Rational replies only, please.
You must log in or register to comment.
There is no rationality in speculating about the afterlife.
That is arguable.
Any exploration into strange realms of life, memory or consciousness (and there have been many of those) might shed useful light on the subject for speculation.
Just take some shrooms man
I appreciate the idea, and do have some experience with that, but these days I prefer Vipassana meditation.
It’s kind of a manual version of tripping.
It takes practice, slower, smoother, better control, permanent and has no ceiling.
Everything is arguable
You must be a blast at parties
Wow you’re amazingly smart and helpful.
Assuming the Christian afterlife, it would be chock full of dead babies and children. They would outnumber adults significantly. Every single failed pregnancy, tiny little unformed baby angels. Even fertilized eggs that just fail to implant, Little blastocysts with wings…
It’s something like 1 in 3 fertilized eggs never get born. Then given global infant and child mortality, another good chunk die really young.
Add on top of that the fact that a good chunk of adults are going to hell, and presto, you have a heaven full of children with an average age well below puberty.
Given that, it’s probably a perpetual pizza party with a ball-pit and some mascots running while listening to baby shark.
Scripture says the soul enters the body on the first breath.
And anyone who still argues anyhow… will likely say they’re condemned to hell because they were unable to accept their “lord and savior” (who ostensibly created everything so he could larp as such,)
I thought that’s what purgatory was for (if we ignore no biblical mention of it iirc).
it’s not technically a place at all, but a state of existence. Basically, its the final purification of souls before being admitted into heaven; Catholics will say that if you die outside of god’s grace, you don’t go to purgatory at all, just straight to hell. (do not pass go, do not collect 200 god coins.) protestants (especially weslians, and maybe eastern orthodox, but don’t quote me on that,) would say that the final purification happens in the moment of death. (Wesely basically argued that they had become perfect enough in life.)
what the other guy said about first breath but also many people vastly overestimate how many humans there have been.
There have been more humans born since 1900 than before (since humans first appeared).
Not as far as any data I’ve seen…
117 Billion Humans ever
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/04/quantifying-human-existence/
109 Billion Humans…
ah, then I was misinformed.
Heaven in Johnny the Homicidal Maniac is how I imagined it.
afterlife, it would be chock full of dead babies and children
Alive babies and children, I guess.
Why do you think they are dead then?
You should watch “The Good Place”.
The 4th (last) season is specifically about this question.
It also may be the best show ever made.Just started watching it. Presently at s01e03
Amazing, enjoy it
If the reply is rational, it won’t.
The Lakota believed that this existence was only part of it all and when you died you would find a path before you. Depending on your life the path would have different characteristics. So if you are missed by your living family and your ancestors are proud of your choices, the path would be easy and it would come out unto the land of hunting and games until your passing onto the other. But if you don’t leave a good life and brought shame your path would be long dark and full of obstacles. You might forget who you are and be lost until the next world
This is what Black Elk kinda describes of the old world
It’s impossible to give a rational answer to an inherently irrational question.
Not exactly an “afterlife” per se. But stay with me on this.
Space is most likely infinite in extent. The amount of information in the part we can see (our “Hubble Volume” – the part of space where light has had a chance to reach us) is finite. Given an infinite number of trials, every possible outcome will happen an infinite number of times. (Given infinite D20 rolls, you’ll get an infinite number of natural 20s. Not only that, but an infinite number of 1,000,000-roll natrual 20 streaks.) So, there’s a good case to be made that there’s an infinite number of exact of copies of our Hubble Volume out there.
But also, something interesting about Quantum Mechcanics is that it predicts that the goings on in spacetime (hand wave, qualifier) aren’t deterministic. Sometimes the exact same same initial conditions and the exact same laws of physics can have different outcomes. So if you could check the state of two Hubble Volumes that are exactly identical now, there’s a likelihood that after some time has passed, the two will no longer be identical.
So how likely is it that you’ll live to be 100? Probably a little under 1%. What about 110? I don’t know off the top of my head, but let’s say it’s around 0.1%. 120? Maybe 0.01%. (Yes I’m making these numbers up, but what the numbers actually are doesn’t matter that much for this thought experiment.) How likely is it that you’ll live to be 200? Pretty unlikely, but it’s definitely not zero.
