Beforelife

Hot topics in delusion and rationalization.
User avatar
joyrex
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 6:19 pm

Beforelife

Post by joyrex »

Considering afterlife from oppisite point of view, what if you hadn't existed in the first place? Would 'you' be someone else? Would the observer that now is you, have some one else's POV? Could it be otherwise and if so, how?

I'm afraid this will lead to a dead end even before it starts.
ceo_esq
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 3:11 am

Post by ceo_esq »

The "afterlife vs. beforelife" question reminds me of the opening paragraph of Vladimir Nabokov's autobiography Speak, Memory:
The cradle rocks above an abyss, and common sense tells us that our existence is but a brief crack of light between two eternities of darkness. Although the two are identical twins, man, as a rule, views the prenatal abyss with more calm than the one he is heading for (at some forty-five hundred heartbeats an hour).
LostAngeles
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 8:44 pm
Location: L.A., way too close to the Scientology Center

Re: Beforelife

Post by LostAngeles »

joyrex wrote:Considering afterlife from oppisite point of view, what if you hadn't existed in the first place? Would 'you' be someone else? Would the observer that now is you, have some one else's POV? Could it be otherwise and if so, how?

I'm afraid this will lead to a dead end even before it starts.
I've considered that myself.

It does, in fact, lead to a dead end. :D
User avatar
Sorgoth
Posts: 95
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:13 pm

Post by Sorgoth »

The 'self' is illusory...we're two battling brain halves, which are each composed of lots of neurons and stuff, which themselves are complex interactions of molecules, so on and so forth. It's a pointless question, because there is no "I" to exist anywhere else. What we consider self is the present form of whatever your physical boundaries are. Anything else isn't you.
User avatar
joyrex
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 6:19 pm

Post by joyrex »

Sorgoth wrote:The 'self' is illusory...we're two battling brain halves, which are each composed of lots of neurons and stuff, which themselves are complex interactions of molecules, so on and so forth. It's a pointless question, because there is no "I" to exist anywhere else. What we consider self is the present form of whatever your physical boundaries are. Anything else isn't you.
When I present my philosophical speculations about what is outside our individual lives from the individual POV, this point is often raised. Still I fail to see how it is relevant - I'm precisely talking about the illusion that we experience, I'm just calling it with names we're accustomed to. I don't think it's entirely pointless subject; many people are afraid of death and don't know what comes after it. I claim my "model " to be one answer.

It's just often hard to put into words. I could say we're all observers, observing our illusion of self. This observing doesn't stop at death because the world is still here - humans are still here. The POV just shifts to another newborn who will slowly develop consciousness and become another observer. Though putting it this way might sound supernatural to some.
Beanbag
Posts: 260
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 11:08 am

Post by Beanbag »

I have no memories of existance before I was born. Hell, the earliest cogent memories I have are from, maybe, three or four years old. I draw a great deal of comfort from this fact. To me, the nonexistance before birth is like the nonexistance after death. No bad memories of the former implies no bad experiences in the latter. If I remember correctly, this is called the Epicurean philosophy (which has nothing to do with the preparation of foods).

Regards
Beanbag
I fear no gods, because they don't exist, but I fear the fool that truly Believes.

I'm voting Romney this time around, because I've never settled for the lesser of two evils.
User avatar
Kilted_Canuck
Posts: 384
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 6:23 pm
Location: Saskatchewan

Post by Kilted_Canuck »

I've pondered this issue quite a bit (for no reason apparently....it seems my subconcious just likes to screw itself over by thinking about the unknowable).

I assume christians think that there's a pool of souls or something and Big Daddy sends them down to earth in each baby, but that's just my interpretation of their beliefs.
User avatar
joyrex
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 6:19 pm

Post by joyrex »

Beanbag wrote:I have no memories of existance before I was born. Hell, the earliest cogent memories I have are from, maybe, three or four years old. I draw a great deal of comfort from this fact. To me, the nonexistance before birth is like the nonexistance after death. No bad memories of the former implies no bad experiences in the latter. If I remember correctly, this is called the Epicurean philosophy (which has nothing to do with the preparation of foods).

Regards
Beanbag
How could one have memories from "previous lives"? I think that's absurd. We, as the current individuals that we are, didn't exist before our lives nor will we exist afterwards This isn't about supernatural phenomena.
User avatar
joyrex
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 6:19 pm

Post by joyrex »

Kilted_Canuck wrote:I've pondered this issue quite a bit (for no reason apparently....it seems my subconcious just likes to screw itself over by thinking about the unknowable).

I assume christians think that there's a pool of souls or something and Big Daddy sends them down to earth in each baby, but that's just my interpretation of their beliefs.
I think there's a good reason for thinking about it; I wouldn't see it impossible if an interpretation to the issue at hand would mean the whole "meaning" of life to someone.

Beliefs are quite irrelevant; this is a thing that needs to be figured out - I think it's going to reveal us more reasons evolution has made us conscious.
Beanbag
Posts: 260
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 11:08 am

Post by Beanbag »

joyrex wrote:How could one have memories from "previous lives"? I think that's absurd. We, as the current individuals that we are, didn't exist before our lives nor will we exist afterwards This isn't about supernatural phenomena.
My point exactly. I deal with what I know from personal experience.

