Question for the atheists

[GwinnettNole]

Is there any scenario where an atheist belives people are still self aware after they die? Or do all atheists believe this is it....?

If you or someone you know believes the former can you elaborate some?

Thanks-- just seeing if there is any other perspectives out there among the atheists.

 

[LesClaypool]

Lock it before it gets off the ground.

 

[GwinnettNole]

Lock it before it gets off the ground.

Come on. Not if people would be mature...

 

[ericram]

I love the fact you think people are going to be mature. That's so cute.

 

[ericram]

By the way, atheists believe in the absence of religion and there is no old man in the sky.

 

[BelemNole]

I'm not sure that the two are required to be tied together - deity and continued existence/consciousness. However, there is no evidence for the latter so I doubt that many who don't believe in the former due to lack of evidence will believe in the latter for the same reason.

 

[ReliableOstrich]

Can't speak for other atheists, I quite like the lack of organization amongst us.

But anyway, I don't believe in any self-awareness after the ticker permanently stops ticking.

I will respond with a question, do folks who believe in heaven think bugs and insects can also find their way into heaven/hell?

 

[YogiNole]

Is there any scenario where an atheist belives people are still self aware after they die? Or do all atheists believe this is it....?

If you or someone you know believes the former can you elaborate some?

Thanks-- just seeing if there is any other perspectives out there among the atheists.

I self identity as a skeptic and scientist. So unless someone presents overwhelming scientific evidence, no to the first question, yes to the second question

 

[MIKE_G]

Dead is dead. Sometimes dead is bettah.

 

[GwinnettNole]

I once read an article where an atheist says after he dies he becomes one of the universe-- almost like there was some self-awareness there. I see if I can dig it up. Just thought some of you folks might know it.

Generally Christians believe animals (like the pet dog) isn't going to heaven. That when they die that's it. The difference is people were given the breath of life, as in a "soul", which differentiates us from animals, bugs, etc.

I'm not sure what other religions believe on the insect/ animal question though.

After seeing the 2nd and 4th responses I can go to a different forum to discuss this if need be. Mods can lock if it will go in a bad way.

 

[nolebum]

By the way, atheists believe in the absence of religion and there is no old man in the sky.

ericram, is it mature when you misrepresent someone's position?
1. Religion is a phenomenon of human life. Religion play a vital role in all human civilizations whether religion is understood as animistic, polytheistic, henothestic, monotheistic, monism, etc. To affirm believe in the absence of religion denies a key part of human history both positive and negative.
2. Which religion believes in an old man in the sky? I am religious. I do not believe in an old man in the sky.

 

[ericram]

ericram, is it mature when you misrepresent someone's position?
1. Religion is a phenomenon of human life. Religion play a vital role in all human civilizations whether religion is understood as animistic, polytheistic, henothestic, monotheistic, monism, etc. To affirm believe in the absence of religion denies a key part of human history both positive and negative.
2. Which religion believes in an old man in the sky? I am religious. I do not believe in an old man in the sky.

Oh here we go....

 

[nolebum]

Will Provine, professor of evolutionary biology at Cornell University, summarized the implications of atheism:
1. No God or gods.
2. No life after death.
3. No ultimate meaning in life. He does not deny that as an atheist like himself cannot have proximate meaning in life.
4. No foundation for ethics.
5. No human freewill. He is adamant on this last point.

 

[DFSNOLE]

This is getting close to being locked because of one.

 

[YogiNole]

Will Provine, professor of evolutionary biology at Cornell University, summarized the implications of atheism:
1. No God or gods.
2. No life after death.
3. No ultimate meaning in life. He does not deny that as an atheist like himself cannot have proximate meaning in life.
4. No foundation for ethics.
5. No human freewill. He is adamant on this last point.

Like @BacardiNole mentioned above, the best part is the lack of organization. The good professor is simply speaking for himself.

 

[Mugsy101]

The funny thing is atheism is a religion.

 

[Banditking]

I don't see any evidence that human consciousness thru the natural course of death can extend past that point. What structure would host your consciousness?

I think in a real sense my job as a neuropsychologist highlights how tied to brain structure our concept of "I" is. Personality and decision making can be drastically changed by neurological disease. So, if your version of "I" can't survive brain damage I don't see how it would survive death.

However, your consciousness is a product of structure. Unlocking and understanding the nature of the brain will allow us to extend consciousness past death.

 

[Banditking]

The funny thing is atheism is a religion.

The funny thing is that is not true. Is theism a religion? No? Why not? Atheism is simply a lack of positive assertion regarding a deity. It is not a religion.

 

[Banditking]

ericram, is it mature when you misrepresent someone's position?
1. Religion is a phenomenon of human life. Religion play a vital role in all human civilizations whether religion is understood as animistic, polytheistic, henothestic, monotheistic, monism, etc. To affirm believe in the absence of religion denies a key part of human history both positive and negative.
2. Which religion believes in an old man in the sky? I am religious. I do not believe in an old man in the sky.

