taking life seriously.

You have it backwards: murder occurs because life is taken seriously; because life is so highly valued. Were it not, murder would not be an attraction.

In fact, the history of man demonstrates clearly his wilingness for systematic, organized murder on a massive scale, whether it be war, pogroms, infanticide, genocide, etc., all pursued with poker-faced solemnity.

more on your post later...

 

[horizon_mj1]

Death is not unknown to everyone. To some in which it is not it is a welcome friend to come in the Future, to others it is something to fear

 

[Penumbra]

Death is not unknown to everyone. To some in which it is not it is a welcome friend to come in the Future, to others it is something to fear

There's a big difference between a scenario where a person knows something, and a scenario where a person thinks they know something.

Throughout history, people have thought that they have known quite a bit about the various afterlife scenarios, and they've greatly differed between cultures. And many of those beliefs have largely died out.

There's also a big difference between knowing, and whether a person welcomes or fears death. A person can think they know, and be either welcoming or fearful. A person can not know, and be either welcoming or fearful. Or neither.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

We fear it because it is an unknown, so fear is the issue, not death.

Fear of death, yeah.

You have it backwards: murder occurs because life is taken seriously; because life is so highly valued. Were it not, murder would not be an attraction.

In fact, the history of man demonstrates clearly his wilingness for systematic, organized murder on a massive scale, whether it be war, pogroms, infanticide, genocide, etc., all pursued with poker-faced solemnity.

So the Nazis committed genocide because they so highly valued the lives of Jews and gypsies? The reason anyone commits any immoral act is because they consider their rights to be superior to the rights of their victims.

 

[godnotgod]

Fear of death, yeah.

...due to ignorance about the nature of death. Without ignorance, there is no fear.

So the Nazis committed genocide because they so highly valued the lives of Jews and gypsies? The reason anyone commits any immoral act is because they consider their rights to be superior to the rights of their victims.

True, but it is the scapegoat which provides the value required to engender feelings of superiority.

 

[horizon_mj1]

There's a big difference between a scenario where a person knows something, and a scenario where a person thinks they know something.

Throughout history, people have thought that they have known quite a bit about the various afterlife scenarios, and they've greatly differed between cultures. And many of those beliefs have largely died out.

There's also a big difference between knowing, and whether a person welcomes or fears death. A person can think they know, and be either welcoming or fearful. A person can not know, and be either welcoming or fearful. Or neither.

Acceptable to you are anyone else is not a relevant fact to; some people have different experiences in life than others. If you experience something do you only think you experience it or do you? That my friend is the difference between thinking you know something and knowing something

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

...due to ignorance about the nature of death. Without ignorance, there is no fear.

How do we remove the ignorance in order to remove the fear? How do we ignore ignorance? I dare say if anyone knew they were going to hell when they died would fear death even more.

True, but it is the scapegoat which provides the value required to engender feelings of superiority.

So they value the scapegoats' live more than their own?

 

[RJ50]

All we have is ignorance, as there is no evidence to support the existence of an afterlife.

 

[Penumbra]

Acceptable to you are anyone else is not a relevant fact to; some people have different experiences in life than others. If you experience something do you only think you experience it or do you? That my friend is the difference between thinking you know something and knowing something

Experiencing something is not proof that it was interpreted correctly.

I experienced a ghost once. So for a while I thought I knew ghosts existed.

Then I found out the experience and later experiences were sleep paralysis rather than ghosts.

So believing something and knowing something are different. There's a reason eyewitness testimony isn't sufficient in court rooms for most serious crimes.

 

[RJ50]

Experiencing something is not proof that it was interpreted correctly.

I experienced a ghost once. So for a while I thought I knew ghosts existed.

Then I found out the experience and later experiences were sleep paralysis rather than ghosts.

So believing something and knowing something are different. There's a reason eyewitness testimony isn't sufficient in court rooms for most serious crimes.

I have had many so called 'paranormal' experiences in my life, I still believe there is a perfectly natural explanation for everything.

 

[horizon_mj1]

All we have is ignorance, as there is no evidence to support the existence of an afterlife.

You do mean however aside from the fact that Energy does not die it only alters reaction right? (this by the way is Scientifically proved)

 

[horizon_mj1]

There's a big difference between a scenario where a person knows something, and a scenario where a person thinks they know something.

