For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
How do you cope with the level of delusion that makes you think the idea of an afterlife is not just a contradiction in terms?henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 12:32 am So: how do you, an atheist, cope with there bein' no afterlife?
This is a serious inquiry: biggy's peace of mind is on the line.
As I say, in my opening: I don't believe there's an afterlife for me to be barred from.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 3:14 pmHow do you cope with the level of delusion that makes you think the idea of an afterlife is not just a contradiction in terms?henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 12:32 am So: how do you, an atheist, cope with there bein' no afterlife?
This is a serious inquiry: biggy's peace of mind is on the line.
The dark night can be endless.henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 2:12 pm He's in his dark night of the soul and needs a nightlight.
Or, mebbe, get on with livin' cuz the answers, they'll come soon enough.All that remains is to wait.
HIM:iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 2:01 amI'm not looking for consolation. I'm simply noting that, given the staggering mystery embedded in the existence of existence itself, no one can rule out anything. A God, the God able to provide mere mortals here on Earth with immortality and salvation is a "leap of faith" that many are able to make. Indeed, I've known a lot of very, very intelligent men and women down through the years who were able to take that leap. And I couldn't possibly have respected them more.henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 12:32 am Over here...
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=35211
...in the latter part of thread, my good friend, iambiguous, laments...I can't console the poor guy.iambiguous wrote: ↑Fri Jul 22, 2022 7:56 pmWell, given all of the things on this side of the grave that still bring me enormous pleasure and satisfaction, the thought that death utterly obliterates them -- and me! -- for all the rest of eternity, is, well, disconcerting to say the least.
Alas, it will not sink in with souls like henry that I am far less interested in what they believe about an afterlife and far more intrigued by what they are able to demonstrate is or is not in fact true about it.henry quirk wrote: ↑Fri Jul 22, 2022 2:41 amI don't believe there's an afterlife for me to be barred from.
Here's someone who needs the existence of a God, the God in order to acquire a soul in the first place. Now, mind you, he is not able to provide us with any substantive evidence that this God exist. Instead, as with most things in his life revolving around value judgments, he "thinks up" his conclusions using "logical" arguments that are little more than words defining and defending still more words.
Unless of course he or others here can link me to conclusions of his that do revolve more around experiential and experimental evidence. I'm relatively new here so, sure, there may be a mountain of it laid out in other threads.
In the past, when confronting those [usually atheists] who seemed able to accept oblivion -- to actually be "good with it" -- the first thing I'd ask is, "okay, here and now, how close to your own actual existential, flesh and blood death are you?"
Are you up there in years, is your health precarious? Or is death something you react to more "philosophically"?
Also, here and now, how passionately attached to your life are you? Do you have many, many people and things that bring you enormous satisfaction and fulfilment?
After all, everyday there are those who actually take their own life. Either because they can longer endure the pain of it, or they just don't have anything or anyone it make it all worthwhile.
And how can this not be embodied existentially in dasein? Each of us is embedded in our own unique set of circumstances.
So, while I can envy those who are "good with" the obliteration of "I" for all the rest of eternity, I can certainly understand how others might be terrified of it. Anything but "good with it".
henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 3:05 pmFlash, Flannel, veg, pro, Advocate, Bob, Iwanna,
On biggy's behalf: thanks.
Come on, henry, this isn't the New ILP. This is a forum created as an adjunct of a respected philosophy magazine.henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 3:05 pmThat there is valuable advice, Iwanna. I hope biggy is payin' attention.
Seems to me we've covered most or all of that multiple times, in other threads (most recently in the gun control thread I link to in my opener).Do you have substantive points to raise about my post above or don't you?
Really? Note where, in other threads, you responded to the points I raised above. Substantively.henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 6:43 pmSeems to me we've covered most or all of that multiple times, in other threads (most recently in the gun control thread I link to in my opener).Do you have substantive points to raise about my post above or don't you?
Again, as noted, it's not consolation that I am looking for. It's intelligent discussion regarding something that each of us must face one by one: oblivion...or not?
Iambiguous may or may not be seeking consolation, but it is clear he is suffering upcoming death. And, further, it's reasonable topic in general. Not metaphysics I would say, but fine as a thread in a philosophy forum. People here then responded, listing the ways in which they deal with death or in my case the way my father did.iambiguous wrote: ↑Fri Jul 22, 2022 7:56 pm
Well, given all of the things on this side of the grave that still bring me enormous pleasure and satisfaction, the thought that death utterly obliterates them -- and me! -- for all the rest of eternity, is, well, disconcerting to say the least.
And note that his version is not how they cope or are consoled. His version is 'not bothered'. It's not enough to generally feel good about life and not being interested in going on and on about the topic. No, one must have no negative reactions at all. The perfect cure.Sure, if you're an atheist and are not bothered by the complete and utter obliteration of "I" for all of eternity, how do you manage that?
