Discussion My Best Argument for the Afterlife (The All Pervading Equilibrium Principle)

[Snake of Eden]

This is my best argument for the afterlife.

-Everything in the physical universe has a tendency to balance itself out to bring a state of equilibrium. Nothing is truly lost forever.
-Our instincts tell us two things. That our consciousness is immortal as manifested by survival instinct and that we must seek justice for ourselves more than anything else which manifests as sense of entitlement to things like being loved, getting things we need, keeping things that we earned or was given to us. When something that is ours is taking from us unfairly then we know it is ours and we cant shake that feeling of wanting back no matter what.
-It is impossible to (always) get back what have been taken from us in this life and no power in the current life could gurantee it back even justice system and laws for example a loved one who has been murdered and taken away from us or losing our lives to murder.
-Because of the way the equilibrium laws are compulsory in the universe and how we innately desire justice for ourselves that can not be achieved in this life in addition to our instinct for consciousness immortality then we can speculate that the same equilberium laws could be extended to allow that equilberium state to be achieved through giving us back what we lost but couldnt regain in this current life will make it necessary for an after life to exist in order that lost things can be restored to us and we can reach to a state of balance again.

Religions already offer a solution for this problem. The existence of a judgement day where good is separated from evil by an all knowing entity which functions as a super intelligent computer can separate all the nuances that happened in this world and restore balance to us. That only can happen when we are alive again all of us at once which will first require all life to go extinct and then come back again to life for one big last time show where all things and disputes are laid out to the super intillegent all knowing computer to restore balance between us. The same thing can not be accomplished as a floating consciousness of per indivisual once they die because the debt that is caused by someone lose and another gain unfairly is multi generational and spans for all humanity history. So in order to detangle all of this human epoch mess from beginning to end will require all the concerned parties including the plaintiff and and perpetrator to be present under the same court of law just Like it is in the current life justice system.

P.S. Our unshakable and absolute need to fairness in its essence is just an emotional manifestation for the equilibrium principle just like what happens everywhere in the physical universe. Why should equilibrium principle be an exclusive feature and only applicable in the physical world when we ourselves have the same need for it in ourselves, a problem which can easily be solved by deducing that this life is not all there is our the equilibrium phenomena will be faulty across all the board.

I would like to hear your thoughts, opinions or counter arguments are welcome

 

[TheAmazingCriswell]

Trying to apply the laws of physics to abstract concepts is a grave methodological error.

Why should equilibrium principle be an exclusive feature and only applicable in the physical world when we ourselves have the same need for it in ourselves,

Wanting something to be true doesn't mean it is.

 

[Snake of Eden]

Trying to apply the laws of physics to abstract concepts is a grave methodological error.

Wanting something to be true doesn't mean it is.

If it was true I wouldnt have called it a speculation. Also wanting something to be true by derivation does not make it impossible even if it is unlikely by physical connection. The extrapolation I alluded to is symbolic but very profound. The same way physical heat could symbolically resemble human reactive emotional state while physical cold resembles human none-reactive emotional state. There is no physical connection between real world physical heat and human emotion yet we know the analogy works perfectly and it is profound. It is about what resonates with us subjectively rather than what can be proven objectively. This is not a theory to have a methodological error as you said. This is a speculation with the goal to open the mind as to why the afterlife makes psychological sense as it is the only way to restore psychological balance if it cant be achieved in this life time and most likely it wont for most people. There are tons of Real world impact and benefits that is derived from this line of subjective thinking. It gives a sense of order and linearity to motivate towards something. This is already in us wether we admit it or not. We strive to uncover facts about the world around us because we know it could make sense to it because we see it everywhere. Why cant we also speculate that order extends to all the actions since it has a permanent imprint in our mind as psyche some which cause imbalances that cant only be rectified by an existence of an afterlife in order to allow that balancing event to take place?

This is more of a plea to resonate with the human instinct and conscience than a theoretical discourse. You see what I am communicating?

Also it is not about wanting something. It is about Never being able to rationalize the feeling of being deprived of something we are entitled to. Deep down we can never let go and we know it is ours and nothing even death will change that.

 

[TheAmazingCriswell]

You see what I am communicating?

No.

 

[Snake of Eden]

No.

