is death really the end?

As an athiest I believe so

According to the Bible, death is just a rest for all the hard work, trials, hardships, difficulties, and sufferings we go throughout our lives. When the 'day' comes, everyone who is resting will be awaken. From dust our bodies are made and it will go back to dust. Our spirits, on the other hand, will be resting in our graves until that 'day'. Death is not the end; it will be the end for our bodies, but not our spirits.

That's what I've learned so far from the Bible.

I understand that is your viewpoint but even beliving what you do,
you don't hope that there is something more then just our life on this earth?

The true key word here is «hope», not «is». What one hopes does not matter the tiniest, most insignificant bit to what actually is true. It seems like matters of the metaphysical and religion allow everyone to wish for a cure for death and get away with it but if we are to hope for what we want, why stop at that? What's the difference between the hope you have for something after death and the hope I have that Olivia Wilde is on my bed right now wearing lingerie? Why is one valid and the other ridiculous?

My view is that death is simply not being so it doesn't hurt at all but it also doesn't feel particularly well. It's purely neutral. Having said that, the fear of death becomes entirely irrational. Why fear death when you won't know you will be dead?

The main objection is that if we don't know if we are dead then we will never know about it. Then how can I know? I actually think this can be argued with an argument that I attribute to Mark Twain although someone else could have come up with it first and that is the following:

Why does it hurt that you will probably be dead in the year 2150 but it doesn't hurt AT ALL that you weren't alive in the year 1600? In other words, you had to wait for millions of years to be born, and yet, it took only a second. Why do you think the following wait will be such a pain?

When you die, you die twice.

Once when you're heart stops beating.

And once more when your name is muttered for the last time.

There is nothing after death and all you have achieved in life and all of your happiness/sadness is utterly pointless.

This is one of those topics that I find extremely interesting. I have just got to put my two cents on this whole matter here. But firstly...



Yes! Although I could either be over-thinking this "phrase" too much or perhaps the other way around, I definitely agree with it. Also, what I'm about to say/think is probably completely irrelevant to the big picture anyway, so why bother being reserved about expressing it.


Thinking about this question, I cannot help but think about the keywords here: "Death" and "End". Personally, I believe that we as well as pretty much everything else are immortal in a sense. I say "in a sense", but what I really mean is that there's just another side to everything that is. It's common knowledge that when one dies, they aren't and cannot be aware that they died. Instead, earlier in their life, they most likely had the knowledge and image of death "persistently" weighing down on their existence. Usually, this knowledge is gained either by being told, or if not so, then from natural instincts of ours over the course of our own development in nature.

This now leads to an interesting train of thought I had: "What if our world as it is now sort of 'reset' to a new 'beginning'? Where everyone suddenly had to start over from scratch with functions like language, thoughts, and speech." With this example, there would be no one to inform us of the concept of death nor to tell us that we were going to die in the future. If not a single human knew about death this way and continued living their "repetitive" day-to-day life... that would make them eternal beings even if their body were to die... in a sense.

Though "death is the result of time". And time is a result of the concept of a beginning and an end to all things. That being said, we humans haven't been able to absolutely prove that there's a definitive beginning to everything. "There could be an event that comes even before this 'beginning'". How could we perform the same absolute proof-work for the end to everything? And not only that, is time itself even an absolute thing to begin with?

Building upon my train of thought above... those reset humans in that reset world would most likely begin their new existence living a simple, daily life in an absolute present-sense. It's the only knowledge they'd have "at the time". But as they experience the repetitiveness of that life, it'd feel as if it could be infinite. Their knowledge of the world would be that it's limitless and infinite, rather than our knowledge of it being that it's influenced by time. In these special circumstances, wouldn't death be a non-existent thing for those people? Their world would seemingly "repeat" itself eternally... and they wouldn't know that they died when/if they did.


Comical thought experiments aside... I can pretty much conclude: "yes" and "no", to the question. Based on my own beliefs, we are a rare and complex existence of a rather subjective nature. Whether we die or not... and whether it's the end or not, is entirely up to us and our control over knowledge/words/language. If, through those powers, we birthed the concept of time, and stayed true to it, then we probably shall die. I believe that there's always two sides to the world... everything that "which is", and everything that "which isn't". One cannot exist without the other. This power we own is merely just the ability to actively place the limits on to that "which is".

Actually, I'd consider true "death" to be when you feel as if you're not moving forward in life. It takes place in the present, so it exists absolutely. Because of that stagnating feeling, it's the "end", as nothing shall move forward from that point. See how it could potentially warp ones' perspective so much to view it as death (or a form of it). Who's to say that person is incorrect? This exact thinking is a specialty of the human existence (particularly, the tool we use: language).

The death we commonly know could be interpreted in so many different and diverse ways. One way I look at it is, common death is the same and/or has the same sensation of deep sleep. With our common knowledge of time, that dream we'd be having as we "sleep" would always be moving forward. And we'd always have the buried feeling that: "At some point, this dream will be over." To me, that rather doesn't seem like the end.

The world can be objective and finite, but then it MOST definitely has to be subjective and infinite in return.


