Life is truth, death is a lie.

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

Its a big statement, has anyone else ever said anything like this before?
Here i go: (inspired in part by life after death theories)

When you tell a lie, you say somthing that is not true;
Either it does not work or it does not exist.
Some people love the truth and hate the lie so much that they think death cannot stop their mind as it seeks something better then what is.
When a man or woman dies it is a hypocracy, their body wanted to live, their mind wanted to live, but then also within that same body was put a decay that caused the loss of life and memory and thought and spirit.

I am sad to say this, but here a second logic from me:
During brain damage a person can loose memory or ability to think.
This memory was not emortal but a part of the physical brain.
Your mind and contiousness doesnt float of and live on if you die does it?
In needs to be inside of your brain and you need to be alive,
its like a soul needs a body before it can exist.

I still agree with the root of those who dont realy believe in complete death, because they dont want to believe in a lie…
^
Its just a little thoery of mine, a few words.
If the mods think it is bad or useless please feal free to delete it, its ok,
im just shareing thoughts with you all.

2

Is it always the case that when a man dies, his body and mind want to keep living instead?

Some interesting ideas though - a good author on the subject is Thomas Nagle (on death) and more classically, Lucretius the poet wrote about the rationality of fearing death.

3

Water is held in a cup.
You break the cup, and the water looses its shape.
But you can tip the water into another cup.

4

If you cut off your legs, they dont get up and walk away.
Matter can become inanimate, simple as that.
Death is my worst enemy, and i am willing to fight the impossable,
for the sake of love itself!

5

Hey Dan,

Well, that’s the business of philosophy. Other than an “attempt to justify their ridiculous looking beards,” as Gamer once reported, philosophy has worked as a way to speculate on dead people.

Let’s face it. That’s why it all started. One minute you’re sitting there chatting with Fred and in the next his eyes close, he becomes silent, stops breathing, and slumps over beside you. You start philosophizing:

“What was that!? What just happened?..Fred?..FRED!!!”

I will let you borrow the greatest weapon used today in philosophy to not only defend, but also make credible and legitimate, idealism, and in the least, rather than proving immortality, which would be great, confounding the issue so much that finally everything sounds absurd and the rock in front of you is no more real than you are.

Consider this. As regards to proof, a word spoken to you by Fred is more or less the same kind of information you might recieve in looking at an apple, or kicking a ball, or reading a text, or singing a song. If all these things are reducible to sensory datum, which inevitably they must be, Fred’s proof that he exists is not given to you- his words are no different than that apple or ball. At this point it is no more likely that Fred is mortal because he stops talking and breathing than it is that Fred could prove he existed by talking to you.

This magnificent weapon is called the solipsism-bomb. It is, whether positivists and behaviorists like it or not, the mother-load and ever lasting gob-stopper. I want it back after you are done using it.

To a point this works but matters of telling the truth and lying are proporitonate to the content of one’s knowledge and the purposeful distortion of what is at least believed to be true. One can’t know everything, but one can and indeed does intend the ‘telling-of’ things to be meaningful.

Right? “Did you steal the cookie, detrop,” isn’t so easily admitted. What is the nature of stealing? What is a cookie? These two definitions make or break the verdict but in turn are only particular interpretations of the events. In reality there is no way of confirming a true or false event by refering to others.

Any negative connotation granted to a claim by calling it a ‘lie’ is actually a fallacy because it pretends as if the defendant could know the whole truth and therefore has the capacity to distort it purposely.

Honesty is an issue of intention, and this is an internal ‘solipsistic’ event.

Why? One cannot know where ‘outside’ stops and ‘inside’ begins.

6

Ok, to that, I must add this quote, (enjoy):

"One is inside
then outside what one has been inside
One feels empty
because there is nothing inside oneself
One tries to get inside oneself
that inside of the outside
that one was once inside
once one tries to get oneself inside what
one is outside:
to eat and to be eaten
to have the outside inside and to be
inside the outside

But this is not enough. One is trying to get
the inside of what one is outside inside, and to
get inside the outside. But one does not get
inside the outside by getting the outside inside
for;
although one is full inside of the inside of the outside
one is on the outside of one’s own inside
and by getting inside the outside
one remains empty because
while one is on the inside
even the inside of the outside is outside
and inside oneself there is still nothing
There has never been anything else
and there never will be"
-R.D. Laing

7

dYz was right, i need to talk more simply.

Trying to live is a war against sertain doom.
Modern life span now is far longer on average then it was in the passed.
I think that a “fight death to the death” attitude, if it were a national philosophy, would raplidy boost medical science, and the cure for ageing would probably already have been descovered by now.

I had a saying that i used on myself to difuse discuragement,
“am i doomed? prove to me that i am doomed? why am i not dead yet if you claim that i am doomed? i am only doomed once dead, im not doomed yet, im still alive!”
^when i siad that to myself it helped me not give up no matter what,
and im still alive despite the big problems in my life that id lived through.
Many people wouldnt have tried as hard as me, and would be dead by now because they gave up.
I think it is a virtue to fight against the impossable for the sake of existance and life or love.

The living can say “i am alive” but the dead cannot say that they are alive, because they are not. I have choosen not to put faith in life after death, but to use all of my efforts to elongate my own life now, and for this reason im not dead yet.

I still consider myself to be quite sain,
i realize that all i imagine and think, does not have to be true or false, it can be either, and it is somthing within me, not somthing outside of me.
I know of thing outside of my mind, but also know that my mind has comprehended them, not created them.

There is a file line between ability and will.