Timeline for How can I scientifically explain the afterlife [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
43 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 23, 2019 at 12:45 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Jan 23, 2019 at 13:19 | |||||
| Jul 17, 2016 at 20:41 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Jul 18, 2016 at 4:18 | |||||
| Jul 15, 2016 at 6:45 | vote | accept | TrEs-2b | ||
| Jul 14, 2016 at 20:43 | history | closed |
Aify Thucydides SE - stop firing the good guys JDługosz Rob Watts |
Opinion-based | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 20:00 | comment | added | TylerH | There's already a field of pseudo science that focuses on this tangentially, called noetic science. Noetics originated as a metaphysical philosophy but has since been used (largely in pop culture) to lend credence to the notion of proof of divinity or physical evidence of a "soul" (which in turn would definitely indicate some form of "afterlife") | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 18:56 | answer | added | Hypnosifl | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 18:36 | answer | added | Adam Wykes | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 16:52 | comment | added | R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE | For an existing exploration of the topic in fiction, you might be interested in en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riverworld | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 16:48 | comment | added | R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE | I don't think the question is well-posed as stated. Are you looking to have a story where, in-world, events that involve some sort of afterlife have indisputably taken place, and you want them to be "scientifically" consistent in-world? Or do you want explanations for why (in-world) characters believe in an afterlife? Or something else entirely? | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 16:27 | comment | added | Graham | You need to define the context for your "explanation". If you're looking for a hook to hang a story on, there are many, many options. You don't need forum posts, you need a reading list and film list - and if you're halfway serious about SF then you should be able to rattle off a whole bunch pretty quickly. If you're looking for a genuine explanation for the real world we live in though, none is possible. Everyone claiming to know the "truth" is actually just wishing it is so. | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 14:06 | answer | added | Henry Taylor | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 13:19 | answer | added | YoMismo | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 13:00 | answer | added | a4android | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 12:40 | comment | added | a4android | Not every culture has a religion with an afterlife. Early Judaism was afterlife-free. Hinduism/Buddhism reincarnation isn't really an afterlife, it's more being recycled until you reach nirvana and that's total oblivion. The Afterlife is historically a recent contrivance. Well, the last millennium or so. | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 12:33 | comment | added | Anonymous | That depends on what you define as the afterlife. Different religions have different ideas. There may be no distinction between life and afterlife (e.g. ancestor worship), the afterlife may be eternal (e.g. organized religion in many agricultural societies), souls may be reincarnated after death (e.g. Buddhism, Hinduism), the afterlife may be an artificial construct built by our post-human descendants (e.g. Roko's basilisk, Cosmism or "religion 2.0"), et cetera. That's not taking into account additional states such as "living dead", limbo or purgatory. | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 11:59 | comment | added | Whelkaholism | Have you read Surface Detail by Iain M Banks? Might give you some ideas. | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 11:43 | comment | added | CptEric | before people die, their memories and "self" are uploaded to a big server that simulates paradise. | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 9:59 | answer | added | Andy Dent | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 9:51 | comment | added | celtschk | @Keltari: While scientific theories don't get proven, they get confirmed (or falsified, of course). | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 9:13 | answer | added | Fiksdal | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 8:35 | comment | added | Ben Hillier | @TrEs-2b That's not true. They are considered theories until proven true; or at least verified beyond reasonable doubt. | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 8:20 | answer | added | celtschk | timeline score: 5 | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 7:12 | answer | added | Peter - Reinstate Monica | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 6:35 | answer | added | Count Iblis | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 2:29 | answer | added | Bryan McClure | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jul 14, 2016 at 0:05 | answer | added | PatJ | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 23:38 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jul 14, 2016 at 12:19 | |||||
| Jul 13, 2016 at 23:10 | answer | added | The Square-Cube Law | timeline score: 25 | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 23:10 | answer | added | Cort Ammon | timeline score: 11 | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 22:53 | answer | added | HDE 226868♦ | timeline score: 21 | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 22:52 | comment | added | TrEs-2b | @Keltari While I agree with that, I never said anything on theories | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 22:50 | comment | added | Keltari | @TrEs-2b scientific theories are never proven. Thats why they are theories. They are considered true, until proven false. | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 22:49 | comment | added | TrEs-2b | @MozerShmozer I agree, that could be a valid answer, redefining death | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 22:49 | comment | added | Cort Ammon | @TrEs-2b That is true. For every point of view, there will be a merit from which one can derive the relative merit of any given answer. (I've explored this question from a philosophical perspective quite a bit, so I'm very used to the issues that arise when trying to defend a scientific afterlife. The issue of merit of justifications is one of them) | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 22:48 | comment | added | MozerShmozer | I'd say we need to redefine what "Death" means in this context. If we're saying "Death is the end of life" then we literally cannot have "Life after Death" because it would contradict the definition. Thoughts? | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 22:47 | comment | added | TrEs-2b | @CortAmmon that's an interesting point, but some answers will still have more merit than others | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 22:46 | comment | added | Cort Ammon | Another key thing to consider is that what you are looking for is a "justification" for a belief in the afterlife. The level of rigor required for this justification changes radically depending on the context. If you're consoling a cancer victim with the idea of an afterlife, the burden of proof is much lower than if you're trying to find sponsors to have the LHC prove your theory of the afterlife. | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 22:45 | comment | added | Cort Ammon | There's at least one answer for every cultural definition of "the afterlife" you are interested in because each one will have different attributes. That being said, the concept of what "death" means is not clear in science, and most approaches I've used to explaining "the afterlife" center around carefully tailoring what "death" could possibly mean in scientific terms. | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 22:45 | comment | added | TrEs-2b | @Keltari we've scientifically explained mind control, gods, realms and ghosts. I think I'll have to wait a little longer | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 22:44 | comment | added | Keltari | If you can scientifically explain the afterlife, you have a nobel prize coming your way. | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 22:44 | comment | added | TrEs-2b | @HDE226868 considering how often it's brought up when talking about realistic religion, sure I would love to hear ideas on that. | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 22:43 | comment | added | HDE 226868♦ | Would "We're living in a computer simulation and death is just the entrance to the next phase" be a valid answer? | |
| Jul 13, 2016 at 22:41 | history | asked | TrEs-2b | CC BY-SA 3.0 |