posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 04:41 PM
This is a rant so I fully expect the full extent of your own ranting responses. Please do not hesitate to do lead the assault. Sometimes inhibition
fosters procrastination. But do not attack me thinking I ultimately believe what it is I am about to say, there is room for experience to change me
yet. Please provide your own assertions, but do not subvert my own on the bases of psychology.
We all die. That is a fundamental truth. Whether or not our so-called consciousness retains the form we are so familiar in life with after that
event has been a topic of popular discussion for thinkers of all ages, past and present. Obviously, to the essentialist, it is wholly important for a
belief in life after death, due to its biological implications. One simply does not give up on life because they know they will die eventually. We can
agree there. To the rationalist, life is a gift, an opportunity to pursue some greater intangible truth. And this is where the uncertainty comes to
play. To the logician, we better make the best of our lives because we can serve no other possible function. Many will tend to disagree with this
based upon a fear that there is nothing greater in store, which again returns us to that of life's biological implications. And to the believer, life
is but a test for something greater, which awaits us all. Mortality truly is the battleground for a multitude of competing notions, all of which are
derived from elements of one's own experiential faculties, or motivated beliefs.
In reality, we are all very capable of observing life after death. I'm sure many of you have experienced the deaths of close companions, of family
and friends, and you are all aware of the genocides and wars across the world, which can viewed on television and the Internet, throughout the
But the answer we are all concerned with, very selfishly I might add, is that which occurs after our own deaths, after we ourselves are unlinked from
the mortal coil we are so familiar with. And the answer can be found in the extent of our observative condition. Observation is simply the amalgam of
physical senses, of inputs. And we are lucky enough, as the exceptional breed of animal that we are, to provide outputs to our experiences, ones that
I am not wholly convinced as of today do justice to that gift. Of course that is merely my own experiential attitude affecting my judgment.
Ok, so I just played the part of the intellectual. You must all be pretty bored. This is a conspiracy forum after all. So now I will offer a
conspiracy of the mind, one that will undermine the very foundation of motivational belief. Well, more a skeptical idea than anything.
We as sentient biological entities have been granted a gift, that is not doubted. But that we ourselves have been granted this body is so perplexing
that it produces the most dizzying headache to even think about it. A biologist might argue that the "we" I am talking about is simply a highly
evolved psychology, which is essence the primarily controller of my body, one which will inevitably direct me towards procreation, and the
continuation of my species...
However, "we", or the soul, to provide a more translatable term, ascends much greater thresholds than a simply random biological purpose. This force
in fact accounts for the very existence of sentience. My assertion should prove that biology is not the ultimate benefactor of sentient existence.
Ok, after having written that I'm about to regret what it is I'm about to say. I really could have made a serious argument out of the above
introduction. Don't worry the Introduction was the longest part. I find it's important to circulate all the preeminent notions of any one topic
before expanding upon on it myself, otherwise it would be an ignorant attempt to dissuade my audience.
We can all agree that the physical body is simply a construction of molecules, held together by gravity, albeit one that is highly complex, derived
from billions of years of coding and recoding, driven by random processes and events. But at the end of it all, giving us as observers at any one
instance in its infinite progression, a seemingly rational result. This is the idea that the body looks the way it does because it obviously serves us
a purpose. That "I have hands because I need to eat" line of thinking.
Take a look at the example of a mother in pregnancy. Everything the mothers consumes is transported across the placenta, and is used in the
construction of another human being. Did that human being not essentially exist in the wheat fields, or the banana plantations from where the products
the mother herself consumed, originated? No, not in the sense that many would like to believe. Not in a rational sense at least. But the potentiality
of such sentience exists in the ability of one individual (the mother) to consume and transform raw materials from another individual (the wheat or
Now imagine this. You age, parts of your body grow and parts diminish, you lose hair, skin, fingernails... All the molecules that once comprised your
physical body are disseminated across the world. All your life parts of your body have been lost to age, fatigue, injury and weathering, or erosion. A
lot of what was once you is "out there somewhere", in some other molecular shape, being utilized by some other organism or mechanical process. And
then you die. Worms decay your organs and remaining flesh, reproduce and scurry off. Birds and other organisms consume those worms, and then too they
die, their physical form only to return again to the Earth. Perhaps solar winds have carried off some of those molecules out into space. A cyclic
existence. When you finally kick off, your brain is the last to be disseminated.
Now imagine if at one point in time, the greatest of all statically improbable events occurs. Every single atom, and at no exception, which once
constituted the molecules, which constituted your physical body, re-converge at a single point, in the form of another sentient being (even more
improbable). You are reborn. But is it you?
A final question. Is all life simply matter trying to imitate the gods (take this metaphor as you please)?
[edit on 1-11-2008 by cognoscente]