And we only know about it because we wake up. Sleep feels instantaneous inside the mind without dreams. It's nothing like what death will be like because we won't dream and we won't wake.

Is it still sleep when the physical brain has rotted away? I don't think something that isn't there can be doing things.

Fixed that for you, because you're starting to argue Nepsotic's point while pretending to argue the opposite. Because we won't wake up, there will, just like dreamless sleep, be no experience.

I don't think anyone's trying to literally say the two are the same. The point is the experience of the two are comparable, in that there is none.

That's incoherent.

Explain.

I don't really know what you're arguing for anymore.

I mean, my argument is simply that our experience of death will not resemble our experience of dreamless sleep because our experience of dreamless sleep is wholly interpretated upon waking. Dreamless sleep is characterized by a lack of experience, yes, but that lack of experience is defined by the lack, as black is defined by white. Death won't be some comfortable nostalgic feeling we have a fleeting recollection of because we'll never again be in a position of experience to interpret it.

Dreamless sleep is the temporary loss of experience, death is the cessation of all experience. And that's why it terrifies me. That's why I can't understand why it wouldn't terrify anyone else.

Thank you, I see what you're saying now. But I still don't see how that contradicts Nepsotic's point. We're not saying that experiencing the state of death feels like when we try to reflect on our sleep. We're saying it's like the state of experience-less sleep itself.

The main difference is that, for the majority of most people's lives, we know we stand a good chance of regaining consciousness after a period of sleep.

Well, my point was mainly to show that Nespotic is stupid for thinking other people are stupid for fearing death, that his analogy shows we should be more terrified of death rather than less.

I guess the mix up happened because I'm not generally very good at seeing the big picture in debates and end up arguing with what's directly in front of my face.

Oops.

I've heard people describe death like being in a dark room forever. The first time I heard someone say that was also the last day I had faith in humanity. I was 10 and I could see how fucking stupid it was.

Ah yes. I'd forgotten that part of his argument. On that count I agree with you entirely.

Who has ever said that committing one bad deed is a direct route to hell, do not pass go, do not collect $200? Every religion I know of weighs up the sum of a person's good and bad deeds before deciding where they go.

Judaism (as the religion with which I am most familiar) even includes the punishment and reward received in life (as characterised as good and bad experiences). This explains the whole 'Bad things happen to good people' thing; everyone does some bad and good things in their life, so bad things happening to you now means that your reward in the afterlife is unadulterated.

The Jewish afterlife has seven levels of heaven and seven levels of hell. Non-Jewish people can still get in to heaven if they are generally good people, although they won't be rewarded as much as a devout Jew. Then again, a non-devout Jew will be punished more than an equally bad non-Jew, as we have more rules to break.

The levels of hell are painful enough that regardless of what you did in your life, a single year in hell at most is sufficient to punish you for your sins. Most people wouldn't even spend that long. And after you're done there, you get promoted up to Heaven for the rest of eternity.

That actually solves the main problem I have with the idea of eternity in hell. Logically (ohoho), no amount of atrocities committed on earth could ever warrant eternal punishment. If eternity is infinite, then no quantity can ever match it. You could commit genocide a million times over and eternity in hell still wouldn't be justified, it's a logical impossibility as far as giving a fair sentence is concerned.

I just hope jewish heaven for non-jewish people has internet, computers, games and a comfy chair.... Then Im good to go =D

I wanna go to Jewish afterlife toooo! Put in a good word for me Nate?

The wonderful thing about the Jewish afterlife is that I don't need to.

Besides, you're probably going to get a better reward than me. I'm not a good Jew.

I imagine Jewish hell is full of pork, manual labor, and everything is overpriced.

Nah, pork isn't Jewish hell. Kosher pork is Jewish heaven.

I used to be religious when I was little. It's because I was raised in a religious environment. Wondering about what the afterlife will bring me was exciting and gave me something to look forward to. But that was when I was too naive to question the logic behind the idea. It's just stupid to me now. I don't know what death holds and I don't care.

I'll die when I die and that's that. Whatever is left afterwards is a mystery. That's exciting in a sense but I'm not going to get my hopes up about anything.
I'm not afraid of dying because death is inevitable. It happens to everyone.

I'm not a good agnostic. XD

The concept of death has never scared me. The only thing that ever even remotely scared me about death was how it might come. I don't want it to be incredibly painful when I die. Physical pain is one of those things where I do everything with in my power to avoid. Some time ago there were those videos though, about the kid with the heart problems. When he shared his near death experiences, it really put me at ease. He didn't seem to feel very much pain at all. He made it sound like a pleasant experience, actually. Now I'm just kind of going along as I am not worrying a bit.