I agree that "old man in the sky" is a reductionistic characterization of some religions. I don't think anyone here is asserting that religion doesn't exist. My position is that supernatural claims are metaphysically subjective and thus religion is not a useful venue for exploring truth about existence. But, by no means do I deny that it has had a prominent place in the sociocultural evolution of many societies.

 

[kj9127]

Will Provine, professor of evolutionary biology at Cornell University, summarized the implications of atheism:
1. No God or gods.
2. No life after death.
3. No ultimate meaning in life. He does not deny that as an atheist like himself cannot have proximate meaning in life.
4. No foundation for ethics.
5. No human freewill. He is adamant on this last point.

Dostoevsky wrote- "If God doesn't exist, everything is permissible".

 

[GwinnettNole]

However, your consciousness is a product of structure. Unlocking and understanding the nature of the brain will allow us to extend consciousness past death.

But even then, this will never tell you if there is a God or not.

 

[Banditking]

But even then, this will never tell you if there is a God or not.

I would argue the concept of God is completely unapproachable and thus, irrelevant.

 

[Mugsy101]

The funny thing is that is not true. Is theism a religion? No? Why not? Atheism is simply a lack of positive assertion regarding a deity. It is not a religion.

The SCOTUS has ruled that atheism is a religion.

 

[Banditking]

The SCOTUS has ruled that atheism is a religion.

So? That's also not precisely true. They ruled that secular humanism is a religion.

 

[GwinnettNole]

Like @BacardiNole mentioned above, the best part is the lack of organization. The good professor is simply speaking for himself.

Except that the professor is a well known biologist and carrys a lot of weight with what he says. It would be like Franklin Graham saying there is a purgatory state after death, for example. Not all Christians would share that opinion but it would carry weight for sure.

Just from a random sample of the posters here all the atheists have agreed there is no consciouness after death. This seems to be consistent with the majority of atheists. So to say there isn't uniformity in views among atheists wouldn't be completely accurate.

 

[Banditking]

Except that the professor is a well known biologist and carrys a lot of weight with what he says. It would be like Franklin Graham saying there is a purgatory state after death, for example. Not all Christians would share that opinion but it would carry weight for sure.

Just from a random sample of the posters here all the atheists have agreed there is no consciouness after death. This seems to be consistent with the majority of atheists. So to say there isn't uniformity in views among atheists wouldn't be completely accurate.

Asserting there is consciousness after death is asserting a supernatural position relative to current science. Thus, all you are doing is picking a question that is effectively solely a theistic topic (other than the science fiction answer I have earlier) and asking for an atheistic position on that theistic topic. You could do the same with the efficacy of rain dances or whether it is possible to read minds.

 

[GwinnettNole]

So? That's also not precisely true. They ruled that secular humanism is a religion.

I definetly see atheism as a belief system. Almost every person that has ever lived believes in something greater than themselves. For theists it's God. For atheists it's the overall encompassing human mind, a government, etc. Heck, even George Carlin worshipped the sun .

 

[Banditking]

I definetly see atheism as a belief system. Almost every person that has ever lived believes in something greater than themselves. For theists it's God. For atheists it's the overall encompassing human mind, a government, etc. Heck, even George Carlin worshipped the sun .

Everyone has a belief system. I agree. Atheism is not a belief system.

 

[GwinnettNole]

Asserting there is consciousness after death is asserting a supernatural position relative to current science. Thus, all you are doing is picking a question that is effectively solely a theistic topic (other than the science fiction answer I have earlier) and asking for an atheistic position on that theistic topic. You could do the same with the efficacy of rain dances or whether it is possible to read minds.

Except for the atheist that said after he dies, he is one of the universe. Whatever that means, and is the root of my original question:

A survey compiled in 2014 by The Austin Institute for the Study of Family and Culture (AISFC) reveals that 32 percent of Americans who identified themselves as agnostics and atheists believe in an afterlife of some kind. In addition, 6 percent of the same non-theistic group expressed a belief in a “bodily resurrection”. These numbers were taken from a sample of 15,738 Americans, all of which were between the ages of 18 and 60. According to the data, 13.2 percent of Americans identify themselves as atheist, agnostic, or some other variation of non-believing.

http://www.theskepticsguide.org/one-third-of-atheists-agnostics-believe-in-an-afterlife

 

[Banditking]

Which goes to my point. Atheism is not a belief system.

 

[vevois23]

Asserting there is consciousness after death is asserting a supernatural position relative to current science. Thus, all you are doing is picking a question that is effectively solely a theistic topic (other than the science fiction answer I have earlier) and asking for an atheistic position on that theistic topic. You could do the same with the efficacy of rain dances or whether it is possible to read minds.

I swear my wife can read my mind. At least I believe as much with the looks she gives me at times.

 

[GwinnettNole]

Everyone has a belief system. I agree. Atheism is not a belief system.

I'd say atheism leads to a belief system whether it's in humanity or government, for example. So, it defintely points to a belief system; which leads to the conclusion from many that atheism in itself is a belief system.

