Has anyone ever pondered this idea before? It may seem like a moot idea, seeing as we can’t really know until we die. But it would make sense to assume that death is knowing, while life is not knowing. I think we can all agree, that in life we all have questions, and when you question them enough, and keep questioning, it seems as if they become unquestionable.
It seems most of us have this idea of death as a nothingness, which scares the crap out of us. But it seems to me more like, the only way you can experience life is with unconciousness. Or, why does the universe exist? Because no one wants to eat dinner alone. And who would want to eat dinner with friends that they knew were imaginary?
I myself have wondered if surviving death would provide me with most of the answers to life. However I feel that if my character and experience of life remains in my after life then I am sure I would begin to question my existance and purpose of my afterlife.
Your contradiction in terms is mind boggling. "experience life ..with unconsciuosness"? In order to "experience" something one must be aware of it. Awareness presupposes consciuosness. And if death is nothing, why are you scared of it? I have a question that is unquestionable (whatever that means). Do you still have Imaginary friends?
[qoute]Your contradiction in terms is mind boggling. “experience life …with unconsciuosness”? In order to “experience” something one must be aware of it. Awareness presupposes consciuosness. And if death is nothing, why are you scared of it? I have a question that is unquestionable (whatever that means). Do you still have Imaginary friends?
[/quote]
lol
torrentfields, i’m afraid mr.knowitall is right (and has certainly lived up to is name in his first post, may it continue); if you think answers come with death, then that presupposes an after life, and how can this be if you are in a state of unconciousness?
This one just doesn’t sit right with me. I believe you have it backwards. Conciousness presupposes awareness.
You can become unaware of things around you and still be concious, but you cannot be unconcious and still be aware of things around you. With this said …
You are correct here. To experience something you only have to be aware. Life is a one big experience. The only reason why I am experiencing it is because I am aware of it. Let us say I am not aware of this big experience for a bit, but concious. Am I dead? I think if my body was extinguished, I would be dead. The only reason I am here is because of this body that I posess. Through my 5 senses I am aware, but through my 5 senses am I concious? No. My conciousness does not rely on my body.
What I am trying to say is that conciousness exists after death, but not awareness.
You can’t reverse what is. Life is conciousness while death is unconciousness. The way I see it is conciousness is interaction while unconciousness is not. If you’re dead you are no longer a use to society and are unconcious, cut off, non-existant, dust. You’re overcomplicating this process.
The way I see it is different, but that’s because I have the notion that we are all God. That’s the only idea that makes sense to me. But given that conception, I think it would make sense to say that during this life we are unconcious of the fact that we are the eternal energy of the universe, and in death, we are concious of that fact. But that’s just my basic metaphysical assumption.
Oh well then I guess. Silent thinks for some reason aware and concious are the same exact thing. Why don’t you look up the defintion for Synonym and I don’t care what you use.
Shall we get into the basis of communication? If one person has a definition away from a common source there would be no point in ever using that word because it would not be understood. Society defines all in this world and tools such as the Thesaurus and Dictionary are its mediums, not Murdoc.
