is that 99% of people go through their daily routines, and never think about consciousness, reality, or why we are here.  Society and expectations have been built up and that is all there is to many.  I recently spoke with an old friend, a neurosurgeon with a brilliant mind (no joke intended) who I've known forever.  I am convinced that if souls travel, than our friendship has done so, but I digress.  Anyway, he was over at an informal party and we got into a conversation on spirituality, the existence of a "soul or spirit," the nature of consciousness.  His belief was conventional but rigorously grounded in biology, physics and chemistry.  That our mind, is a product of the brain.  That our thoughts our biochemical products only.  That there is nothing after we die.  All of the rest, all of my arguments and discussions could not be proved.  However, here was a friend who had been every bit as interested in consciousness as myself.  He simply based it in conventional biology, medicine and anatomy and dismissed the spiritual.

But I saw something interesting under the surface.  Although he wanted to "trump" me with his intellect, and disprove the notion of consciousness existing outside of the brain, part of him wished it were so.  I said to him, just between us (because I wanted to get through the BS), so do you really discount the possibility that your consciousness will go on.....and he thought for a minute, and said he thought he would cease to be, but if he did continue on, he'd deal with that when the time came.

Amazing to me, that our close friends and loved ones can be so oblivious to examining consciousness and the soul, thinking outside the box (as my fellow explorer Alysia mentioned in another post), and trying to do more than achieve standard success in the Western world.

I vow though that my three year old son, the apple of my eye, will know my interest, and these ideas one day.  He may do with them what he will, but as I love him, I could not bear if he did not at least get exposed to these concepts, and possibly take them farther than I could.

Matthew

These days it make me laugh when someone says they don't believe in there soul. The truth is with out there soul they would not exist, there body will die when its time is over and the part that remains will and always has been conscious.

I don't feel the need to argue or defend what I know, these souls who think they know will be very disappointed with themselves when there time to go home comes,for they have brought into the program that the material world is all there is,how sad to Denie who you are , but  to each there own there time will come.

Matthew, that's good that your son is so young and you can help to shape his future. I'm sure that's why he chose you as his father. ;-)

I work with my grandchildren ages, 12, 16 and 20, but don't get anywhere...........they know it all at those ages. But I do have my 1 1/2 year old great grandson that I hope to help to love nature and spiritual/metaphysical stuff when he's old enough.  ::)

Love, Mairlyn ;-)

hi, I'm still awake :D you know the problem with always thinking about consciousness, theology and the afterlife, is I can't find nothing worth watching on TV. but its basic cable I admit. I came from an age where TV was free at first. $60 a month seems high already and seems I should be able to find something good at that price. then I wonder if others are satisfied with what is found on today's basic TV channels.
maybe thats what life is basic cable TV, basic presentation of basic mentality moral majority or consensus agreement sort of thing.

but I wanted to talk about Larry. Larry is dead now. Sometimes i go to his website and think he died but he's still on the internet and I think about him. he died last year. like Mathews friend, he said the same thing to me, "I will find out when I get there, if there is an afterlife." he had a fine intellectual mind but he used to say only today is important. i couldn't change his mind to take a look. his logic was always impeccable. it's not for me to argumentive with anyone has more words than me; it's ok, I'm almost total right brained, he was almost total left. one day he tells me he's dying. I say fight it, he says no, I'm going for the conventional way of cure. so ok. there was no money for unconventional cures, only for traditional medicine. so he dies. pretty soon, I'm waiting for him to call on me. I know he will try; then I'm gonna rub it in!! he shows up one day in my kitchen..."Howdy, howdy!" yep, thats my Larry, only one of him in the whole wide world. so now u know I was right Larry, I told you and u didn't believe me there was an afterlife. I am smug a moment. then I realize I miss him. I told him, I miss our emails, then he leaves after telling me I was right after all.