Given infinite exact copies of you and a non-zero chance that each one will live to be 200, you can expect an infinite number of copies of you to live to be 200. And why stop there? 300? Still an infinite number. 400? Still infinite. Is there any ceiling? Only if there’s an age at which there is a truly 100% chance that you won’t survive to. So, maybe the heat death of the universe, then? Asserting that the chance of living that long is zero assumes we won’t find a “loophole” in the Second Law of Thermodynamics. (In fact, the Second Law of Thermodynamics is a statistical law, not an absolute one. It’s not true that entropy always increases in a system. Only that it does the incalculably vast majority of the time. There’s always technically a chance that all the air molecules in the room you’re in will happen to meander to one half of the room, which would be an example of entropy spontaneously decreasing. It’s only a technicality, but we don’t need more than a technicality for this thought experiment.)
All that to say, there’s a case to be made that there’s a possibility that at least one version of your consciousness will “live” forever.
I say “there’s a case to be made” because indeed what I’ve said above depends on a few assumptions. (For instance, it is possible that for any one particular person, there might be some unknown reason why there’s a truly 100% chance that they’ll die before a certain age.)
This whole train of thought is related to the concept of “Quantum Immortality.” And if it intrigues you, I highly recommend Max Tegmark’s book “Our Mathematical Universe.”
And again, it’s not an “afterlife” per se. But might go at least a little bit in the direction of the question you’re asking.
I’m looking for the connection between copies.
My copy lives forever. How does that bear upon me?
There’s got to be a connection between identical systems. That just feels right. A kind of perfect sympathy. And add consciousness to the mix and it seems inevitable.
And given that there will always be infinite cases of total entropy reversal, there will always be a “plausible narrative” for resurrection available for every corpse. So if “immortality via copy” doesn’t do it, that will.
Here are 2 authors who explored the impossibility of subjective death. IE while everybody else sees you die, you actually travel to a universe where your survival is explained by a plausible narrative (and progressively less plausible). Or thereabouts.
GREG EGAN. Permutation city. He called it “dust theory”
ROBERT CHARLES WILSON. Divided by Infinity (in “The Perseids and other stories”). I forget what he called the theory.
As a practicing Frisbeetarian, I believe your soul lands on a roof and gets stuck there. You just get to watch as time and people pass by for all of time.
Philip Jose Farmer explored this idea in a few of his stories.
In one there was an alien race. They thought it was tragic that people would die and be gone from the world forever. So they invented an artificial soul (called a “wathan”) and hooked it up to all the sentient beings. Then they managed an artificial afterlife too. Reincarnated everybody.
The Frisbeetarian concept actually comes from a George Carlin joke, but I genuinely thought it was one of the most beautiful afterlife concepts I’d heard so I choose to believe it. That our souls are still here, but also at rest.
Um I think that not knowing is kind of the point. If we knew how it worked then it wouldn’t be the “after life” it would just be page two. Part of life is the unknowns. It is not always about figuring out the unknowns but learning to let go of them. They will always be unknown it is much better to learn to let them be and let go.
So, semantically speaking, it can’t exist. Ok.
I don’t believe that is what I said at all but okay…
Sorry if that was trite. I was going off your “If we knew what it was then it wouldn’t be the afterlife” thing.
it would probably be a sort of universe shaped by ideas, since the most rational thing that could be transported is your consciousness.
A natural internet maybe. Discarnate dreamers drifting around, talking, looking for fun, spaceless, bodiless, timeless. Until a really good game catches your eye. And then there are rules.
We don’t (and possibly can’t) know.
I think it would be super awkward if you’ve been widowed.
I mean, you’re supposed to meet everyone again, including your former spouses who had been waiting for you.
What if this is the afterlife of a religion we don’t know about from our previous existence?
I don’t think you can have a rational reply to your question - it’s all head canon
Either like the last episode of “the good place”, or like the short story “the egg”.
Thank you. I will look them up.
Maybe you’d like it to be that (The Egg would be my worst nightmare), but I don’t see how it’s rational to speculate that.
There is nothing rational about speculating on the afterlife. Ultimately, it’s human to speculate on the unknown. For me personally, “the egg” helped tremendously to overcome my own fear of death, and it turned into an optimistic nihilist.
Probably just as poorly as life