TL;DR: Quote from one of my favorite philosophers... "Death is not an event in life: we do not live to experience death. If we take eternity to mean not infinite temporal duration but timelessness, then eternal life belongs to those who live in the present. Our life has no end in just the way in which our visual field has no limits." -- Ludwig Wittgenstein


That concludes my exact thoughts on this specific topic. I apologize if I went in circles with it, but I just couldn't help myself when it comes to this sort of thing. It's just too much fun.

Kind of a bleak outlook don't you think? Is it accurate that you are saying it doesn't matter what we do with out lives because ultimately it doesn't matter in the long run?
If in fact that is the case, then why would we exist at all? If no matter what we do no matter how great or small amounts to nothing then why? (this is kinda turning into a "what's the meaning of life?" thing i guess.)

Beliefs are simply that.

My belief:

We are all one human consciousness, so there is no true death. When you die, you go back to the bubble that is 'all of us.'

And to believe in any sort of superstition is to limit your capabilities as a human. Don't worry about what might happen when you are not, and instead worry about what is happening while you are.

'Life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves.' - Bill Hicks

Some depressed or distressed turn to suicide, self-afflicted death, as a form of an easy way out, thinking that it would be the end of their alleged pain and suffering should they die. Not all of them had the gall to either jump, shoot themselves or stab themselves or et cetera, but those who have we can never converse with.

One thing that we know is that what lies after death is unknown. Another thing is that human fears the unknown. Well, maybe some of you don't. Maybe, it's a way of saying what lies after death will involve facing your fears.

Then fuck me because I'm going to walk into a beehive in the afterlife.

By saying you go back, you directly imply that at one time you were there. If so, where is «there»? Do you have any memory of it? If so, what's it like? If not, what reason would you have to forget it? And how do you know it exists if you don't remember? If the point is to be united, why would people split off, live on Earth for a few years and then return? Can we have memories of that place? If so, how and where are they? If not, how do we even know it exists?

I agree on the second point though: all we should be concerned about is what really matters i.e. the real world, the world in which you will gain instant reflexes to jump out of the way of a moving car because we know this is the one that matters.

It is as you say. That is my belief, and I find life so pointless that it is ridiculous. If you would ask me what the meaning to life is, the I would simply answer that there aren't any. I guess I am a cynical person.

Love the picture btw.

This may be the most debated topic since man first realized he was mortal. While various religions and philosophies attempt to explain what happens after and what is the meaning of this existence as we know it, no one will ever truly know until we met our end. While I could go on ad infinitum about explaining the different beliefs and view I have made a few observations that lead to my conclusion.

1.The universe has near clockwork perfection. From the laws of matter to the creation of galaxies the complexity of the universe is far more than what it seems at face value. Science has one begun to unlock the mysteries of our universe. It is quite possible that the law of space and time as we know it now are like a caveman staring at a space shuttle.

2.The nature of thought and consciousness is complex and not quite fully understood. While we can describe the physiological nature of how thought occurs, we cannot begin to fathom how one consciousness varies from another. Do you dream the same way I do? Do we taste the same thing the exact same way? When we are in pain what image is triggered in your mind? We may one day answer than question but to your mind is a foreign as Neptune.

3.Life is too complex to be accidental. If you look at all the intricacies in your body alone, the machine like design, how trillions of cells work in harmony to function to make a single organism; is almost miraculous.
Ultimately I think what is after this is beyond simple earthly paradise or nonexistence. Rather it is simply the beginning of a new journey that is beyond powers of description or human understanding.
Regards,
Mel

All 3 of those observations you made there I feel are correct and I can't help but agree with them wholeheartedly.

No matter what, we will never truly know everything there is to the "universe". As soon as we get closer to figuring everything out, more mysteries/questions seem to pop up in its' place, pushing us farther back than we thought. Therefore, we're not getting closer at all, we're just "moving in place" to a truth that doesn't even exist. We twist words on to ourselves and others that make things seem totally otherwise... Just as I'm doing right now to all of you who read this. And anyways, this "web" of words becomes meaningless in the face of death, even if they don't disappear entirely.

There's something strange that possibly could be counted as just a silly coincidence. The same way we can never truly know about the universe, also can be said about a person that is not yourself. A person that is not yourself, like the universe, holds "infinite" complexities far beyond our comprehension in much the same way. This might or might not have significant meaning... but I think it does, personally.

I believe in miracles, as in, that our existence (and existence in general) is the product of a miracle. I simply find it "romantic" that everything works in perfect harmony. That's enough for me to believe in it... I'm always made acutely aware that there is no truth, and I just can't let that get me down. Not that I'll have those feelings before I die (which is a deal-breaker for some, or most people)...

I believe the universe, or existence, works in an "aimless flow" nature (that which follows no plan/goal), still manages to have complete order, and forms that perfect harmony regardless. The sheer amount of contradictions in that sentence is astounding, and no human would dare try to understand, let alone comprehend it. I didn't even get close to describing how it "truly" worked, myself. Maybe beyond death, therein lies the answer?