I made an edit to the reply. Read the part about the symbology

 

[TheAmazingCriswell]

This entire debate is too esoteric for me.
Have a nice evening.

 

[Snake of Eden]

This was the point you were making in the part I quoted: "We have the need for an equilibrium of justice, therefore the conservation principle should apply to it as well."

I am not speculating over our sense of needed justice when we are deprived of what we feel entitled to. Not everything we feel entitled to is definitely a rightful pursuit like what happens with greedy people who encroach on other people's livelihood and exploit them and other resources to get what they want. I am more specifically speaking of what everyone possibily could agree on as a rightful and just cause. We have legal systems and laws in place to ensure that everyone is treated fairly as much as possible and that existed in some form in other so societies so the matter of absolute sense of justice in everyone is undeniable.

What exactly is the point of this exercise?

What does this mean?

Nobody can prove that the afterlife exists for obvious reasons. A) The dead cant speak. 2)It doesnt/didnt happen yet in physical reality. The best approach to make sense of why it is needed is based a human psychological approach. Therefore it is a speculation or an appeal to resonate with the human conscience rather than a (dis)provable theory that can have physical aspect to measure and produce.

I strongly dislike your habit of claiming many things in very general fashion without proving any of them.

I too dislike that I have to provide some empirical evidence to support every point I am making when I am clearly coming from a very human experience point of view and I didnt claim other wise. We will not be able to measure everything with a ruler. If your world view is solely shaped by that approach then I just feel there will a strong lack of flavor to life. Sometimes generalizations are simple ways of looking at the world when we cant help it. We dont always have the specifics to every experience we think we are having so we try our best to make sense of it until some better alternative gives a more accurate reflection of the reality of the experience. Also the rigid ways of looking at things may not always be helpful. For something as deep as the afterlife or human consciousness we lack understand and proper language to discuss their essence so we try our best with what we currently have

 

[Snake of Eden]

This entire debate is too esoteric for me.
Have a nice evening.

I wouldn't label it esoteric. Thank you for the discussion it was lovely. Have a Nice evening

 

[lostautist]

Carlo Rovelli has an interesting book entitled The Order of Time that explains our observation of everything and existence in time as a state of low entropy of starting with maximum thermal equilibrium progressing to minimum thermal equilibrium. It is equally science based and philosophical.

It's really an amazing read. I highly recommend it. He is the designer / theorist that came up with Loop Quantum Gravity. You've already read my views of this on other posts so I don't need to rehash it.

Trying to apply the laws of physics to abstract concepts is a grave methodological error.

I don't agree. Theoretical Physics is by nature philosophical and examines existence at it's most basic level in ways we will never directly observe. A belief that you either have free will or do not is a topic of debate. So is the belief that Consciousness may be quantum in nature and possibly fundamental force like the 4 that are known and accepted.

If it was true I wouldnt have called it a speculation. Also wanting something to be true by derivation does not make it impossible even if it is unlikely by physical connection. The extrapolation I alluded to is symbolic but very profound. The same way physical heat could symbolically resemble human reactive emotional state while physical cold resembles human none-reactive emotional state. There is no physical connection between real world physical heat and human emotion yet we know the analogy works perfectly and it is profound. It is about what resonates with us subjectively rather than what can be proven objectively. This is not a theory to have a methodological error as you said. This is a speculation with the goal to open the mind as to why the afterlife makes psychological sense as it is the only way to restore psychological balance if it cant be achieved in this life time and most likely it wont for most people. There are tons of Real world impact and benefits that is derived from this line of subjective thinking. It gives a sense of order and linearity to motivate towards something. This is already in us wether we admit it or not. We strive to uncover facts about the world around us because we know it could make sense to it because we see it everywhere. Why cant we also speculate that order extends to all the actions since it has a permanent imprint in our mind as psyche some which cause imbalances that cant only be rectified by an existence of an afterlife in order to allow that balancing event to take place?

I can directly correlate this to equilibrium and low entropy really easily. As a complex system designed to provide to the greater goal of equilibrium, you ingest highly stored energy, living matter, transform it to heat energy with your complex thought and processes and dissipate that as photons being shed by the matter that you compromise of. It's a slow process. Low entropy. Everything you observe and exist with is part of this process, including trees, mountains and the clouds passing.

