View Full Version : Why there can't be nothing after death


Fraser_0762
07-08-14, 09:22 PM
I've been thinking a lot about death lately. (No, this isn't a suicide post, so please don't remove)

I was looking into many different theories that people were coming up with about what they thought happened after you were dead.

One theory that often crops up is the idea that there is an eternity of nothingness after you die. You simply seize to exist and that is the end of it.

Well i've thought long and hard about this theory and think I can give a logical explaination as to why an eternity of nothingness doesn't occur after you die.

So here it goes. "If nothingness was eternal, then you would never have been born into existence in the first place".

Bascially the idea comes from the fact that you start from nothingness, before you're brought into existence. Which proves that nothingness can't last forever, seeing as you came to exist from what we understand to be nothingness. Which means when you die, nothing won't last for an eternity, as you would never have existed in the first place.

I hope i'm making sense here. :scratch:

Abi
07-08-14, 09:24 PM
You're not.

No offense, but no. Just no.

Fraser_0762
07-08-14, 09:31 PM
You're not.

No offense, but no. Just no.

It would be more helpful if you elaborated on why you think this is incorrect.

As far as i'm aware, what i've said is strictly correct on a logical scale.

If nothing was eternal, you couldn't have been born, as you came from nothing to begin with. That is a fact, no?

Abi
07-08-14, 09:35 PM
At 330 AM after a bunch of beers, haldol, and codeine?

How about a raincheck? :)

Fraser_0762
07-08-14, 09:38 PM
At 330 AM after a bunch of beers, haldol, and codeine?

How about a raincheck? :)

I'll hold you to it bro.

mildadhd
07-08-14, 11:16 PM
I think we exist in the neural wiring of the lives we've influenced, both good and bad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QA1gPVXBQRg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhkSXBJajpI


P

sarek
07-09-14, 02:14 AM
What if all that nothingness you speak of, was composed of all the possible somethingnesses, with the one caveat that they add up to zero?

In that case, everything that is not impossible, happens somewhere or somewhen. The probability of you being alive is not zero, therefore it happens given an infinity of possibility space.
Potentially it even happens an infinite number of times so there could be lots of all of us out there.

Of course, if all has to add up to zero, that means there can not be a net amount of time. This would imply that time itself is illusory.

SB_UK
07-09-14, 02:54 AM
The problem with considering life after death is that people resign themselves to a miserable life before death in the expectation of something better when they die - an idea which is used by the ruling class to maintain their position. The law imprisons the majority in subservience to the minority. Sadly 'Occupy - we are the 99%' has lost steam - unsurprising as long as survival requires money is controlled by the 1%
fair play or not fair play - what a remarkably clever way of controlling people.

Your wonderful life after death v 1 and 2 comes only with dissent from schemes which enforce human inequality.

Life after death v 1 (enlightenment) and 2 (physical death) are the 2 key motifs of the great religions.

SB_UK
07-09-14, 03:04 AM
It would be more helpful if you elaborated on why you think this is incorrect.

As far as i'm aware, what i've said is strictly correct on a logical scale.

If nothing was eternal, you couldn't have been born, as you came from nothing to begin with. That is a fact, no?

We need to be founded on eternal substrate.

There's no such thing as true nothing.

No building is suspended in mid-air
- all have hidden foundations.
We just need a simple understanding of how hidden foundations can exist 'in this world'.

- pre-Big Bang reality (monotheism):
http://www.ouroborus.dk/Image1.jpg
o
- this world of duality:
http://www.stmary.ws/highschool/physics/home/notes/waves/img7A.gif
oo
- our total reality:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/Boy_Surface-animation-small.gif
.o
oo

SB_UK
07-09-14, 04:14 AM
o - boson
+
oo - fermion

=

.o - re
oo -reality



o -> spirit, organizing principle, social impulse, creativity, metalevel, fundamental substrate, evolutionary imperative ... etc etc etc ...

All we need to understand is that the organizing principle generates equal societies from the ground (Planck length standing wave matrix) up.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51W9UugXexL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA300_SH20_OU02_.jpg

The spirit level.
Why equality is better for everyone.

Fuzzy12
07-09-14, 05:41 AM
Fascinating idea and I think I understand what you mean. The concept of infinity or eternity has always fascinated and puzzled me. One of the few things I actually believe in (and I could be wrong, of course) is the law of conservation of energy: "Energy can neither be destroyed nor created but only transformed from one form into another". I think, energy is eternal and it's only the various transformations that keep changing, reforming, passing on in an endless cycle.

I don't think that being human or "alive" is anything special. I think, it's just another form of energy, another compilation of atoms, just like any other form of matter. I don't think we come from nothing. When you are conceived, smaller building blocks assemble into a zygote that develops into a human being, which happens to have a consciousness and when you die, the energy associated with your atoms transforms again or is released either as heat energy (if you get cremated) or as "dead matter" that serves as fodder for other organisms if you don't get cremated. That energy can't be destroyed but what is destroyed, what isn't eternal and infinite is your consciousness, which dies or becomes nothing/non-existent after death.

What if all that nothingness you speak of, was composed of all the possible somethingnesses, with the one caveat that they add up to zero?

In that case, everything that is not impossible, happens somewhere or somewhen. The probability of you being alive is not zero, therefore it happens given an infinity of possibility space.
Potentially it even happens an infinite number of times so there could be lots of all of us out there.