Obviously! or we would not have so many Religions now would we?

Throughout history, people have thought that they have known quite a bit about the various afterlife scenarios, and they've greatly differed between cultures. And many of those beliefs have largely died out.

If a person has an actual experience, this is where the "thinking" turns into Knowledge; you can argue this all you want, but it does not change the Facts.

There's also a big difference between knowing, and whether a person welcomes or fears death. A person can think they know, and be either welcoming or fearful. A person can not know, and be either welcoming or fearful. Or neither.

You are almost completely right, but Knowledge is Knowledge and Knowing is Knowing, which does make a huge difference in how a person would make up their mind

 

[George-ananda]

Experiencing something is not proof that it was interpreted correctly.

I experienced a ghost once. So for a while I thought I knew ghosts existed.

Then I found out the experience and later experiences were sleep paralysis rather than ghosts.

So believing something and knowing something are different. There's a reason eyewitness testimony isn't sufficient in court rooms for most serious crimes.

How do you know anything you experience is real then?


Regarding Horizon_mj1's superphysical experience I've heard the following analogy. When we sleep we believe the dreams to be true. When we awake we believe the dreams to be imaginary and the awake state to be real. When people have certain experiences, for example associated with brain trauma or near death, they feel that state is more real than the waking state. Of course there's no way to convince another in the waking state that they're not in the most real state. I believe consciousness is much like layers of an onion. Removing each outer layer (one being the physical brain) takes you closer to the core and things are more real.

 

[Penumbra]

Obviously! or we would not have so many Religions now would we?

If a person has an actual experience, this is where the "thinking" turns into Knowledge; you can argue this all you want, but it does not change the Facts.

You are almost completely right, but Knowledge is Knowledge and Knowing is Knowing, which does make a huge difference in how a person would make up their mind

There are no facts being changed.

The "thinking" part comes into play in how they interpret their experience.

How do you know anything you experience is real then?

One can't know that anything they experience is real, possibly apart from something as fundamental as Cogito ergo sum (I think, therefore I am).

 

[godnotgod]

How do we remove the ignorance in order to remove the fear? How do we ignore ignorance?

"Where there is light, there is no nescience"

You are walking along a path at dusk and the wind is blowing. Suddenly, from the corner of your eye, you see a snake writhing on the side of the road. You jump in horror, only to realize in the next moment that it was nothing but a rope moving in the wind.

I dare say if anyone knew they were going to hell when they died would fear death even more.

I said nothing about hell; all I said is that by seeing into the true nature of death and the self, all fear is dispelled. Hell is just part of that fear.

So they value the scapegoats' live more than their own?

Obviously not, since, in the case of the Holocaust, they ended up exterminating them. The value placed on them is unintentional; they don't realize that the scapegoat is an integral part of seeing themselves as superior. It all has to do with the balance between Persona and Shadow, if you know what I mean, 'untermenschen' having been projected onto them as Shadow in order to enhance the Nazi Persona even more.

 

[godnotgod]

One can't know that anything they experience is real, possibly apart from something as fundamental as Cogito ergo sum (I think, therefore I am).

The Zennists love to have fun with this one. They will ask:

"So, when you are not thinking, you then don't exist, right?":biglaugh::biglaugh:

 

[horizon_mj1]

There are no facts being changed.

The "thinking" part comes into play in how they interpret their experience.


One can't know that anything they experience is real, possibly apart from something as fundamental as Cogito ergo sum (I think, therefore I am).

So a scar or a wrecked vehicle is not tangible evidence of an experience then? I think therefore I am is something to say when you have nothing else

 

[Penumbra]

So a scar or a wrecked vehicle is not tangible evidence of an experience then?

It's certainly tangible evidence you had a car wreck.

I think therefore I am is something to say when you have nothing else

It's something to say when asked specifically what one can know is real.

No winks necessary, just being precise.

 

[godnotgod]

One can't know that anything they experience is real...

The only way you can say that is if you know the difference between what is real and what is not.

 

[Penumbra]

The only way you can say that is if you know the difference between what is real and what is not.

Not if you examine the method of knowing itself.