Timeline for Is it rationally possible to believe in a sensationless soul after death?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
33 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 19, 2021 at 14:34 | answer | added | CriglCragl | timeline score: 0 | |
| Dec 18, 2021 at 11:34 | answer | added | Speakpigeon | timeline score: 0 | |
| Feb 12, 2021 at 21:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPhilosophy/status/1360332868577337347 | ||
| Jan 19, 2019 at 7:20 | comment | added | rus9384 | Also, the idea that soul dies with body is the original one. Both in PIE and semitic languages it means "breathe". So, you die and don't breathe, no soul after that therefore. (The word "soul" itself is not derived from PIE, but appeared later) | |
| Jan 18, 2019 at 20:53 | comment | added | rus9384 | But sensation of incoming death is possible. | |
| Jan 18, 2019 at 16:02 | answer | added | Richard | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jan 18, 2019 at 11:11 | answer | added | user36715 | timeline score: 0 | |
| Dec 19, 2018 at 19:09 | vote | accept | Tobias Ethercroft | ||
| Dec 19, 2018 at 13:16 | comment | added | user20253 | @jobermark - Good point. | |
| Dec 17, 2018 at 22:36 | comment | added | user9166 | I think the question allows for the kind of 'death beyond death' that these worldviews espouse. Whether you want to picture complete cessation from information as bliss or nonexistence, it is not an afterlife of the sort the OP seems to object to. Arguing out orthodoxies, when we haven't even chosen a given tradition is a waste of time. | |
| Dec 17, 2018 at 13:06 | comment | added | user20253 | PS - Wiki is quite good on this and gives the various meaning of Nirvana in current use. | |
| Dec 17, 2018 at 12:13 | comment | added | user20253 | I think perhaps were using 'consciousness' in different ways. I'd add in the proviso that Nirvana is no different from Samsara and both are conceptual distinctions | |
| S Dec 17, 2018 at 3:51 | history | suggested | Joachim | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Shortened title, improved readability
|
| Dec 16, 2018 at 22:00 | comment | added | user35983 | i'm guessing you've misunderstood consciousness only, yogacara buddhism, as meaning that nirvana is consciousness. you could ask on the buddhist stackexchange if that's right. ps i think of the skandhas as defining the body | |
| Dec 16, 2018 at 21:54 | comment | added | user35983 | non abiding and final nirvana, often called bliss eternity purity and self (do they have a standard order?), is conventionally thought as the termination of the skandhas, which include consciousness (of bodily contact and so on). if you equate consciosuness with the buddha self then sure, but surely that would be a heresy in buddhism @PeterJ ? | |
| Dec 16, 2018 at 21:37 | answer | added | user35983 | timeline score: 2 | |
| Dec 16, 2018 at 21:22 | comment | added | user35983 | Buddhists definitely do not believe that final nirvana is consciousness! which sutra or sastra are your referring to @PeterJ | |
| Dec 16, 2018 at 18:06 | comment | added | Joachim | @Tobias_Ethercroft (Substance) monism, or, at least, a 'subcategory' of it? | |
| Dec 16, 2018 at 17:59 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Dec 17, 2018 at 3:51 | |||||
| Dec 16, 2018 at 13:20 | comment | added | Bread | If the afterlife is similar to an out-of-body experience or a lucid dream-state, one can say that there is perception of a different kind: the ability to see and hear the pure energy of specific forms. Also the ability for your own individual energetic form to consciously 'travel' or move around. And to think, and to observe. And to socialize or interact with other beings. Without the body, there is no pain or death. But the senses of sight and hearing remain, somehow. I'm not sure about scent or taste, but I suspect they survive somehow, as does touch, warmth, coolness (in some fashion). | |
| Dec 16, 2018 at 11:39 | comment | added | user20253 | @jobermark - Not 'nothingness' (praise the Lord) but no-thing-ness. Often described as 'Being, Consciousness, Bliss'. 'Nothingness' would be what materialists look forward to. This view requires no 'souls'. . | |
| Dec 16, 2018 at 10:29 | history | edited | Geoffrey Thomas♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Revised heading brings question into line with the text box.
|
| Dec 16, 2018 at 5:37 | comment | added | user9166 | Most reincarnation beliefs presuppose a soul and no afterlife -- at least no afterlife other than another life. One of the most straightforward of these, Buddhism, actively seeks the cessation of sensation in 'nothingness', achieved by dying without attachments. So this is rational enough that it is the core of some of our more rationalistic religions. | |
| Dec 16, 2018 at 1:02 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Nov 16, 2018 at 18:31 | comment | added | Tobias Ethercroft | If you think that the soul dies with the body? Is There a name for that viewpoint? | |
| Nov 16, 2018 at 1:26 | comment | added | Tobias Ethercroft | I am asking if it is rational to believe that "you" is not just your body, that you have a soul; while believing at the same time that there is no life whatsoever after death. | |
| Nov 16, 2018 at 1:06 | comment | added | Conifold | 4) is one definition of "alive". From it no sensation means not alive follows trivially. If someone rejects the definition then it does not follow. But what is the question? | |
| Nov 16, 2018 at 0:27 | comment | added | Richard | Of course. Your soul is not a tangible item. It's a concept.. bit like truth or honour.. it exists. | |
| Nov 16, 2018 at 0:12 | answer | added | elliot svensson | timeline score: 1 | |
| Nov 16, 2018 at 0:05 | history | edited | Tobias Ethercroft | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 295 characters in body
|
| Nov 15, 2018 at 23:40 | review | Close votes | |||
| Nov 16, 2018 at 8:37 | |||||
| Nov 15, 2018 at 23:22 | comment | added | Conifold | Possible duplicate of Does idealism allow for thought without any sensory input? | |
| Nov 15, 2018 at 22:53 | history | asked | Tobias Ethercroft | CC BY-SA 4.0 |