There's 2 possibilities:
a) This is the only life there is. When we die we simply cease to exist. Our lives and the Universe are, in a sense, ultimately absurd. In that case nothing we do ultimately matters. How much money we accumulate and our social status are transitory and ultimately unfulfilling, and in the end are to no avail since we all end up in the same boat -- namely eternal non-existence. I suggest instead we just live our lives, have a laugh, have a few drinks, be kind to others, but most importantly of all not to take life too seriously.
b) Or there is a "life after death", and perhaps an ultimate purpose to our existence and to all things. But if we continue to exist after death, why do we think what we achieve in this life is so terribly important? If there is some ultimate purpose to life, we don't know what it is, but presumably it will have nothing to do with how much money we accumulate and our social status. I suggest instead we just live our lives, have a laugh, have a few drinks, be kind to others, but most importantly of all not to take life too seriously.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
Just reading the following article: 20 years ago, we were all set for a Y2K disaster that wasn’t Article says: Patti Duncan stockpiled ...
-
I read this article. * The parents of a boy claims their boy appears to remember being Princess Diana in a former life. It's also cov... -
I recently read the following article: What the Buddha Didn't Teach About Reincarnation It says: "This is not to say that “we” ...
-
On the 13th January I discovered a lump on my neck. Eventually had an ultrasound and a fine needle aspiration. The lump was 4.2cms long and ... -
Someone on twitter/X asked the following question: A mathematician emerges from a cave, hands you the photo below, and asks "Will a c... -
There's 2 possibilities: a) This is the only life there is. When we die we simply cease to exist. Our lives and the Universe are, in a...
-
It keeps being claimed (eg David Papineau, Sean Carroll et al ) that if consciousness caused anything in the brain over and above physical c...
-
I bought the Lenovo D32-45 PC Monitor 10 days ago (it's not available on Amazon). It cost £169.00 which I believe is about the cheapest...
-
This is a continuation of the post about my cyst. I think it's sufficiently important to warrant a separate post. After asking many que...
-
Yesterday I had a conversation with Claude (an LLM similar to ChatGPT) about hemispherectomies (permanently removing half of one's brain...
3 comments:
Hello Ian! This is totally random (hopefully you'll receive this post) but I'm a fan (I agree with much of what you say regarding metaphysics & I discovered you via Bernardo Kastrup). I have a few quick questions I'd like to ask you (regarding metaphysics essentially) if you have the time to answer. Anyway could I email you perhaps? My name is James btw, sorry if this weird. I've never posted on a blogspot site before.
No sweat. Ok so basically regarding metaphysics/philosophy of mind, did you ever consider pursuing a degree in philosophy or cognitive science? I'm sure you already have a career but (assuming this is something you've been interested in for quite a while) I was just wondering if you've ever thought about this as a career (if it's even viable).
I myself already have an BS degree & a career going. However I've been considering if getting a graduate degree in philosophy/cognitive science would be wise (either for fun or as a potential future career). I'm very interested in "immaterialist" metaphysics & would like to become more knowledgeable about it (as well as debate the rabid physicalists). I'm just wondering what your thoughts are on this since you're clearly very knowledgeable about this subject. I'm not sure how much credentials actually play in the study of consciousness. I know Bernardo Kastrup doesn't hold a philosophy/cog science degree (he does the philosophy stuff for fun & holds a technology profession) & I don't plan on changing careers anytime soon, I'd just like to know if from your understanding, if this is a big deal in regards to consciousness studies.
My 2nd question is, what's your opinion on Out of body experiences & psychedelics? Have you ever tried to induce an OBE or take a psychedelic? From my research, I believe OBEs & psychedelics are really strong methods for have mystical experiences & confirming to oneself that you're not your physical body. I view psychedelics as training wheels though, I've never had an OBE but it seems they are a little more reassuring than psychedelics since one could say the mystical experience on a psychedelic is just an "hallucination", whereas with an OBE, you induce it yourself without any external aids.
I'd just like to get your opinion on the above topics. Thanks for your time.
I approach the issue of whether there's a "life after death" mainly from a philosophical perspective. My main blog doesn't discuss in detail the evidence for an afterlife anywhere because I don't feel I have sufficient knowledge.
The thing is even those who believe in an afterlife and psi think that materialism is astonishingly successful. They think it explains the world, and the only reason we have to doubt it is the apparent existence of psi and the evidence for an afterlife. No doubt they also buy into this notion that psi and an afterlife are "extraordinary claims".
But, as people will know if they've read certain essays in my other blog, I think this notion that materialism is obviously correct to be utter nonsense. Indeed, on the contrary, it's obviously false, although in saying that I'm certainly not necessarily saying that the brain doesn't somehow generate consciousness, or at least that the brain might be necessary for the existence of consciousness (but of course the evidence for an afterlife weighs against this).
And this is the main problem. This idea that some flavour of materialism *must be* correct, and that therefore any evidence suggesting that consciousness survives or has certain abilities, is an extraordinary claim. And it's not just psi that would be an "extraordinary" ability of consciousness, but even the notion that consciousness per se has a causal impact on the world at all!
In a sense it doesn't matter how compelling the evidence for an afterlife might be. Whilst people are convinced that some flavour of materialism must be correct, they won't pay much attention to the evidence. They will assume it can be explained away somehow or other. If they have any doubts in this regard, the Net is flooded with skeptic articles pooh-poohing the evidence. They'll just assume these articles tell it as it is since they serve to reinforce their existing beliefs. So I think the underlying philosophical issues are more important and that's what I concentrate on. However, once I feel I have sufficient knowledge, I'll be happy to write about the evidence too.
OK, so having said all that, what is my opinion on "Out of body experiences" & psychedelics? First of all I should say I've never had an OBE or NDE, or taken any psychedelics, or ever had any mystical experiences, or ever had any psi experiences. Well, a few cases of synchronicity, and I think I might have had a fair few psi experiences as a young child, but nothing really since. Having said that I suppose I would regard these experiences as a glimpse of other realities, but nevertheless shaped by our expectations and underlying psyche. In fact a bit like our vision in this physical reality! (see a blog entry of mine http://ian-wardell.blogspot.co.uk/2011/03/are-perceptual-illusions-always.html)
When you say 'the mystical experience on a psychedelic is just an "hallucination"', do you mean that the experience is wholly one generated by the brain; that there is no input from any external reality? If so why do you think that?
Post a Comment