No.234341[Reply]
I've seen this image posted around here many times and I think it warrants its own thread for discussion. It really gives a good visual summary of Schopenhauer's philosophically grounded idea of reincarnation:
>Only by a false illusion does the cool shade of Orcus allure him as a
haven of rest. The earth rolls on from day into night; the individual
dies; but the sun itself burns without intermission, an eternal noon.
Life is certain to the will-to-live; the form of life is the endless present; it matters not how individuals, the phenomena of the Idea, arise
and pass away in time, like fleeting dreams.
>When we die, we throw off our individuality like a worn-out garment
In short, according to this position, life is the permanent condition of this world. When you die, you may lose your self (your elevated perspective) but not selfhood in general. As long as there is a perceiving subject, it is (you) that is perceiving as transmuted consciousness. What is compelling about this idea is that it doesn't depend on the existence of an immortal soul or spirit in order to be true.
So my question is, do you find this position plausible? If yes, does it scare you?
Honestly I find it both plausible and nightmarish in its consequences, because it entails that there is no rest, no peace and no release from the torments of this world, not even for a minute. The moment you are gone, there is not even a pause before you are violently brought back to be tortured, gutted, and consumed once more in the cosmic slaughterhouse.
27 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view. No.234772
>>234751>you die you lose consciousness forever and that's about itI hope you're right
No.234810
>>234753I can't prove a negative. You need to prove to me that consciousness continues after death.
No.234812
>>234753>>234810Threads like these would be much shorter if more people knew what an unfalsifiable claim is.
No.234821
>>234810Why should there being no afterlife be the "default" position? Even if an afterlife can't be proven, why do you believe in eternal oblivion in the first place?
No.234831
>>234341why cant it be finite before and infinite after?