As an atheist, how do you cope with the thought of death?

[hobbit]

i hold the belief that since 'nothing' can't exist then a nothingness afterlife, by similar logic, can't exist.

[YPrrrr]

Not a nothingness afterlife, just nothingness. Nothingness exists as itself. Lack of something or being. It is a somewhat disturbing thought to many that after so many experiences that it all ends rather anti-climatically...

I mean you wouldn't even get to see the high scores list and how you stacked up

[??????]

death means i can finally be free from everything because i'll never ever have to use emotion or cognition again 

[YPrrrr]

death means i can finally be free from everything because i'll never ever have to use emotion or cognition again 

So what do you live for

[??????]

So what do you live for

expression
LOL BUT IT ISN'T WHAT I LONG FOR BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS

[snoorkel]

Not a nothingness afterlife, just nothingness. Nothingness exists as itself. Lack of something or being. It is a somewhat disturbing thought to many that after so many experiences that it all ends rather anti-climatically...

I mean you wouldn't even get to see the high scores list and how you stacked up

I think the hobbit is right, no-thingness can't exist because it necessarily begets thingness. Do you see no-thingness anywhere? The entire universe and the infinity of universes beyond it are rippling with space and energy. No-thingness can, in a way, exist, but only completely outside of thingness in an abstract way. It would be petty to think that something amazing and different happens for a human consciousness, i.e., transferring into the abstract no-thingness outside of everything, because nothing else seems to do this.

So, the question to me is, does a mind occupy the physical limits of the brain or does it occupy someplace that all brains occupy? There are valid reasons to believe either, but I tend toward the latter because it can be seen that all of space occupies the higher space that all other spaces also occupy (think cosmological homotopy).

[YPrrrr]

I think the hobbit is right, no-thingness can't exist because it necessarily begets thingness. Do you see no-thingness anywhere? The entire universe and the infinity of universes beyond it are rippling with space and energy. No-thingness can, in a way, exist, but only completely outside of thingness in an abstract way. It would be petty to think that something amazing and different happens for a human consciousness, i.e., transferring into the abstract no-thingness outside of everything, because nothing else seems to do this.

Semantics. Saying the same thing with a pointless philosophical argument. I am merely saying there would be no conscious recognition of the nothingness, you are dead, there is no awareness.

Unless I am confused by his terminology "nothingness afterlife" which would seem to suggest awareness of some sort of void.

[snoorkel]

I just don't buy the whole argument of 'complete lack of awareness seems incomprehensible, because it is -- the human mind can't comprehend a complete lack of awareness.'

Isn't that exactly the same argument as Tertullian's 'I believe in the impossible simply because it is impossible'?  


[spoiler]also it wasn't a purely semantic argument I was illustrating clear concepts [/spoiler]

[YPrrrr]

I just don't buy the whole argument of 'complete lack of awareness seems incomprehensible, because it is -- the human mind can't comprehend a complete lack of awareness.'

Isn't that exactly the same argument as Tertullian's 'I believe in the impossible simply because it is impossible'?  

Does human comprehension of nothingness affect its status though? I don't know that it is incomprehensible to begin with either considering humans essentially come from nothingness or cannot remember a state of being from before conception/birth

[snoorkel]

Does human comprehension of nothingness affect its status though? I don't know that it is incomprehensible to begin with either considering humans essentially come from nothingness or cannot remember a state of being from before conception/birth

If human comprehension of nothingness doesn't affect the status of nothingness, then you're differentiating human consciousness from the 'consciousness' (or lack thereof) of everything else, which would seem to be a hole in your own theory. In other words, no, human consciousness doesn't affect the status of nothingness, we perceive it the same way everything else does: as not there, because it's outside of everything that exists and therefore negligible.

Speaking about where humans 'come from' implies a dissection of the definition of time, which has been shown to be completely relative. To an observer existing right now on a faraway planet, you may not have been born yet. Where does that leave you? Unborn, or born as you are in this moment? Both are 'this moment'; it's ultimately your individual perspective that makes the difference. But what if your perspective changed, and the body remained in place? This is close to a definition of 'death'.

A more physically grounded metaphor would be that we are traveling through successive frames of time in a tube, as we do in 3-dimensional existence. Outside the tube, in a 'higher dimension', lies the realm of whole and undivided events, thoughts, and consciousnesses. What we experience inside the tube are actually only fragments of the whole events  and thoughts; in this way our bodily consciousness is also only a 'fragment', or projection, of the 'whole' consciousness. We experience different fragments in successive moments of time. Temporality is necessary in 3 dimensions, but not in those higher, meaning the whole events/processes and consciousnesses as they exist in the 'higher dimension' are atemporal.

[YPrrrr]

In other words, no, human consciousness doesn't affect the status of nothingness, we perceive it the same way everything else does: as not there, because it's outside of everything that exists and therefore negligible.

Exactly... And some believe that is what death represents, the end of existence altogether.

Speaking about where humans 'come from' implies a dissection of the definition of time, which has been shown to be completely relative.

Since when does "come from" imply time? It implies "where," or a place or source (or lack thereof). I have no interest in time.

Honestly it doesn't matter because what follows death is ultimately a mystery to the living and it will inevitably be answered of its own accord

[snoorkel]

Exactly... And some believe that is what death represents, the end of existence altogether.Since when does "come from" imply time? It implies "where," or a place or source (or lack thereof). I have no interest in time.

Honestly it doesn't matter because what follows death is ultimately a mystery to the living and it will inevitably be answered of its own accord

[YPrrrr]

I don't understand you either. Why overcomplicate things

[snoorkel]

I don't understand you either. Why overcomplicate things

Because pursuit of knowledge is the point of life. You can say, 'the meaning of death is impossible for us to discern, so let's wait til the question is answered of its own accord', but that doesn't make for a very long sci-fi novel, does it?

[YPrrrr]

Because pursuit of knowledge is the point of life. You can say, 'the meaning of death is impossible for us to discern, so let's wait til the question is answered of its own accord', but that doesn't make for a very long sci-fi novel, does it?

Possibly, but all that knowledge won't necessarily matter much when you're dead

Life is what you make of it, if you seek knowledge, by all means continue... Sure imagining (ie what comes after death) is fun, but it won't create any more of a concrete conclusion and in the end is just daydreaming. Not that daydreaming can't be entertaining (sci-fi).