What are your views on the afterlife?

[KeepitRealMark]

I highly believe that there is an after life. I know someone who came back from it.

If that actually happened, we would all know that person by now.
He/she would be on with Jay Leno in no time and the cover of every magazine.
My own younger sister was determined “Clinically Dead“, and came back to “Consciousness”. It happens often that people are thought to have “come back from death“. But that’s not the case. They were not quite completely dead…yet. True Death is when all the electrical stimulus is stopped, no brain activity (not just measurable) at all occurring, for a sufficient time that enough physical brain damage occurs, and the brain can no longer function processing the energy required for life to survive.
Some people may survive in various states of brain damage if their body functions are maintained.
I wouldn’t call it life. Life ends when the brain dies.
There is no afterlife.

[Jarvamundo]

I highly believe that there is an after life. I know someone who came back from it.

If that actually happened, we would all know that person by now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNbdUEqDB-k

Probably the most controlled conditions and monitoring of any NDE case.

[StevenJay]

It seems that this sort of topic invariably gets bogged down right from the get-go with the a priori assumption that Consciousness is a procuct of physicality, rather than vice-versa.

Consciousness is neither "after" nor "before." It is simultaneous. "Afterlife" is a misleading term carrying too many pre-programmed connotations. I prefer to call it "Otherlife." There are multitudes of people who have claimed to have had a glimpse of it while still tenuously anchored/focused in this life. Same goes for OBEs. There are aspects of both that simply cannot be monitored and quantified, and are therefore, outside of the scope of scientific investigation as currently practiced.

So, meaningful discussions about it among the inexperienced are limited, and amount to little more than endless speculation and not just a little pontification.

[KeepitRealMark]

There are those people who are inclined to believe anything without solid proof. Claiming nobody can say for sure if they haven’t experienced something personally. Everything is on the table as possible.

There are those who use their own sense of commonsense to determine what they believe or not. They tend to allow some of the unproven due to their own lack of certainty.

Then… there are those who refuse to believe in anything unless proven as factual reality. Nothing is considered real without real evidence. Nothing is on the table until it stands on its own with certifiable proof.

Imagination is not considered proof of reality.

[StevenJay]

There are those people who are inclined to believe anything without solid proof. Claiming nobody can say for sure if they haven’t experienced something personally.

Why are these two statements lumped together? What does the first one have to do with experiential knowledge?

There is no way you can sit down with a group of mothers and carry on an experiential discussion with them about pregnancy and childbirth. Same goes for a group of people who'd been emotionally and/or sexually abused. Same goes for a roomfull of combat veterans. Same goes for any number of intensely personal experiences - both negative and positive. And if you ain't ever been there, then you've got nothing to offer at anything other than maybe an academic level. Your personal beliefs and perceptions don't even enter into it.

There are those who use their own sense of commonsense to determine what they believe or not.

Mark, that's a meaningless statement. Almost everybody determines their beliefs based on their personal sense of common sense.

Then… there are those who refuse to believe in anything unless proven as factual reality. Nothing is considered real without real evidence.

I asked you once before, by which criteria do you determine that which you deem to be "real," versus not "real." It's a simple enough question for someone claiming to be so well versed in "realness." But you chose to dodge it with an ad hominem retort. So, I'm tossing it out again because I think that it's entirely relevant to your position.

Imagination is not considered proof of reality

I'm quite certain that I've never heard anyone ever claim one way or another. It's irrelevant, though, because immagination is an aspect of "reality," not proof of it - which, by the way, has never been successfully nailed down by anyone, scientist and philosopher alike, as far as I'm aware.

[KeepitRealMark]

Reality

What is it?
Reality is left to individual perceptions of it. There are as many possible realities as there are individuals to perceive them. Ultimately there is only one true reality. Everything falls into one of only two sides on the coin.
Real or Unreal.

As I perceive reality it is all that we know is real in the material world. Like our keyboards. Matter we can see, feel, measure, test scientifically. The foundation… bottom line of reality is everything that doesn’t require any thought process to validate it’s existence.

All other ideas and concepts are built on top of this foundation.
Ideas like a Flat Earth, For many years it was a credible idea and stood up to critical analysis. It was believable. Then it fell down like a House of Cards when the truth was discovered. Ideas like all the mythical stories have fallen down under the weight of examination. Religious ideas are still standing but is growing more unstable as we learn more about our universe. Science theories like Black Holes are still standing. This forum is a source of wind growing stronger and may soon blow down the gravity theories. Only that what is real will stand the test of time and human learning. Knowledge either supports an idea or knocks it down.

If an idea is standing only with the support of human thought’s or imagination, it is destined to fall under the weight of Reality

There is a difference between thinking/wishing/hoping something is real, and knowing it is real.

I don’t have to prove reality. It is what it is…. in spite of what any of us believe.
You need to prove your delusions are real.

[StevenJay]

Reality is left to individual perceptions of it. There are as many possible realities as there are individuals to perceive them. Ultimately there is only one true reality.

Circular reasoning at its clumsiest. And that last bit is pure, unadulterated hubris. For it to be an honest statement, you would've had to have experienced "reality" via a perception other than your own. You like impossibilities? There's one.

[KeepitRealMark]

Reality is left to individual perceptions of it. There are as many possible realities as there are individuals to perceive them. Ultimately there is only one true reality.

Circular reasoning at its clumsiest. And that last bit is pure, unadulterated hubris. For it to be an honest statement, you would've had to have experienced "reality" via a perception other than your own. You like impossibilities? There's one.

Delusional... with an unfriendly bad attitude towards anyone who ridicules and shatters your absurd ideas.
It is rather funny.... Thanks for the laughs.