Answer me these questions

[Wiccan_Child]

Now you are just playing games.

I rather think I'm making a salient point

There is no absence of evidence.

Then, pray tell, what evidence have I garnered?

You looked in your garden and observed no elephant, evidence of the absence of elephant.

Bingo. The absence of evidence for the claim, constitutes evidence against the claim. That's the point. In some cases, the absence of evidence for X constitutes evidence against X.

You're taking the idiom, "Absence of evidence is evidence of absence", too literally.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Exactly. Death is death. That was my only point, really. You have taken my original statement out of its context, which was in response to AVET claiming that according to science death is a "way out." This he misaligned with the theory of Heat Death of the universe, which had nothing to do with the subject he was commenting on. Also, when one speaks of an "afterlife" it is usually in reference to heaven or some other place that is not in the physical world. Science says nothing about that, which is why I said you misquoted me. I was not referring to heaven at all.

You referred to life after death. What is that, if not the afterlife, Heaven, etc?

 

[Tomatoman]

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Carl Sagan, Demon Haunted World pg 7.

Tomatoman, you are working with a discredited philosophy of science called Logical Positivism.

If you read the paper I cited, you will find that there is no correlation of NDE with anything.

I'm not working with any philosophy. I'm saying that without evidence of an afterlife all you are doing is saying "wouldn't it be nice if there was an afterlife". That is is called wishful thinking.

And as for sagan's quote, when applied to an afterlife that is pretty thin. You might as well apply it to father christmas as an argument, it's about as relevant.

This is just a really bad way to do science. In fact, it is just the opposite of how science is done. It's the equivalent of "it seems so apparent that you need a designer to have design ..."

I wasn't "doing science" or putting forward a scientific proposition, as I didn't think it was necessary. I was giving my own opinion that wishing for a continued consciousness without a brain is silly. The fact that all science based evidence for a direct connection between your brain and your consciousness backs this up is neither here nor there.

The problem is that people have reported consciousness when their brain is shut down. What's more, if you read the paper, you will find many reports of the person in NDE "seeing" things that were not in line-of-sight of their physical bodies.

Which paper?* I’ve flicked quickly through the thread and can’t find it. Can you give the link again? From what I’ve read in the past all NDE reports of seeing things out of line of sight are extremely dubious at best or just hearsay and certainly wouldn’t pass a ‘laboratory’ test.
Reporting things when the brain is shut down is certainly very interesting, but as I'm sure you'd be the first to agree, is difficult to know whether these experiences actually happened when the brain was fully shut down, or as it was shutting down or being revived, which would make far more sense, and is what the increased levels of CO2 idea proposes and supports, apparently.

"1. All our theory, ideas, preconceptions, instincts, and prejudices about how things logically ought to be, how they in all fairness ought to be, or how we would prefer them to be, must be tested against external reality --what they *really* are. How do we determine what they really are? Through direct experience of the universe itself."

It strikes me that you are actually insisting on the possibility of an afterlife because you have a prejudice that that is how things ought to be instead of how things are. I know you have a christian faith. Are you sure you are not allowing this to influence you in this one area where it wouldn't in others? Would you for instance, be as vehement in not ruling out the possibility of astrology being true? Or witchcraft or levitation or telepathy or ghosts or alien abduction? And if not, why not?

Logic and logical chains are always trumped by data.

Indeed. Are you writing this for my benefit or is your subconscious trying to tell you something?

Now you are into your personal likes and dislikes. These, too, have nothing to do with how things really are.

I never pretended they weren't personal, but you may be missing the point. The point was that consciousness itself is evolutionarily designed to serve a physical body. A disembodied consciousness for any length of time is bad news as far as mental health, sanity, boredom and purpose go. Consciousness is as much designed by evolution as eyes or opposing thumbs. As Joey from Friends said "I thought it'd be great, you know? have some time alone with my thoughts... turns out, I don't have as many thoughts as you'd think.”


*I found the paper and skimmed through it. As I thought, the out of line of sight reports are presented as hearsay: "During the pilot phase in one of the hospitals, a coronary-care-unit nurse reported a veridical out-of-body experience of a resuscitated patient". This is in a paper, remember, and that is the best they can do: someone unnamed reporting something that once happened to someone else unnamed. It's not much better than than "this bloke down the pub told me...". Sorry, but it really isn't, which is presumably why it is presented as nothing more than an anecdote in the paper for you to interpret as you please.

 

[Split Rock]

You referred to life after death. What is that, if not the afterlife, Heaven, etc?

Once again, my statement was about the physical world. Where is heaven located? Is it located somewhere in the physical world?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Once again, my statement was about the physical world. Where is heaven located? Is it located somewhere in the physical world?

We both know fundies who would say that, in fact, it is

 

[Split Rock]

We both know fundies who would say that, in fact, it is

Really, that seems to depend on the Fundie. Some claim heaven if part of the firmament, some claim heaven is inside the earth, some claim it is not physical at all.

 

[AV1611VET]

Some claim heaven if part of the firmament...

Which firmament would that be, Split? there are three of them.

(But you knew that, right?)

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Which firmament would that be, Split? there are three of them.

(But you knew that, right?)

Ohh, I got this.
The Bible mentions 'heaven'.
Then it mentions 'heavens' - so there's at least 2.
Then there's the New Heaven, which is one more.
TOTAL: THREE (3).

 

[AV1611VET]

Ohh, I got this.
The Bible mentions 'heaven'.
Then it mentions 'heavens' - so there's at least 2.
Then there's the New Heaven, which is one more.
TOTAL: THREE (3).

Very close!

Notice 'heaven' in Genesis 1 becomes 'heavens' in Genesis 2:

Genesis 1:1 ¶ In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Genesis 2:1 ¶ Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

... and we know from here, that there are three heavens:

2 Corinthians 12:2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, ( whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth; ) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

 

[Split Rock]

Very close!

Notice 'heaven' in Genesis 1 becomes 'heavens' in Genesis 2:

Genesis 1:1 ¶ In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Genesis 2:1 ¶ Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

... and we know from here, that there are three heavens:

2 Corinthians 12:2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, ( whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth; ) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

Actually, according to your logic, there are at least three heavens. There could be six, twelve or a thousand.

 

[AV1611VET]

Actually, according to your logic, there are at least three heavens. There could be six, twelve or a thousand.

I would employ Occam's Razor on this, for the reason stated.

 

[Nathan Poe]

I would employ Occam's Razor on this, for the reason stated.

If you would emply Occam's Razor, there would be no heavens.

 

[Deleteriousnonsense]

You're taking the idiom, "Absence of evidence is evidence of absence", too literally.

Perhaps, but you have to admit it's fun to say "evidence of absence of elephant."

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Perhaps, but you have to admit it's fun to say "evidence of absence of elephant."

Absent elephants are not elephants in absentia?