Michael John

  • **
  • 43 Posts
    • View Profile
    • The Truth Is God
Scientific objections to eternal life
« on: July 05, 2019, 10:02:08 am »
Most atheists object to the idea of life after death because they claim there is no evidence. Science requires the observation of evidence to confirm or falsify a theory. So they will claim that this life is all there is; there is no life after death in any form. So they claim there is no judgement of the soul, no consequences of any kind. 

But that's a theory that is inherently not observable, and so it is not scientific. You cannot observe evidence if you are no longer conscious. To observe that fact that you no longer exist is a contradiction of terms. It is impossible in any reality. And so that theory is ruled out by logic. The only alternative is that there is life after death, and there are consequences to life that you must face.

1

jayceeii

  • **
  • 373 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Scientific objections to eternal life
« Reply #1 on: July 05, 2019, 05:19:42 pm »
The tables cannot be turned against the atheists in this manner, with both parties shouting, “Show us the evidence!” You're creating a straw man. They are not claiming that they have observed there is nothing after death, but that they see no evidence there is something after death. When you say, “And so that theory is ruled out by logic,” in fact they don't have a theory. They're citing a lack of evidence for yours.  There's also a non sequitur, since the fact no evidence is found for life after death, in no way implies there is life after death. I have found atheists and theists not to be so different from one another. Neither cares vitally about the soul. Neither seeks an authority, to feel reassured about immortality.

2

noahboughdy9

  • *
  • 1 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Scientific objections to eternal life
« Reply #2 on: July 10, 2019, 11:11:25 pm »
Are there not things one is rational to believe apart from scientific evidence?

1. Logical and Mathematical Truths
Science presupposes logical and mathematical truths.
2. Metaphysical Truths
e.g., The external world exists. The past is real. There are other minds other than my own.
3. Ethical Truths
One can't by science show that which is good--the Nazi war scientists were doing science just as much as those in Western democracies.
4. Aesthetic Truths
and, most ironic of all,
5. Science itself
You cannot, via science, prove that science is true, or use the scientific method to verify the scientific method. It's arguing in a circle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQL2YDY_LiM

With this, the thrust of your claim losses its power. So what if there are scientific arguments to life after death? Obviously, life after death would be something science cannot prove, and there are many things we believe apart from science.

3

jayceeii

  • **
  • 373 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Scientific objections to eternal life
« Reply #3 on: October 08, 2019, 10:36:34 am »
Are there not things one is rational to believe apart from scientific evidence?

1. Logical and Mathematical Truths
Science presupposes logical and mathematical truths.
2. Metaphysical Truths
e.g., The external world exists. The past is real. There are other minds other than my own.
3. Ethical Truths
One can't by science show that which is good--the Nazi war scientists were doing science just as much as those in Western democracies.
4. Aesthetic Truths
and, most ironic of all,
5. Science itself
You cannot, via science, prove that science is true, or use the scientific method to verify the scientific method. It's arguing in a circle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQL2YDY_LiM

With this, the thrust of your claim losses its power. So what if there are scientific arguments to life after death? Obviously, life after death would be something science cannot prove, and there are many things we believe apart from science.
The trouble of science as it was conceived on this world is that it is being used to get, not to preserve. Another way to say this is that it is not being applied holistically. Many millions of scientists and engineers can apply material balances in small local settings, but none can perform a material balance on the whole planet in its total time frame. From this it is proved the entities engaging in science are not facing all the realities around them. Watching how science proceeds based on consumer dollars, it seems these minds are motivated for profit, but actually lose almost all mental function on basic questions regarding the long-term future, even for the children they think they so zealously guard.