An idea about death (atheist perspective)
Offline Hello everyone,
My wife and I (who are both atheists) were talking last night about religion, life, death, etc., and it finally arrived at this idea I've had, and been trying to work out for the last few months.
Mind you, it's still an incomplete idea, as the methods for describing it have not been ironed out to a point to avoid confusion. And, this idea has no scientific data or evidence to really support it - it's just an idea that seems (to me), possible, within the laws of our universe.
At first glance, it would appear to be very similar to the idea of reincarnation (which my wife thought I was talking about). However, this is most definitely not the case, as I don't believe in the existence of a soul, nor do I believe anything about "me" survives the death of my brain.
Having said that, here is my idea about what may happen at death; Any opinions about it are welcome, as are any suggestions on how to better describe this (if one is able to grasp the idea I'm trying to convey).
______________________
It's obvious we don't recall anything before we came into existence - "we" didn't exist then. And likewise, we don't recall a distinct moment in time when we became conscious of ourselves, or this universe. In other words, we gradually "awakened" into our lives.
From a 3rd person perspective however, the cycle of life is much more distinct; We witness when people are born, and the moment they die. Contemplating our own death is difficult to comprehend - I suppose because our minds have trouble coming to grips with the idea of non-existence. As such, most people choose to believe that "they" must move on to an afterlife of some sort - that somehow, some part of them escapes death, and continues on in some form or fashion (the basis for most religions).
This uncertainty about death, and what it is, is caused by our consciousness - our ability to be self-aware. Our consciousness is essentially driven by a collection of memories - short and long-term - interacting within the capacity of our brains. At the moment of brain death, our thoughts and memories quickly fade, and, at some threshold, we cease to exist, and simply do not have the capability to "care" about non-existence.
I think most of you are following me so far... Here is where it might get confusing:
At this moment of death (which I imagine is much like going under a general anesthetic), could there be a gradual awakening into an entirely new, self-conscious life, somewhere within the universe? It could be a human existence... it could be something else (alien). I like to think of this idea as a "chain of lives without the chain". In other words, there is no connection; no linkage; no relation, between one existence and another.
The idea of "you" is only relative to the existence at present. The moment of death would be just like being born for the first time - each existence necessarily entering into an older and older universe - until the universe no longer supports self-conscious life. (Did you ever wonder why you find yourself existing during this particular period in the universe's history?) I suppose the actual moment of death can not really be experienced by the lifeform - only the moments leading up to it. After that, the only evidence that you ever existed, is wholly contained in the influence you exerted on the universe.
So, you can see how this differs from the idea of reincarnation, in that "you" aren't contained within some eternal "soul". "You" are completely temporary as a physical entity, at a particular moment in this universe.
Any thoughts or opinions on this? Suggestions are welcome!
Thanks,
Ryan
- Login to post comments
Um. Based on what evidence? Without evidence, it's just as much a fantasy as god is.
All the evidence so far rather suggests consciousness is an emergent property of a relatively complex brain. That means when the brain stops functioning, the consciousness ends. Much like when you crush a computer, computation vanishes. Crash a car into a wall, 75mph vanishes. Etcetera. Consciousness, computation, and velocity all not "things" per-se, but properties.
Besides, what's the actual difference between simply no longer being, and this I-not-I you describe? And... come to that, what is it you are describing, really? If there is no link between one consciousness and another, why even bring it up?
What's wrong with the simple "We cease to be"?
Hi Fingergun,
I stated initially, that this idea was not based on any scientific evidence. It is an idea of what might be how things are perceived as conscious beings, without invoking gods or supernatural concepts. This idea is purely speculative. My aim, was to gather opinions on the subject, in hopes to better describe the idea, if I was successful enough in conveying the concept my initial description (which apparently I was not).
I realize that speculating about something that is ultimately untestable, is futile - but - it may offer some philosophical fodder - food for thought, at the very least.
Inherently, there is nothing wrong with the "When I die, I cease to exist" - I agree with it. I'm trying to envision how that process might be perceived. And as I mentioned, I don't really think it's possible to experience death first-hand. When you're dead, you obviously can't exist to ponder about what it was like. But consider the fact that there will be billions of more future conscious beings born in the next few decades alone - all of which will gradually awaken into their conscious lives - having not a clue what came before, or the 'purpose' of their existence - just like we did.
I suppose the general idea, is that the moment a conscious being dies, it may actually be perceived as the experience of being born (as something capable of being self-aware, somewhere in the universe). In our case, it was awakening as a human, some 14 billion years after the big bang.
Does this make any more sense now? I'm not sure what benefit this idea could have, even if true. I suppose it could help bolster the idea that life is indeed special, and that it should be treated carefully and respectfully.
