Life after death

Rebuttal: 1. I don't conclude that the same thing would happen to a non physical-being, on the contrary, I include the examples of how consciousness is affected when a specific gland or lobe in the brain is damaged to show precisely how consciousness cannot exist in the absence of the brain. " how can a dead being perceive himself in the so called afterlife, when there a no neurological structures to perceive/interact with the elements of the world? Reply: I disagree. You reason from the physical to the non-physical but only concentrate on the physical to conclude consciousness cannot exist as a non-physical entity based on observations of a physical body. When did you observe a non-physical entity to say what it can or cannot do? That is what I meant with: "situations that might impact ghosts in a negative way". According to your argument a ghost cannot see etc. because the physical organ is missing. On the other hand, I have mentioned that energy cannot be destroyed but only change form. It is likely that consciousness therefore is not destroyed at death but continue without the physical organs present. You observe the processes involved while the body is alive by assigning certain organs as the origin of the conscious and then conclude if the original organ is not there then the said consciousness can also not be there. The NDE cases were mentioned to show that people who"s "organs of origin" (if you will) were shutdown could still experience awareness. They were also able to return to life to testify that. By changing the attention to a deceased corpse do not change this fact. You argue for consciousness based on the human anatomy. The fact is that all kinds of different animals are also able to experience awareness but their brains are different than humans. This should be enough reason to conclude that consciousness can utilize different mechanisms to express itself and is not bound to absolute specifics. That also counts for how light etc. is perceived and processed. Even though the physical characteristics are different they are all able to experience consciousness. A "ghost" has different properties and since consciousness is not restricted to a specific physical organ it is probable that a "ghost" do not need the same physical organs it had before death to experience consciousness. 2. Regarding the man with the 7-second memory. Reply: The point is as you well note is that he is still able to experience awareness. His consciousness did not cease to exist in the absence of his memory. 3. If you take light, sound, touch, space, time from reality, what is there to be aware of? If memory is gone, together with identity, language and emotion, how can you say that there is an afterlife? Reply: Again, you assign specific organs to a certain function as if that was the only way to do it. Your example is human based so it only accounts for a human. Consciousness is not confined to humans only. That is why I pointed out the differences between humans and animals before. Processing light can be done in different ways. Even a dead camera can process light to form a visible image. When the physical is gone then the way in which processes functions also changes. What was required before death is not necessarily required after death. 4. You then bring up the Near death experiences but if you compare a real dead person with someone who was clinically dead, the differences are immense. Reply: A rotten corpse cannot testify as someone who came back from the dead. First off, a rotten corpse does not nullify the experience because even a rotten corpse went through the same process to die. The only difference is one was able to come back and the other not. The NDE experience is still valid. Secondly, NDE cases where the body stopped functioning and is "dead" but then the person came back IS PROOF THAT DEATH IS NOT THE END. You argue that consciousness is seated in the brain and when the brain rotted consciousness ceased. This is an assumption on your part and the reason we have this debate. No scientific experiments have ever proved that consciousness was confined to only the brain and cannot continue after death. 5. Because in all near death experiences, at least a group of glands and lobes are left undamaged in the brain, perception still occurs. This is rather obvious and your point becomes invalid. Reply: In all? Have you examined ALL to make such a statement? It is not so "obvious" after all unless you have examined ALL the cases. You speculate to say the least. Some of the cases I know about registered no electrical pulses as was the case in the article I refer to. At a later stage, miraculously, electrical impulses were detected but not initially and it is obvious his consciousness survived it. Give me "ALL" the evidence you claim and I will concede my point is invalid. If you cannot then I suggest you refrain from making these type of comments. But moving on, let"s look at brain dead cases that are similar to your rotten brain case. There are cases of brain dead people who were able to recover. Brain dead represents the same scenario in that the organ responsible for the actions are "absent". Although the brain was "absent", consciousness was regained and memories were restored when they were revived. Yes I know the corpse cannot be revived but in principle the comparison is based on organ functionality (or absence there of) and according to you the above is not possible if the organs functionality is impaired. 'Miracle recovery' of teen declared brain dead by four doctors. http://www.telegraph.co.uk... 6. Tell me, how can a ghost see without optic nerves? How can he touch something solid without nerves to take that information to the brain? Reply: In the same way a camera is able to "see", a robot is able to see (and act on what it sees) and different animals are able to see using different processes other than what humans use. In this age we have proven that a specific human organ is not the only way to produce a desired action. Many mechanical parts have been developed to overcome human disabilities. Although the matter is different the human consciousness can use mechanical devices to produce the same results. In the same way it is therefore possible for consciousness to retain the same functionality after death without the "flesh" using different "matter". You ask me this question but state in your opening: "I don't conclude that the same thing would happen to a non physical-being". You are still forcing physical requirements on a non-physical entity. 7. Einstein showed that matter is contained energy. Reply: It depends on your interpretation of what he said. Energy can leave one entity and move to another but will still be contained in the grand scale of thing, namely the universe. As a side note: Einstein"s was not infallible. (Einstein) "He called it the "cosmological constant," and it helped the equations account for the unchanging nature of the universe. But not long after Einstein published his equations, physicists discovered that the universe wasn't constant, but actually expanding all around us at a blistering speed. Oops. http://www.businessinsider.com... "In physics, the law of conservation of energy states that the total energy of an isolated system remains constant"it is said to be conserved over time. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed; rather, it transforms from one form to another". https://en.wikipedia.org...