Perception, the End of

[Adahn]

[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=darkolivegreen]First, let me state some assumptions. [/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=darkolivegreen][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=darkolivegreen]One can only experience things through one's own perception.[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]To those who have complete faith in the laws of nature, our perception is a direct result of various physical masses located within our bodies.[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]Death is final and removes all functionality of the required masses which results in an end to the perception of said dead individual.[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]Permanent loss of perception is nonexistence.[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]Now, from this individual's perception there is no past, present, or future. Nothing ever happened. The individual, from this nonexistent perspective, never existed at all.[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]There are those who would say, "He's alive in the hearts and minds of those who knew and loved him."[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]To this I respond, "How does this matter at all to the dead guy who no longer exists?"[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]There are those who would say, "His body feeds the earth and new life springs from it."[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]To this I respond, "How does this matter at all to the dead guy who no longer exists?"[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]You get the picture.[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]My question is, first of all, whether (from the perspective of one who has faith in nature) I'm right or wrong. My second question is how these people cope with this, if it indeed is true.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[Dagger]

I'm not totally sure what you're trying to say, but I will mention that this is usually where religion comes in. If you're an atheist, you [I]have[/I] to accept the fact that you are eventually going to cease to exist; believing in some kind of afterlife utterly alters how a person views the prospect of death.

~Dagger~

[future girl]

This doesn't make sense to me at all. When a person dies he ceases to exist, but that hardly means he never did exist. The dead man has no purpose to himself, but he serves a purpose to others. When someone says "he lives on in the hearts of others" it's to console the living and as far as his role in nature, well that unavoidable, Circle of Life and all that. I don't even know if I'm answering your question properly seeing as I'm not very sure what your question is.

[DeathBug]

Why do you assume that, because we cease to precieve the dead man, he ceases to exist? If a tree falls in the forest, and no one's around, does it make a sound?

Is the man in this scenario dead because a tree fell on him? Maybe he could tell us. Opps...

[Godelsensei]

[COLOR=Gray][FONT=Courier New]As [i]both[/i] Sarahs stated, you most definately cease to exist for your own purposes.

However, like the second Sarah said, you still "live on", in an abstract sense, in the memories people have of you. If you told them something or did something that influenced them, then they will most likely pass that on to others as well.
Even if it isn't attributed to you, you're influence is still there.

EDIT:

Actually, Buggie, no. It creates the waves that have the potential to become sound, but, in order to be sound, they have to be picked up.

But, yeah, I agree with what you're saying.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Adahn]

[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=darkolivegreen]So, the person's life may affect other people's lives, but still, what does it matter to the one who dies? From that person's perspective, the nonexistent one, it really doesn't matter.[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]Time is relative, do you agree? If you cease to exist, time ceases to pass for you. Time and life may continue from our perspective, but when that person poofs out of existence, time ends for him. From this hypothetical non-existent perspective, there is no difference between one second and 100 trillion years. By then, everyone is dead, anyway. When that happens, there are no perspectives (that we know of) and if life is only found on our planet (which is rather remarkable to begin with), then the universe will do whatever universes do for about an eternity until life is formed again, and perspectives come to be once again. [/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]If a universe exists somewhere, but nobody can perceive it, does it still exist? Is there such a thing as time if there are no perspectives to establish relativity?[/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f][/color][/size][/font][/b]
[b][font=Trebuchet MS][size=2][color=#556b2f]I apoligize in advance for any lack of clarity. This is rather abstract, I think.[/color][/size][/font][/b]

[James]

[color=#707875]If you cease to exist then presumably, this entire discussion becomes redundant. I mean, it becomes redundant if we assume that there is no afterlife (and since I haven't yet died or had a ghost come and tell me what death is like, I don't have the answer to that question).

I think that your second post kind of gets to the heart of the matter; does something exist if nobody perceives it. My answer would be a definite "yes".

When I was born, I didn't perceive my birth; I didn't perceive my surroundings or have any awareness of them. But had those surroundings not existed, I wouldn't be here today.

In terms of life and death, my own feeling is that none of these questions matter when you die (ie: when you no longer exist and have no perception/cognition/thought).