What I'm trying to get at here in this all is that there's a "limit" (like a circle with a dot in the center, being us) to the things we know. The more we learn (which is inevitable), the more this limit expands outwards. But everything that's outside of it are the truly unknown that never crosses our minds, things that we cannot know or talk about. Maybe perhaps, our sense of things, in which that there's "always more to realize", is the main culprit here. Because of our awareness of the unknown, it exists indefinitely. We could be the controlling factor of this very "limit" we place upon the world of knowledge and information.

Not that any of that is going to matter right before we die...

Which is why it's extremely important to have both a sense of the world and a belief of the world. A "common" sense or sense is a necessity, no doubt. But because of our subjective nature, it can sometimes deceive us. This is where having a belief becomes crucial. It gives us something to live for even in the face of death and the end if it were so.

I believe... death isn't an end, but a change to the "status quo" that which encompasses us entirely. I won't try too hard to figure everything out... Nonsensical as it might seem, just have a belief (whether it's a flimsy one or not).

Well theres certainly claims that there is an afterlife for Christians we have the whole "heaven/hell" thing. I am pretty sure there is sone kind if afterlife somewhere after our bodies fail us. But in the end sinehow when we die we are going to be judged. Either by the ones up above or our peers looking at our tomb. Nothing is ever set in stone but its more likely that there is an afterlife and frankly id also prefer it if it was like that. so yes in short i think there is an afterlife.

As a Buddhist, I do not believe that it is the end, but everyone thinks their own thing, so believe you want, however only one idea is actually true, so the vast majority of answers to this question may be wrong, but then again, I don't truly know that I'm right either. I guess I won't know until it happens.

I don't see how your first point contributes to the discussion aside from saying that we still have a lot to learn. I agree and since I don't see how that tilts you in either direction, I'll leave it.

As for number two there are a few objections. The nature of thought isn't all that unknown as people think (nor is Physics but that's for another day). We know a lot by know and with Neurocience we are on the verge of a breakthrough. Next, you argue that we can't know how conscience varies from Subject A to Subject N and you give those philosophical examples. I can think of three objections to that. One, you don't establish how knowing exactly what it's like to be in someone else's place adds to the death discussion. Two, those questions are not as deep as they sound; they are actually the very basis of Epistemology and most philosophers will have ready answers for them. Third, again, you use the «Not Knowing» card but this time it's different because you say we don't know particular questions; however, have you stopped to think that maybe we don't know those questions *because* they are analitcally impossible to know? Just because you can make a sentence and end with a question mark, it doesn't mean it deserves an answer. What is the color of abstraction? What does knowledge taste like?

Number three is my favorite because you hide it well but you are essentially using the God of the Gaps argument and the Watchmaker argument which are both silly. Life on Earth as we know it is very well explained. Again, you seem to claim the «Not Knowing» card but Evolution is solid and new people have worked on it since Darwin; it's not stale either. Then there's Stephen Hawking and Lawrence Krauss, two brilliant physicists who have not found a single shred of evidence that points to a creator. I'm sorry but I think their authority is higher. And also, since you use the word «almost» this next objection isn't valid but I'll still add it. One cannot describe the natural order as miraculous. By definition, a miracle is a suspension of the natural order; not part of it. You can say of an existing X that it is miraculous unless it could only arise by a suspension of the natural order. The clockwork functioning you mention yourself contradicts this. But again, not a valid objection to you particularly.
I also like that you instantly discard Hell. It's either the best thing ever or nothing at all. It's a nice way to see things but fundamentally wrong. Well, not wrong per say but meaningless because it is evidently wishful. By religious standards, you are dead wrong. By philosophical standards, your claims are unsuported.

I am personally agnostic and don’t really care about this subject. I was trying to be optimistic for the sake of someone who is going through an existential crisis. You make excellent points, and I don’t doubt your intellect. However, you come across as abrasive and condescending. If that was your goal, congrats and you completely missed the point of what I was trying to do.

Maybe I didn't, but now that you explained I don't feel the need to retract my post. What we want or what we would like to be true has absolutely zero impact on what is true. I couldn't care less about what people wish with regards to Philosopy or Metaphysics; I care about what is true and where the evidence, rational or empiric, lead us. I don't see the need or even the good in petting someone on the back and going «There, there» which is what you did only in a different way.

With regards to anything, one has to ask: Is there a reason to believe in P? If so, what is that reason? And, is it a valid one?

So, is there a reason to believe in the afterlife? Yes. What is that reason? Fear, doubt, egocentrism, pain, songs, cookies, mayonnaise. Plenty of reasons.

Are they valid? No.

In Metaphysics, one should not take a dogmatic view either way. So I can't know with absolute certainty that there is no afterlife but I'm gonna live my life with the belief (the word belief here with a platonic conotation) that there is no afterlife. I think if I do so, I'll get more out of it once I accept it. Otherwise, you are encouraging false, unfounded, wishful thoughts.

the truth is, nothing happens after death. there is no afterlife, no heaven, no hell, no reincarnations. they are all just fantasies made up by scared people just like you to convince themselves that death is not the end.