Question

We obviously do know what happens after death. We die and that’s it. Why is there so much literature on this subject in philosophy and why does this concept gain special status?

We have determined, empirically, that consciousness cannot exist without a brain or atleast a material substance. We’ve manipulated brains that result in various different conscious experiences. We even experience a lack of consciousness when we sleep, so why wouldn’t we when we die?

All standard objections to this knowledge rely on how we can’t disprove that consciousness can’t exist without a mind. But then you can’t know anything since you can’t disprove an infinite number of things. However, rarely are the people who propose life after death perennial skeptics with all other knowledge claims. They are obviously inconsistent.

I’m simply having trouble understanding why the claim of life existing after death or even the idea of a conscious, completely immaterial being get special status in philosophy compared to invisible pink unicorns. Is this again a result of persistent human irrationality?

Answer 1

The question addresses the philosophical debate on life after death and the nature of consciousness, with roots in materialism, idealism, and existentialism. Philosophers use different arguments to justify the existence of non-material consciousness or a divine entity, but skepticism often questions the lack of empirical evidence for such phenomena.

Step-by-step explanation:

The question posed touches upon a deeply complex and highly debated topic in philosophy: the nature of consciousness and the possibility of life after death. This philosophical quandary is central to themes such as materialism, idealism, dualism, and existentialism, all of which explore different facets of the mind-body relationship and the essence of human existence.

Existentialism and the Human Experience

The existentialists, for instance, focus on what can be known with certainty: our existence and awareness thereof. This approach stems from contemplating whether non-material elements of consciousness exist alongside our physical bodies, as suggested by essentialists such as Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, and Leibniz.

The Materialism and Idealism Debate

The debate between materialism, which asserts only material substance exists, and idealism, which claims only spiritual substance exists, is central to the literature on what happens after death. This philosophical discourse is further complicated by the hard problem of consciousness, namely explaining the subjective experience of being aware.

Cosmology and Theological Arguments

In examining the existence of God, cosmological arguments move from observed effects to their causes, while ontological arguments reason from a priori premises. Moral theorists link the existence of a divine entity to the existence of objective values.

However, skepticism challenges these views, as it requires a level of justification beyond doubt, which proponents of materialism and empirical science uphold by indicating a lack of evidence for existence without physical bodies.

In conclusion, while we are certain of our own existence and consciousness, the special status afforded to claims of life after death in philosophy endures due to the unknown nature of consciousness after brain function ceases, the historical and cultural significance of such beliefs, and the profound human desire to understand the meaning and trajectory of life.