Since you know how to cope, then why ask an atheist?henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 3:33 pmAs I say, in my opening: I don't believe there's an afterlife for me to be barred from.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 3:14 pmHow do you cope with the level of delusion that makes you think the idea of an afterlife is not just a contradiction in terms?henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 12:32 am So: how do you, an atheist, cope with there bein' no afterlife?
This is a serious inquiry: biggy's peace of mind is on the line.
I'm thinkin', if you're interested, you can do you own leg work. You can start on page 10 of...viewtopic.php?f=7&t=35211Note where, in other threads, you responded to the points I raised above.
Well, I might be if I spent my days agonizing over it. Instead, most of my time revolves around doing things that I very much enjoy...things that handily distract me from it. Music, film, art, PBS, science, novels, magazine subscriptions.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 9:38 pm Henry quoted Iambiguous in his OP.Iambiguous may or may not be seeking consolation, but it is clear he is suffering upcoming death.iambiguous wrote: ↑Fri Jul 22, 2022 7:56 pm
Well, given all of the things on this side of the grave that still bring me enormous pleasure and satisfaction, the thought that death utterly obliterates them -- and me! -- for all the rest of eternity, is, well, disconcerting to say the least.
Of course he or she has to make this personal. Accusing me of accusing others of being wrongheaded when over and over again I always emphasize how in regard to such things as profoundly personal as this it's dasein down to the bone. What can possibly be more subjective than that?!Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 9:38 pmAnd, further, it's reasonable topic in general. Not metaphysics I would say, but fine as a thread in a philosophy forum. People here then responded, listing the ways in which they deal with death or in my case the way my father did.
This is all wrongheaded to Iambiguous and he brings up a post, presumably from another thread, that Henry hasn't responded to to Iambiguous' satisfaction. Why not take that up in that thread? If Iambiguous has no interest in being consoled, fine, he can ignore this thread.
Sure, if you're an atheist and are not bothered by the complete and utter obliteration of "I" for all of eternity, how do you manage that?
Again, I'm an atheist who is bothered by the prospect of oblivion. Just not 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Here and now.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 9:38 pmAnd note that his version is not how they cope or are consoled. His version is 'not bothered'. It's not enough to generally feel good about life and not being interested in going on and on about the topic. No, one must have no negative reactions at all. The perfect cure.
Unbelievable. He claims to have responded to the points I raised above. And then when I ask him to demonstrate this, he demands that I go through his posts to prove it!!henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 11:40 pm biggy,
I'm thinkin', if you're interested, you can do you own leg work.Note where, in other threads, you responded to the points I raised above.
My answer to this was right there in the post you supposedly read. I quoted you and it was part of my response to that quote.And, by all means, note the part above where I posted that "one must have no negative reactions at all". In regard to what?
[my emphasis added since this was somehow missed despite my quoting you.Sure, if you're an atheist and are not bothered by the complete and utter obliteration of "I" for all of eternity, how do you manage that?
Here you are interesting, but you up the ante...it has to be someone in the very last stages, at most months from death. IOW you do want answers to the question that Henry asked in this thread, since you ask the question yourself, but add on criteria that are, in the end, unbelievably hard to me for a variety of reasons. Even religoius people, very sure of their soon to be beamed to heaven are likely to be bothered by death now and then. You deny an interest in consolation, but then ask people the same question Henry did, just making it less likely anyone can answer. And imagine how few people on the entire planet, months or weeks or day, as you say, from death, are spedning their time in philosophy forums, rather than say with their families, friends or in nature or whatever.Sure, if you're an atheist and are not bothered by the complete and utter obliteration of "I" for all of eternity, how do you manage that?
Personal and the opening of your first post here.I'm not looking for consolation.
PersonalAlas, it will not sink in with souls like henry
PersonalHere's someone who needs the existence of a God
And it's not as if anyone said that. At least I didn't. Another reason to dismiss. Another extreme criterion. Not considering that one could perhaps be inspired by what people do here without a single person saying that THEIR apporach is the wisest. But something someone does might be useful for someone. That's three times the criteria for what would be useful for you are approaching perfection. Only that. While at the same time denying you are interested in consolation, you go ahead and give the criteria for a valid response: someone at most months from death can answer, they must be not bothered by death at all AND their response needs to be the wisest reaction. (as if the wisest reaction will be universal, but that's another topic. )And it's not like anyone of us here can articulate the optimal or the "wisest" reaction to it.
'Supposed to'? I didn't say that. I said I found it odd, as I said, that you claimed the topic had no interest to you, but then went on and have continued to, clarify what kind of responses to his topic would be valid or interesting to you. It seems like you are looking for consolation while denying it. Going by the words, all I have.And I'm supposed to ignore a thread in which I am myself a personal target of henry:
Again: I would never argue that anyone is obligated to be bothered by or have negative thoughts about oblivion. I can only note why it bothers me as an atheist and then solicit points of view from other atheists who are not bothered by it. Given the points I noted above.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 7:09 am OK, let's start with the easiest...My answer to this was right there in the post you supposedly read. I quoted you and it was part of my response to that quote.And, by all means, note the part above where I posted that "one must have no negative reactions at all". In regard to what?[my emphasis added since this was somehow missed despite my quoting you.Sure, if you're an atheist and are not bothered by the complete and utter obliteration of "I" for all of eternity, how do you manage that?