and thats how it stands. for awhile. most of us won't know we go on because we are immersed in that thing called experience, and while immersed in action, we are not immersed in full awareness, because the nature of C1 is by definition limited experience which precludes a fuller awareness of what we are. we are like star children to me, taking dives down here; just like in Bruce's vision of the disc where in order to have an experience we had to focus in ever more tightly into just one pattern and the narrower we focused in the more of our fuller awareness got lost in our experience, thus the memory erasure idea. I'm waiting for the scientist and the theologian to merge here, thats two very different focus's right now, but just wait until they get married, that's gonna be fun!
good nite everybody, remember to enjoy your life. at least I think Larry did..he always used to say to me every single day "it's another day in paradise." I used to tell him to please stop sounding like a broken record!
;D  love, alysia

It troubles me that sooo many people are stuck in C1.

It's hard trying to have a discussion about the Afterlife with those in C1. They look at you like you're insane - a wishful thinker that needs to join the 21st century of science and evolution theory.

Tis a shame that people do not realise their potential. I'm sure there would be alot more happiness in the world if people knew the truth.

there will be a lot more happiness in the world Magic bullet, I'm sure of it. it's coming! it's people like you help make it come true.

Hi Matthew-
For some reason, people are unwillingto admit of more than a single viewpoint at a time. Thus, if we are members of the Big Bang Gang, then we force out thinking into a matter-dominated idiom, and pray to Friedman and Lemaitre to explain it.

However, science makes no such impositions upon us. The scientist's job is to describe, and by consistency, to predict. thus answering the "what" of the world. That does not, in fact, prevent numerous alternative descriptions of the same phenomena, each arising from a different viewpoint.

The case is rather like a social psychologist iving your lifespan close scrutiny and coming up with an airtight explanation for your personality, that expains perhaps 90% of the variance at alpha less than 1%. This is possible, and it would be considered good science. But it does not preclude your ability to review the same lifespan in terms of  your own intrapsychic drives, deep feelings and values, and thus the valid creation of a very diferent explanation using different terms. While both explanations are different, they are also valid, and a full understanding would require both perspectives to be considered,

Because these ideas are approaching the same event, our present Now, from opposite directions, they appear different. Like the left and right hands clapping. Yet our hands are part of a larger unity (connected through our shoulders), as are otherwise disparite explanations (connected through a larger logical space).

My impression is that we cling tenaciously to what we prefer because we are afraid that if we lose that we'd be lost in a sea of anomie, a terrible existential quandry, as Descartes might put it, "a sense of being cast into the midst of a sea so profound that we can neither touch our feet to the bottom, nor rise again to the top". That's not good science. The good scientist would seek the meta-persppective through which the "rantings of airey fairey freaks" could be contained as another perspective on the same topic, otherwise explained by "cold facts of scientific positivism".

Denial is a very primitive defense mechanism. Coupled with projection of an exclusively scientific reality, it locks us into a wilful blindness, while protecting us from nothing more dangerous than superior understanding.

Maybe the underlying threat associated with having an open mind, is that we would be called to be responsible for our actions. It might be nice to have a nation of deeply spiritual scientists, those willing to see both objective and subjective explanations of reality as valid. Such a nation would probably be less willing to bomb their neighbors. Since we already are born into a world of hatred and dissonances, it's probably easier to "go with the flow", and accept the economic benefits of killing, torturing and so on. As scientists, we don't need to worry.

More to the point, as exclusively materialistic scientists, we are not morally obligated to seek a better way to live. Business as usual is thus justified. Preemptive nuclear strikes are simply good business. Etc.