Of course, if all has to add up to zero, that means there can not be a net amount of time. This would imply that time itself is illusory.

There is a theory in physics, which assumes that the universe is infinite and that there is an infinite number of parallel universes, each composed of one of an infinite number of possibilities. Something like that. I need to read up more. Fascinating topic.

I don't understand your last sentence (bolded). Could you explain that to me please?

sarek
07-09-14, 07:11 AM
Fascinating idea and I think I understand what you mean. The concept of infinity or eternity has always fascinated and puzzled me. One of the few things I actually believe in (and I could be wrong, of course) is the law of conservation of energy: "Energy can neither be destroyed nor created but only transformed from one form into another". I think, energy is eternal and it's only the various transformations that keep changing, reforming, passing on in an endless cycle.

I don't think that being human or "alive" is anything special. I think, it's just another form of energy, another compilation of atoms, just like any other form of matter. I don't think we come from nothing. When you are conceived, smaller building blocks assemble into a zygote that develops into a human being, which happens to have a consciousness and when you die, the energy associated with your atoms transforms again or is released either as heat energy (if you get cremated) or as "dead matter" that serves as fodder for other organisms if you don't get cremated. That energy can't be destroyed but what is destroyed, what isn't eternal and infinite is your consciousness, which dies or becomes nothing/non-existent after death.



There is a theory in physics, which assumes that the universe is infinite and that there is an infinite number of parallel universes, each composed of one of an infinite number of possibilities. Something like that. I need to read up more. Fascinating topic.

I don't understand your last sentence (bolded). Could you explain that to me please?

We don't actually come from nothing as nothing is unchangeable. Nothing is still nothing. We are in it but that is only possible if everything that makes us and the rest of everything up (probably waves of some kind) adds up to a sum total of zero. Only then can you have something while preserving nothing. Something did not come out of nothing, something = nothing.

It is necessary to start your theory with nothing because nothing is the only thing that you do not need to explain. You can never ask what this nothing came from.

So how do you arrive at something? That is another case of reductionist reasoning. If something is possible, and it is not found, then you end up with the problem of having to explain why it is not there. The only way you end up with a "first explanation" that leaves no more fundamental questions behind is by assuming that both Nothing and Everything exist. Only that which is impossible does not exist, but I have not the faintest idea how to determine whether anything is impossible. We do not even know how many permutations of physical laws are valid.

And yes, this also means that there can never be a surplus of time. If there was a surplus of time then nothing would not be nothing. This means that for every positive amount of time there has to be an equal negative amount. Don't ask me how that translates into timespace continuums, however.
Time is a difficult subject to define anyway since the only way it can apparently be measured is by tracking the passage of events. This feeds right back into the concept of Nothing because within Nothing as a whole there are no events and thus no time.

It does help to have a zen brain though:)

Stevuke79
07-09-14, 07:58 AM
Your logic is flawed. You're not consistent in your terminology. In the sense that you experience "Nothing" when you die, that "Nothing" does not cease to exist when you are born, you're simply not experiencing it anymore. That does not preclude the possibility of resuming this experience of nothingness when you die. The nothing that ceases to exist at birth is particular, the nothing we experience at death is also particular. This does not mean that universally, all individual nothings must eventually cease to exist, but only that one particular nothing has ceased to exist.

Another way to look at it, particularly if you want to measure yourself against the scales of logic (I presume you mean the rules of logic), and this is also the inconsistency in your terminology: You've taken an existential quantifier and re-asserted it as a universal assertion.

In other words you've said something, and then you've said it again, the same words with a 100% different meaning. ie:
My nothing has ceased to be when I was born - Existential quantifier
Therefore All nothings must eventually ceases to be (hence death can't be eternal nothingness) - Universal assertion

Said differently - my nothing before I was born was not eternal. Therefore "Nothing" is never eternal. Therefore the nothing experienced upon my death also will not be eternal.

One nothing can cease to be, such as the nothings before our birth. This does not contradict that other nothings, the nothings when we die, may be forever. In order to get to your universal assertion, you have to go from one instance of "nothing ceasing", and extrapolate that ALL nothing must cease. It's similar to saying "Bill Gates is wealthy, therefore I must be wealthy." Though it gives me no pleasure to say it, I am not wealthy. The nothing before my death ceased, therefore the nothing after my death must cease. No it musnt. (musnt.. musn'd.. musn't .. musinit .. that's not right,.. mustin't .. mustard-in-it .. a little help here??)

I'm not making a religious point here. Whether death actually is eternal nothingness - I'm sure I don't know.

Abi
07-09-14, 08:00 AM
^^ This

Stevuke79
07-09-14, 08:03 AM
I think the lesson here for all of us, is that someone with OCD should NEVER be allowed to study formal logic,.. it's just a bad idea.. :lol:

Fortune
07-09-14, 08:38 AM
We didn't come from nothing. The matter that makes us up, like all the other matter in the universe, came about due to the big bang, due to the events that occurred afterward, from the hot, short-lived stars that were born when the universe was very young, and said matter that in stars through fusion became heavier forms of matter.

The material that makes you up is just as old as the material that makes up the Sun, the stars, and the galaxies in this universe. There wasn't a nothing.

Awareness and consciousness is something else, what appears to be an emergent property of self-organizing matter (organisms).

And the matter that makes you up today will be gone in seven years. You'll still be you, but your cells will all have been replaced.

And when you die, the matter that made you will continue in other forms.