In terms of time...well, if we look back at the history of the earth (via carbon dating, for example), we can establish events in time that are beyond our own lives and existence. While it's true that we have a perception to allow us to view those events (ie: they are relative to our current existence), the fact remains that these events took place, regardless of whether or not we perceive them.

I think that it would actually be very arrogant to say that something doesn't exist simply because we don't perceive it (ie: time or something). Mankind constantly puts himself at the center of the universe, when I think in reality, we are probably on the fringes somewhere. ~_^[/color]

[Brasil]

So, the question is, if we don't see something, does it exist?

I think the "Tree Falling and its Sound" question is actually pretty easy to explain. Even though nobody is there to apply meaning to the sound the tree makes, it will always cause a vibration in the air, because air molecules and matter are being displaced by the fall and subsequent crushing of brush, bushes, and any little furry animals that happen to be standing there at the time.

I also think we need to clearly define what we mean by "sound," as well. The tree makes a sound. That much should be clear from physics itself. We may interpret the sound as different things (i.e., thundercrack, water slapping, etc, etc.), but there is always a sound.

So, the Tree definitely makes a sound even when no humans are around to hear it.

In terms of metaphysics, if we don't see something, does it exist...seems like the major focus that would come out of this one is does God exist, even if we can't see him.

I seem to be saying this a lot lately, and I have no idea why, but when you look at things objectively, you see that there really is no proof that God exists. Sure, there's the whole "Mother Mary in Window Soap" story, but that's not real, actual proof of the existence of a higher power, because people think they see Mother Mary in there, when in all actuality, it's simply just soap residue. It's not proof of God, because people are seeing what they want to see in that soap residue.

This goes for pretty much every single instance of someone saying, "It was Divine Intervention." If it were clearly God coming down and influencing the world in every single minute detail, I think it'd be a lot clearer than a vague similarity to the outline of Mother Mary in a window.

If God did exist, and really was set on proving His existence to us, don't you think He'd just simply open up the sky and start talking to everyone in the world, in one universal language that everyone can understand?

To my recollection, that hasn't happened apart from in the Bible itself, and the Bible isn't any [i]real[/i] authority on the matter, because it's still written by humans, who are very susceptible to seeing/hearing/acknowledging things they want to see/hear/acknowledge, so the Bible isn't exactly reliable to prove the existence of God, because the authors were unreliable narrators, lol. I mean, they actually say, "Okay, you've got to listen to me here, because I'm going to tell you the truth."

[Dagger]

[quote name='Siren']So, the Tree definitely makes a sound even when no humans are around to hear it.[/quote]

Additionally, there are plenty of noises which human beings are physically incapable of hearing, regardless of how near they are to the sound's source. Dogs, for example, can perceive high-pitched notes that people simply can't... it would be silly to assert that this means such sounds may as well not exist.

~Dagger~

[Mitch]

[quote]One can only experience things through one's own perception.[/quote]

While this is true, I think it's fair to say that we as humans eventually develop the cognitive abilities to try to think and see like someone else - to be able to understand why they're the way they are, and to be able to see how they see the world. Although this seeing is still from our own perception, it's kind of like a guesswork at seeing things from another's perspective.

There are those who can't see from another's perspective in this guesswork sense - we often call them close-minded. On the opposite spectrum, those that can readily perceive other's perceptions via guesswork are open-minded.

There's also an impairment a child might develop called autism. It's basically an inability to understand other's feelings. You know, it's the whole thing when you were a kid, and you hit Johnny, and the teacher asked you, "And how do you think that made Johhny feel?" Kids with autism can't understand how Johnny felt. They're egotistical and introverted because of mental impairment - and it's not their fault.

[quote]To those who have complete faith in the laws of nature, our perception is a direct result of various physical masses located within our bodies.
[/quote]

So basically, these "physical masses" would be the organs? Mainly, the brain? The eyes?

And what is exactly "faith in the laws of nature"? Would you explain what this means in a more in-depth way? Does it involve god (I'm thinking of your faith thread here), or is it simply the truths that science has told us about nature - natural selection, etc?

