Science works because there are repeatable patterns in nature. (Reply #66)

In the discussion thread: "Proof" (?) of an afterlife [View all]

Sun Oct 9, 2016, 03:30 PM

cpwm17 (3,829 posts)

66. Science works because there are repeatable patterns in nature.

That's why we can study physics, chemistry, and any other science.

An alternative would be nature acting by the whims of a god. In that case, a natural (really supernatural) event that has been proven to happen once may not be possible to happen again. That's not the world we live in.

Anything in nature that has been proven to be able happen once has been proven to be able to happen any number of times. A chemical reaction that works once will be repeatable.

A particular conscious-self is a product of nature. Our minds are not magic and there is no evidence for a soul. If whatever brain processes that create my current consciousness are ever duplicated in the future, my consciousness should return. There is no evidence of any separate entity that disappears and dies when my body dies and no records of my current conscious existence are kept anywhere in nature. My consciousness just shuts off, returning me to the exact same state I was in before I was alive.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

98 replies	Author	Time	Post
"Proof" (?) of an afterlife [View all]	left-of-center2012	Oct 2016	OP
It's purely a matter of faith	grubbs	Oct 2016	#1
None, as far as I've ever seen. nt	SusanCalvin	Oct 2016	#2
There is no material evidence. We are left with Thomas.	rug	Oct 2016	#3
Doubting Thomas?	beveeheart	Oct 2016	#6
One and the same.	rug	Oct 2016	#8
The only thing that lives on is the good you do for others	Moostache	Oct 2016	#4
Plato and Sirach affirmed that.	Brettongarcia	Oct 2016	#23
There is much we don't know.	pipoman	Oct 2016	#5
We are here now. In what may be an infinite universe of infinite possibilities,	Doodley	Oct 2016	#7
That's essentially what I'm going to write.	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#10
Thanks for the reply. I agree that is possible, but if it is inevitable we will return, is it also	Doodley	Oct 2016	#14
I've wondered about that.	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#22
I agree that the chances of our existence seems to be so tiny that it appears	Doodley	Oct 2016	#53
And the chances of getting the correct number on all 100 roles of dice would be far greater	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#57
You keep trying to put the burden of proof on others for disproving your reincarnation theory	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#91
Throughout history	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#92
I'm not sure how this helps your argument	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#95
Ain't any.	Iggo	Oct 2016	#9
Zero evidence of afterlife.	Bernardo de La Paz	Oct 2016	#11
Also looking up to see the white operating table lights	Brettongarcia	Oct 2016	#86
Much as I'd like to live on forever after I die, writing a book just seems like too much work.	stone space	Oct 2016	#12
All reward and punishment in the afterlife is conveniently unverifyable	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#13
It is only unverifiable if we cannot confirm that we are not already in an afterlife.	Doodley	Oct 2016	#15
Even then it's still unverifiable because you can't confirm the after-afterlife	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#16
No you can't, but can you confirm that our existence now is life or the afterlife?	Doodley	Oct 2016	#34
Yes	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#37
Please point me to the evidence.	Doodley	Oct 2016	#44
Cogito ergo sum	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#45
You made a claim that a particular conscious-self can't ever reapear.	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#46
No, I did not	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#47
I won't bet my life on in particular reality	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#48
Your reasoning process appears to rely heavily on the nonsequitur.	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#49
The question still remains unanswered.	Doodley	Oct 2016	#54
I already have	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#56
I use a similar argument against the requirement to prove the negative	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#58
Your assumption is just as far fetched	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#59
You haven't made any logical arguments against the possibility of conscious minds returning.	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#61
I feel no obligation to disprove something that was never proven to begin with. YMMV.	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#63
I guess my multiple lines of reasoning will all remain unchallenged.	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#64
Honestly I didn't think it was even worthy of as much effort	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#65
Science works because there are repeatable patterns in nature.	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#66
