An Afterlife? - Peter's 1st Post - Do Computers Think?

At this point I joined the Facebook discussion with a reply to Richard's contributions. I discuss apparent differences between the way in which a computer can be said to think and human thought. The issues of process, in contrast to experience, consciousness, and emotion are considered. I refer, also, to the limitations of physical science in explaining the full meaning of time and space.

My post was made on 10 May 2008 at 07:43 am:

Hi everybody. I have recently joined Facebook and found this site. I have read your various contributions with interest because I specialised in the philosophy of mind many years ago and am still as fascinated with it as ever. All of you make some kind of reference to experience or consciousness which does seem to be crucial in coming to some kind of conclusion. I remember, long before the rise of microsoft, being asked to consider the question"Do computers think?". The question is appropriate because a computer can perform many sophisticated tasks and even have some sort of memory of what it does. If we run a computer program can we say that the computer has had an experience? Can we also say that it has awareness of what it is doing? What also do we make of the issues used to date the beginnings of human identity, namely the production of art. Of course a computer could produce art but could it do it for pleasure? Could it experience emotion? I am suggesting that the ability to build sophisticated physical structures does not take us very far at all toward an understanding of what it means to be human. Therefore we need some other means of addressing these clear features which physical science is unable to describe. Consider, again, our ability as physicists to describe the structure of the physical cosmos so precisely that we can describe the process of physical evolution all the way back to the dawn of the known cosmos - the big bang. If the cosmos began then does time begin also, and space. Can we imagine what preceded time, and space. What sense is there in saying "In the beginning was nothing - and then it exploded"?

These are just some of the issues which have haunted me over the years. I do not pretend to have the answers and I am probably further away from answers than when I started - but I am inclined to continue the quest.

Best wishes to you all. I hope you find my small contribution of interest and that you will reply to it.

Tags: afterlife computer thought process experience consciousness emotion science time space philosophy of mind big bang

Peter Rayner

An Afterlife? - Richard's 4th Post - The Point of Death

The reply which Richard received defined the self as essentially spiritual and discussed how we may come to know our true selves. It attempted to harmonise the "mundane scientific" with the "transcendental scientific" which it further defined as "the science of self-realization". The ultimate goal of this endeavour is to reveal the "Absolute Truth". Death is defined as the moment of transmigration of the soul into another body which is selected for you according to your state of mind at the moment of death. You can read the full reply here. Richard's reply to that post is the second one quoted below.

In the meantime, another writer picked up on the original post concerning brain activity continuing up to 3 years after death. The writer did not make any submissions but thought this meant that Richard was claiming to "have the answer and proof to this whole question" and asked for further elaboration. What follows is his reply.

Richard's post was made on 08 May 2008 at 04:46 pm:

Yeh. Apparently we only know a reasonable amount of knowledge about the conscious part of the brain, and only a very limited amount about our unconscious. It was described to us as there are deep fathoms that have never been explored in our unconscious. This person's body was preserved in some way, (how exactly I don't know) and they did brain scans and saw that their mind was still active.

We can only pronounce someone dead once they have no pulse, they have stopped breathing totally, and after a number of times of electronically charging the patient's chest, they won't have one breath or give out a heart beat. But we don't know what happens to the people afterwards. This is a light that breaks open the full possibility of out of body experiences, near death experiences etc. However in the dead person's mind case, their mind didn't stay alive forever, and many people's minds can die a lot lot earlier than this case. This means you can either understand this in two ways, your mind dies last and it is unlikely there is an afterlife, or your mind dies last and it gives hope of an afterlife. Still no absolute answer to an afterlife I'm afraid, where there hasn't been enough testing and exploration of the mind after death.

I still find things like this fascinating though, there are peculiar things that happen to people when they are unconscious. I've heard a couple of cases in the news however long ago where people have woken up in hospital with a completely different voice and speaking accent to what they had before they went into general anaesthetic. The unconscious could be the very key into the real and distinct answer of an afterlife, and a lot of other branches of knowledge too, but for now, it seems to be a step forward rather than a real answer. I hope what I've said helps, and that you share the same curiosity as myself.

Richard's reply to the first writer was made on 08 May 2008 at 05:21 pm:

Hey, I've not been on facebook in a while, and I sign in to find two replies to posts of mine in this forum! lol It's been rather sunny and hot where I live for about a week now, so maybe the Summer Sun is here at long last! Anyway, back on track...

"It is said that according to the particular state of mind/consciousness one may have at the time of leaving the material body (death), one will receive that particular body suitable for such state of consciousness..... (tell me what u think and 'll tell who u r)."

I'm not sure I totally understand what you mean here, I've got to ask because I'm open-mindedly curious... how would that connect in with myself, and how would I recognise this in myself from what you said?

I dont tend to ignore religion, in a way I just find it unreliable. Religion relies heavily on hear'say learnt knowledge, and that's when all the flaws start to creep in, and as sad as it may be, this is how there are so many wars caused just from conflicting religions. If you take a religion that believes there are 10 gods, and christianity which believes in one, they both can't be right, because that doesn't make sense. So I tend to try and keep away from religions and try to make sense of the world through making a connection to a given topic through experiences I have and things I learn.

Best wishes, and I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Tags: scientific transcendental self-realization Absolute Truth death soul body moment of death consciousness brain unconscious mind religion

Richard Debnam