Philosophy Discussion Forums

Both mental and physical reality both exist, they are inter dependent on each other. Just as thoughts can effect the physical world through action the physical can affect our mental state through other peoples actions or sickness or anything held by the senses. Our senses through our physical body's let us experience the physical world and give rise to our sense of self and consciousness. Self cannot be explained as one thing because it is many things that create a whole.
No matter what happens when you die you can know that you did exist at one point in time, and since death takes away our physical body's which would leave us in unconsciousness without our body's to experience life does something remain? If we did exist in the mental world at one point as well would that somehow carry on? Why or why not. Do we somehow survive our death but also not survive? Does our existence change for us after death or are we just deleted as people? And if we are deleted does being existent at some moment in time help us?

Weight wrote: ↑February 21st, 2018, 2:09 pm And if we are deleted does being existent at some moment in time help us?

For me this is one of the most important philosophical problems if philosophy has something to do with our existence in the universe.

For the universe is my universe. It does not vanish when I die, but if I cease to exist, there is no universe, and has never been, for that would be the end of time, and the past is the past of the present.

So there is a paradox here, and the paradox cannot be resolved by saying that the universe is still there for the others, because the others are only others for me. This is the very definition of 'other'.

The logical conclusion seems to be that my death has nothing to do with my existence.

The universe of my yesterday is no more my universe, but the universe is still my universe, the universe of my present. In the same way when I am dead the dead person's universe is no more my universe, but the universe must still be my universe if it is the universe at all.

I have tried to solve this paradox by some metaphysical considerations elsewhere on this forum and I do not go into that now. But as you seem to have recognized the depth of this problem it would be interesting to receive some other suggestions for a solution from you and others.

To sum up: (1) do you see the problem? (2) what is your solution?

If I had to bet I'd say there is one reality we live in, not two.

Eduk wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2018, 2:37 pm If I had to bet I'd say there is one reality we live in, not two.

Yes we do live in one realty, our mental experience. the physical world makes this happen through dependent arising but the main question I asked was if you exist in one point in time "the present" how does that correlate with our non existence. Because non existence cant be forever, life exists and if you were to compare non existence to not being conscious if you are unconscious for 1 second it would feel the same as a million years.

I don't understand. If I have an apple and then eat it then I no longer have an apple. I don't have an infinity of no apples.

Weight wrote: ↑February 21st, 2018, 2:09 pm Both mental and physical reality both exist, they are inter dependent on each other. Just as thoughts can effect the physical world through action the physical can affect our mental state through other peoples actions or sickness or anything held by the senses. Our senses through our physical body's let us experience the physical world and give rise to our sense of self and consciousness. Self cannot be explained as one thing because it is many things that create a whole.
No matter what happens when you die you can know that you did exist at one point in time, and since death takes away our physical body's which would leave us in unconsciousness without our body's to experience life does something remain? If we did exist in the mental world at one point as well would that somehow carry on? Why or why not. Do we somehow survive our death but also not survive? Does our existence change for us after death or are we just deleted as people? And if we are deleted does being existent at some moment in time help us?

My view is that life is cyclical.

Death is merely the closing of a circle. At death, awareness has nowhere else to go other than to the Beginning (conception).

And this view is based on the space-time paradigm. If every moment of time eternally exists, then you (from birth to death) also eternally exist. And your awareness cannot escape itself...

Atreyu wrote: ↑February 26th, 2018, 8:58 pm

Weight wrote: ↑February 21st, 2018, 2:09 pm Both mental and physical reality both exist, they are inter dependent on each other. Just as thoughts can effect the physical world through action the physical can affect our mental state through other peoples actions or sickness or anything held by the senses. Our senses through our physical body's let us experience the physical world and give rise to our sense of self and consciousness. Self cannot be explained as one thing because it is many things that create a whole.
No matter what happens when you die you can know that you did exist at one point in time, and since death takes away our physical body's which would leave us in unconsciousness without our body's to experience life does something remain? If we did exist in the mental world at one point as well would that somehow carry on? Why or why not. Do we somehow survive our death but also not survive? Does our existence change for us after death or are we just deleted as people? And if we are deleted does being existent at some moment in time help us?

