Response to Life After Death by William L. Rowe
Life After Death by William L. Rowe was a synopsis of the afterlife and immortality according to various schools of thought. I viewed this not only as an assertion of his personal belief but also an exposition of different thoughts throughout human and religious history to enlighten readers so that they might make their own assessments. He organizes this by breaking the topic down into different areas of discussion as well as the difficult questions posed by each idea. In his introduction, after describing ancient views of immortality and life after death, he introduces two ideas, the Homeric and Platonic views, and their attributes. At the end of his introduction, Dr. Rowe poses two questions
…show more content…
Homer believed that the human soul lived on in Hades, the afterlife, but that it was sort of a shell of a person and not actually “living”. Plato, on the other hand, believed that the human soul indeed lived on in the afterlife, as a conscious and coherent thing. He believed the body as a mortal vessel of sorts and that it was not the person because it dies. To him, the soul was the person. I was very intrigued by this because I saw it as the first instance of this type of thinking which would later be adopted by Christian belief. Rowe went on to describe various other conceptions of immortality (as there are many), including the Hindu, Jainist, and Buddhist views. Throughout all different types of religions, he narrowed the three different views of the afterlife to three; the disembodied existence of the soul after death of the body, the reincarnation of a soul after bodily death, and the reuniting of the soul with its resurrected body. He then presented two questions regarding life after death and immortality. Is it meaningful? Is it …show more content…
Dr. Rowe wrote that the majority of scientific argument is based on a series of phenomena of mental mediumship. He gave a brief recount of the research done by the Society for Physical Research (SPF) on people claiming to be mediums (people who can communicate with the dead). For their research, they decided to use the case of Edgar Vandy and his mysterious death in 1933. They made it a point not to tell the mediums their intentions and keep most of the details a secret to verify the validity of the mediums. During their encounters, the SPF noticed that the mediums were able to describe key details of the day and location where Vandy died. This was astonishing to the researchers because for as many details as they told, they were much too specific for it to be considered a coincidence. This fascinated me because as I believe in souls, why shouldn’t I be able to believe in communication with them? Perhaps it is a form of communication, verbal or otherwise, with which most are not familiar.
The theistic argument for life after death is the existence of God. It states that if a theistic God exists, then He would certainly want his creation to live on forever. Rowe said an argument for this would be the contradiction of immortality by God allowing people to perish. But I do not believe God allows us to perish, simply our bodies. Our souls, our true selves, live
A Comparison of Two Accounts of Life After Death Materialism is the view that the body and mind are inseparable, and for there to be life after death then the body must be resurrected. This is much like the Christian view of life after death. John Hick was a materialist and he argued that, in certain circumstances, it would be possible that the dead could exist as themselves after death, if an exact replica were to appear. Hick uses thought experiments to show the person who dies in this world is the same person who is resurrected in the next. He uses examples of using a character named John Smith.
What if I told you that you’d be able to relive the fondest moments of your life as many times as you want in a dream world reality, would you believe me? This may seem far-fetched for some people, but if you take the time to read "The Soul Survives and Functions After Death” by H.H. Price, you’ll start to question your own beliefs about your soul and where it goes once death strikes. Price questions the nature of souls once the inevitable happens and states that the soul goes to another world, a Next World. The idea of the dream world I previously mentioned will make you question your very own beliefs about where your soul will go once life’s inevitable happens to you. So, is Price’s afterlife theory of the Next World really something to
The fundamental ideals behind the afterlife have vastly changed between Grecco-Roman Tartarus and Christian afterlife; specifically pertaining to the idea of hell and punishment. While there are also essential commonalities between the two afterlife views, the adaptation that has occurred over time contrasts the two views harmoniously. Fear is the underlying theme that eventually connects yet juxtaposes the ideas of life after death.
The afterlife can be described as the belief that an essential part of an individual's identity or the stream of any consciousness continues to show after the death of the physical body. In African culture and religion, life does not end with death, but it continues in another realm. The concepts of "life" and "death" are not mutually unique concepts, and there are no clear dividing lines between the two. Death does not end the life or change the personality of that individual, but it does cause a change in its conditions. This is expressed in the concept of the term ancestors. Ancestors are people who have died but who continue to live in the community and communicate with their families in reference to many African cultures. Death is usually
One of the greatest and oldest human mysteries on Earth is death, and the fate that lies beyond it. The curious minds of human beings constantly wonder about the events that occur after death. No person truly knows what happens after a person ceases to live in the world, except for the people themselves who have passed away. As a result, over the course of history, people of various backgrounds, ethnicities, and religions have speculated and believed in numerous different possibilities for the destiny that awaits them beyond the world of the living. The great ambiguity of the afterlife is extremely ancient that many different beliefs about it have been dated back to several centuries ago. These beliefs go as far back to the beliefs of Ancient Egyptians, which outline the journey that the dead travels to the land of Osiris; and the belief of Ancient Greeks that all souls eventually find themselves in Hades’ realm, the Underworld. Throughout history, views and beliefs from emerging religions continue to develop as the human conscience persists in finding answers to this ancient, unresolved mystery. Prime examples of the various and separate beliefs regarding death and the afterlife are found in the diverse faiths of Roman Catholicism, Islam, and Buddhism.