 

[Banditking]

[QUOTE="I'd say atheism leads to a belief system whether it's in humanity or government, for example. So, it defintely points to a belief system; which leads to the conclusion from many that atheism in itself is a belief system.

[/QUOTE]

That doesn't make sense. You are pinning as a necessary cornerstone theism or atheism. That is a theistic centric position.

 

[YogiNole]

Except that the professor is a well known biologist and carrys a lot of weight with what he says. It would be like Franklin Graham saying there is a purgatory state after death, for example. Not all Christians would share that opinion but it would carry weight for sure.

Just from a random sample of the posters here all the atheists have agreed there is no consciouness after death. This seems to be consistent with the majority of atheists. So to say there isn't uniformity in views among atheists wouldn't be completely accurate.

Sure there are many well known atheist/secular/humanist/agnostic/skeptic school of thoughts and personalities - Hitchens, Hawking, Dawkins, Harris, Neil Tyson and so on. But it's a personal choice on how one chooses to rationalize their lack of faith/religious belief in a world that's overwhelmingly pro-religion. Also because of the inherent nature of it, there is no consequence to picking one over another. I would think of these famous personalities more like radio talk show hosts than Pope of Reverend.

As for the no consciousness after death part, I'm sure all of us agree that there are no pink unicorns either (I'm not being facetious here). Think of consciousness after death falling in the same category for someone who does not subscribe to that line of thinking. It is a result of the approach not an approach

 

[Random_John]

Wouldn't the only one who knows if God truly exists is God him/herself?

There is no definitive proof one way or the other. In fact both sides of the coin are left to believe yes there is a God or no there is not a God. Either way, a person chooses to believe something.

I feel like faith and belief are some of the many miracles of life. We all take a position, no matter how flawed either way, based on our beliefs.

The better question would be from where do our beliefs come and why do some believe one way and some believe another?

 

[ReliableOstrich]

Interesting discussion.

I'll go back to what I said earlier, it's misleading to characterize the beliefs (or lack thereof) of one athiest based on the opinions of another. We all have our own ways of thinking about the "bigger questions" and aside from a few drunken late night chats with friends, I'm quite happy not really having to talk to folks about it. I feel no need to enlighten or persuade others but will share a quick smile with those who've arrived at the same relative place as I have.

Frankly, and I said this in another thread, I simply don't care to talk to people about their religion or mine. There are so many, much more interesting, tangible topics to discuss.

 

[Nole Lou]

The better question would be from where do our beliefs come and why do some believe one way and some believe another?

I'm sure for a lot of people, it's about what they were exposed to in their youth...particularly good or bad experiences with religion or religious people especially. That wasn't the case with me though...I could not have had a more lukewarm experience with organized religion. I went to church all of about 3 times until sixth grade, when I was suddenly put in Catholic school, which I stayed in through high school. It was neither an inspiring experience in any way, or one that left me with any scars. I don't think any of my other high school friends 25 years later continue to practice, but they would probably identify as Christians or lapsed Catholics.

I can't say why I am practicing/believing. I tend to think many people do look for some unifying theory to life. I'm not even saying a "belief system", just a way to make the world make sense. Science can fill that need, religion can fill that need. Why one or the other? I don't know, if you don't have an experience or relationship that pushes you one way or the other.

I think I could be mentally disposed to a scientific/atheist world view, I can't say for sure why I look at the teachings of my faith and see the truth. Maybe it helps that my faith is not anti-scientific. Is it extra-scientific? Absolutely. I believe in miracles and things that would be called supernatural, but I don't believe that science is wrong.

I can see how people unify their lives around either religion, or science/atheism. What I can't relate to at all are what is probably the majority...the in-betweeners. I can't relate to people who are "religious" but don't adhere to any actual principles or guidelines or dogma, or people who are not religious/atheist, yet have no problem buying into pseudo science about vaccines, GMOs, etc.

 

[BelemNole]

I never understood the argument that atheism was a religion. Are all the other things people don't believe in a form of religion too? My kids still believe in Santa but I don't. Are those two different religions? Believers in the Loch Ness monsters and doubters..two separate religions? What are the rites and ceremonies of those who don't believe in Bigfoot?

 

[ReliableOstrich]

I never understood the argument that atheism was a religion.

Agree, kind of puzzling.
To say you don't believe in a higher-whatever is to neither subscribe nor not subscribe to any belief system or religion - it's simply to say ,"hey man, I don't believe in that stuff."

Not sure why it has to be boiled down into constructs similar to those of modern religion. Frankly, I might perhaps find religions more palatable if they were less rigid. Not that I'd believe in the god part at that point, but IMO the rigidity seems a bit over the top if there really is/are a god/gods out there - I think he/she/they would be able to see the forest from the trees and be a bit less binary about rights and wrongs.

 

[nolebum]

Like @BacardiNole mentioned above, the best part is the lack of organization. The good professor is simply speaking for himself.

Yogi, the good professor is expressing his opinion. He is not addressing himself. He is challenging fellow atheists to accept the entailments/implications of atheism.