After death, does the consciousness continue?

[Deleted]

they didn't die... they are alive.

This topic is about clinical death, which they died. Biological death comes ~5 minutes later. This means there's ~5 minutes to have those dreams.

[Deleted]

I kind of like the idea of reincarnation.

Definitely would opt for a pigeon, shitting on people all day and stealing food seems like a fantastic life.

[Deleted]

I ask because I can't imagine myself not 'being' anymore, not being in existence. It's hard to explain.

Just try and remember when before you were born and you'll have an idea of what that might be like.

[prwraith]

If you could perfectly preserve a brain so there was no decay after someone apparently dies and then later found a way to put that brain into another body or a computer, I think the person would still very much exist.

It's my personal view but I don't see a reason why someone would continue existing once all electrical impulses stop in the old brain. Why does there have to be something else? Why can't that be the end.

I'm not saying it is the end with 100% surety, what I'm saying is I'm open to being proved wrong when I die. I don't understand people who are 100% for or against it. Especially when nothing is proven.

[Velaniz]

Sorry; it is a religious thread by default. It pertains to beliefs held about the supernatural. That makes it religious.

Nope, not at all. It's a thread about the unknown. Granted, that's generally a vacuum religion wastes no time seeking out and saturating with silly doctrines, but that doesn't change the intrinsic nature of the discussion itself, which in this particular topic is quite divorced from religion. It's no more super-natural or religious than a thread discussing the various ways the universe could've begun is religious. Hell, even if it were super-natural, that still wouldn't make it religious. There's no cognitive dissonance involved in wanting to investigate paranormal occurrences without also believing there's an omnipotent being out there looking out for you.

[Stir]

Nope, not at all. It's a thread about the unknown. Granted, that's generally a vacuum religion wastes no time seeking out and saturating with silly doctrines, but that doesn't change the intrinsic nature of the discussion itself, which in this particular topic is quite divorced from religion. It's no more super-natural or religious than a thread discussing the various ways the universe could've begun is religious. Hell, even if it were super-natural, that still wouldn't make it religious. There's no cognitive dissonance involved in wanting to investigate paranormal occurrences without also believing there's an omnipotent being out there looking out for you.

The afterlife is not just the unknown. It is a concept for which there is no evidence, nor has there ever been any evidence for it. Furthermore, it assumes a supernatural spirit that trancends the physical, natural world, and it does so by default.
In a very real sense, it is not a topic about the unknown, but a topic about the rejection of the known and the acceptance of a wish pertaining the supernatural as either fact or possibility on no other basis than a personal desire for an infinite existence.

While it is not strictly speaking religious per sé, we're not using the word 'religion' in its strict sense in any case, and we rarely do. 'Religion' as a binding or bonding set of ideas, in its strictest sense, is never, ever used. Instead, 'religion' is always used to describe a faith system with beliefs that are unsubstantiated and concern the supernatural (in which deities usually, but not always, play a part).

Saying 'we don't know if there's an afterlife or not, so it could be possible, and holding the view that it exists is entirely valid' is exactly the same as saying 'we don't know if there's faeries or not, so it could be possible that they do, and holding that view is entirely valid.'

[Donald Hellscream]

I've never died before so I can't say with 100% certainty but logic dictates that it doesn't as it is bound to our brain and the brain ceases to function after death. but logic may very well be wrong for all we know.

[prwraith]

Could we test it?

I mean it's unethical but we could kill people under revivable conditions give them a few minutes and pop em back?

[Yvaelle]

Could we test it?

I mean it's unethical but we could kill people under revivable conditions give them a few minutes and pop em back?

Why bother going through the unethical route of killing them? People die all the time and we revive them all the time - some of them claim to see a white light at the end of a tunnel (which is likely the result of brain death in your occipital lobe) - none of them seemed to have retained consciousness though.

[prwraith]

Why bother going through the unethical route of killing them? People die all the time and we revive them all the time - some of them claim to see a white light at the end of a tunnel (which is likely the result of brain death in your occipital lobe) - none of them seemed to have retained consciousness though.

I'll admit I'm extremely interested to know. It's a person problem but I've always had trouble waiting for answers, and this answer I'll have to potentially wait a lifetime for. Frankly I think it'd be amazing if there was something, another plane of existence as it were. I have my doubts but only the most closed minded of the closed minded wouldn't be willing to be proved wrong in this case