Quote:

I would be so bold to say that I do know that, not as a belief but as a fact. Having witnessed death and come close to death, there is no doubt in my mind as there is no doubt in anyone elses mind that we do in fact die and the universe continues without us after that death. Lets not talk falsely

---

hmm so it doesnt sound at all like your conclusions were effected by your subjective experience

blingbling said:

i don't take near death experiences that seriously when it comes to the existence or conversely the non-existence of an afterlife. imo they offer little evidence either way. i do believe there is no afterlife, but this is far from a fact. also, i think it is strange that you use your subjective experiences to claim unfounded facts while simultaneously denouncing the importance of subjective experience. if you are correct about your assertions regarding subjective experience then your near death experience and witnessing of death counts for nothing.

---

The afterlife is beside the point though, thats another topic. The argument here is that the universe continues to exist after a person dies, regardless of what happens with them. However anyone in the world wants to think about it, they're wrong if they think they won't someday die and the universe will continue after their death.
You could say this is a statement, but both the idea that the universe dissapears after an individual dies & the idea that an individual will not die - are demonstratably false. I'll leave it without an argument for the reader to decide, do you believe you won't die or that the universe will cease to exist when you die?

blingbling said:

Its true that you can get different results by changing the concept, but the central point is whats important.

imo the results from your proposed experiment and mine would be of equal importance.

---

blingbling said:

you may be right when it comes to psychedlics. however, i think you are picking out evidence that supports your ideas and excluding a mountain of evidence that does not support your claims. sure, maybe you can't fake a psychedelic, but beyond the use of extreme examples like hard drugs there is a lot of room for subjective experience.

---

SeaShrooms said:

I have given several conclusive arguments, that you can not, and will not, answer, you sir, are a fraud, and should leave the forums, you are also a troll, and should be banned.

---

blingbling said:

Certainly on another subject, the point in the original example was that 5 people can hold a demonstratably false opinion - all having different subjective views and all false. Yet there is still an objective answer to the question which they answered wrong. So their subjective perceptions are subject to objective reality

this is a tricky one. what if all people, including the participants in the experiment and the scientists conducting the experiment are objectively wrong? do they remain subjectively correct even though objectively they are wrong? i'm not sure if you can separate objective and subjective reality in that way. also with the pitfalls of language meaning can be contended. for example, most people believe the sky is blue, but if in a particular culture the word blue also means death then the objectively correct statement "the sky is blue" can take on new meanings. the point i'm trying to get across is that you are not wrong when you make simple statements about objective reality such as the sky is blue, or if you jump off a building you will die, but there is a lot of room to move, a lot of grey areas. imo it's not so cut and dry.

but no evidence given to contradict the existence of an objective reality

oh, i'm not trying to deny objective reality (as if i could) it just erks me when people claim that subjective interpretations of reality are not valuable, or should somehow take a back seat to objective interpretations. really this whole dualism cannot be consistent. we need a subjective view point in order to make inferences about objective reality and vice versa.

---

Subjective reality is important, a direct perception of reality is likely impossible. Being able to feel hear and see everything around you without a range of limitations, that would be an experience.

The objective reality I've been referring to is the universe before us, the planets and stars, all this before us. Its common for people to limit the universe into perception and say that it wouldn't exist without the individual experiencing it, and this thread is only an argument that the universe exists outside of us. Really all there is to it lol, guy up there hating on me for saying that our minds didn't create the world around us



Thanks for the good posts