My view is that life is cyclical.

Death is merely the closing of a circle. At death, awareness has nowhere else to go other than to the Beginning (conception).

And this view is based on the space-time paradigm. If every moment of time eternally exists, then you (from birth to death) also eternally exist. And your awareness cannot escape itself...

Probability says that the new conception will not be "you", rather there will always be those who are more like you than they are like other people, simply by chance. The fact that there is no memory of these systemic and informational peers doesn't matter; we don't even remember most of our own childhood. The repetition is approximate but, then again, we ourselves are only approximate versions of who we once were.

Rather than reincarnate, the kinds of thoughts that we think and feelings we feel will instead approximately keen on happening via certain people in future generations, just as we ourselves have to some extent roughly reiterated the kinds of personal and character dynamics that have appeared from time to time in the past. No doubt, though, that some attributes are more or less common than others.

Atreyu wrote: ↑February 26th, 2018, 8:58 pm At death, awareness has nowhere else to go other than to the Beginning (conception).

I agree, but there are two possibilities: awareness can go back to my beginning or to another's beginning.

Tamminen wrote: ↑February 27th, 2018, 3:56 am

Atreyu wrote: ↑February 26th, 2018, 8:58 pm At death, awareness has nowhere else to go other than to the Beginning (conception).

I agree, but there are two possibilities: awareness can go back to my beginning or to another's beginning.

No, you are what you are. No one can become somebody else.

Otherwise we could become each other while alive.

It will be another life, but not another you.

There are no other yous....

Atreyu wrote: ↑March 5th, 2018, 7:02 pm No, you are what you are. No one can become somebody else.

Otherwise we could become each other while alive.

It will be another life, but not another you.

There are no other yous....

I think death is forgetting. When I am dead, I do not remember who I was. I will be another. And I think Heracleitus was right: I cannot step twice into the same stream. There is only one Self that goes through all individual lives. But I cannot step into another's life when I am who I am, only afterwards.

Let's face it, we can generally barely remember last year, let alone our childhoods, and our infancy and gestation are a complete blank.

So, yes, what we remember is a proven unreliable guide as to what is. Personally, if I had prior lives it would have been nice to have been made aware of the lessons of previous lives. Remembering all the way back to microbial existence would be even more helpful. It would have saved everyone a lot of trouble and heartache if we could actually remember what it felt like to be simpler, more primitive animals of the earlier Earth and thus be able to appreciate exactly how much, or little, suffering was being meted out in the process of living.

Indeed, death is forgetting. You will have no memory whatever of anything that happened in this life, in your next life.

Nevertheless, it will be you living your next life. Not anyone else. And you will still be you. The big forces which created you will create you again. Your genetic code at birth will be virtually the exact same in the next 'cycle'. Nothing big, nothing caused by big forces (like the Sun, planets, Earth, or Moon) can be any different the next time around.

Only small incidental things, caused by incidental forces, could be different next time...

Atreyu wrote: ↑March 13th, 2018, 6:37 pm Indeed, death is forgetting. You will have no memory whatever of anything that happened in this life, in your next life.

Nevertheless, it will be you living your next life. Not anyone else. And you will still be you. The big forces which created you will create you again. Your genetic code at birth will be virtually the exact same in the next 'cycle'. Nothing big, nothing caused by big forces (like the Sun, planets, Earth, or Moon) can be any different the next time around.

Only small incidental things, caused by incidental forces, could be different next time...

My subjective time is a series of presents or “nows” that constantly change their mode of being from present to past, as new presents replace them from the future. There must have been the first “now”, for if there had been a “now” before each “now”, I could not be here now: there could not be the “now” I am experiencing at present. There cannot be the last “now”, because this would mean that there would be non-being: if I did not exist, there would be nothing, which would be absurd and self-contradictory. So my subjective time has a beginning and no end. There is a parallel to this in cosmology, where the universe has started from zero, the singularity we know as the Big Bang, and will possibly expand with no end.