Were we to adopt the idea of an afterlife as a valid, well supported and extensively documented condition, then we'd have to make some changes. I don't think we're ready as yet - at least not on a national level. But that might simply reflect my own biases. There may be another side to the story. I'm willing to learn.

dave

Dave said:Were we to adopt the idea of an afterlife as a valid, well supported and extensively documented condition, then we'd have to make some changes. I don't think we're ready as yet - at least not on a national level. But that might simply reflect my own biases. There may be another side to the story. I'm willing to learn.
___

hi dave, you said you don't think we're ready yet on a global level. sometimes I think the same thing..yet other times I'm just equally certain the shift is upon us full force. so I'll say this is my belief to own, that we are getting ready for it globally, and that the time it takes until when it's complete; somebody said this century..I have no idea to speculate the year's distance  to global  awareness of this magnitude..wonder how long it took people to become aware the world was not flat? maybe we could predict the distance then.
cheers, alysia

I think a world where the afterlife is fact and accepted more where we also communicate openly with is like a dream to me lol. But i don't think that'll happen in any of our lifetimes, i do agree whats been said here the world's not ready to just drop everything, people will still on gugdes and seek revenge and people will still want to stay in control and earn loads of money etc but it'll happen its got too, people are changing in this direction more and more and more its inevitable.

People stereotype this kinda of side and i hate it (even though we stereotype almost everything which i don't like either), to be honest i don't know much of this new age stuff and haven't heard much about it, once or twice maybe.

Also going back to the actual topic of this thread lol i think from what I understand and have read sometimes people go through this life in C-1 conciousness only and wont even think about another life purly because if they did this would ruin their lessons set to be learnt here. Does that sound right? I'm no expert oviously! but get this impression which seems to make sense i think lol.

Ryan

it makes sense to me Ryan what u say. it seems here, we can get distracted easy; theres so many interesting directions to look in..so many fine books to read..these books are other people's lives and thought systems and experiences to check out...so what you are saying to me..I see myself as a book reader..as love books...but I can only read one book at a time, not three books at a time, lol, (some friends have told me they do read 3 books at a time, laying around their house) but if you really want to live one life at a time, or one book at a time, you really get into it then, to focus only on one thing, one intention to completely understand that life, or book, or person.
what u are saying does make sense then and reminds me of a person who is called the jack of all trades but master of none, versus another who does one job very well, to stick with one trade.  love, alysia

Hi All-
With Matthew,  I'm also amazed that we are so little involved with the nature of consciousness, since the nature of the "Self", in psychological terms, is the result of self-referential inspection. That is, the sense of being an individual is based on consciousness of ourselves as extended in the reality around us, and is thus a factor derived from consciousness.

The only formal areas that actually look into this fundamental area are metaphysics and genetic psychology. The rest of the world presumes the primacy of matter, rather than the primacy of awareness through which we conclude the nature of matter. Big difference. Maybe not such a good thing.

I get the image of a whole lot of people beating on each other who suddenly become aware that the guy next door is me, and we is God.  Ooops.

I hope the epiphany brings the joy you mention, Alycia, and not  a sense of guilt and depression for our errors. I just had a major case of flu that led me to question my mortality, bringing a little more conservative attitude, and I suspect that the same kind of thing is needed to get others to look into their own inner selves. The Gulf storms and disasters elsewhere, may be the actual means of enlightenment of the masses, rather than allowing us to float away on pink clouds.

I'm up for pink clouds myself.

Dave thanks fo rthis paragraph:
The case is rather like a social psychologist iving your lifespan close scrutiny and coming up with an airtight explanation for your personality, that expains perhaps 90% of the variance at alpha less than 1%. This is possible, and it would be considered good science. But it does not preclude your ability to review the same lifespan in terms of  your own intrapsychic drives, deep feelings and values, and thus the valid creation of a very diferent explanation using different terms. While both explanations are different, they are also valid, and a full understanding would require both perspectives to be considered

You gave words and validity to something that used to bother me, because I saw myself so clearly in terms of my intrapsychic drives, the ones motivated by my values, that I felt a real disconnect between that and the way people reacted to me. On the one hand, it was just blind of me to not see the other parts. but on the other hand, I wasn't stuck in that C1 view either. In fact, it has been hard to learn that most people are. I still think they must be motivated by deep feelings and values. Well of course, as we get more mature and suffer through different things, it seems more people are willing to allude to those deep values.

