/sci/ - Science & Math

...

Death is the lack of life.

Remember those times before you existed? No? Because you didn't exist. Death is alot like that, except it's in reverse. When in death you cannot recollect life because you do not exist.

>>1181695
You been there eh?

>>1181706
There's no "there".

>>1181695
Do you remember when you were 6 weeks old?

>>1181731
I'm not that anon, but I have documented proof, includng photographs, of that time.

>>1181706

At our current state of knowledge there is no reason to believe anything else. Through neuroscience we have learned that our conscious being, our awareness of existence is rooted in our mind, as are all other higher functions. When we die, our brain loses function and we cease to exist for all intents and purposes.

Qualified philosopher here

"herp derp but you don't KNOW" is about as sane an argument as giving me $100 because I _might_ become a millionaire in the future and give you a lot of money back!

>>1181746

Exactly this, burden of evidence cannot be used as a backwards argument. We can only function and operate on the assumptions granted to us by what we DO know, all else is speculation that holds no place in scientific thought.

>>1181738
But you cannot yourself.. recollect it? therefore using your logic.. you must have been dead?

>>1181746
right back at chya though
herp derp I know because I dont know is as sane an argument as the world is flat.

IS ｐpoｏＰ sAuＳａgE Ｔhｅ bｅＳT ｆOOｄ u cａn ＥＡts ｏＫｕBEＫＵYｕｃｌzｑhPｓbｐD

death is pre birth/conception, it is nothing, your the collection of atoms and molecules, get over it you won't exist and your brain can't comprehend it, so don't think about it just accept that this is the most logical thing that will happen. its like being asleep and not dreaming, iz smahrt

>>1183130
>implying everything about our universe is know. yeah, no. There is much much more to be discovered, realised and understood.

>>1183594

>wut is death....idont believe in an aferlife..im asking itelligence
>im asking itelligence
>wut
>idont
>itelligence

We're done here

>>1183627
I lol'd but it is a very interesting question