Until the end of the universe, at any rate.

Your best bet is if our universe turns out to be a simulation. (http://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html)

Or I guess, maybe the somewhat wild quantum immortality theory. (http://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/science-questions/quantum-suicide.htm) I wouldn't advise holding out hope for that one.

Also, this theory that sense of smell works via quantum tunneling is intriguing. (http://phys.org/news/2011-03-quantum-explanation.html) No relation at all to the previous feature, just evidence that life can evolve some abilities with some interesting foundations.

Of course, none of this is certain. But I wouldn't hang my beliefs about life after death on whether "nothingness" can exist or not exist, because all of that is already accounted for without requiring consciousness to continue past death. After all, no one expects a computer to continue computing after someone takes a sledgehammer to the motherboard.

Also, this "on/off" switch for consciousness doesn't really support a need for consciousness to continue past death. (http://www.techtimes.com/articles/9898/20140709/brain-switch-to-turn-consciousness-on-off-discovered.htm) If you can shut off all awareness while alive, then what is the necessity for awareness past death?

Fraser_0762
07-09-14, 10:46 AM
My point is. Before you became self aware, you had no consciousness. But that non-consciousness didn't last forever, as you were able to become conscious.

So if you lose consciousness when you die, why would it last forever, if it didn't last forever the last time, which allowed you to gain consciousness in the first place?

If death brings a loss of consciousness, a loss of consciousness you experienced before you were able to become conscious and live, then why would it last forever when it didn't the last time?

mildadhd
07-09-14, 01:55 PM
My point is. Before you became self aware, you had no consciousness. But that non-consciousness didn't last forever, as you were able to become conscious.

So if you lose consciousness when you die, why would it last forever, if it didn't last forever the last time, which allowed you to gain consciousness in the first place?

If death brings a loss of consciousness, a loss of consciousness you experienced before you were able to become conscious and live, then why would it last forever when it didn't the last time?


I think it depends what type of consciousness being discussed.


Affective consciousness (instinct)(ancestral memory)(pre-verbal)(pre awareness)

or

Cognitive consciousness (adapt)(learned memory)(verbal)(awareness)


P

mildadhd
07-09-14, 02:31 PM
Types of Consciousness

-AFFECTIVE
-More Subcortical
-Less Computational
-More Analog
-Intentions in Action
-Action to Perception
-Neuromodulator codes (Neuropeptides)


-COGNITIVE
-More Neocortical
-More Computation
-More Digital
-Intentions to Act
-Perception to Action
-Neurotransmitter Codes (Glutamate, etc)


A major goal of psychotherapy is to promote
cognitive control of affective processes.




Figure 1.3. A summary of the major differences between brain systems that mediate affective and cognitive processes in the brain. Overall, the affective system controls global states of the brain, while cognitions process incoming information from the external senses.





Panksepp/Biven, "The Archaeology of Mind", (Chapter: Ancestral Passions), P 8.


i!i i!i

midnightstar
07-09-14, 02:48 PM
If we all come from nothing, what happened to cause us all to be created? There has to be something in order for us to exist because if nothing existed nothing + nothing = nothing whereas something +nothing = something :scratch:

mildadhd
07-09-14, 03:59 PM
It seems the higher social purpose of family, friends, education/religion type things, are required to pass on non-genetic memory, like, language and cultural, traditions, etc, after passing on?

Example,

If my biological parents where Aboriginals from Ireland, but, for some terrible unintentional/unvisible circumstances, I was adopted and shipped internationally and raised in the most loving French speaking family, but was never exposed to the Gaelic language.

I would never know the Gaelic language.

I would never be able to speak or understand Gaelic.

My cognitive memories would be of the language/stories/culture, I was exposed to.

Religion/education type establishments are required to pass on information to the next generation.

Because genetics is unable.

Fascinating how both non genetic social structures (cognitive), and, genetic biological structures (affective), could be equally as important/essential in complex human advances/civilization.



P

Amtram
07-09-14, 05:46 PM
I've had Versed before surgery a couple of times. I'm pretty comfortable with nothingness.

Unmanagable
07-09-14, 10:04 PM
I've had this tune, and some major afro envy, in my head ever since I read this thread title yesterday......time to share and get it outta my brain. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_DV54ddNHE

Fortune
07-10-14, 01:10 AM
My point is. Before you became self aware, you had no consciousness. But that non-consciousness didn't last forever, as you were able to become conscious.

So if you lose consciousness when you die, why would it last forever, if it didn't last forever the last time, which allowed you to gain consciousness in the first place?

If death brings a loss of consciousness, a loss of consciousness you experienced before you were able to become conscious and live, then why would it last forever when it didn't the last time?

You appear to be making some rather significant assumptions about the nature of consciousness, and your argument is not particularly logical.

For example, as a living human being you are a conscious, aware, sapient being. Before you were conscious, you didn't exist at all. Why would you assume you would continue to exist after death?

Why would my computer not continue to compute after it's destroyed? After all, it never computed before the first time it was turned on.

Fortune
07-10-14, 01:12 AM
If we all come from nothing, what happened to cause us all to be created? There has to be something in order for us to exist because if nothing existed nothing + nothing = nothing whereas something +nothing = something :scratch:

We do not come from nothing. We come from hundreds of millions of years of evolution, and the matter that we are made up of came to be after the big bang. What came before the big bang is a question and a mystery, but we have a pretty good idea of what's been happening since.