It's not enough if people are generally ok, they have to be 'not bothered'. I mean, I get bothered by some store staff, some drivers, a too soft bowel movement.
Sure, if you're an atheist and are not bothered by the complete and utter obliteration of "I" for all of eternity, how do you manage that?
Yes, each of us as individuals confronts death given the actual circumstances of our lives. And the "philosophy of life" we subscribe to. And any possible religious convictions that we have. The latter two profoundly rooted existentially in dasein from my frame of mind. My circumstances may be entirely unfathomable to you and others. And, of course, the other way around.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 7:09 amHere you are interesting, but you up the ante...it has to be someone in the very last stages, at most months from death. IOW you do want answers to the question that Henry asked in this thread, since you ask the question yourself, but add on criteria that are, in the end, unbelievably hard to me for a variety of reasons. Even religoius people, very sure of their soon to be beamed to heaven are likely to be bothered by death now and then. You deny an interest in consolation, but then ask people the same question Henry did, just making it less likely anyone can answer. And imagine how few people on the entire planet, months or weeks or day, as you say, from death, are spedning their time in philosophy forums, rather than say with their families, friends or in nature or whatever.
Look, okay, I admit it: if someone is actually able to convince me that an atheist in close proximity to the Grim Reaper and living a life they love need not be bothered by oblivion, sure, that might console me.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 7:09 amConsider the possibility that you have given a lot of signals that you are interested in consolation, which you even do in this thread where you say you are not interested. Is it possible that you have given some double messages? Or is that possibility just off the table?
Now, logically and epistemologically, let's pin down the exact defintion and meaning of the word "personal" here.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 7:09 am I did not 'make it personal'. You came to this thread and made statements like 'I am not interested in consolation.' For example. Henry, yes, made a person-focused thread. I responded twice without making it personal and made a good faith effort to answer the question in a way that might be useful to someone looking for consolation. When you joined the thread and responded in a personal manner, sure, I did respond to you and your post in the context of Henry's person-focued thread. You want things not personal, don't join in at a personal level.
...how odd do you find it?Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 7:09 am If the topic is not to your interest or wrongheaded since you are not interested in consolation, well, of course, come and say that. But what I found odd was that you more or less confirmed, after denying it, that you are interested in consolation and sent out the messages about what would be the criteria for a valid responder/response that I mentioned above. I stand by that being odd. From the moment you make the simple assertion that you are not interested in consolation, if true, what else is there to say, you can ignore it from that moment forward. Or you could ask that your name get taken off the thread. But, no, you engage, give criteria to be met for responses to the topic that you would be interested in, while not seeming to admit that you are interested but you have finer criteria.
I found this odd. I think it sends a double message', which by the way is perfectly human.
And I find it odd that you see me as making it personal when you clearly engaged in the thread personally about yourself and in relation to others.
Which has been my experience before. Constant double messages. Like I am not supposed to read what you write and take it seriously. Or even... it is impossible to decide what you are trying to say. Despite repeated requests for clarification.
I do see now that the post you wanted a response to from Henry was actually from this thread. So I was mistaken about that.
I do always consider that I may simply missing some cues as to how I should take these kinds of contradictions. So perhaps I bear some or more of the responsibility for the perceived oddity quale. But that doesn't change the likelihood that it's better for me (if not also us) that I avoid responding to you in general. I am going to keep to that in the future. Given the personal nature of the thread and whether you believe it or not a genuine intent on my part to help (not necessarily you but anyone who might find the topic interesting/useful) I wanted to read your posts. But such a situation is very unlikely to happen much or at all again.
I found this odd. I think it sends a double message', which by the way is perfectly human.
And I find it odd that you see me as making it personal when you clearly engaged in the thread personally about yourself and in relation to others.
Which has been my experience before. Constant double messages. Like I am not supposed to read what you write and take it seriously. Or even... it is impossible to decide what you are trying to say. Despite repeated requests for clarification.
I do see now that the post you wanted a response to from Henry was actually from this thread. So I was mistaken about that.
I do always consider that I may simply missing some cues as to how I should take these kinds of contradictions. So perhaps I bear some or more of the responsibility for the perceived oddity quale. But that doesn't change the likelihood that it's better for me (if not also us) that I avoid responding to you in general. I am going to keep to that in the future. Given the personal nature of the thread and whether you believe it or not a genuine intent on my part to help (not necessarily you but anyone who might find the topic interesting/useful) I wanted to read your posts. But such a situation is very unlikely to happen much or at all again.