Athiests and Death

[blackout]

A few posts recently have me wondering,
why do athiests seem to assume so overwhelmingly
that there is no form of continuing consciousness
after death.

While I realize there is really no evidence FOR such a thing,
well... who knows.
It's silly for us to think we understand the all encompassing
ins and outs of the universe
and reality, and consciousness.
Truly we know very little.

So why is the general default position of athiests
a solid "there is nothing after death",
instead of even, "probably nothing, but who really knows".

I am hardly a theist.
Not a theist really.
My idea of deity is Self, or everything, or Universe...
I can evidence that life and consciousness exists.
So I don't know.
I feel no need to take a position.
I like to think that I can continue becoming
in some other form?...
some continuation of Self,
maybe even of my choosing?
certainly it is possible...
but obviously, I don't know.
And there is the idea of losing individual form,
but not essence, life, being, existence, whatever.
But still I don't panic over the idea that there's nothing.
It may well be so.
And if it is so,
I will never know.
So I'm not worried about it.
Living can only be found in "now".
So why worry about "later".
Or "before".

Anyway,
I am so on the edge of theist/non theist line,
but I think things like this,
make me not want to label mySelf "athiest".
There are general assumptions that go with the term.
Like this one.
And they don't "fit" me.

 

[McBell]

There is no reason to think that there is something after death outside the wishful thinking of those who claim otherwise..

 

[Caladan]

A few posts recently have me wondering,
why do athiests seem to assume so overwhelmingly
that there is no form of continuing consciousness
after death.

While I realize there is really no evidence FOR such a thing,
well... who knows.
It's silly for us to think we understand the all encompassing
ins and outs of the universe
and reality, and consciousness.
Truly we know very little.

So why is the general default position of athiests
a solid "there is nothing after death",
instead of even, "probably nothing, but who really knows".

There are much more things we know now about the universe than ever before, and as you say there are many more that we don't. part of not knowing is hanging to logic and not drift to mythological possibilities.
In nature, creatures are born, and they die. I can tell myself that I'm going to a better place after I die, but logic and what we do know about the universe doesn't point that way. so for now, I'm settling for this life. I got lucky in the sperm and egg game, I was born. and that's just going to have to be enough.
In general I don't look for proofs to extraordinary claims, I'll settle for more naturalistic phenomena and the evidence that supports them.

 

[HonestJoe]

Where there is no evidence for something, it is perfectly reasonable to assume it doesn't exists. In fact, I'd argue that's the only reasonable position. That assumption isn't the same as saying it 100% certainly doesn't exist but for all practical purposes, that is the starting point. I suspect most people actually work on this basis, even if they don't admit it (or even realise it).

but I think things like this,
make me not want to label mySelf "athiest".
There are general assumptions that go with the term.

Sadly all too true but then that applies to pretty much every label or subgroup. I'm not especially fond of the baggage attached to the term atheist either but that doesn't stop it's fundamental definition applying to me so I've taken to trying to correct those incorrect assumptions and generalisations like this one.

Most atheists don't post on internet message boards. Lots of atheists don't know that they're atheists. There is no more you can say is true of all (or even most) atheists are you can say is true of all theists.

 

[blackout]

There is no reason to think that there is something after death outside the wishful thinking of those who claim otherwise..

Is it possible for an athiest to take a stance of,
"we don't know"?

instead of "there is no reason to think"...

 

[McBell]

Is it possible for an athiest to take a stance of,
"we don't know"?

instead of "there is no reason to think"...

Yes it is possible.
However, the fact remains that there is no reason to believe in something without evidence.

 

[blackout]

There are much more things we know now about the universe than ever before, and as you say there are many more that we don't. part of not knowing is hanging to logic and not drift to mythological possibilities.
In nature, creatures are born, and they die. I can tell myself that I'm going to a better place after I die, but logic and what we do know about the universe doesn't point that way. so for now, I'm settling for this life. I got lucky in the sperm and egg game, I was born. and that's just going to have to be enough.
In general I don't look for proofs to extraordinary claims, I'll settle for more naturalistic phenomena and the evidence that supports them.

My'tho'logical possibilities ARE so much of who we are.

Just look at our movies, tv shows and books,
our religions, stories and creations.
We are concievers of possibility.
We construct realities.
I evidence these things.