SB_UK
07-10-14, 02:52 AM
It's sad that [effectively] nothing (in much the same way that people fixedly looking at the ground can see no sky) from nothing via a remarkable pattern of organizational evolution find themselves 13.8 billion years later spending their every waking moment making life extremely unpleasant for one and for all - by 'virtue' of the expression of selfish (money) desires.

Supposedly intelligent organisms - but only supposedly.

To be intelligent we need to be consistent with species (and through extension all of phenomenological reality) wellbeing.

And instead people spend their times considering matters of little or no consequence given higher understanding / structured mind.

What's the point of introducing a new law to outlaw blah blah blah in beeble beeble beele - when law (and money) are the forces which prevent society (globally) from forming into a workable structure ?

sarahsweets
07-10-14, 06:14 AM
I suppose this could venture into spirituality or religion vs scientific facts/knowledge and there is a difference between the two. I do not have a religion that I can believe in because for me, they can be wild guesswork and, frankly not possible when you take an interpretation and try to turn it into fact. I am however spiritual,I believe in something, I just dont know what that something is and I cant dispute science.

lmg2474
08-20-14, 07:39 PM
I think that instead of being born from nothingness, we were born from everything - the vast potential of everything that could ever happen and ever will happen.

Hathor
08-20-14, 10:22 PM
The problem with considering life after death is that people resign themselves to a miserable life before death in the expectation of something better when they die - an idea which is used by the ruling class to maintain their position. The law imprisons the majority in subservience to the minority. Sadly 'Occupy - we are the 99%' has lost steam - unsurprising as long as survival requires money is controlled by the 1%
fair play or not fair play - what a remarkably clever way of controlling people.

Your wonderful life after death v 1 and 2 comes only with dissent from schemes which enforce human inequality.

Life after death v 1 (enlightenment) and 2 (physical death) are the 2 key motifs of the great religions.


Ah, so true, (if I understand you correctly) at first I thought you were going the way of the little herded animal (F. Nietzsche), but unlike him your philology is solid enough to see the difference between the spoon fed crap and enlightenment.

ps

Q - How many fascists does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

A - Fascists don't fit in a lighbulb silly. :eek:

Q - why not?

A - Because they are fracking dimbulbs

http://i0.wp.com/vigilantcitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/leaddarkhorse8.jpg

Hathor
08-20-14, 10:31 PM
I suppose this could venture into spirituality or religion vs scientific facts/knowledge and there is a difference between the two. I do not have a religion that I can believe in because for me, they can be wild guesswork and, frankly not possible when you take an interpretation and try to turn it into fact. I am however spiritual,I believe in something, I just dont know what that something is and I cant dispute science.

In the history of education, the most striking phenomenon is that schools of learning, which at one epoch are alive with a ferment of genius, in a succeeding generation exhibit merely pedantry and routine. The reason is, that they are overladen with inert ideas. Education with inert ideas is not only useless: it is, above all things, harmful—Corruptio optimi, pessima. Except at rare intervals of intellectual ferment, education in the past has been radically infected with inert ideas. That is the reason why uneducated clever women, who have seen much of the world, are in middle life so much the most cultured part of the community. They have been saved from this horrible burden of inert ideas. Every intellectual revolution which has ever stirred humanity into greatness has been a passionate protest against inert ideas. Then, alas, with pathetic ignorance of human psychology, it has proceeded by some educational scheme to bind humanity afresh with inert ideas of its own fashioning.

The Aims of Education



Alfred North Whitehead

http://www.anthonyflood.com/whiteheadeducation.htm

iagteyh
08-24-14, 06:39 PM
I think the things that are your consciousness.. no, they won't suddenly go to zero when you die.. I don't think it's usually of much practical use to consider that life is not just 0 or 1 (dead, or alive) but in some sense continuous.. but I think that from being adhd we should have an understanding of the continuous nature of consciousness (I'm at times more or less conscious.. that's the case more for me, being adhd, than 'normal' people... but, I think that when we die this evaporates.. we use the lifeless state of death as the cut off, but it's always slightly arbitrary (maybe the millisecond scale around generally accepted deadness is where it might be sensible to consider whether the subject is recently deceased or not)

I think we drift off into death, and the physical forces/particles/phenomena which govern how consciousness works exactly.. the states of that which are understood and experienced as life and consciousness.. that fades, and there's no proper cut off (for being dead, or being alive.. these are (very useful) simplifications... which it would generally be ludicrous to deny. The physical phenomena underpinning it do not vanish to nothing.. ever, although to consider the consciousness to persist in any meaningful way would be erm.. odd.

An ice cube.. put in a glass of water.. a solid lump of water (in the shape of a stegosaurus, hopefully) in a pool of liquid water. When it melts. what has happened to the stegosaurus? erm, mister.. a bleepin stegosaurus has vanished from your equation?

Kunga Dorji
08-24-14, 07:00 PM
What if all that nothingness you speak of, was composed of all the possible somethingnesses, with the one caveat that they add up to zero?

In that case, everything that is not impossible, happens somewhere or somewhen. The probability of you being alive is not zero, therefore it happens given an infinity of possibility space.
Potentially it even happens an infinite number of times so there could be lots of all of us out there.

Of course, if all has to add up to zero, that means there can not be a net amount of time. This would imply that time itself is illusory.

