A Scientifically Supported Heaven (and Hell)

[joigus]

1 hour ago, MigL said:

That's what happens when people  ( more specifically, BigQuestioner ) start confusing subjective beliefs and opinions with actual science.

Heaven forbid.

[Area54]

On 9/7/2020 at 8:27 PM, BigQuestioner said:

Funny how you don't acknowledge that your analogy was flawed,

Funny how you seem to think I offered an analogy. I didn't.

 

On 9/7/2020 at 8:27 PM, BigQuestioner said:

don't want to address the specifics of my explanation regarding the need for viewing the NEC (and natural afterlife) from the proper frame of reference. 

I've addressed the possible impact of your concept upon religions. I understood that is what you wanted us to focus on. I have respected that wish. Funny you chose not to respond to my comments in that regard.

 

On 9/7/2020 at 8:27 PM, BigQuestioner said:

Makes me think 1) why did I even bother to try to explain and 2) you don't really want to understand the NEC Theory (perhaps because if you did, you might have to deal with it). This ends my dialog with you.

I don't understand where you get that from. I have considered your "theory", but find insufficient reason to find it convincing. You have declared, quite strongly, that you do not want to debate the theory. Such debate would be necessary if I were to stand a chance of being convinced by it. You have closed the door to that option in this thread. So, I have - for sake of argument - considered its possible impact on religious believers. Exactly what you asked for.

BigQuestioner, a dialog involves both parties paying attention to what the other says. You have ignored what I did say and imagined me to have said things I didn't. If you wish to offer an explanation for that I am ready to listen.

 

[BigQuestioner]

6 hours ago, Area54 said:

Funny how you seem to think I offered an analogy. I didn't.

 

I've addressed the possible impact of your concept upon religions. I understood that is what you wanted us to focus on. I have respected that wish. Funny you chose not to respond to my comments in that regard.

 

I don't understand where you get that from. I have considered your "theory", but find insufficient reason to find it convincing. You have declared, quite strongly, that you do not want to debate the theory. Such debate would be necessary if I were to stand a chance of being convinced by it. You have closed the door to that option in this thread. So, I have - for sake of argument - considered its possible impact on religious believers. Exactly what you asked for.

BigQuestioner, a dialog involves both parties paying attention to what the other says. You have ignored what I did say and imagined me to have said things I didn't. If you wish to offer an explanation for that I am ready to listen.

The statements you quote were in intended as a replay to  pzkpfw.  Don't know how things got messed up.  Sorry.

[pzkpfw]

2 hours ago, BigQuestioner said:

The statements you quote were in intended as a replay to  pzkpfw.  Don't know how things got messed up.  Sorry.

So another sort of analogy then:

This thread of yours seems like saying "given a banana could ride a bicycle, I claim it would compete in the tour de France" ... and then trying to say "I don't want to talk about how a banana rides a bike, just the impact on the cycle race".

 

After someone dies, what is retaining their last thought or feeling?

[MigL]

Even pzkpfw's cat ( avatar ) is distressed by the lack of rigorous thinking in your argument.
He's slapping his forehead in disbelief.

[iNow]

5 hours ago, pzkpfw said:

After someone dies, what is retaining their last thought or feeling?

Nice post overall. One possible and reasonable answer to this one question from it:

Once we die, we live on solely in the memories of those who survive us.

Some of us leave bigger footprints in the proverbial snow than others. For some, that snow is just digital, while for others that snow is printed into history books and sung into stories for future generations, but for all of us we only live on in the lives of others who encountered us and our “thoughts and feelings” are retained solely in the neural connections of those whom we may have somehow touched. 

Edited September 10, 2020 by iNow

[pzkpfw]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

Nice post overall. One possible and reasonable answer to this one question from it:

Once we die, we live on solely in the memories of those who survive us.

Some of us leave bigger footprints in the proverbial snow than others. For some, that snow is just digital, while for others that snow is printed into history books and sung into stories for future generations, but for all of us we only live on in the lives of others who encountered us and our “thoughts and feelings” are retained solely in the neural connections of those whom we may have somehow touched. 

Absolutely. When I croak, my kids will hopefully remember me a while. ... but they are unlikely to know if my last thoughts were of heaven, hell, or pizza. (And I won't behaving any more thoughts!)

[Charles 3781]

On 9/10/2020 at 4:37 AM, pzkpfw said:

Absolutely. When I croak, my kids will hopefully remember me a while. ... but they are unlikely to know if my last thoughts were of heaven, hell, or pizza. (And I won't behaving any more thoughts!)