Wagner, Stephen. “Descriptions of the Afterlife from Those Who Returned.” ThoughtCo. Accessed 6 Sept. 2017.
First and foremost, Socrates believed that when a person dies the body is what seems to die while the soul continues to live and exist. Although many suggested that when the body dies the soul dies with it, Socrates provides numerous arguments to prove his point otherwise. The arguments that were presented consisted of The argument of Reincarnation, The argument of Opposites, The argument of Recollection, and The argument of Forms. The argument that was most convincing for me was that of the Argument of Forms because Socrates makes his most compelling arguments here and it’s the most effective. On the other hand, the argument that I saw to be the least convincing was that of the Argument of Recollection and Reincarnation because both arguments fail to fully support the idea of the soul being immortal.
One thing that we often hear is that “death is just a part of life.” So often in our day and age do we hear people utter these words. However, death is far more significant and impactful than some would allege. True death is not merely a time when we cease to exist; it is an entombment, a mindset in which we are dead to this world. Throughout our lives, it is true that we can all be dead in one way or another, but it does not have to be that way. When we have our eyes opened to what death actually is, it is far easier to grasp what the true meaning of life is, and to embrace it. Often, we will come across individuals who are enveloped in death and others who are immersed in true life. The shadow of death and entombment lies upon some, encompassing
In BJ Millers TedTalk, “What Really Matters at the End of Life?” BJ Miller discusses on how we think on death and honor life. He speaks to the audience about how for the most people the scariest thing about death is not death itself, it is actually dying or suffering. The targeted audience is everyone in the world, because eventually everyone is going to die and everyone thinks about death. BJ 3 has big points in the article saying, Distinction between necessary and unnecessary suffering. Also by having a little ritual that helps with this shift in perspective. Another point is to lift and set our sights on well-being. We need to lift our sights, to set our sights on well-being, so that life and health and healthcare can become about making life more wonderful, rather than just less horrible.
Throughout history, the concept of death and an afterlife has always been present regardless of the culture or religion. It has also been very influential in literature and other writings. In the epic poem The Odyssey, by Homer, there is a portrayal of the Greek beliefs of the afterlife. The Bible addresses this theme as well in the gospel of Matthew. Between these two works, there are noticeable differences about the beliefs of death due to the different cultures in which they were written. Despite the many variations, there are some slight similarities regarding the afterlife. Although the two writings were composed in different cultures and time periods, the notions of an afterlife in each piece can be easily related.
The concept of human mortality and how it is dealt with is dependent upon one’s society or culture. For it is the society that has great impact on the individual’s beliefs. Hence, it is also possible for other cultures to influence the people of a different culture on such comprehensions. The primary and traditional way men and women have made dying a less depressing and disturbing idea is though religion. Various religions offer the comforting conception of death as a begining for another life or perhaps a continuation for the former.
... In conclusion, the debate of life after death was to bring forth whether or not it is plausible to have life after the occurrence of death. Russell argued against life after death, while Hick argued in defense of it. Russell’s argument for life after death overall was emphasizing that it is not possible for one to continue to exist after death because death is simply the end. Hick’s argument in defense of life after death was discussed through his John Smith thought experiment and his insight into parapsychology.
In Plato’s dialogue, the Phaedo, Socrates gives an account of the immortality of the soul. Socrates does this through a series of arguments. He argues that the soul will continue to exist, and that it will go on to a better place. The argument begins on the day of his execution with the question of whether it is good or bad to die. In other words, he is arguing that the soul is immortal and indestructible. This argument is contrary to Cebes and Simmias who argue that even the soul is long lasting, it is not immortal and it is destroyed when the body dies. This paper focuses on Socrates 's first argument for immortality of the human soul, his counter arguments to Cebes and Simmias ' arguments, and an explanation as to why Socrates first argument for the immorality of the soul does not succeed in establishing that the soul is immortal.
Plato believed that the body and the soul were two separate entities, the body being mortal and the soul being immortal. In Plato’s phaedo, this is further explained by Socrates. He claims that by living a philosophical life, we are able to eventually free the soul from the body and its needs. If we have not yield to our bodily needs, we should not fear death, since it can than permanently detach the soul from the body. The most convincing argument for the immortality of the body is the theory of recollection, which shows that we are already born with knowledge of forms and that learning is thus recalling these ideas. If we are already born with knowledge this implies that are soul is immortal, since it would otherwise be a blank page.
What is going to happen to us when we will die? Some people never considered what it could happen to them after life. For many people, death is a redoubtable event because they do not know what to expect after their death. However, other persons, such as religious people are conscious of what to expect after their death because of their beliefs. Each religion has different ideas and different ways of looking life. Death, therefore, is viewed by different religions in many ways. Although, different religions have a distinct conception of death, they all have something in common: they all give hope to people. Among all different religions in the world, four of the most common ones - Catholic, Jewish, Islamic, and Hindu- view death in different ways.