Time itself exists only relative to a conscious observer- or at least that seems to be where quantum theory is leading. Apply the "Schroedinger Wave Equation" to the whole universe and it is said that time would freeze.

I think I need to do more maths to be able to do more than reference this argument!

mildadhd
08-24-14, 10:23 PM
Time itself exists only relative to a conscious observer- or at least that seems to be where quantum theory is leading. Apply the "Schroedinger Wave Equation" to the whole universe and it is said that time would freeze.

I think I need to do more maths to be able to do more than reference this argument!


I do not claim to know anything about these topics but I think would like to understand quantum theory, sometimes when the topic comes up.

I have a hard time understanding how anything could be equal to one.

If it takes a relationship to develop?

P

mildadhd
08-24-14, 10:56 PM
2 :) = 1 :)




p

SB_UK
08-25-14, 06:28 AM
Time is an emergent property of the first Universal event of the creation of a Planck length standing wave.

It is an illusion.

But a bukasha jolly persistent wadda boom one

() <- God

God spontaneously reconfigures to generate the first phenomenological substrate.

.()
()() <- Planck length standing wave which encodes the smallest distance in reality, duality, speed of light, time period ... ... ie out of 'nothing' appears space and time

- and then several emergent events later - all of which are pretty much the same as that one - with frame of boson (ie () ) keeping (a social impulse) the emergent structure which it has seeded ie the Planck length standing wave matrix together - in this case

- we find ourselves at a point where we need the frame of boson to descend upon the human species so that we're positioned as an enforced social species.

~ADHD~
where no reward is obtained from doing harm.

SB_UK
08-26-14, 03:13 AM
As far as I can see - one of the simplest ways to getting one's head around - what on earth is going on in this 'orrible place -
is working out that there can be no such thing as nothing.

Everything is manufactured.

Your neutrino is made, your proton is made, your gamma ray made, your brain made, the gas you breathe is made
- reality is a matrix of things -

what is nothing must be an effective nothing (to our senses) and it must be imbued with the power of creation/evolution.

So - we have a creative impulse which generates increasing informational complexity.

We can give it a name - call it the natural process of generating increasing informational complexity to a pattern or Gog for short.

Then we can get on with the process with helping Almighty Gog along by setting up a social species where the combined collaborative forces of the species, each person competing only against themselves to become better - try to generate increasing diversity (informational complexity).

That's all.

What gets in the way ?
A combination of a default reward system of materialism and a society which won't allow you to survive unless you give in to the default reward system of materialism and collect a whole set of vintage sports cars which you then spend your life showing off to people even though all you've done is to buy (not make, design) them.

You see the banker do this with art.

Just buying something elegant (not that cars are) doesn't make you elegant.

The natural tendency towards informational complexity requires you to become ever more elegant - a process which is impeded by the materialist imperative.

So - the people who buy themselves 'elegant' things become inelegant in the process.

Anybody with any elegance, beauty (morality) CANNOT support a reward system of materialism
- since it is required to be usurped for the individual to attain personal betterment.

Increasing external reward (having more than other people at cost to others) vs Increasing internal reward (becoming personally better for species betterment)

SB_UK
08-26-14, 03:30 AM
You see this all the time - people go to art galleries and claim how wonderful the art is, people who go to restaurants of world famous chefs and claim how good the food is

- but the artist and the chef (if they're good) have spent years educating their senses to produce something of high quality.

The clientele may not have the sensory capacity (ability to define quality) to appreciate the deliacy of another's art.

But they know that it's supposed to be good and so proclaim to everybody after paying an extreme entrance fee - how wonderful the experience was.

You can't see something if you're blindfolded.

I can only label somethign as 'good' if I obtain 'chills' and even then the 'chills' are qualified with the idea of being potentially personal ie whatever music has called the chills is personally enjoyable - I can't extend this idea of personally enjoyable quality to other people ... ...
There will be some sort of connection there though - but not one which is strong enough to arrange art into a hierarchy of quality.

The term education is used not only to build a mind but to generate the senses also.

-*-

The point being that an individual enjoying the 'finer' things in life needs to be learnt in much the same way that an individual understanding their personal context (standard education of mind) must be learnt.

Now - we're at a peculiar place because we're about to understand that Gog is just an organizational principle which generates increasing informational complexity to a pattern -
and so with the effective completion of mind (ie understanding the above) - we're left at a loose end.

Or are we ?

The pattern is towards increasing informational complexity - and so what should we be striving towards - 'educating' our senses towards higher quality, introducing higher quality onto the planet and thereby seeing 'Gog's will be done'.

But you can't generate increasing informational complexity and a world of people who obtain joy from quality in an economic system - because economics is simply a rebranding of war (competition) and collaboration is essential for people to get into an unflustered place in which they're able to develop personal quality.

So if anybody is interested in people living a meaningful life - then people need to get used to the idea of collaborating on the essentials - creating space for people to voluntarily aggregate and to make themselves (and hopefully the world) better in the process of what they achieve.
The only stipulation though'd be to do no harm - but doing globally appreciated good - for instance a piece of music disseminated over the Internet - would be (to the originator) of greater personal reward.

So - a scale from little to incredible personal reward.
To be contrasted with from little (less than minimum wage - Yay!!! It's so much fun here) to silly levels of remuneration (FTSE 100 CEOs)
- where the scales are reversed.

The more you earn (materialism) the lower the personal quality through necessity of having to swallow the wrong reward system - where the two reward systems cannot co-exist.