Your kids won't give a stuff about your dying thoughts. They'll want to know:  "How much money do we get from his croaking".

[MigL]

Maybe you should have treated your kids better, Charles.

[Charles 3781]

On 9/20/2020 at 9:46 PM, MigL said:

Maybe you should have treated your kids better, Charles.

Would it matter how well a father treated his kids?

Surely the kids' thoughts, on hearing of the paternal demise, will spring immediately to the question: "How much has he left us in his Will?" 

Of course, the kids will exhibit the expected, culturally appropriate  signals of grieving and mourning,  at the Funeral.  But once this ceremony has been accomplished to satisfaction, the  most important business will be attended to:  "The Reading of the Will".    Hasn't it always been that way,  it's just human nature.  Or am I being appallingly cynical?

 

[zapatos]

10 minutes ago, Charles 3781 said:

Or am I being appallingly cynical?

I'm voting for appallingly cynical. Just because you feel that way doesn't mean the rest of us do.

[Charles 3781]

58 minutes ago, zapatos said:

I'm voting for appallingly cynical. Just because you feel that way doesn't mean the rest of us do.

Everyone feels that way really.  It's just that most people don't like to display it.  That's understandable.  And not at all a bad thing.  What would happen to families, and society,  and civilisation, if we all displayed the truth to each other all the time.  We'd be mere inconsiderate animals.

The uniqueness of humans is precisely our capacity to lie about our true feelings, in order not to hurt others.

 

[Area54]

1 hour ago, Charles 3781 said:

Everyone feels that way really.  It's just that most people don't like to display it. 

Your belief in your ability to discern the thinking of others is less viable than you think.

Anecdotes do not normally provide proof, but in this instance a single exception trumps your "everyone feels". When our father died his solictor pointed out to my sister and I that we had a substantial legal claim on his estate. Our concern was not "How much are we going to get", but how quickly could we ensure all assets were released to our mother. When she died, sharing her "net worth" was a painful reminder she was gone, not a source of mercenary delight.

1 hour ago, Charles 3781 said:

The uniqueness of humans is precisely our capacity to lie about our true feelings, in order not to hurt others.

And yet, at times, this capacity should be invoked not to spare feelings, but in order to avoid a string of offensive personal remarks. Such is the case here.

[MigL]

I would think your parents left you something much more valuable than an inheritance Area54.
They left you valuable life lessons, like caring and getting along with your siblings, and anyone else you care about.

Dig deep Charles, your cynicism may have buried those same lessons your parents taught you.

[swansont]

5 hours ago, Charles 3781 said:

Everyone feels that way really. 

Wow. No, they don’t. 

You shouldn’t assume that everyone shares the feelings/motivations that you do. It suggests a certain narrow-mindedness.

 

[zapatos]

6 hours ago, Charles 3781 said:

Everyone feels that way really.

How dare you trash the bond I had with my father in such a way. I'm not prone to violence but if you said that to me in a bar I imagine you'd be picking yourself up off the floor right now. You are despicable.

[Crocduck]

On 9/9/2020 at 10:32 PM, iNow said:

Nice post overall. One possible and reasonable answer to this one question from it:

Once we die, we live on solely in the memories of those who survive us.

Some of us leave bigger footprints in the proverbial snow than others. For some, that snow is just digital, while for others that snow is printed into history books and sung into stories for future generations, but for all of us we only live on in the lives of others who encountered us and our “thoughts and feelings” are retained solely in the neural connections of those whom we may have somehow touched. 

What happens to isolated peoples who don't have interactions with others?  Who's memories of them will live on?  And what happens to your afterlife when all those who ever knew you are dead and gone?  Seems like a very short and finite existence either way in the grand scheme.  Even if you have managed to make a big impact on the world and get in the history books...those books will be gone someday...and this time will be relatively short compared to the time scale of the universe or even the Earth's existence.

It has been said, however, that all moments in time exist and are potentially retrievable as long as light persists (I guess).  100 million years after your death somealien from a planet 100 million light years away could potentially watch your funeral with a telescope or equipment advanced enough.  Probably outlandish but at least conceptually conceivable.

Either way, I would not see this as any sort of evidence for common perceptions of Heaven.  It seems more like trying to fit a circle in a square hole.  Let's not loose sight of the common perceptions of Heaven or Hell...Nirvana and Eternal damnation that pervade much of society.  Those ideas work more efficiently in the world of fear, propaganda and struggles for power or hope for a better life.

