What happens when we die

[Jinei]

Could be

If a person is capable of thought when the brain is visibly dead then we'd have to investigate further as to wether thoughts or visions are possible while there is no visible brain activity.

If there is no evidence of brain activity, what would lead one to believe the patient is still capable of thought? How would we know that? The guy tells us while he's dead?

[Rainbow]

What happens when we die.
What Happens When We Die? - Yahoo! News

Not so much of a question but a debate. Obviously I'd be interested in seeing the results or whatever findings this man's work turns out.

But there is no doubt some resistance to his work. Some due to people who don't think looking into death is worthwhile since everyone should know death is final and the end. Others probably also feel looking into "God's" realm will only lead to misery and punishment.

But share your thoughts?

How about a list:
- What would you look into to study consciousness after death?
- Is there a specific criteria or hypothesis you would use?
- What types of results or data would you count as being valid and workable?

We have no means even to approach that subject, today.
Except for general conclusions and/or determinations we are clueless on that subject.

[HelioPrime]

If there is no evidence of brain activity, what would lead one to believe the patient is still capable of thought? How would we know that? The guy tells us while he's dead?

The people the OP is about are people who were declared brain dead then revived. Wether or not they had memories or experiences while brain dead is the question.

[minorwork]

It is easy to accept that because one does not know what happens upon physical death, then no one knows. But there are those who practice the technique of dying daily, or dying while we live. There is, for the diligent student, techniques to enable, at will, those experiences that seem available only to those who have been clinically dead or in an accident.


From this link: Plutarch - His Life and Legacy

"The soul, being eternal, after death is like a caged bird that has been released. If it has been a long time in the body, and has become tame by many affairs and long habit, the soul will immediately take another body and once again become involved in the troubles of the world. The worst thing about old age is that the soul's memory of the other world grows dim, while at the same time its attachment to things of this world becomes so strong that the soul tends to retain the form that it had in the body. But that soul which remains only a short time within a body, until liberated by the higher powers, quickly recovers its fire and goes on to higher things."

It will be apparent to the careful student that this system of spiritual exercises, taught and practiced by all the Masters, carries the student actually through the "gates of death". After that he enters regions above the play of death, as we know it. He is also able to return to this plane, at will, retaining perfect memory of all he has seen and heard. This is one of the minor achievements of the student. The samadhi of this science takes the student through and beyond death. Of course, this solves once for all the most serious problem which has ever confronted the human race--the problem of death and what lies beyond it. This fact of experience has not remained wholly unknown to the world's greatest thinkers.

[rez]

How about a list:
- What would you look into to study consciousness after death?
- Is there a specific criteria or hypothesis you would use?
- What types of results or data would you count as being valid and workable?

death = off consciousness = on


not too much of a debate here pal. Something can't be on when it is turned off.

[rez]

But human beings are more than just matter.

Tell that to mentally retarded people, or those that are paralyzed in a certain part of their body.

[rez]

dying while we live.

Ah yes the art of being off while being on is a new an upcoming field of study.

I hear engineers are pulling it off with electrical equipment to fool all the electricity companies.

[minorwork]

Ah yes the art of being off while being on is a new an upcoming field of study.

I hear engineers are pulling it off with electrical equipment to fool all the electricity companies.

I dare not tell how easy it is to fool the electric companies.

There is no empirical evidence. Only journals of anecdotal experiences. Lacking a physical body and brain to interact, what form would any consciousness take? None that can be related to the physical. By the way this science and art of being off while being on is not a new field of study. There are newer systems that attempt more modern explanations of the phenomena. Jung's psychology for one. Experiment in Depth: A Study of the ... - Google Book Search

Sam Harris has addressed the issue of the message of the contemplatives. The excerpt has to do with discursive thought.
From the talk by Sam Harris; The Problem with Atheism 'The Problem with Atheism' by Sam Harris - RichardDawkins.net

From the point of view of our contemplative traditions, however-to boil them all down to a cartoon version, that ignores the rather esoteric disputes among them-our habitual identification with discursive thought, our failure moment to moment to recognize thoughts as thoughts, is a primary source of human suffering. And when a person breaks this spell, an extraordinary kind of relief is available.