I'm not sure how you're getting from an individual perception of the death event to other consciousnesses. I just don't see any connection there.
I'm also not sure it's even possible to perceive one's own coming into and going out of existence. After all, perception is itself an attribute of the same mechanism that consciousness emerges from, and is part of that same emergence. What we perceive is "other", e.g. the world around us. Even our perception of ourselves is a matter of reflection from that "other", e.g. mirrors and other people and the like. We don't perceive "I", but "I" perceives that there is evidence of "I" and identifies with and of itself.
I think "I" might be able to detect it's last moments when the perceptions become weaker/more vague as the brain ceases to function. Compared to memories of previous perceptions, etcetera. Though any degradation of "I" would probably be missed for the reasons I state above.
That's the thing; there is no connection. This idea, is more for the "benefit" of the being that is currently conscious and able to consider it. I suppose it would offer an alternative to the 'comfort' provided by believing in a supernatural afterlife, such as heaven. Not that the universe owes us such comfort, but if the moment of death is actually perceived as birth into this universe as some conscious being, the idea seems pretty interesting (to me at least).
And I totally agree. The perception of coming into this existence is hazy at best. We can only go back as far as our earliest memory - and most likely, that memory is very vague and nondescript. Going out (death) must be non-perceivable, since like you mentioned, is dependent on the consciousness functioning in the first place.
I died once in a car accident. I wouldn't say that during those 7 minutes it was anything like full consciousness. Rather very "dreamlike" and the highest high anyone could ever imagine. I did recall coming back to consciousness and dreading feeling my body and earthly presence. I don't know if that's what every person experiences when they die but all of the scenarious that I have read from others that have survived fatal accidents are very similar to what I've experienced. Many attribute this to religion. I don't. I agree with Jung's description of the collective unconscious or the "super-conscious". I think the super-conscious is kind of like a big tree. And the leaves are each individual person's conscious experience. Some leaves may become diseased and fall off before other leaves(like sick people) and sometimes they have to be cut off so they do not spread their disease to the rest of the tree(like serial killers). But when an individual leaf dies naturally, it will wither up(back into the tree, so imagine the consciousness going back into the super-conscious). That is what make sense to me, we are all connected after all. Basically, once we leave we go back to where we used to be, which is not-existing.
"I can resist anything, except temptation..."
~Wilde
You say many times there is no connection, so I must ask again what Fingergun already asked: why bring up the new consciousness at all? If there's no connection, then how is it relevant? If you take that out, then... what are you trying to say?
"Nobody will ever win the battle of the sexes. There's too much fraternizing with the enemy."
This is why it's so hard for me to describe;
I suppose it's not directly relevant. It's not like we can take this info with us when we die, and it's not like this can somehow help out the "next consciousness" - since there's no connection.
After talking this out with you guys, I'm starting to realize that there really is no real relevance in this idea; what difference does it really make when you're dead? Well, I suppose the only difference it could possibly make, would be how such an idea affects me during my life. In this sense, it's similar most other religious influences, except there wouldn't be the addition of supernatural elements, nor the idea of an afterlife where my thoughts, memories and experiences are valuable or useful...
Reminds me of the Buddhist idea of re-birth.
Doesn't really make sense to me either.
There was a cool idea about death in one of these threads, I don't know which one though.
It was talking about the biological mechanism of death, how our brain shuts down.
Part of the process was how it fills with dopamine and gives us the experience of calm and acceptance.
We also get the experience of going into a bright light, and because we lose our "sense of time", as far as our perception goes this moment lasts forever.
So a bit like our time can go quickly for us or slowly for us or how it can just "disappear" altogether (e.g. sleep), our perception of time can freeze and seem to last forever. So although that moment passes on, our body rots away and the world keeps turning, our soul/perception, the part of us that thinks and feels, that remains trapped in time in that peaceful moment of acceptance and happiness.
Not sure if that's actually true or supported by the evidence.
Even if it was, it still wouldn't be true for how all people shut down. (e.g. some have "bad trips" and feel the fires of hell)
But if it was supported by the evidence, it would be a nice rational spin on "eternal rest" and "eternal happiness" and would make death easier to accept and less feared by a lot of people.
I found two ways to interpret your post.
The first suggests dualism. I assume that you don't believe in dualism, but then, how can your consciousness somehow "wake up" in something else? Your consciousness is completely the result of your brain. Once your brain dies, your consciousness is gone. All other consciousnesses that may appear will not be "you." Other people's brains may eventually have a particle that used to be in your brain, but the consciousness is completely unique.
Now, the second thing I think you might be suggesting is that we can just take any random consciousness and call that consciousness a different manifestation of "you." But, what would be point of that? Plus, there is nothing "you" about that consciousness. Why try to semantically establish a connection?
Maybe I just don't get it.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare