An afterlife and forgetfulness

[Immanuel Can]

A period or state of inactivity or equilibrium happens at death,

You don't know that, either. Even asking somebody who claimed to have a 'near death' experience couldn't assure us of anything, since delusions are a human possibility.

Only God could say what happens after death. Only He is free from the constraints of time and space.

Anything else would be guesses.

I'm talking about the state prior to there ever being a ''someone''
'someone' implies twoness.

You may indeed be "talking about" that. I'm not.

So you can have that conversation with anybody who has time for it.

[RCSaunders]

You have no idea what it is. Nobody really does. There are over a hundred possible definitions of the term, and no conclusive one.

So your confidence is based on nothing. "Life" remains a mystery to you.

You just hope it ends at death. But you have no idea what happens at death.

You obviously have no idea what life is, since you claim nobody does. It's a bit of hubris to assume what you are ignorant of pertains to everyone.

I at least know what I mean by the word life. I mean the attribute that differentiates living organisms from mere non-living physical entities. I identify exactly what the attributes of life are that are unique to living organisms.

Here is a PRIME EXAMPLE of when one can NOT even think for "themselves" that much, that they, in turn, can NOT even express what they think. They have to, literally, link to what ANOTHER SAYS about an idea or perspective.

Idiot! I wrote the article.

[Age]

Age wrote:



But the block universe does co-exist with beings that can "consider ALL-OF-THIS".

1. I NEVER said otherwise.

2. Is this so-called "block universe" an ACTUAL 'thing' is just an ASSUMPTION or GUESS of what COULD BE true, or something else entirely?

The reason for their co-existence is that beings that can "consider ALL-OF-THIS" are limited to the phenomena that appear to us .

Who and/or what 'made up' this 'reason'?

Also, 'you', limited human beings, are NOT thee ONLY 'beings' that can exist.

Furthermore, 'your reason' here does not seem to logically follow.

How, exactly, that 'you', 'beings' are limited be the 'reason' for "their" co-existence?

We are limited by birth, death and causality but the infinite universe is not limited.

Obviously. Was there a POINT in expressing this Fact?

If yes, then what was that POINT, EXACTLY?

Some people believe the block universe is thing; others don't.

For phenomenology see Husserl.

phenomenology, a philosophical movement originating in the 20th century, the primary objective of which is the direct investigation and description of phenomena as consciously experienced, without theories about their causal explanation and as free as possible from unexamined preconceptions and presuppositions.

We human beings are supposedly the only beings that can abstract to the extent we do.

Not only humans but all creatures of time, space, and force are limited by these conditions whereas the block universe is infinite.

What is this so-called 'block universe' of which you speak of here?

In other words, How does the 'block universe' DIFFER from thee One and ONLY 'Universe', Itself?

[Age]

It's a cure for what they call "midwittery."

You recall wrong.

Actually, you furnish a case-in-point. You don't know what you've missed, obviously.

You're not a bad guy, RC, and you're moderately smart, too. But there are others who are smarter...there always are...and humility teaches us to realize that.

How can ANY one be 'smarter' than the so-called "smartest"?

If you knew more of the great thinking of the past, you wouldn't be nearly so confident that you are the wise man with whom wisdom itself will die.

Absolutely NO one thinks this here, and I would say "rcsaunders" ALSO is NOT saying NOR thinking this here.

'you', "immanuel can", have a tendency to bring up these False CLAIMS to 'try to' DETRACT from what was ACTUALLY being SAID and POINTED OUT.

[Age]

You obviously have no idea what life is, since you claim nobody does. It's a bit of hubris to assume what you are ignorant of pertains to everyone.

I at least know what I mean by the word life. I mean the attribute that differentiates living organisms from mere non-living physical entities. I identify exactly what the attributes of life are that are unique to living organisms.

Here is a PRIME EXAMPLE of when one can NOT even think for "themselves" that much, that they, in turn, can NOT even express what they think. They have to, literally, link to what ANOTHER SAYS about an idea or perspective.

Idiot! I wrote the article.

Was there absolutely ANY thing stated ANYWHERE that INDICATED that 'you' wrote that article?

If yes, then WHERE, EXACTLY?

By the way, if I had KNOWN 'you' had written that article, then I would have READ IT.

Now, if you would like to go through that article, which YOU WROTE, to FIND the FALLACIES, FLAWS, and/or FAULTS, then I am more than willing to. But if you do NOT want to do this, then that is also PERFECTLY FINE with me. Either way just let us know.

[RCSaunders]

Here is a PRIME EXAMPLE of when one can NOT even think for "themselves" that much, that they, in turn, can NOT even express what they think. They have to, literally, link to what ANOTHER SAYS about an idea or perspective.

Idiot! I wrote the article.

Was there absolutely ANY thing stated ANYWHERE that INDICATED that 'you' wrote that article?

If yes, then WHERE, EXACTLY?

By the way, if I had KNOWN 'you' had written that article, then I would have READ IT.

Now, if you would like to go through that article, which YOU WROTE, to FIND the FALLACIES, FLAWS, and/or FAULTS, then I am more than willing to. But if you do NOT want to do this, then that is also PERFECTLY FINE with me. Either way just let us know.

Since you didn't know, to just assume my ideas came from someone else was wrong. I'm not interested in any more of your wrong assumptions. Read the article and learn something. I don't care if you agree with it or not.

[Age]

Idiot! I wrote the article.

Was there absolutely ANY thing stated ANYWHERE that INDICATED that 'you' wrote that article?

If yes, then WHERE, EXACTLY?

By the way, if I had KNOWN 'you' had written that article, then I would have READ IT.

Now, if you would like to go through that article, which YOU WROTE, to FIND the FALLACIES, FLAWS, and/or FAULTS, then I am more than willing to. But if you do NOT want to do this, then that is also PERFECTLY FINE with me. Either way just let us know.

Since you didn't know, to just assume my ideas came from someone else was wrong.

VERY, VERY True, Right, AND Correct.

And, even further PROOF of WHY it is always BEST to NEVER ASSUME absolutely ANY thing. IF I had CLARIFIED, with you, BEFORE I ASSUMED, then I would NOT have come across and LOOKED like such the IDIOT that I have here, to you, now.

I'm not interested in any more of your wrong assumptions.

LOL I wrote one Wrong ASSUMPTION here, and forever more I am JUDGED on 'that'.

Read the article and learn something.

What EXACTLY is the 'thing', which you think, ASSUME, or BELIEVE I would 'learn' from that article, of YOURS?

I don't care if you agree with it or not.

And, you OBVIOUSLY do NOT want to DISCUSS what is False, Wrong, and/or Incorrect in YOUR article.

So, we WILL leave them IN THERE.

Oh, and by the way, you did NOT answer my two CLARIFYING questions;

Was there absolutely ANY thing stated ANYWHERE that INDICATED that 'you' wrote that article?

If yes, then WHERE, EXACTLY?

[Dontaskme]

You don't know that, either. Even asking somebody who claimed to have a 'near death' experience couldn't assure us of anything, since delusions are a human possibility.

Only God could say what happens after death. Only He is free from the constraints of time and space.

Anything else would be guesses.

I'm talking about the state prior to there ever being a ''someone''
'someone' implies twoness.

You may indeed be "talking about" that. I'm not.

So you can have that conversation with anybody who has time for it.

[Dontaskme]

"Life" remains a mystery to you.

You just hope it ends at death. But you have no idea what happens at death.

[Dontaskme]

"……………..

[Dontaskme]

You may indeed be "talking about" that. I'm not.

So you can have that conversation with anybody who has time for it.

[Belinda]

1. I NEVER said otherwise.

2. Is this so-called "block universe" an ACTUAL 'thing' is just an ASSUMPTION or GUESS of what COULD BE true, or something else entirely?


Who and/or what 'made up' this 'reason'?

Also, 'you', limited human beings, are NOT thee ONLY 'beings' that can exist.

Furthermore, 'your reason' here does not seem to logically follow.

How, exactly, that 'you', 'beings' are limited be the 'reason' for "their" co-existence?


Obviously. Was there a POINT in expressing this Fact?

If yes, then what was that POINT, EXACTLY?

Some people believe the block universe is thing; others don't.

For phenomenology see Husserl.

phenomenology, a philosophical movement originating in the 20th century, the primary objective of which is the direct investigation and description of phenomena as consciously experienced, without theories about their causal explanation and as free as possible from unexamined preconceptions and presuppositions.

We human beings are supposedly the only beings that can abstract to the extent we do.

Not only humans but all creatures of time, space, and force are limited by these conditions whereas the block universe is infinite.

What is this so-called 'block universe' of which you speak of here?

In other words, How does the 'block universe' DIFFER from the thee One and ONLY 'Universe', Itself?

Some people think the one and only universe itself is temporal and only temporal, whereas the block universe is not temporal but is both infinite and eternal. I say
"eternal" and while aware of the word's supernatural connotation I don't imply supernatural.

By "temporal" I imply sequential time .

[Age]

Some people believe the block universe is thing; others don't.

For phenomenology see Husserl.


We human beings are supposedly the only beings that can abstract to the extent we do.

Not only humans but all creatures of time, space, and force are limited by these conditions whereas the block universe is infinite.

What is this so-called 'block universe' of which you speak of here?

In other words, How does the 'block universe' DIFFER from the thee One and ONLY 'Universe', Itself?

Some people think the one and only universe itself is temporal and only temporal, whereas the block universe is not temporal but is both infinite and eternal. I say
"eternal" and while aware of the word's supernatural connotation I don't imply supernatural.

By "temporal" I imply sequential time .

When people talk of or about 'supernatural' what is the 'connotation' they have with that word?

To me, thee One and ONLY Universe IS 'infinite', spatially, and 'eternal', temporally. And, there is NO other ACTUAL way that this could be different.

This also has already been, can be, and WILL BE, PROVED IRREFUTABLY True, Right, Accurate, AND Correct.

And, as long as we keep on that SAME TRACK we are NOT MISSING THE MARK.

By 'temporally' I mean ALWAYS CHANGING, which creates an APPEARANCE of what a LOT of 'you', adult human beings, think of as 'time'.

[Belinda]

What is this so-called 'block universe' of which you speak of here?

In other words, How does the 'block universe' DIFFER from the thee One and ONLY 'Universe', Itself?

Some people think the one and only universe itself is temporal and only temporal, whereas the block universe is not temporal but is both infinite and eternal. I say
"eternal" and while aware of the word's supernatural connotation I don't imply supernatural.

By "temporal" I imply sequential time .

When people talk of or about 'supernatural' what is the 'connotation' they have with that word?

To me, thee One and ONLY Universe IS 'infinite', spatially, and 'eternal', temporally. And, there is NO other ACTUAL way that this could be different.

This also has already been, can be, and WILL BE, PROVED IRREFUTABLY True, Right, Accurate, AND Correct.

And, as long as we keep on that SAME TRACK we are NOT MISSING THE MARK.

By 'temporally' I mean ALWAYS CHANGING, which creates an APPEARANCE of what a LOT of 'you', adult human beings, think of as 'time'.

Some people mean that supernatural is exactly the same as paranormal(ghosts and stuff).But philosophers mean that supernatural implies a state of being that is not bound by time, space, or force.

Universe , and temporal, mean to me the same as they mean to you.

There may seem to be an inconsistency in what I have just written: if the Universe is not bound by time, space, or force is it not then supernatural?

The inconsistency vanishes for idealists who hold that absolute mind or as I prefer to call it, absolute experience, is not bound by time, space, or force.

[DPMartin]

I find myself forgetting many things, places I've been, things I've done, people I've known. What happens when I completely forget everything? What happens when I die? If there is being after death, then what could/would it be like without any memories or sensory experience?

from a view that would be of the Creator and Judge. its not about what you may or may not remember or have memory of, its whether or not the Almighty remembers you.