There is life after death

In this paper, I argue that there is life after death, by defending what Schick and Vaughn call the “Argument from Mediumistic Communication.” After analyzing this argument and showing it in premise-conclusion form, I then will give my three strongest objections. These objections argue that there is not life after death. After giving the objections I will give a reply to show that the objections are false, and there is in fact life after death. Whether one believes it or not, it is evident that there is life after death.

Before I get to the argument I am going to clarify the terms mediumistic communication and life after death. Mediumistic communication uses a medium, which is a person who is supposedly able to create a spiritualistic connection with the dead. Once the medium connects with the dead being, he or she then communicates what this dead being might be feeling or wanting to say. Mediumistic communication is one kind of evidence for life after death. There are many views of life after death that differentiate between religions. One example is Hinduism; which consists of a cycle of death and rebirth called samsara and one can escape samsara by attaining moral perfection; the escape is called moksha. Those who achieve moksha spend eternity with God. The main idea of life after death I will focus on is when a being dies the soul will go to either heaven or hell.(Tepley, Slides)

Mediumistic Communication is one possible argument for the existence of life after death.

(1) Some people seem to be able to communicate with the dead.

(2)The best explanation of (1) is that there is life after death.

(C) Therefore, there is life after death. (1,2)

This argument is not valid, however,...

... middle of paper ...

...s that Theresa Caputo the medium on TLC has where she asks one specific question and it is correct. Cold readings do not seem to prove mediumistic communication false because the odds are very slim that the medium just happens to choose the right assumption/question within each session they have.

These three objections, in my opinion seem to be false and do not prove that life after death is false. Since these three objections I have presented fail, I have come to conclusion that mediumistic communication is in fact true and there is life after death. Even though this argument of mediumistic communication may not be valid, premise (1) is true, and premise (2) can be argued. I conclude that mediumistic communication is true and the objections stated do not give strong enough evidence to show that there is not life after death; therefore, there is life after death.