As far as I can tell you are simply replacing "soul" with "conscious-self"	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#67
Conscious self is just another name for conscious mind.	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#68
And yet you proceed to compare it to other processes in nature as if it were a thing	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#69
To me, the belief that a particular self can't return is	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#70
Belief in the supernatural requires the suspension of reason	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#71
I don't believe in the supernatural at all.	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#73
And yet you are claiming your "conscious-self" not only can but has transcended your physical being	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#74
I have no evidence that my conscious-self is attach to any particular atoms in my body	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#75
You acknowledge "conscious-self" isn't a thing, yet base your premise on its transposition	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#78
I addressed the teapot above.	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#80
You are getting harder to understand with each post	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#83
Is there a distinct you that is separate from somebody else?	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#88
There's lots of things which differentiate me from everyone else	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#90
Russell's Teapot doesn't apply here and doesn't help your position at all.	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#93
I'm not claiming any position is the "default", which is where you are confused	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#94
What is consciousness? We can build computers but know very little about the human	Doodley	Oct 2016	#85
Yes, we know so little about consciousness.	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#89
Music isn't a "thing." It is neither only soundwaves or perception. Can it be transposed? Yes.	Doodley	Oct 2016	#84
Music IS a thing, and isn't a state of being	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#87
Are you saying consciousness is not much different from being dead?	Doodley	Oct 2016	#96
No, and such nonsense is too ridiculous to be entertained	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#97
You are the one who made the claim. I am just asking you can back-up your claim.	Doodley	Oct 2016	#60
My "claim" was that any mention of an afterlife is conveniently unverifiable	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#62
I'm not demanding anything. I'm pointing out that we don't have a clue if	Doodley	Oct 2016	#50
If you really intended to be rhetorical about it...	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#51
You're citing Descartes first step in the proof of God - for what reason?	rug	Oct 2016	#72
What are the properties of the afterlife?	trotsky	Oct 2016	#21
You wouldn't anymore than you'd recognize you are alive. Similarly, there is a theory that	Doodley	Oct 2016	#35
Completely unfalsifiable theories are fun to think about,	trotsky	Oct 2016	#36
Those that tend to dwell on such things...	Major Nikon	Oct 2016	#38
Yeah, well...	trotsky	Oct 2016	#39
The same with there being other universes.	cpwm17	Oct 2016	#43
Afterlife	Electron1	Oct 2016	#17
'Proof of Heaven' Author Has Now Been Thoroughly Debunked	left-of-center2012	Oct 2016	#19
There is no evidence available except witness-accounts.	DetlefK	Oct 2016	#18
Witness accounts aren't evidence.	Act_of_Reparation	Oct 2016	#20
Your energy will live on ............ read The Shack	Angry Dragon	Oct 2016	#24
"read The Shack"	left-of-center2012	Oct 2016	#25
Millions of people believe in an afterlife based on a fictional novel.	trotsky	Oct 2016	#33
my proof is in the first part............. I just suggested The Shack for your enjoyment	Angry Dragon	Oct 2016	#40
I believe there is...	Mike Nelson	Oct 2016	#26
Except reality.	cleanhippie	Oct 2016	#29
There is no proof because no one has ever made the return trip	Warpy	Oct 2016	#27
Well as a Buddhist	Loki Liesmith	Oct 2016	#28
no	left-of-center2012	Oct 2016	#31
How does that square with the doctrines of	Loki Liesmith	Oct 2016	#32
Energy can neither be created nor destroyed; rather, it transforms from one form to another.	still_one	Oct 2016	#30
And?	Goblinmonger	Oct 2016	#41
Whatever the OP wants it to be. I will not project anything else	still_one	Oct 2016	#42
I really enjoyed Michael Newton's 2 books on this topic.	Chemisse	Oct 2016	#52
You haved lived and you will live again. Let it be so.	The Wielding Truth	Oct 2016	#55
Look into	whathehell	Oct 2016	#76
I am doubting NDEs (near death experiences) more and more	Paula Sims	Oct 2016	#77
Here is a web site you may want to visit	awake	Oct 2016	#79
You get a turn at life, when its over, someone else gets a shot	Uben	Oct 2016	#81
"Thousands of years and no proof of an afterlife"	left-of-center2012	Oct 2016	#82
If you accept the premise of a Near Death Experience...	brooklynite	Oct 2016	#98

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.