But the problem with a contemplative claim of this sort is that you can’t borrow someone else’s contemplative tools to test it. The problem is that to test such a claim-indeed, to even appreciate how distracted we tend to be in the first place, we have to build our own contemplative tools. Imagine where astronomy would be if everyone had to build his own telescope before he could even begin to see if astronomy was a legitimate enterprise. It wouldn’t make the sky any less worthy of investigation, but it would make it immensely more difficult for us to establish astronomy as a science.

To judge the empirical claims of contemplatives, you have to build your own telescope. Judging their metaphysical claims is another matter: many of these can be dismissed as bad science or bad philosophy by merely thinking about them. But to judge whether certain experiences are possible-and if possible, desirable-we have to be able to use our attention in the requisite ways. We have to be able to break our identification with discursive thought, if only for a few moments. This can take a tremendous amount of work. And it is not work that our culture knows much about.

What happens when we die? is better formulated; What happens while we are alive?

[HelioPrime]

death = off consciousness = on


not too much of a debate here pal. Something can't be on when it is turned off.

That's your perception. And don't give me the normal "it's logical thinking" answer.

Scientists (with the intention of debating theism) were unable to give themselves victory so they developed a set of rules to define the debate.

On of these is the "doesn't exist until scientifically proven."

In this case your rule declares that the soul or consciousness doesn't exist unless we can prove it with solid verifiable evidence that anyone can reproduce. "Beyond measurement" doesn't apply to you. You've attempted to rule it out with the declaration that only solid verifiable evidence be counted for anything.

In the case of the memories while dead your point falls flat on itself with enough people who have memories of experiences while in a state of brain death. If people can remember something from a period where they visibly had no brain activity then there must be something more to thought that electrical or chemical interactions.

Of course the rules of science demand that we be able to measure and verify what that other source is. If we can't find it then it doesn't exist. See how the rule you support has boxed your thinking?

[rez]

That's your perception. And don't give me the normal "it's logical thinking" answer.

Scientists (with the intention of debating theism) were unable to give themselves victory so they developed a set of rules to define the debate.

On of these is the "doesn't exist until scientifically proven."

In this case your rule declares that the soul or consciousness doesn't exist unless we can prove it with solid verifiable evidence that anyone can reproduce. "Beyond measurement" doesn't apply to you. You've attempted to rule it out with the declaration that only solid verifiable evidence be counted for anything.

In the case of the memories while dead your point falls flat on itself with enough people who have memories of experiences while in a state of brain death. If people can remember something from a period where they visibly had no brain activity then there must be something more to thought that electrical or chemical interactions.

Of course the rules of science demand that we be able to measure and verify what that other source is. If we can't find it then it doesn't exist. See how the rule you support has boxed your thinking?

um instead of talking about the semantics of words like "proof" and"evidence" I am going to talk to you based on the simple notion that consciousness requires your body to be turned on. If your body is not working and everything is just off, so too is your consciousness.

You can't be turned off, but be on at the same time. You either are on or off.

In the case of the memories while dead your point falls flat on itself with enough people who have memories of experiences while in a state of brain death. If people can remember something from a period where they visibly had no brain activity then there must be something more to thought that electrical or chemical interactions.

Memories = on and dead = off. When you have memories you are on. So please explain to me what brain dead is?

[stardust]

Tell that to mentally retarded people, or those that are paralyzed in a certain part of their body.

Then i presume that according to you the perceptual experience of dreams is also a part of what we call 'matter'. Well, dreams and auras are not matter but still they exist. Some people can see auras and for them they exist. Some people spirtually experience God, and for them God exists....There is no reason to believe that death is the absolute end when if souls exist, then human beings are immortal, somewhat..

[stardust]

Our understanding of the world is "confined." Therefore souls exist?

Yes?
Our confined understanding of the world wouldn't allow us to draw a straight forward conclusion on that. We can only perdict the chances of it being...