The trouble is, how do you devote yourself to this and still survive the culture? Unless you go live in the desert (and the desert hermits were the celebs of their day, no?) then you pretty much can't get out of the game (3rd law of thermodynamics).

yeah so this is a pretty good description of where my questioning landed me:

My impression is that we cling tenaciously to what we prefer because we are afraid that if we lose that we'd be lost in a sea of anomie, a terrible existential quandry, as Descartes might put it, "a sense of being cast into the midst of a sea so profound that we can neither touch our feet to the bottom, nor rise again to the top". That's not good science. The good scientist would seek the meta-persppective through which the "rantings of airey fairey freaks" could be contained as another perspective on the same topic, otherwise explained by "cold facts of scientific positivism".


Yeah. Not good science.It sometimes felt like something out of Nausea. It is kind of difficult to seek that metaperspective on your own, and you need to have a good day job to see you through, too, you know, like the way actors wait on tables until the big break comes. yep, paying the rent gets to be a priority and next thing you know, you are sucked right back in to that C1 thing, serving the corporate masters, who by creating a system where I have to pay rent, assure that I won't have time to follow my inner yearnings fully. So much for intrapsychic values.

(Sorry. It;'s been a long journey, and it isn't over yet. You just always amaze me with your perspective.)

Do you know anything about Kary Mullis? Does he achieve an openness by design or just by circumstance? Do you have to be a Nobel Laureate to get away with writing the things he has, or do folks just think he's a really smart/lucky nutcase? I mean, does he meet any of your criteria for a nonmaterialistic scientist, or would that have to be a philosophical stance too?

Kary Mullis? - Nah. I dunno.

As for how to get along, we do what seems appropriate, and we think in terms that ultimately will bring it together with what's real. On a good day, we may even get it right, and everything almost comes out even. But, as Matthew pointed out, there's not much interest in the method, but only in the use of it.

Most of us live in our heads, an airey stance (hence airheads?), and in doing so we forget that our feet are rooted in a common clay. The commonality of our origins carries responsibility to one another, which actually equates with the ability to respond, but it's easier to overlook. Oh well ...
-d

Just for info

Kary Mullis got a Nobel (1993) for inventing the pcr reaction, the one that makes it easy to duplicate DNA in a test tube, so to speak. In his autobiography on the Nobel website, he discusses the visit of his grandfather to him in California right after the grandad died in Carolina. He wrote even stranger things in his biography (Dancing Naked in the Mind Field) but his extrasensory experiences don't seem to become his focus. He still seems to like chemistry. But he's been really open about these alternative experiences. But I guess he's not a non materialistic scientist. Maybe being really bright doesn't help you see the falsity of the materialism..it just keeps you open to different things. Didn't Feynman try out John Lilly's isolation tank, or whatever he called it?  Although for being able to use your mind to stay cool under strange new conditions, Hoffman is right up there at the top.

