Does my logic prove life after death?

[Eric Tarpall]

If something happens once it can happen again. Including your birth.

[Eric Tarpall]

10 minutes ago, Winter said:

Remove the physical world and there's no such thing as death.

I think the logic still works if the world is non physical. 

[Shadowraix]

When the body ceases to function in the configuration it is in remember that's only a set of moments in the whole. It is always alive and dead simultaneously unless you consider only a specific moment. 

But dying is only relevant to the ego for your true self is all of existence. 

[Moreira]

3 minutes ago, Shadowraix said:

When the body ceases to function in the configuration it is in remember that's only a set of moments in the whole. It is always alive and dead simultaneously unless you consider only a specific moment. 

But dying is only relevant to the ego for your true self is all of existence. 

Defining the essence as the awareness, isnt the consciousness afraid to cease to be conscious of this world?

[Eric Tarpall]

34 minutes ago, Winter said:

There's no such thing as you, life, time or logic.

I typed this in the past so time must be passing. 

[Eric Tarpall]

2 minutes ago, Winter said:

Your past is just your memories. They could be altered or created at any moment.

They could and I'm open to that possibility. But I'm not going to blindly believe that because a video says it. 

[Bluebird]

@Eric Tarpall You don't have to believe it, you can experience it. Even if you get it logically, you will still be miserable until you directly experience it.

Also, was that an Alan Watts para-quote?

[Eric Tarpall]

2 hours ago, Bluebird said:

was that an Alan Watts para-quote?

I don't know who that is.

[Salvijus]

17 hours ago, Eric Tarpall said:

If something happens once it can happen again. Including your birth.

I think about this often. So far I think you're right. But I don't know.

[InfinitePotential]

18 hours ago, Eric Tarpall said:

If something happens once it can happen again. Including your birth.

I have thought and said this many times!  Not the most rigorous scientific proof but seems reasonable to me.  In fact, there is a name for how long it'll take for a "system to return to a state very close to, if not exactly the same, as the initial state".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poincaré_recurrence_theorem

Time it'll take for the universe to reset itself (and thus for us (or perfect copies of us?) to be posting on this thread talking about the universe resetting itself):

 

[Aimblack]

1. Not necessarily just because it CAN happen does not mean it DOES happen so even at best it only creates the possibility of life after death.

2, The stronger point is that reality is under no obligation to follow your string of thoughts even if you were to find a sound logical argument that would prove that there is life after death,logic  cannot justify itself so it is just an assumption that logic can capture the entirety of reality and it is also an assumption that everything that logic proves to be true/false is actually so.

[InfinitePotential]

1 hour ago, Winter said:

If you want to talk about proofs, then there's the Godel's theorem that proves you can't prove anything.

You can prove stuff!  You just have to transcend the logical system containing the proof you're trying to prove.

Which brings you to a new logical system which you must transcend to prove is consistent and complete.

Which brings you to a new logical system which you must transcend to prove is consistent and complete.

Which brings you to.... Mu

Q.E.D.

[InfinitePotential]

2 minutes ago, Winter said:

No, you just can't prove anything if you don't have any axiom. If you take the physical world as your axiom then all the ideas of life after death are bullshit. You can enter wonderland illusion and decide to prove stuff there (in a mentally generated world with self induced axioms) but that's very pointless.

There's no such thing as logic or proofs unless you decide to assume those things exist. Take a step back and realize all of this is mental chatter for your own satisfaction. 

(I know).  

Also, taking the physical world as an axiom... Science cannot prove anything.  It can only deal with correlations.  Maybe A caused B, or maybe some unknown C caused both A and B, or maybe A has just happened to precede B every time we've looked, etc etc.

Mathematics on the other hand... now that sure seems to be logically consistent and be able to make definitive statements that cannot be questioned.  Until Gödel came around and bitch slapped every mathematician and crashed Hilbert's Program.

 

But yeah, ultimately it's all bullshit.

[InfinitePotential]

8 minutes ago, Winter said:

Science can't prove a lot of stuff but it doesn't need to. We all live by considering the most sensible possibilities. When you eat you're not scared that your fingers will explode for no reason. Even though science can't prove that it can't happen, it can give you enough evidence to live a practical life without worrying about your fingers exploding.

Humans want proofs for their own satisfaction because they don't like uncertainty. Truth is that nothing can be proven.

Godel did not slap any mathematician. Mathematicians know what are axioms and no one tried to do maths without axioms. It's like we are all building sand castles on a beach and someone is like "You fools! Did you know that if the beach is removed your sand castles will fall?". Everyone knows that but that doesn't prevent anyone from building sand castles on the beach.

The foolish would be the one coming without a beach and hoping to build something. This is unfortunately what this post is about. Want to prove anything? What are your axioms?

Yes he did.

Mathematicians tried to create a finite, formal set of axioms that was complete (all mathematical statements can be proven true or false), consistent (no contradictions), and decidable (some algorithm should exist which can decide the truth or falsity of any mathematical statement), and that could prove itself to be true.  (Hilbert's Program)

Godel came and slapped every single Mathematician working on developing such a system hard on the face.

 

But yeah, I agree with everything you're saying.

[InfinitePotential]

1 minute ago, Winter said:

Oh didn't know. Thanks for correcting me!

No problem, thank YOU!  but you won't read about that in the history books.

[BjarkeT]

you can't use logic as proof what you need is evidence so your logic doesn't prove anything.