[quote]Death is final and removes all functionality of the required masses which results in an end to the perception of said dead individual.[/quote]

I'd agree with this. When you die, the functionality of you as a being - and your perception - die, and your organs die as well, which were what gave you your perception.

[quote]Permanent loss of perception is nonexistence.[/quote]

If someone loses their sight, or their brain gets damaged in some way which completely hinders their perception of the world, they would still exist.

[quote]Now, from this individual's perception there is no past, present, or future. Nothing ever happened. The individual, from this nonexistent perspective, never existed at all.[/quote]

I point to my above reply.

To the individual he never existed at all, but to other's perceptions he exists. He's still alive.

[quote]To this I respond, "How does this matter at all to the dead guy who no longer exists?"[/quote]

It doesn't matter. It isn't able to matter to him, because he no longer exists to himself, but to others he's still alive. Or, if he's dead, he's remembered in their memories and perceptions.

[quote]Time is relative, do you agree? If you cease to exist, time ceases to pass for you. Time and life may continue from our perspective, but when that person poofs out of existence, time ends for him. From this hypothetical non-existent perspective, there is no difference between one second and 100 trillion years. By then, everyone is dead, anyway. When that happens, there are no perspectives (that we know of) and if life is only found on our planet (which is rather remarkable to begin with), then the universe will do whatever universes do for about an eternity until life is formed again, and perspectives come to be once again. [/quote]

What exists now had to exist before I could exist, because without the earth existing before me I couldn't've existed. Thus, things exist even if we aren't there to perceive them.

It's just as James said.

Also, adding onto the whole non-existence thing:

Others can carry on our memory, but those who have our memory will one day die. Perhaps they will pass on the memory of us to a second generation, and that generation will pass it on to the next, etc.

But, thinking in the long-term. Human beings will one day be extinct, and once that happens, you really do cease to exist. Therefore, life is rather pointless if what you do during your time will eventually just go to waste anyway.

Sure, in the present, what we do will change things - but way far away in the future, when mankind's done, we won't have mattered. Some of what we've done will still exist, and perhaps we'll leave behind a fossil record, but we'll be like dinosaurs. Our existence will be known, if there is intelligent life out there (which I believe there is), if they were to find us. But our achievments - us as people, how we were and what we were like - will be forgotten.

Or perhaps, say this alien life finds some of our literature and language (that is, if it survives) - and they learn how to speak our language and read it. Then they'd learn something about us. But, at this point, there are 6 billion people upon the earth, and only a small number of them matter. Therfore, they will be remembered, but everyone else will be a forgotten name and person.

But, as vast as the universe is, what are the chances they'd find us?

The alien race which would find us would inevitably go extinct as well. Perhaps they would continue hopping from planet to planet, but eventually they'd exhaust all resources on every planet that's habitable.

Perhaps the universe is infinite, but to me, there's always new things appearing in it. As the old are destroyed, the new are made. And also, perhaps there's parts of the universe that are just blank - that have nothing in them, and eventually will have something in them.

The point is, there isn't an infinite number of habitable planets, where you can get the resources required to live. Eventually all life dies and our memory will fade, and this other lifeform's memory will fade.

Eventually, the sun will become a red giant and swallow the earth and everything on it. With it, all we've created here will be gone. But perhaps we will have more highly developed space travel by then, and will have gone and found another habitable planet?

But, if we don't leave the earth before it's inevitably destroyed - it could even be from a meteor, perhaps - everything we are and did would truly be almost gone, except for our satellites and whatever else we have.

Also, one day, will the universe end, as a whole? Will another be made? Or does it exist forever?

[DeathBug]

Never mix the abstract and the literal.

The "True Falls" scenario is similar to the "Half empty/full" question. The idea is that, if you think the tree doesn't make a sound, you pecieve reality as created by perception. If there's no one to hear the tree, then how can you say it makes a sound, right?

I don't subscribe to that notion, however. To tie that into our warped little corpse man, just because he's dead, that doesn't mean that he ceases to exist. Maybe he doesn't, or maybe we can't percieve his existance.
]