*****************
But I saw something interesting under the surface.  Although he wanted to "trump" me with his intellect, and disprove the notion of consciousness existing outside of the brain, part of him wished it were so.
*****************
The part of him that wanted to "trump you" is most likely his conscious half... his "spirit."
The part of him which was inarticulate, but clearly present, and wanted it
to be so... was probably his UNCONSCIOUS mind, or "soul."
In essence, we are most likely TWO persons, cohabiting in the same body! (Their interplay forms the illusion of the "ego" during life.) One goes on to reincarnate (the conscious spirit, which then becomes somebody else independent from you) and the unconscious soul goes onto a robotic, dream-like existence in heaven or hell (most often hell, unless the person's most vivid memories - which he'd constantly be reliving throughout eternity - were GOOD ones. If they were BAD ones, the memories would strengthen and get worse and worse, and the soul would lack the ability to make choices... mindlessly digging itself deeper and deeper into misery.) The existence of the excarnate soul would be similar to the confused, muddle-headed existence one experiences in dreams, or upon awaking from a deep sleep (when the conscious mind is still disengaged.) This muddle-headed state would exist in HEAVEN as well as hell... so how could one truly enjoy heaven?
I TRULY hope I'm wrong about this theory... it would indicate that we will have no free will in the next life (if the conscious and unconscious divide at death, and go their separate ways... and the part that is YOU is the "soul!")
Alternately, if the part that is "you" is the REINCARNATING SPIRIT, then your memories ("soul contents") are discarded between lives, which would also suck like a hull breach on the USS Enterprise. You'd lose all your hard-won knowledge (and memories of all your friendships and loves!) between lives. Although, I'd greatly prefer this to the FIRST option (that is, the "soul" is you and only lives once.) At least you'd have freedom (of a sort.)
This theory reconciles traditional Eastern and Western ideas about the afterlife, and is extremely ancient and widespread amond disparate peoples (the ancient Egyptian, Hebrew (that's right!) Caananite, Greek, Mayan, Aztec, Inca, Chinese, and Hawaiian cultures, to name just a few from all around the world, believed in it... and most (if not all) of them HATED the implications, devising complex theologies and rituals to try to unite the two halves of the mind... take the national obsession ancient Egypt had with funerary practices! One can only guess if any of them were successful...)
Furthermore, modern scientific studies of the mind appear to vindicate these ancient insights... that we  are, indeed, BINARY beings! (Think about the division of our brains into a "right-brain functions" - i.e., emotions... and  "left-brain functions" - i.e., logic.)
I'd hope that your friend's materialistic interpretation of consciousness is correct, if I were you. (And it may well be so... the fracture of the mind into two halves would result in the death of the ego... and if the EGO is the "fundamental you", then your friend IS for all intents and purposes correct. At least I hope he's right for his sake, and mine, yours and everybody else's!)

Chumley

It troubles me that sooo many people are stuck in C1.

It's hard trying to have a discussion about the Afterlife with those in C1. They look at you like you're insane - a wishful thinker that needs to join the 21st century of science and evolution theory.

Tis a shame that people do not realise their potential. I'm sure there would be alot more happiness in the world if people knew the truth.
****************************
I don't know about that.
I used to be a complete C1 thinker. I look back
on that as the good old days.
I've been compelled, however, by metaphysical
thinking since I was a kid ("gee, does daddy see
the same blue as I see, or would HIS blue be RED
to me" and so forth. I remember wondering what
would happen to me when I died, when I was SIX YEARS OLD. And my dad tried to raise me as an atheist!)
In the last couple of years, "spiritual" matters have become a compulsion for me (accounting for about 60% of my time on the Web...)
Would not the world be happier, if they'd never
heard of HELL? (It probably exists.)
Think about that.

Chumley

Chumley,

I truly feel sorry for you.  Many of your assumptions are simply incorrect.  A scientist named Lashley did experiments with mice, where he would train them to run a certain maze.  Then, he would remove sections of their brain, figuring he could localize memories of how to run the maze.  No matter how he burned their little brains (disgusting as that is to animal lovers like myself), the rats maintained their memory.  He came to the conclusion, that consciousness/memory for them was not in any one location in the brain, but everywhere at once.  This right brain/left brain dictum is greatly overstated.  There are neuronal pathways interconnecting our brains in many convoluted ways.  I believe, myself that Lashley is correct, in that the brain is more of a receiver of the spirit than the creator of our thoughts.  But the dualism you see.  Conscious/unconscious, right brain/left brain, is all a construct of our intellect, and is not real.

Freud postulated the id/ego/and superego.  His theories held true for many situations.  Your hypothesis doesn't ring true for him.  These are all intellectual constructs.  They are interesting, but come and go.

The notion that I am divided in two is, to me ridiculous.  Most spiritual teachings and religions consider the true nature of all things to be connected and one.  These divisions are mental constructs, employed by our rational minds.  

For those who have explored into F27, and with astral projection, many have reported visiting memory centers and having past live memories restored.  Completely restored - if this is to be believed.  I'm still on the fence about this.

Descartes wrestled with these issues, but finally said "I think therefore I am."  This is you, your conscious mind with thought and intent.  In meditation, you can merge with a more universal mind and soul, and truly learn new things.

