Originally Posted by Datsick
Death as most people perceive it really can't be a possible scenario. It doesn't take any leaps of faith to realize that it's impossible to be conscious if you're "dead" but it's also impossible to be unconscious because you cannot be aware of not being aware(as you have stated you agreed with). Therefore the only plausible explanation is that you never really "die" your physical body is gone, and you are reborn with no pauses in between. Now the method in which this occurs is either not known or I haven't read that far yet. Either way you can't deny its true.
It most certainly is not true.
When you are dead your ability to be conscious and unconscious both stop completely. Life sustaining electrical activity ceases, and within a short time the brain decays irreparably.
There is a very simple way to disprove your theory. You exhibit a logical fallacy known as 'false dichotomy'. You firstly assert that a person can only ever be conscious or unconscious, which is not correct. If you are neither conscious nor unconscious, then you have ceased brain function.
There's another flaw, you say you cannot be unconscious because you cannot be aware of not being aware, but that is totally irrelevant. People are unconscious all the time. The vast majority of time when you sleep you are not lucid, when people sustain a head injury and 'lose consciousness' they - unsurprisingly - lose consciousness. More often than not when people are unconscious they are not aware.
If you die then you are dead. Trying to play word games won't change that.
<Faint> the rules have been stated quite clearly 3 times now from high staff
Gorman's pretty much hitting what my retort would be dead on the head, sole exception being that you are completely ignoring the fact that, as I said before, being unable to be conscious of being unconscious means nothing by itself. It requires a situation where that observation could be violated for it to mean anything.
nyan :3
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
It most certainly is not true.
When you are dead your ability to be conscious and unconscious both stop completely. Life sustaining electrical activity ceases, and within a short time the brain decays irreparably.
There is a very simple way to disprove your theory. You exhibit a logical fallacy known as 'false dichotomy'. You firstly assert that a person can only ever be conscious or unconscious, which is not correct. If you are neither conscious nor unconscious, then you have ceased brain function.
There's another flaw, you say you cannot be unconscious because you cannot be aware of not being aware, but that is totally irrelevant. People are unconscious all the time. The vast majority of time when you sleep you are not lucid, when people sustain a head injury and 'lose consciousness' they - unsurprisingly - lose consciousness. More often than not when people are unconscious they are not aware.
If you die then you are dead. Trying to play word games won't change that.
You talk about how you're completely unconscious in your sleep, that is not true. One of two things happen in your sleep. One being you have dreams, this is a sort of consciousness in itself, just not in the physical world. The second being that you just sleep and wake up with nothing in between. But the thing is, that when you sleep you don't know that you're asleep you just instantaneously transition from the point you lose "consciousness" to the point where you regain it. The thought that when you die, you lose consciousness forever can't be true because there's nothing to instantly transition to, like when you sleep. There can't just be blackness because blackness is something you are aware of, but then again there can't be nothing because there has to be SOMETHING, nothingness isn't possible. I don't know if I'm really getting my message across the way I intend to, so I apologize if I don't make sense.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
There is a very simple way to disprove your theory. You exhibit a logical fallacy known as 'false dichotomy'. You firstly assert that a person can only ever be conscious or unconscious, which is not correct. If you are neither conscious nor unconscious, then you have ceased brain function.
Ok. That's his take on it; not what the author actually says.
The author says that logically, if you are concious of being unconcious then you are not actually unconcious. He uses that as a premise for immortality, because death is essentially the infinite unconciousness to some people. If you are incapable of realizing that you are dead; does that not make you immortal? Because if you can't realize you're dead, you are either alive, or you are in some sort of limbo; which is not death.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
There's another flaw, you say you cannot be unconscious because you cannot be aware of not being aware, but that is totally irrelevant. People are unconscious all the time. The vast majority of time when you sleep you are not lucid, when people sustain a head injury and 'lose consciousness' they - unsurprisingly - lose consciousness. More often than not when people are unconscious they are not aware.
When people are in comas for long periods of times, do their brains shut off? No, there is still brain activity, proving some sort of awareness to life. Perhaps not what we percieve as physical, but there is still some measure of activity and conciousness.
Simply because someone is not speaking to us or they are asleep, are they truly unconcious?
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
If you die then you are dead. Trying to play word games won't change that.
Prove it. Prove there is no second life, please do.
Please show me definitive evidence that there is no such thing as reincarnation or a higher existence.
Please do it. I'd really love to see what nonsense you manage to come up with.
You would seem to be over-thinking this. The author doesn't actually ever say that this is definitively true. It's a postulation. Similarily to how people say that when we die it is simply a black void of nothingness and unknowingness. We don't know this, and perhaps we will never know it; but we can always think about possibilities. Can't we?
This must be the sadest thread I've seen on here.
The thing is, when you want to do science you, in pleb-speak, start from a clean slate, and then work your way from there.
You don't start with an opinion that makes you feel good and ask others to disprove it, which is what you're doing when you go "there's life after death and you can't disprove it hurr durr".
The burden of proof is on you, show us there is a some sort of afterlife if you want to have a serious discussion about it.
In the case you think that's a bullshit reasoning I'd ask of you to try disproving Russel's teapot, which is a famous example using the exact same logic as you've presented us with.
The point being, why would there be a teapot orbiting the sun, there's nothing pointing to it being so, but we can't disprove it.
Off-topic: Why can't we filter out people who repetitively show they're unable to make a solid point, or something like that.
Originally Posted by Dscigs
Prove it. Prove there is no second life, please do.
Please show me definitive evidence that there is no such thing as reincarnation or a higher existence.
Please do it. I'd really love to see what nonsense you manage to come up with.
The thing is, when you want to do science you, in pleb-speak, start from a clean slate, and then work your way from there.
You don't start with an opinion that makes you feel good and ask others to disprove it, which is what you're doing when you go "there's life after death and you can't disprove it hurr durr".
The burden of proof is on you, show us there is a some sort of afterlife if you want to have a serious discussion about it.
In the case you think that's a bullshit reasoning I'd ask of you to try disproving Russel's teapot, which is a famous example using the exact same logic as you've presented us with.
The point being, why would there be a teapot orbiting the sun, there's nothing pointing to it being so, but we can't disprove it.
Off-topic: Why can't we filter out people who repetitively show they're unable to make a solid point, or something like that.
Last edited by Hattersin; Dec 4, 2014 at 05:23 PM.
PM me with any and all questions