Really I'm not out to argue any stance.
I'm just wondering if this is somehow elevated
to the stance of "belief" for most athiests.
And if most athiests assume this
assumption of nothingness after death
to be "part of what an athiest is".

 

[blackout]

Yes it is possible.
However, the fact remains that there is no reason to believe in something without evidence.

What people "evidence" varries widely.

 

[McBell]

What people "evidence" varries widely.

That is true.
And the fact is that I have not seen any evidence that supports the idea that there is any sort of "life after death".

 

[Danarch]

We all die. You will die. Even if there is something beyond, it wont matter. It's irrelevant. Because you will be dead. True that our knowledge is quite limited in the greater grand inner workings of this universe, let alone (beyond that?)

In any case it's beyond our control (excluding many theist theories).

 

[HonestJoe]

And if most athiests assume this
assumption of nothingness after death
to be "part of what an athiest is".

Many "pro-active" atheists will challenge such ideas because they're often presented as or presumed to be (sometimes wrongly) linked with some kind of god. Others will challenge them on the same basis as they challenge claims for the existence of gods even if the concepts are independent - many of the basic arguments apply to both ideas.

Some atheists consider non-belief in gods to be just a small part of (their) atheism and may include a general non-belief in any kind of existence after death as an aspect of it. I personally think they're wrong to do so - they're just atheists who believe (or not) other things too. Everyone believes more than one thing and nobodies beliefs can really be encompassed by one general term.

 

[LuisDantas]

Everything is possible, I guess.

But an afterlife is IMO something that would only be possible by supernatural means.

And personal observation leads me to doubt that a true "self" or soul does exist even while we have living and functional brains and bodies that grant us such a functional illusion.

I figure losing such brains and bodies makes the illusion that much harder to maintain...

 

[LuisDantas]

That is true.
And the fact is that I have not seen any evidence that supports the idea that there is any sort of "life after death".

Not in the sense that this expression usually takes, anyway.

Sometimes I wonder if the earlier concepts of life-after-death weren't more down-to-earth, basically appeals for taking the good of community into consideration. After all, there IS life after death. It only isn't for the same people.

Some people die, some people keep on living, some people are born. Those people too eventually die, but others will be born by that time.

No need for anything mysterious or hidden going on beyond that, but I guess some people can't stand facing their own mortality.

 

[sandandfoam]

but I guess some people can't stand facing their own mortality.

Isn't the mortality of loved ones the bigger problem?

 

[LuisDantas]

Oh yeah. You're probably correct, Stephen. Thanks.

 

[Caladan]

My'tho'logical possibilities ARE so much of who we are.

As long as no one expects me to believe in mythological realities, all is good. when I read Neil Gaiman, for a while, Odin walks my world, folk magic is possible, and the world is filled with ancient mysteries. but the rest of the time, realities around me take most of the place: the Israeli-Palestinian issue, archaeology, etc.

Just look at our movies, tv shows and books,
our religions, stories and creations.
We are concievers of possibility.
We construct realities.
I evidence these things.

I've been a student of religion for most of my life, but to me it doesn't mean adhering to these things I study.

Really I'm not out to argue any stance.
I'm just wondering if this is somehow elevated
to the stance of "belief" for most athiests.
And if most athiests assume this
assumption of nothingness after death
to be "part of what an athiest is".

I view it the other way around. death seems to be the natural default, not a matter of belief. to me the option that there is an afterlife is the assumption.
People can choose to believe many things; gods, prophets, revelations, life after death, etc.
but at the end of the day, all these things demand a lot of assumptions. in a way, the way I see it, these things belong to the realm of what people would wish life to be, but the real universe works differently.

 

[ButTheCatCameBack]

Nothing even remotely suggests that our consciousness survives physical death. People absolutely LOVE to separate the brain and its workings from our physical bodies when nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[dust1n]

Is it possible for an athiest to take a stance of,
"we don't know"?

instead of "there is no reason to think"...

I've seen a dead body before. It seemed to be doing nothing.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

No brain no cry.

 

[blackout]

Are there any athiests (courageous enough to come out...lol)
on the board who do not necessarilly default to the idea
that there is nothing beyond the death of the body?

Any athiests with a more,
"who knows" type attitude?