When it's time for me to die, I'll welcome it with open arms, though I will never go out of my way to be the cause of it.

I have no clue what will happen after death, but it can't be any worse than... well, living. At least I would hope not. It's just a nice thought. Ceasing to exist. No more worries, no more pain. And even if that seems horrible to you, at least you got a glimpse of life and were able to experience it first hand for a short amount of time. While it's practically miniscule compared to how long the universe has existed, it's still better than never existing at all.

I've never understood why people say this. Yes it can.

I'm just trying to be optimistic about what's inevitable. Life itself is depressing and painful to trudge through, it's nice to think that after it's all over things will be even marginally better than they are now.

'I'm just trying to be optimistic about what's inevitable'
'Life is depressing and painful'

Try being optomistic about things you can guarentee exist rather than wishful thinking and airy hopes. At least religions build their afterlifes on religious experiences. Building one on wishful thinking alone is just ignorant.

I suppose. I'm not really fit for discussing right now regardless running off only 4 hours of sleep, and I know for certain (not just based off what you yourself have said) I'm coming across as ignorant, as well as pessimistic.

That's not really the case either. I'm actually working to my fullest potential right now and everything's going wonderfully. Looking out on the rest of the world though just tends to be a reminder that while I might be doing alright, others are completely miserable and are in daily pain. Physically I haven't been doing too well but that's not a very big deal.

The overall idea that eventually everything just comes to an end, and anything bad that stuck out during your lifetime will just "vanish" is very comforting to me.

I'd rather hope what happens after life is better than what happens during life than constantly hope for good while I'm still alive when so much good is already happening.

http://www.ilcittadinoonline.it/resi...&maximize=true

What's the real Jewish dilemma?
Free bacon.

Oh man, is that image from that Animal Farm cartoon?

I have trouble believing you have ever had an experience significant enough for you to say this statement non-sarcastically.

I don't think there's an objective way to judge if someone else should be enjoying their life based on their experiences and circumstances.

If someone says non-existence wouldn't be worse than their own life, I don't see how you can really argue with them without basing your argument on what you personally value about life.

You can't, but then objectivity is impossible due to all sides being afflicted by human perception. This means to me that it doesn't fucking matter, the point being that if I'd had a truly shitty life and heard and 18 year old (presumably) Westerner regurgitate those platitudes, I think that I would be annoyed.
I know nothing of Slog Bait's life (and do not mean to attack him with the above statement), but I have to agree with Sekto that his statement is unwarranted.

I think it would only be unwarranted if someone was publicly complaining about their life when it was comparatively problem free to people with genuine problems. I don't think it's unwarranted for anyone to be personally unhappy with their life. Given the nature of this thread it seems fair enough to talk about it, I don't think it's the same as just spouting off your personal problems.

I'd say it's absolutely fair enough to talk about things being difficult if you feel that they are. I'd also say that it's absolutely fair enough to point out the perceived errors with the expressed opinion, especially when the aforementioned opinion appears to contradict the reality of the individual's situation.
Anyway, I think that this is a tangential argument, and I don't want to blow shit around for the sake of it.

That's fair, but the point stands that if you value your own life less than non-existence, and your personal strife isn't particularly significant, then you're a bit of a shithead.

I'm not attacking Slog Bait here. I'm saying this generally.

Well you're giving inherent, objective value to being alive and I disagree with that, although I understand that it's in our nature to think like that and it's just practical. I don't think life is just good by default, although I do feel lucky to have been born where I was.

It might seem misguided for someone to think their life isn't valuable and they might even change their mind later in life but in the end if they don't enjoy their life, they don't. If they were telling other people not to enjoy life, then yes they would be shitheads.

I disagree with not giving objective inherent value to being alive. It just seems fucking retarded not to.

This.

Even if you live in squalor and both of your parents are incestuous, crack-addicted coprophiles who molest you daily, life has inherent value. Perhaps not circumstantial value, but it is a precious gift that should be unconditionally appreciated. If yours isn't the best, then strive to make it better, but don't sit on your hands and envy non-existence.

I think Butters said it best...

Until you've experienced that for yourself, I can't take that statement seriously. I'd rather not continue to argue about this anyway, most people would agree with you and apply that thinking to their own lives which is a good thing, but some people just can't deal with life in that way.

The one with the massive cop-out at the end? Yes, yes it is.

That cartoon was magnificent.

If you believe that there is nothing after death then in no way can ending your own life be called a rational decision. There are no negatives in life. Any kind of life is better than no life.

Granted, people may be led to believe it is, and other people may be relying on faith or hope to guide them to a better afterlife but I would not call that rational.

I hate this thread. It bores me.

To death? And then?