If you take your conscious thoughts to a dark and fearful place, and if thought is all there is when we pass, than for a time, a person is most likely to experience dark and fearful things.  I choose not to  do so.

Best to you,

Matthew

I feel that many people over-complicated the workings of the Afterlife and the Soul.

I have been reading vasts amount of Afterlife material. Here is what I have learned so far.

1. We are spirit beings by nature. That is to say, we are not physical beings first, spirit beings second. We are spirit beings first, physical beings second. Ironic, eh?

2. Our time on Earth is a chance to learn, grow and experience. What happens if I push the star shape through the square hole? Think of that analogy but on a much more advanced level.

3. The Afterlife is an automatic, sub-concious reflection of your mind. For example, supposing you love pumpkins for whatever reason. Once in the Afterlife, you won't have to 'desire' pumpkins, they'll just be there. Imagine walking across the glorious fields of the Afterlife and then surprise, surprise - you discover acres and acres of beautiful, orange pumpkins! Each one a perfect specimen!

There is no such thing as Hell. Just like pumpkins, you'd have to love a Hellish environment in order to exist in a form of Hell. Hell to some is Heaven to others.

However, when souls get trapped between realms things become a little more complicated. :-/

- Luke

Chumley said
"In the last couple of years, "spiritual" matters have become a compulsion for me (accounting for about 60% of my time on the Web...)"

Are you also researching and trying real life spiritual adventures?  For me the experience goes hand in hand with the reading and investigative aspect of it.  The "aha" may come after some time of sifting through both kinds of learning.  

It's good to see you again--your "penmanship" is a bit  softer to the ear...

love, blink :)

You said that if you love pumpkins for whatever
reason, they'll be everywhere in the afterlife?
For as long as I can remember, I've had a passion
for weapons... shooting and collecting firearms,
throwing knives, and a more than passing interest
in the martial arts. Most of my friends have
shared these interests.
I'm a HUGE believer in the Second Amendment, and
an innocent person's right to kill an attacking thug
if necessary. (No "turn the other cheek" for
me!)
I also like to get a little pied on Saturday
nights (NOT drunk mind you, just happy.)
I also enjoy hunting, fishing, ect.
I'm an admirer of Robert Heinlein's work and LIKE most of his political ideas.
I'm a military history buff as well.
SO...
Some people call these things EVIL...
What awaits ME in the afterlife? (I don't plan
on getting into floristry, stamp collecting, knitting,
or sock-drawer arranging anytime soon
to replace these interests..!)

Chumley

Well, that's pretty much self-explanatory, isn't it.  :D

In the Afterlife, there's enough room for everyone to have their own private universe.

If you think about it.

If everyone thought the afterlife was 100% certain, then alot of people would just quit the toughest challenges in life, and end it.

i would'nt consider a broken neck and 60 years sat in a wheel chair, a lesson, id think of it as a punishment, and would you continue with life if you had to live under such conditions unless you knew you would be punished for quiting this existance?.

Yet since you cannot guarentee the continuation of your consciousness/soul, then people cling to life, and live the lesson they were ment to ( if you belive this sort of thing).

That's one way to look at it, Spitfire.  

Another is that, like Christopher Reeves, a person can choose to live out a higher purpose than that of their own pleasure.  I'm sure there were many days he wished he had not survived, but he found the strength to live on for his wife and son, and found worthwhile things to do for his fellow men, all while never giving up hope that he might forge new ground in finding new medical advances for his condition.  The world needs more people like him.  His was a meaningful existence, even after a terrible accident and a fate that many would shun.

love, blink

I'm sorry spitfire,

I think you would find the reverse in fact ,if everyone new for a fact! that there is something so wonderful so amazing that they separated themselves from it. So they could grow and become more than they where, they then would try even harder to complete there programs, because they would know without question, its so Worth the effort.