IE it's the addictive reward system of money/power (competition) at the detriment of others EOR personal reward which benefits your fellow man.

SB_UK
08-26-14, 03:50 AM
So - in answer to the question there can't be nothing before death, there can't be nothing after death - there can't be nothing during death.

There may be room for the term nothing - but it's a something which we're frozen out from having any interaction with.

Nothing - for the most part is used by man to describe something boring ie there's 'nothing' to do - which is a byproduct of the economic system - because the majority of us haven't enough money to pay an incredible amount to dispel the boredom of living in a world of money.
In truth though - the best that the world of money has to us (Disney world and an Italian ice cream) - become boring soon after entering - and they're not good for us either.

However developing high personal quality and enjoying that personal quality and the things we shape (efferent) /experience (afferent) ARE good for us.
Do not shorten our lives, make life worth living for other people.

So - a junction between 2 reward systems - either to do to hurt others vs to do to help others
- where we actually hurt ourselves if we choose the reward system which hurts others - because unsurprisingly what comes around goes around - and we descend into a culture of all people treating one another similarly - actually through necessity of survival.

We need a cease-fire and that can be arranged through understanding why money transactions are indistinguishable from war and then to eliminate the global economic system for a global voluntaryist system in which becoming as good as you personally can be is the goal.

Yes - you'll never get there - but as you tend towards better - the entire world around you will be pulled up by your efforts.

The reward will come from 10 billion people collectively becoming better - each one in a small way - that small way though amplified 10 billion fold ... ...

life could be great and instead it's just a miserable, grey sky, pouring down with rain in the middle of Summer (JUST LIKE TODAY!) experience of from birth to death - gloom.

All that needs changing is the human desire to take when they give; the pleasure of giving without taking is the higher (moral,properly human) reward system.

And the emergence of the pleasure of giving without taking (via the mirror neurone system) is a well documented characteristic - which has arisen in relatively recent evolutionary history:
"A monkey would probably never agree that it is better to give than to receive, but they do apparently get some reward from giving to another monkey. "
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/12/121223152732.htm

We're simply the culmination of this property ie from its humble beginnings through speciation events into a species which (through education of mind to wisdom) seizes 'it is better to give than receive'.

-*-

The core difference between ADDer and nonADDer is that the basic mind type which is formed at wisdom is strongly promoted in the ADDer ie the ADDer's mind cannot become waylaid on the path to wisdom - although this is education dependent ie a mind which will naturally self assemble to global logical consistency with moral wellbeing won't be able to self assemble if it doesn't have any information at its disposal to assemble.

Also - note - a clear connection between the tendency to fight other people and lack of education.

As evidenced by the various religious wars taking place in poor parts (no education on offer) of the world.
Also to be noted is the extremist's resistance to educational schemes.

And as evidenced by thinkers choosing conscientious objection.

It's a simple reactive shift from competition (barbarism) to collaboration (social behaviour) with an education which actually serves to develop a mind with information which can be used to tell the difference between right and wrong.
A strong emphasis need be placed on education - but a strong emphasis also on the nature of education as being into teaching the individual right from wrong - the entire Western educational system does not teach this - and teaches only mechanical systems which anybody with a memory can absorb and regurgitate.

We're in a peculiar place where we have to reinvent education and roll it out to all people - where that education needs to somehow help the individual to see the difference between right or wrong - perfect algebraic or grammatical skills aren't of overwhelming importance. Not entirely sure that advanced maths or advanced natural language are required to differentiate right from wrong.

SB_UK
08-26-14, 04:19 AM
So - yes - when you die what you call you (the face in the mirror) is gone.

Don't waste your time dreaming of going to a better place.

Enjoy making this current place a better place.

We're all running out of time - don't have many years to waste here before dying and so don't have the luxury of messing about waiting for people dawdling - worried about the unsettling nature of something (A BETTER WORLD) new; in actual fact it's just evil (materialism) not wishing to relinquish the little it has - but more important the dream of having (personally) more - not that this 'dream' will ever come to pass. It's (the dream) simply the strait-jacket stamped (often by ourselves [love/desire of money] and often with a little help
from others [group delusion] and often with the explicit desire from others (corporations) to keep you consuming [profit motive]) with images of carrots.

So ... ...

[1] Global collaboration -<- easy
[2] Every day's a holiday -<- easy
[3] Create something worthwhile -<- if you want and so easy
[4] Live an unstressed life and die a painless (instead of a death to chronic disease) death -<- easy
[5] Re-dissolve back into your fundamental substrate maker when one dies enlightened -<- effortless

So what're we waiting or - hubba bubba hubba - it's miserable outside and I want to break the Tarahumara 20 ironman triathlon challenge somewhere warm.

Miserable wet gloomy England - I can see why you lot :-) spent your whole time invading hot places.

Abi
08-26-14, 05:13 AM
You see this all the time - people go to art galleries and claim how wonderful the art is, people who go to restaurants of world famous chefs and claim how good the food is

- but the artist and the chef (if they're good) have spent years educating their senses to produce something of high quality.

The clientele may not have the sensory capacity (ability to define quality) to appreciate the deliacy of another's art.

But they know that it's supposed to be good and so proclaim to everybody after paying an extreme entrance fee - how wonderful the experience was.

So this guy went to a Van Gogh exhibit with an "ear" he had carved out of corned beef and labelled it "Ear of Van Gogh" and everyone oohed and aaahed at it.

