Consciousness and Reincarnation: A Scientific Perspective

  • Thread starter Thread starter solipsis
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of consciousness, its potential origins from unconscious states, and the concept of reincarnation. Participants explore philosophical and scientific perspectives on whether consciousness can arise from a state of unconsciousness and if it can be regained after death. The conversation touches on theoretical implications, personal identity, and the physical constituents of beings.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that consciousness may arise from a state of unconsciousness, questioning if this implies the possibility of regaining consciousness after death.
  • Others argue that if nothing remains after death, it would not be possible to regain consciousness, emphasizing the uncertainty surrounding the nature of existence post-mortem.
  • A participant suggests that the physical constituents of a person (atoms and molecules) exist in different forms before birth and could potentially reassemble after death, raising questions about the nature of reincarnation.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the idea of an 'I' or personal identity persisting after death, suggesting that the arrangement and interactions of atoms define identity rather than the atoms themselves.
  • There is a discussion about the recycling of atoms in living organisms, with some noting that most of the atoms in a body are replaced over time, which complicates the notion of personal continuity.
  • Participants explore the implications of being composed of atoms that were once part of other beings, questioning the significance of this in terms of identity and experience.
  • Some express uncertainty about whether experiences are exclusive to humans, pondering the nature of existence in different forms.
  • A later reply highlights that while interactions of atoms cease after death, the arrangement of those atoms also disappears, leading to a conclusion that personal identity does not persist.
  • Another participant mentions emergent properties of matter, suggesting that current scientific understanding may not fully encompass all aspects of existence.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no clear consensus on the nature of consciousness, identity, or the possibility of reincarnation. Disagreement exists regarding whether any aspect of personal identity persists after death.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes various assumptions about consciousness, identity, and the physical processes involved in existence. Some claims depend on definitions of consciousness and personal identity, which remain unresolved.

  • #31
Wow seriously, this is as overly speculative as it gets.

Freedom of speech doesn't apply on a privately run forum. There are rules regarding posts like this.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Tell me, what sentiments am I hurting? Or what 'mainstream' sciences do u want to back my theory? And when u say posts like 'this', what exactly do u mean...? There is a reason why these posts are here and not in metaphysics section

U are reacting rather strongly to a proposed alternate theory. Do you have anything better to suggest? Ur obviously not puTting it forth.
as for the force from star wars, all imagination has a basis in reality.
 
  • #33
All claims must be backed up by mainstream scienctific publications.

Overly speculative posts and personal theories are not allowed.

These are the forum guidelines.
 
  • #34
If its proof that u want, I will find it for you.
 
  • #35
jarednjames said:
All claims must be backed up by mainstream scienctific publications.

Overly speculative posts and personal theories are not allowed.

These are the forum guidelines.

It's the philosophy forum.

You're overdoing the materialistic human-centric point of view, just a bit. ;)
 
  • #36
jarednjames said:
All claims must be backed up by mainstream scienctific publications.

Overly speculative posts and personal theories are not allowed.

These are the forum guidelines.

There is no possible way in which to back up philosophical "Luft" of any magnitude, coming from anyone (ranging an unknown to giants of philosophy) , with mainstream scientific papers.
 
  • #37
Any post in philosophy regarding science or maths is subject to the same rules of the other forums. Philosophy forum rules, not mine.

The claims made are regarding a "life force" inside all living beings and the differences between being alive and dead. This is a Biology topic and better answers given in the biology forums for the claims made in those posts - to continue discussion here won't provide anything meaningful without someone who can give better input regarding the topic.

As per the posts themselves, they were an alternative hypothesis on the subject and they are specifically banned.

But hey, if the moderators feel the rules can be applied as they see fit and ignored where they don't wish to enforce them then so be it. It just lowers the quality of the forums.
 
  • #38
jarednjames said:
Any post in philosophy regarding science or maths is subject to the same rules of the other forums. Philosophy forum rules, not mine.

The claims made are regarding a "life force" inside all living beings and the differences between being alive and dead. This is a Biology topic and better answers given in the biology forums for the claims made in those posts - to continue discussion here won't provide anything meaningful without someone who can give better input regarding the topic.

As per the posts themselves, they were an alternative hypothesis on the subject and they are specifically banned.

But hey, if the moderators feel the rules can be applied as they see fit and ignored where they don't wish to enforce them then so be it. It just lowers the quality of the forums.

Let moderators handle it. A philosophy forum is the last place where anyone should ask for references from scientific journals. They are as inappropriate as asking a writer of SF literature for scientific papers to abck up his books.

One the other hand, I have to congratulate you for your outstanding conformity and obedience to the rules. I think that any newcomer to those forums should look up to you and learn from your example.
 
  • #39
Thread locked.
 

Similar threads

Epothilone B study connected to 'Hard Problem of Consciousness' Model
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Is Consciousness Simple or Complex?
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
13K
Consciousness and the Perception of Time
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
Some more vague questions about consciousness.
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Time and relationships (or, consciousness per Martin Heidegger)
  • · Replies 212 ·
8
Replies
212
Views
45K
Is Human Reincarnation a Scientific Reality or a Philosophical Concept?
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
7K
Consciousness in the materialist perspective.
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
How Do We Study Consciousness and Why Is It Important?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Undergrad Why don't we bury Schrodinger's Cat?
  • · Replies 143 ·
5
Replies
143
Views
12K
What or where is our real sense of self?
  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
16K