Love to all

You sound like a man(? you didn't specify your gender, or if you did, I missed it) after my own heart.
Go to the top of this page (page 2 on this thread) and read what I wrote up there in response to DocM's header post.
There is evidence that the ancients who first conceived of the afterlife, WEREN'T trying to comfort themselves... they were more, well, DESPERATE to try to save themselves from what they thought would naturally happen to their MINDS after their bodies were sloughed off.
Also check out:

http://ww.divisiontheory.com/

And see what you think.
The website proprietor (Novak) maintains a Christian perspective on this ancient theory (which is found in different cultures all over the world) but it is not necessary to be a Christian (I'm not) to see the implications of the theory, and cast some light on the historical (and even pre-historic!) roots of religion (which you are QUITE interested in, unless I miss my guess.)

Chumley

MagicBullet said, "There is no such thing as Hell. Just like pumpkins, you'd have to love a Hellish environment in order to exist in a form of Hell. Hell to some is Heaven to others."

I like this statement very much.  I think we seldom notice the power that we each have over our perceptions.  Perhaps it is premature to label a place which we find uncomfortable as "bad" or "hell"--and our own comfort level changes constantly anyway.  What was hell to us yesterday might be quite pleasant today.  And the opposite too.  It is all our own interpretation, isn't it?

What is "light" to me may be garish brightness to another.  What is pitch black to you may be a rather pleasant gloom to me.  

When I am aware enough to examine my own discomforts with self and other I can often find that they are inconsequential.   Thanks for this reminder.

love, blink

@ Blink: You make a good point, but im sure that superman, if given the choice would not have chosen to live a higher purpose and would have kept his mobility.

Alot of people, are bound my things other then love, such as, honor, dutie to ones family as you said, this to me could be a form of love, for it's a decision you must make each and every day. But on the other hand, he's not given the choice, because of what he believes in, i dont know where he is religous or not, but we all fear what we cant sense, and ending ones life, is not an easy task, unless your mental state is very degraded.

Most people, no matter how badly injured would not choose to end there life, because the body's instincts of self presevation are to strong to overcome.

Even he has some things going for him. He has a family, fame, a purpose.

People who i feel worst for are those who have no supportive family, no fame, and seemingly no purpose in life except to suffer.

Then again if i knew 100% id get somthing out of it at the end of my life, i would put up with it. But since we mortal beings dont get a how existence works manual, it's hard to know whats best for anyone.

@ Chum: Indeed im an 18 your old guy, and you make a good point, i think the "you get to do whatever you like best all the time in the afterlife", is abit of a falicy.

For if the afterlife does exist, then you will no longer have a pshyical body giving you urges, such as eating, sleeping, drinking, running a marathon etc.

Which is why i guess we come down to earth etc to have experience's which we cant in the afterlife (if it exists).

i have read a few books which claim, ancient people lived on earth, long ago, im not very inclined to believe this, because theres no evidence, not 1 artifact etc, you can often find some trace of man, somewhere, unless the full earth has gone and flipped it's entire crust.

The best proof for an afterlife ive seen, are mainly NDe's, (Near death experiences). As they sound logical to me, and also Plausable with modern neuro since explaining that our conscoiusness operates at a quantum level. And they say how it can leave the reciever of the brain when a persons body comes near to death.

Im not to sure about being able to visit the afterlife totally unless you meet this requirement, it seems to me if you think about a subject for hours on end, when you sleep or enter a trance, your dream will evolve around what you have previously been thinking of.

Look into edgar casey's work also, i find it very intresting, especially since he could get very accurate infomation about things without being there.

Id try to look at the link, but it seems it's down or incorrect.

Laters

MagicBullet,

Just one more thought regarding superman.  You know, he rode horses very well.  He believed in his ability to ride horses well because of his past experiences riding horses.  Knowing that the possibility of great accidents are always possible when riding such a powerful creature, he still rode the horse.

Life is like that.  We choose it.  We keep riding the horse, don't we?  It's big and powerful and will regularly throw us off its back.  But we should always try to recover the best that we can because a man or woman riding the horse well is such a splendid and amazing thing, isn't it?  

love, blink  :)