Proof of life after death?

yes, but not a spirit/soul

Originally posted by Great Vengeance
Ive been speculating on this idea I had for a while, so perhaps I should post it here.

What are you before you are born? You are dead. One cannot possibly be neither alive nor dead. I believe I have said this once before as an offhand comment and I encountered this argument:

"Death is the condition that follows life." Or something to that effect.

I believe this argument sort of dances around the question, but meh....

Moving on:

The implications of my theory being true, includes logical proof that it is possible to be 'dead' and come into a life. If that is the case, it could very well be that we do go through some cycle of 'rebirth'. It would certainly fit in with what we see throughout nature(cycles everywhere).

So anyways....discuss.

I do not see logic anywhere in your second paragraph which is ironic since as proof for this illogical argument you use logic.

If you are trying to talk about reincarnation, please, say it in an easier way to comprehend, if you are not trying to talk about that then still, make your point more clear.

You are alive before you're born, just an egg missing half the DNA it needs to grow.

Originally posted by Alliance
You are alive before you're born, just an egg missing half the DNA it needs to grow.

So...

Given that a woman has all the eggs she will ever have by the time of her birth, her children are in a sense "living" at that time...

they're alive, but so is a bacteria in an even greater sense. I think were using two different defenitons of alive.

Originally posted by Great Vengeance
Ive been speculating on this idea I had for a while, so perhaps I should post it here.

What are you before you are born? You are dead. One cannot possibly be neither alive nor dead. I believe I have said this once before as an offhand comment and I encountered this argument:

"Death is the condition that follows life." Or something to that effect.

I believe this argument sort of dances around the question, but meh....

Moving on:

The implications of my theory being true, includes logical proof that it is possible to be 'dead' and come into a life. If that is the case, it could very well be that we do go through some cycle of 'rebirth'. It would certainly fit in with what we see throughout nature(cycles everywhere).

So anyways....discuss.

Thats not really life after death. More like life after existense

Originally posted by Great Vengeance
And please somone answer this, if you are not dead before birth, than *what* are you. I dont imagine it is possible to neither exist nor non-exist.

Those are the only two states that our limited intelligence can discern for now. It does not mean that there could not be another state that is neither. And it is just that our limited collective intelligence is not aware of it yet! or is unable to define it based on the very limited knowledge we currently have! Or it could be that the knowledge we already have, is not true knowledge at all. And therefore it is possible that we have defined some concepts incorrectly. and that hinders our intelligence to detect other possible true concepts. We are aware of the soul, but how much do we really know about it?And of the little we know about it, How much is true and how truly is it understood?

Not being aware of something should never mean that it does not exist.

So my answer to your question would be that I could be neither it is just that I do not have the intelligence to grasp that concept and define it for you. At least not for now.

But I will keep working on it. And hopefully I can get back to you on it before I am dead. Oh well! if I am dead before that, then I may just cease to exist all together or I may just acquire a higher or new knowledge.😉

are we aware of the soul? i didnt think we were 😕

And the concept of a soul itself is difficult to define, because there have been so many different ideas as to what it really is.

True. The spirit, soul, energy could be the real us, and the body are only the clothes we decide to wear....Like the Kirlian Cameras seem to show us to be outside our bodies and not just inside them. An energy like field.

Originally posted by Storm
And the concept of a soul itself is difficult to define, because there have been so many different ideas as to what it really is.

Originally posted by Alliance
Exactly why I think that we have yet to define. There is no phyiscal eveidence of a soul and since we really haven't pinned it down, to me it remains more of an emotion.

For something to exist, it does not have to be defined. All things must exist (at least in our thoughts) before we can really even try to define them.

And if you think that it is and emotion or anything else for that matter, then logically you are admitting that it at least exist:In a different form nevertheless that it exists. you just don't have a true definition for it yet.
or at least that: you are aware of it 😉

No. Existance is a phsical presence. Awareness does not mena existance. You are aware of the images holograms present, even though they do no exist.

Originally posted by Alliance
No. Existance is a phsical presence. Awareness does not mena existance. You are aware of the images holograms present, even though they do no exist.

So you are saying that the soul is an emotion and that emotions do not exist. Or am I misunderstanding you?

Do our thoughts exist or not? if they do not really exist, they should have no effect on our existence. they should not make it better nor worse. and therefore they should be considered as irrelevant all together. but I think that our thoughts actually exist and that they have made our lives somehow better and somehow worse.

I usually don't limit myself by the definitions we have already made up for things. Because I believe that it may be a hindrance in truly understanding things the way they TRULY are.

"I only believe half of I think "

Originally posted by TheSpinner
I usually don't limit myself by the definitions we have already made up for things. Because I believe that it may be a hindrance in truly understanding things the way they TRULY are.

Originally posted by TheSpinner
So you are saying that the soul is an emotion and that emotions do not exist. Or am I misunderstanding you?

Originally posted by Alliance
First off, if you wnat to debate a concept, you need to define what that concept is. THis is not a free for all argument. If you don't do this you are unlikely to: adress the topic, concisely adress the topic, and to make real world significance. YOu dont need to use textbook definitons, but if you plan on using your own, you need to define such inconsitancies. YOur personal definitnos, as well as textbook ones, will be up for debate as well.

.

I Totally agree with you on this part. And why can't my definition be better than anyone else's definition? so many things we think make sense do not make sense at all.

And here is my definition of existence:" If am aware of it then it must exist in one form or another. But it may exist even if I am not aware of it " ( Note: It is a pure one way implication and not at all an equivalence).

Originally posted by Because I can
^ after your dead tho, what happens?

its a long story, but in the end you become worm shit

*Reads PVS's Autobiography*...............ahhhhhhhhhhh yep!

Originally posted by TheSpinner
I Totally agree with you on this part. And why can't my definition be better than anyone else's definition? so many things we think make sense do not make sense at all.

And here is my definition of existence:" [B]If am aware of it then it must exist in one form or another. But it may exist even if I am not aware of it " ( Note: It is a pure one way implication and not at all an equivalence). [/B]

Explain???.........you're sounding more like me........oh go god stop!!