[iNow]

3 hours ago, Crocduck said:

What happens to isolated peoples who don't have interactions with others?  Who's memories of them will live on? 

They're just gone. Maybe an animal or pet survived them, but that's it. 

3 hours ago, Crocduck said:

Seems like a very short and finite existence either way in the grand scheme.

That's because it is. 

3 hours ago, Crocduck said:

Let's not loose sight of the common perceptions of Heaven or Hell...Nirvana and Eternal damnation that pervade much of society.  Those ideas work more efficiently in the world of fear, propaganda and struggles for power or hope for a better life.

They're almost surely just fictions, though. So long as that's how they're considered, then so be it. People can take comfort in whatever mental crutch they want, but the moment people begin acting as if they're real and that anyone who disagrees will burn for eternity in a fiery hot place, or who tries to enforce legislation based on these fairy tales, then things take on another tone altogether. 

[Charles 3781]

19 hours ago, MigL said:

I would think your parents left you something much more valuable than an inheritance Area54.
They left you valuable life lessons, like caring and getting along with your siblings, and anyone else you care about.

Dig deep Charles, your cynicism may have buried those same lessons your parents taught you.

I don't remember that when I was a child,  I got taught any lessons at all from my parents about caring and getting along with siblings, and  other people.  I was horrid to my younger sister.

I had to figure out the correct operating principles for myself, in later life. This was accomplished by reading loads of books.  Mostly science fiction books. Especially Asimov's "Foundation" series, which reveal invaluable lessons about human behaviour.  I could go on to explain further.  But who cares?  

This forum is about hard Science, not fiction!

18 hours ago, zapatos said:

How dare you trash the bond I had with my father in such a way. I'm not prone to violence but if you said that to me in a bar I imagine you'd be picking yourself up off the floor right now. You are despicable.

 I never go into bars, as they tend to be full of drunks who start fights.  

Edited September 23, 2020 by Charles 3781
fear

[Crocduck]

On 9/23/2020 at 1:54 PM, iNow said:

They're just gone. Maybe an animal or pet survived them, but that's it. 

That's because it is. 

They're almost surely just fictions, though. So long as that's how they're considered, then so be it. People can take comfort in whatever mental crutch they want, but the moment people begin acting as if they're real and that anyone who disagrees will burn for eternity in a fiery hot place, or who tries to enforce legislation based on these fairy tales, then things take on another tone altogether. 

There seems to be a tendency to try to make supernatural beliefs fit into the natural realm.  Describing heaven as living on in memories is not very convincing nor very reassuring to those who see heaven in the common use of the term.  You will live on somehow until the last person remembers you.

Speaking of mental crutches a lot of folks still like to look at extreme odds events happening as miracles (when they are positive).  A sole survivor of a plane crash.  A holocaust survivor.  Surviving a disease.  Etc.   But who is charting negative things like lightning strikes, shark attacks, etc?  And what about those who didn't survive the plane crash or holocaust or disease?  When comparing the "miracles" to the deceased it's rather appalling in some scenarios.

If surviving a disease with a 1 in a million survival rate is a miracle...then it should have been a 0 in a million chance rather than 1.  Because 1 in a million SHOULD actually survive by the odds given.  With 7 billion people on Earth it's going to happen a lot.  It would certainly be lucky to be the 1 in a million...but trying to pass it off as a miracle of god seems to be cherry picking the data.  I wanna know who's charting miracles and tragedies...and who's winning!

Now I am sure some will say any scenario that involves a 1 in a million chance to survive will have had a 0% chance at some point in time.  But maybe some person had a rare genetic mutation or makeup that allowed them to survive.  Would we say god gave them the miracle survival condition...and withheld it from the other 999,999?  That's a lot of tragedy for one miracle to take place.  But again who's counting?

[iNow]

Can you summarize your point in a single sentence?

[Area54]

On 9/22/2020 at 11:47 PM, MigL said:

I would think your parents left you something much more valuable than an inheritance Area54.
They left you valuable life lessons, like caring and getting along with your siblings, and anyone else you care about.

That was the central point of my post: contrasting those implicit benefits with the mercenary gains that seemed to be the principal (only) interest of @Charles 3781. Perhaps the point was lost in my courteous attempt to avoid calling Charles's view that of a pathetic and despicable narcissist.( I shall be more direct in future. :))