 

[TheAmazingCriswell]

The best approach to make sense of why it is needed is based a human psychological approach.

Who says it is needed?

I don't agree. Theoretical Physics is by nature philosophical and examines existence at it's most basic level in ways we will never directly observe.

He tries to argue that there exists such a thing as "conservation of justice", for goodness sake.

 

[lostautist]

He tries to argue that there exists such a thing as "conservation of justice", for goodness sake.

I don't believe that, but I have different conclusions that are also founded by some of his reasonings.

 

[Snake of Eden]

I don't believe that, but I have different conclusions that are also founded by some of his reasonings.

Who says it is needed?

He tries to argue that there exists such a thing as "conservation of justice", for goodness sake.

What is conservation of justice that you are saying that I am erroneously implying is true? Pardon my slowness of mind, i barely read 5 books in my whole life so be little patient with me. I am just trying to understand what you both dont agree with that I said. It will make it easier for me to make my point clear

 

[Snake of Eden]

Ok i think i know what you are talking about when you say why it is needed? I will make the point and i dont like your tone of language with me @Voûte_Étoilée
It is needed because you can not absolutely resolve injustices committed in this life time. People who suffered injustices in this life need their natural state restored as before they suffered injustices. Nothing can eliminate that need. Arguing that there is no need to restore justice for those who suffered injustices is akin to forcing someone else to sit in boiling water and not let them leave because you dont see the need for them to get out of the boiling water but they do even when you think they shouldnt. Nothing and no one can argue with that and nobody ever will get over their need to get real justice when they suffered. The worldy justice system has limits to what it can restore losses to those who suffered. There got to be a need for an absolute justice system to restore balance.

 

[lostautist]

What is conservation of justice that you are saying that I am erroneously implying is true? Pardon my slowness of mind, i barely read 5 books in my whole life so be little patient with me. I am just trying to understand what you both dont agree with that I said. It will make it easier for me to make my point clear

I didn't take it that way nor did I agree with their interpretation of your beliefs, either of which I have no issues with. I don't agree with some of what you've said, but you've already read what I believe in those other posts I've made. I do see how some of our beliefs are compatible on some levels and chose to respond to you accordingly. Please continue to share whatever you wish... on topics like this, it's all philosophical and you don't need to justify what you believe, at least to me. I appreciate what you've shared.

 

[settheory]

Kinda reminded me of this

Just-world fallacy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Snake of Eden]

Kinda reminded me of this

Just-world fallacy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

this is not the exactly the same but thanks for sharing

 

[rationaldeath]

It does kind of feel like nothing "good" in life comes for free, doesn't it? Whenever we do something to reduce suffering or gain happiness in some way there seems to be a kind of equilibrium that wants to be satisfied to return things to neutral. If you want to avoid long term suffering like loneliness or unhealthiness you need to suffer in the short term by putting in work. If you want to avoid short term suffering by neglecting responsibilities and indulging in distractions like drugs or junk food you will pay the price in suffering later on. Being able to choose death feels almost too good to be true, like ctb is going to leave me with some debt that must be paid later.

 

[Snake of Eden]

ctb is going to leave me with some debt that must be paid later.

Our inner world and the outer world can only overlap together through symbolism but they pretty much run on the same principles. We desire fairness because it is natural that we like to feel just as validated as everyone else across the board. Life can never be truly fair from start to finish and despite of all our attempts to make it otherwise. The physical world is built on principle of equilibrium. Nothing is truly ever lost. If we took that aspect and applied it to our inner nature (emotional, psychological) the only way we can restore equilibrium in our inner nature is if we somehow brought back again to experience that even to pay our debts and collect them. Thats the only way our nature can get resolved in perfect balance just like what is happening in the physical world. The limitedness of our physical existence is the only barrier standing in the way to achieve that balance again. our only way to solve this inner nature equation problem is to add the variable of the possibility for an afterlife which will enable this mathematically to be achievable. I say our physical bodies must come back from death because we need them to be restored as the imbalance happened when we were in them so they are also another variable of the equation that must be available to make this equation work. There are also other variables but i dont want to get much into it for now but you get the idea

 

[KimKevorkian]

You think the NY Times has a readership or editorial staff with the smallest fraction of the brainpower on display here?? Bravo to the huge, bulging, pulsating organs of our members!