True Story.

Hathor
08-26-14, 05:48 AM
Time itself exists only relative to a conscious observer- or at least that seems to be where quantum theory is leading. Apply the "Schroedinger Wave Equation" to the whole universe and it is said that time would freeze.

I think I need to do more maths to be able to do more than reference this argument!

Do you think it is similar without all the Math just see that Parminides froze his brain and Zeno helped explain. :confused:

Stevuke79
08-26-14, 06:25 AM
So this guy went to a Van Gogh exhibit with an "ear" he had carved out of corned beef and labelled it "Ear of Van Gogh" and everyone oohed and aaahed at it.

True Story.

OMFG!! Holy cow!! WTF!!

That IS (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Troy) a true story!!

ROTFLMFAO!!!

MADD As A Hatte
08-26-14, 08:31 AM
... You simply seize to exist and that is the end of it.

Well i've thought long and hard about this theory ...

I hope i'm making sense here. :scratch:

Recalcitrant irreverent response:

Um

Seize to exist. Seize???

Thinking longer, think harder. No! Hey!!! THINK CLEVERER.

Theory. Nope.

Theories result from wacko ideas (like we all think up in the pub after the sixth beer), which are rephrased as an hypothesis ("ADDF wackos think there's life after death") ... the hypothesis is then subjected to specific processes to try to bring it unstuck.

Are you making sense?

No. Try again. But do your homework first.

SB_UK
08-26-14, 08:43 AM
You simply seize to exist and that is the end of it.But to really live you have to let go, and that's the ending we all want.

Ain't nuttin' ain't noone not nuttin no nowhere other than your mind, body and spirit belong to you - and your mind and body are on temporary loan - where allocating ownership of spirit (to you) doesn't seem entirely fair either.

Meaning that you own nothing.

Yay! Nothing is alive and kicking in the heads of materialists.

Hathor
08-26-14, 09:42 AM
It must be that darn gravity that makes it tick; I mean kick.

Tricky bugger that gravity, and I am mostly idealist. If that weight makes nothing kick can it make a materialist tick?

SB_UK
08-26-14, 09:55 AM
Gravity keeps the space time matrix together placing it as the emerrgent property (social impulse) of the Plank length standing wave space:time matrix.

Now can we kill the global economic system and replace it with one in which I can go and gets me some sun.

(which is actually the Korean name of my wife)

What're the odds ?

So the Universe is synchronized to a defined metronome [space time] and the Universe is all stuck together [gives rise to gravity].

space/time -> gravity [an impulse which maintains social integrity of the ST matrix]
mind (understanding) -> social species [an impulse which maintains social intergrity of the human matrix]

Fraser_0762
08-26-14, 12:59 PM
Recalcitrant irreverent response:

Um

Seize to exist. Seize???

Thinking longer, think harder. No! Hey!!! THINK CLEVERER.

Theory. Nope.

Theories result from wacko ideas (like we all think up in the pub after the sixth beer), which are rephrased as an hypothesis ("ADDF wackos think there's life after death") ... the hypothesis is then subjected to specific processes to try to bring it unstuck.

Are you making sense?

No. Try again. But do your homework first.

Do my homework? If you know where I can find the factual material "What happens after you live". Then i'll glady read it and educate myself on the matter.

As i've never came across such material, all I can do is form an idea of what may or may not occur.

I base my idea on the understanding that life ultimately comes from nothing. Making lack-of-life (death) finite, as apposed to infinite.

Hathor
08-26-14, 06:21 PM
I entertain the notion that there may be something after death, but nothing may come first as consciousness in limbo.

Notice the population curve centered around 1881

http://blog.dssresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/world_population_1050_to_2050.jpg

SB_UK
08-27-14, 03:21 AM
need this too

http://www.theoildrum.com/uploads/12/LongTermPopulationGrowthRates.gif

Destined to go into negative territory

http://populationpyramid.net/japan/2005/
http://populationpyramid.net/japan/2050/

CAPITALISM'S GROWTH PARADIGM DEVASTATED BY NATURAL PHENOMENON !
(headline in 2050's Herald Times International Edition)

People wonder what to do about things because money doesn't work any more.
(headline in 2050's Daily Mail)

How about people just do things to be nice and don't require payment ?
(headline in 2050's Guardian electronic edition)

SB_UK
08-27-14, 03:28 AM
I entertain the notion that there may be something after death, but nothing may come first as consciousness in limbo.

Notice the population curve centered around 1881



wikiP/1990s
They occurred at the core period of the Second Industrial Revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Industrial_Revolution)

When growth was alive !!!

and capitalism could work.

-*-

Lucky for us growth is dead, capitalism is dead and we all now have to be nice y'all.

The Hedge fund head eaters of Wall Street will have to be asked to either go vegan or to eat one another's head.

SB_UK
08-27-14, 03:30 AM
The Hedge fund head eaters of Wall Street will have to be asked to either go vegan or to eat one another's head.


Where those who cease to repent Why there can't be nothing after death will be transplanted into a fiery trading pit deep in Planet Earth where they'll be roasted to produce pork belly derivatives for Satan himself.

ooooo! ribs !!!

(The diddly Book of Flanders)

SB_UK
08-27-14, 03:40 AM
We're in a bit of trouble - everything collapses in the next few years and there will be nothing after the death of the economic system unless people learn to work together.