Now I have described my subjective time where my experiences of the world follow each other without an end. But are there other subjective times, times of others? I do not think so. For terms like 'subjective' and 'experience' denote 'my subjectivity' and 'my experiences'. If there were experiences that I never experience, it would be the same as saying that there is something which is not there. As I said, there can be experiences that are not here and now, being in the past or future, but they must nevertheless be experiences in relation to my present experience, so that I have had them in the past or will have them in the future. So the others' experiences must be in my past or in my future. This is the solution for the paradox of foreign minds.

And who is this 'I'? I am not only my body, my genetic code and my memories. I can be whatever body, whatever genetic code, whoever's memories. So I am something that transcends my personal identity: I am the transcendental subject that manifests itself as every individual subject in the cosmic space-time, each in its proper time. And because this flow of existence is endless, there are no loops in it: I cannot step twice into the same stream.

All right, this is metaphysical speculation like your scenario, but as your hypothesis solves only the paradox of death, my hypothesis solves also the paradox of foreign minds or foreign experiences, which I think is equally important.

And, as Hereandnow says, this is all beyond language and can only be seen in a phenomenological intuition. When we try to put it into words, we are in the middle of paradoxes in expressing our ideas. It all becomes sort of poetry. But let us read each others' poems.

Weight:

If we did exist in the mental world at one point as well would that somehow carry on?

We have never existed in a mental world. We are physical beings capable of mental activity. That activity has created what might be called a mental world, but the mental world is dependent upon the physical world. The mental world is carried on by physical beings via thoughts and beliefs transmitted in oral and written form, institutions, structures (buildings, roadways), technology, and ongoing practices.

Do we somehow survive our death but also not survive?

There is a great deal of speculation about such things, but it seems to me that it is fueled by an unwillingness to accept our mortality, our finitude, and a desire that there be something more in which we can find a meaning and purpose to our lives.

And if we are deleted does being existent at some moment in time help us?

Well, if I did not exist then there would be no me to be helped. When I no longer exist having existed can no longer help me. It may, however, be of benefit to others who do exist.

Because non existence cant be forever, life exists and if you were to compare non existence to not being conscious if you are unconscious for 1 second it would feel the same as a million years.

Why can't the non-existence of a person be forever? The fact that life exists says nothing about the existence of a particular person. If to be unconscious means without awareness then it does not feel like one second or a million years. It is the absence of feeling.

There are some who hold that consciousness is a fundamental property of the universe. Existence, the existence of consciousness, and the existence of life will be seen as one thing, two things, or three depending on one’s underlying assumptions.

Atreyu:

And this view is based on the space-time paradigm.

There are various space-time paradigms. We do not know which, if any of these models, adequately models reality. Physicists and philosophers will continue to argue about this for some time to come. Whether at some time in the future it is resolved is something we cannot now know.

If every moment of time eternally exists, then you (from birth to death) also eternally exist.

If there is birth and death then there is an arrow of time. We do not grow younger. If life is cyclical and every moment of time exists eternally then how do we make sense of a cycle based on the premise of what was and will be? What prevents you from living a former life? Are you claiming that you are at every moment living all your lives?

Indeed, death is forgetting.

Forgetting what? What happened? If every moment exists eternally then there is no past in which something happened, only what is happening.

Nevertheless, it will be you living your next life.

How can there be a next if every moment of time eternally exists. Next entails a future.

Your genetic code at birth will be virtually the exact same in the next 'cycle'.

It is well established that the human genome changes: www.nature.com/news/past-5-000-years-pr ... me-1.11912

Atreyu wrote: ↑March 13th, 2018, 6:37 pm Indeed, death is forgetting. You will have no memory whatever of anything that happened in this life, in your next life.

Nevertheless, it will be you living your next life. Not anyone else. And you will still be you. The big forces which created you will create you again. Your genetic code at birth will be virtually the exact same in the next 'cycle'. Nothing big, nothing caused by big forces (like the Sun, planets, Earth, or Moon) can be any different the next time around.

Only small incidental things, caused by incidental forces, could be different next time...

I like the poetry of it. Each orbit of a planet brings some change, sometimes massive, although usually not.