this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2025
644 points (99.2% liked)
People Twitter
7384 readers
849 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I find it odd that we doubt the afterlife.
This is a universe where nothing is ever truly created or destroyed, merely changing form from one thing to another.
And yet the view we associate with "Science!" is that conciousness is the one exception? What makes you think you're so special that the universe will only experience you for a limited time? You're not a happy meal promotion, you're as immortal as everything else.
Consciousness isn't a tangible thing. It's just a label we use for a type of brain behavior. Once there's no brain, there's no more behavior. Just like once your heart dies, there's no more heartbeat.
I dunno we still see things like Terminal Lucidity and NDEs all the time.
One of those is pre-death and the other is near-death. I don't see how either suggests that there's some ghost-brain that functions after death.
Saying "Oh that's just near death. Never mind that we are seeing active consciousness where none should exist."
Isn't that just moving the goal post at the end of the day?
No, both of those still involves some form of brain consciousness. What we don't have any evidence of is consciousness existing without a physical body.
I find NDEs fascinating because so many have tried to debunk them and they keep failing.
At first they tried to say they weren't real, but then they kept happening
Then they tried to say that were dreams but the effects were too profound
They tried to say it was oxygen starvation but people under an NDE tend to be lucid and those oxygen starved tend to be dizzy.
They tried to say it was a religious delusion but then a cursory glance over the NDEs show them to be too universal, the only thing that changes is whether someone sees Jesus or Buddha...
They even thought they had the smoking gun when the effects were replicated under DMT only to find that the human body doesn't have enough native DMT to trip on.
So they started doing things like the AWARE study and the data keeps piling up. Machines that detect no brain activity and yet people accurately recalling conversations and seeing sights despite being incredibly close to brain death.
Even related phenomena like the Shared Death Experience and Terminal Lucidity were found.
Typically when something is superstitious nonsense it goes away when investigated.
NDEs do not
The best skeptics have is trying to say that the person recovering from brain death must have not REALLY been brain dead. To say that it doesn't count as coming back from the dead if you came back from what is defined as clinical death.
This is moving the goal post, sure we can't summon Capser up and ask him what being dead feels like.. but.. the data is still pointing in the direction of conciousness where none can exist. Conciousness that is powerful and lucid despite the "source" of it not working properly. Not just "kinda lucid" but more so than normal.
There are people who are born blind reporting what the room they were in looked like because their NDE let them see for the first time ever.
The human equivalent of me frying my mother board yet somehow windows is still booting up.
So at this point saying "Oh well you can't point to a ghost so this means nothing." Is as absurd as throwing out astrophysics because we haven't found out how to make an FTL Drive.
Now I'm not saying this proves God or anything, but at some point you have to say "Oh well how about that." To the thing that continues to happen