Regards;
Beanbag
I fear no gods, because they don't exist, but I fear the fool that truly Believes.

I'm voting Romney this time around, because I've never settled for the lesser of two evils.
User avatar
xouper
Posts: 9473
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 4:52 am
Location: has left the building

Post by xouper »

joyrex wrote:... We, as the current individuals that we are, didn't exist before our lives nor will we exist afterwards ...
May I ask, what do you mean by that?
User avatar
xouper
Posts: 9473
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 4:52 am
Location: has left the building

Post by xouper »

Beanbag wrote:I deal with what I know from personal experience.
Some people who believe in the efficacy of homeopathy say the same thing.
User avatar
gentlehorse
Posts: 281
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 pm

Re: Beforelife

Post by gentlehorse »

I feel as thouogh I'm missing the point of the thread, but I'll answer as best I can.
joyrex wrote:Considering afterlife from oppisite point of view, what if you hadn't existed in the first place?
Then I wouldn't exist. The universe would have to hum along without me, unless I am indeed the progenitor solipsist as I've suspected all along. :wink:
Would 'you' be someone else?
No. Consciousness would exist, but since I never existed in the first place, I couldn't very well be someone else.
Would the observer that now is you, have some one else's POV? Could it be otherwise and if so, how?


The observer that is me now would not exist if I hadn't existed in the first place. If the observer "me" had someone else's POV, then it wouldn't be the observer "me". It would be the observer "someone else". Could it be otherwise? It seems as though you might be asking if it's possible to be me and not-me at the same time. I'd have to say no.
I'm afraid this will lead to a dead end even before it starts.
It seems so. If I entirely missed the point of your thread, I apologize.
[size=75]"How can the third-person requirements of the scientific method be reconciled with the first-person nature of consciousness?" Win

"Oh Holy gravity,
the mother of all powers,
what you do to us,
the children of the stars" pillory[/size]
User avatar
joyrex
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 6:19 pm

Post by joyrex »

xouper wrote:
joyrex wrote:... We, as the current individuals that we are, didn't exist before our lives nor will we exist afterwards ...
May I ask, what do you mean by that?
I mean the personal boundaries of our lives, birth & death.
User avatar
xouper
Posts: 9473
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 4:52 am
Location: has left the building

Post by xouper »

joyrex wrote:
xouper wrote:
joyrex wrote:... We, as the current individuals that we are, didn't exist before our lives nor will we exist afterwards ...
May I ask, what do you mean by that?
I mean the personal boundaries of our lives, birth & death.
Well, dang, I didn't ask my question clearly enough. You clarified the part of your comment that didn't need clarification. My fault. Let me try again.

I meant to ask, what exactly is it you are claiming does not exist before or after? I am not familiar enough with your position on the matter to make any assumptions what you mean.
User avatar
joyrex
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 6:19 pm

Re: Beforelife

Post by joyrex »

No. Consciousness would exist, but since I never existed in the first place, I couldn't very well be someone else.
Consciousness is the key in my pondering. I'm suggesting that instead of your consciousness there would be another; one before birth and one after death.
The observer that is me now would not exist if I hadn't existed in the first place. If the observer "me" had someone else's POV, then it wouldn't be the observer "me". It would be the observer "someone else". Could it be otherwise? It seems as though you might be asking if it's possible to be me and not-me at the same time. I'd have to say no.
It's the words that are hard to choose.. by "observer" I mean the "act of observing" - that is a common factor for all humans. So there would be someone else observing instead of you, hadn't you been born.
User avatar
joyrex
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 6:19 pm

Post by joyrex »

xouper wrote:I meant to ask, what exactly is it you are claiming does not exist before or after? I am not familiar enough with your position on the matter to make any assumptions what you mean.
:D
It is us that don't exist before or after, but consciousness does, the denominator that we all share.
User avatar
xouper
Posts: 9473
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 4:52 am
Location: has left the building

Post by xouper »

joyrex wrote:
xouper wrote:I meant to ask, what exactly is it you are claiming does not exist before or after? I am not familiar enough with your position on the matter to make any assumptions what you mean.
:D
It is us that don't exist before or after, but consciousness does, the denominator that we all share.
Yer not being very helpful. But thanks anyway.
Beanbag
Posts: 260
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 11:08 am

Post by Beanbag »

xouper wrote:
Beanbag wrote:I deal with what I know from personal experience.
Some people who believe in the efficacy of homeopathy say the same thing.
I have a tag I wear around my neck that is engraved with three very important words: DO NOT RESUSCITATE. It pretty much never leaves my posession. I died once. It really wasn't that bad. What hurt like hell was getting pulled back. I don't mind dying once more, but I sure as hell don't want to get pulled back by some well-intentioned idiot.

No further comment is available from me on the subject. It's like sex -- you can describe the sensation all you want, but you have to actually have the experience to understand.

Regards;
Beanbag
I fear no gods, because they don't exist, but I fear the fool that truly Believes.

I'm voting Romney this time around, because I've never settled for the lesser of two evils.