And even then - I'm not too sure how easy it is going to be to clean up all of the toxins and rubbish we've introduced onto the planet.

Up against it are we

Not too sure how this will end - all depends on whether we learn how to put all of the awful stuff we've pulled out of the toxic toy drawer away.

This is way harder than building after a war though - because blank canvasses are easy to re-shape - when human beings introduced toxins through the industrial process into the environment - nobody gave a thought to how to remove them ... ... it just may not be possible.

How about huge swathes of planet Earth marked with the toxic symbol and taped off from access ?

The deserts are still safe thanks to them being uninhabitable and thereby not being destroyed by man.
Yay! We've somewhere to live on planet Earth and it's uninhabitable - go human beings !!!

The ending is described in this short video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfGMYdalClU

SB_UK
08-27-14, 03:46 AM
And you wonder why ADDers can't pay attention to doing pointless things for money on planet Earth ?

We've the weight of huge great aliens (= MORALITY) jumping on our backs - and that is somewhat distracting.

It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.
-- Krishnamurti

ADDers aren't better because we're unable to pay attention to immorality - incapacity to pay attention to engagement in immorality SHOULD be the norm
- otherwise NOTHING can work.

How do we ensure this ?
Sustainable zero energy appropriately heated housing built with the young boys and girls to **all** and a timetabled session down with the old boys and girls at the allottment
- whilst the collective brains of planet Earth work out how to clean up all the **** **we've** generated.

-*-

There's irony here - because it's rapidly looking as though human sickness is failure to access (through over-consumption) a natural mechanism (fasting -> autophagy) to clean up the **** that living (ROS) generates.

Over-consumption and Over-consumerism as a two pronged attack which destroys species viability
- and what is it at its root ?

Greed.
The primitive reward system.
Gaining reward from the suffering of others.

Where - to be properly human - you gain reward from your contribution to the happiness of others.

So alien is this concept that it is estimated that few will be able to understand this post.

Is USA DVD region 1 or 2 ?1


YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! USA USA USA

SB_UK
08-27-14, 04:00 AM
Why there can't be nothing after death
After death of the economic system life will either be WONDERFUL or ELIMINATED dependent on the reward system which man chooses to embrace.

What will you not have in the good reward system ?
Exclusive ownership (its mine mine mine!) of any *thing* - as *every* thing will be shared - unless we can all have one (like a nice pair of hemp underpants).

Kunga Dorji
08-28-14, 06:18 PM
Do my homework? If you know where I can find the factual material "What happens after you live". Then i'll glady read it and educate myself on the matter.

As i've never came across such material, all I can do is form an idea of what may or may not occur.

I base my idea on the understanding that life ultimately comes from nothing. Making lack-of-life (death) finite, as apposed to infinite.

The tricky thing here is whether you are able to consider personal reports as "factual".

Much of what I believe is factual would be described as anectodal or "mystical".

There are two problems with this approach-

The "Anecdotal Evidence" claim is often raised from the underlying assumption that any anecdotal evidence that is not in conformity with the prevalent scientific narrative (scientific materialism) has been generated by incompetent, deluded or dishonest witnesses.

The second problem is that what we dismiss as "mysticism" is more properly understood as the scientific analysis of subjective experience. Anyone with any direct experience of any of the mystical traditions comes to realise very quickly that they are dealing with individuals who have a very analytical approach to their experience and who are given to repeatedly testing and cross referencing that experience.

The current narrative within the scientific community that dismissses the validity of subjective experience renders much of human experience impervious to analytical examination, and places it permananently outside the realm of the "factual".

However if it is "factual" accounts you want:
There is a considerable body of first hand accounts of near death experiences, and also a significant body of accounts of small children who appear to have accurate knowledge of past lives.

There is a considerable cache of such reports contained within this website:
http://noetic.org/

It is huge and I have yet to have time to read as much of it as I would like.

The founder of this site was the astronaut Edgar Mitchell- clearly not a "lightweight".
http://noetic.org/directory/person/edgar-mitchell/

Also - just google "Near Death Experiences and get reading. (It will keep you very busy though) :)

Equally the book known as the "Tibetan Book of the Dead" is essenstially made up of the experiences of Tibetan yogis from the interspace between their reincarnations (which is known as "the bardo")
The "Book of the Dead" is more properly known by its full title "The Book of Natural Liberation through Hearing in the Bardo" and contains instructions re preparatory practices for death- and also instructions as to specific advice those close to the dying/recently deceased person should recite to the dying/recently deceased person to help them find their way through the death process and to aid them in wisely choosing their next incarnation.

The Tibetans have been very thorough in keeping formal records as to the identification procedures for reincarnated lamas- and these records go back for many years and are deficient only in cases where the Chinese Army has ransacked monasteries and destroyed the records during their invasion and occupation of Tibet. However they are somewhat selective in who they allow to access these records- and they are all in Tibetan.

Hathor
08-28-14, 06:44 PM
I base my idea on the understanding that life ultimately comes from nothing. Making lack-of-life (death) finite, as apposed to infinite.

How do you understand life comes from nothing? I surely do not understand that, but see other options.

For example, energy may have always existed.


If life comes from nothing how does that make death finite rather than a return to nothing forever?

dvdnvwls
08-28-14, 10:37 PM
Fraser - I'm not sure about this, but I wonder if maybe it's possible, in the way you originally stated things in this thread, for it to be nothing to me when I die, even though it isn't nothing in an absolute sense.