The way to convince me that an afterlife exists would be to negate the evidence that currently convinces me that there isn’t one. This is essentially that :
Physics is pretty well understood and there’s no evidence that following the laws of physics from the starting conditions of the universe would create an afterlife.
There’s not a clean cut between “brain damage” and “death” nor is there a clean cut between “brain damage” and “experience”. How would an afterlife know when to scoop someone up from this world? How would it know what personality to give them in the afterlife? Especially if someone dies gradually of a mental illness.
If I were shown why these reasons were wrong or confused then I might be convinced.
Even is there was something that I couldn’t become Bayesianly convinced of, this still wouldn’t show it to be false. If such a thing existed it would be a problem with Bayesian reasoning.
Logic stays true, wherever you may go, So logic never tells you where you live.
The way to convince me that an afterlife exists would be to negate the evidence that currently convinces me that there isn’t one. This is essentially that :
Physics is pretty well understood and there’s no evidence that following the laws of physics from the starting conditions of the universe would create an afterlife.
There’s not a clean cut between “brain damage” and “death” nor is there a clean cut between “brain damage” and “experience”. How would an afterlife know when to scoop someone up from this world? How would it know what personality to give them in the afterlife? Especially if someone dies gradually of a mental illness.
If I were shown why these reasons were wrong or confused then I might be convinced.
Even is there was something that I couldn’t become Bayesianly convinced of, this still wouldn’t show it to be false. If such a thing existed it would be a problem with Bayesian reasoning.
From the Parable of Hemlock.