Comments | pscion: A Conundrum

pscion

A Conundrum

Nov 09, 2007 08:50

As some of you may know, I subscribe to a religion of my own devising, based largely on theoretical ideas about higher dimensions but loosely tied into Catholicism as well. Well, I haven't put a lot of research or work into my beliefs, it's more of a series of theories that I've concocted that "sound pretty good to me." I have, however, hit a snag.

( Read more... )

Comments 11

Impossible to know onewordprayer November 9 2007, 19:17:19 UTC

My belief is that death and the afterlife cannot be described beyond a wild guess except by those who are experiencing it. Hence, no living person can understand the afterlife. What we can do, though, is come up with a set of theories that comfort us enough to live our lives.

Too bad I don't have time to discuss further right now...

Re: Impossible to know pscion November 12 2007, 15:19:07 UTC

Well, find time, dangit! :)

Some of the ideas that I've come up with have not only made me comfortable living my life, but actually excited about death. Not that I'm eagerly eyeing any sharp objects, mind you, but I think I'll face death with a wink and a smile, and complete spiritual calm.

silvyrdragon November 9 2007, 21:36:46 UTC

Hmmm, GOOD entry ( ... )

pscion November 12 2007, 15:17:04 UTC

I think you're onto something with the whole reincarnation thing, where when you pop out, you really pop into another you, and just keep going. It removes some of the complexity.

See below for more.

brawi November 9 2007, 22:53:04 UTC

Great post! I especially agree with the theory that the afterlife is bound up with the idea that it is freedom from linear time. To some extent, I think that has to be true ( ... )

pscion November 12 2007, 15:15:39 UTC

First of all: ROFLMAO ( ... )

alexvoz November 14 2007, 00:13:58 UTC

Nice post brah. Finally, I read something on livejournal that is not about painting one's house.

So, simply put, the dilemma you brought up in the original post is the main, conscious, right now you may be punished for the actions of the other yous in Alternate Universe A, B, or C? I think that in the infinitely complex (all encompassing) universe you describe, there would be some kind of separation and some yous will be in a certain hell and some in a certain kind of heaven. And you will experience all of the yous fates. Not all at once, but since time is no longer an issue, you will not run out of it.

No, I don't like that. Just an infinite switching between the punishments / rewards of all the yous. Dude, now that I think about it, I don't have a very well formed concept about this at all. I share your belief that is the bulk of your post, about time, stepping out of it, and I think having that freedom from time and space and body would be a sort of heaven. But the question you pose at the end baffles me ( ... )

pscion November 14 2007, 15:42:18 UTC

Glad I could help ;)

I find myself constantly thinking about things like this, and I hope I can rope more people into some discussion, because these topics astound me.

What I'd like to know, is if there is a religion out there that actually talks about this sort of thing. I just haven't done the research to find out.

mavrax November 19 2007, 02:25:57 UTC

Wow that was a long and probably the most interesting thing I've read in a while. Here's my take on some of your questions:

Yes, if there are multiple versions of you in alternate realities, then there has to be multiple versions of heaven and hell. From this, you can say that if one version of you goes to hell and one version goes to heaven, then there are two different souls. But since you said your soul is what makes you you, then it's impossible for there to be multiple versions of you.

One way to solve this contradiction is instead of saying your soul is what makes you you, I like to believe that all souls are generic, spiritual energies that fuel the bodies that it inhabits. What makes us us is based on the decisions we make and how our friends and family shape our lives. There is no good or bad version of a soul. It is a ball of putty, if you will, that gets molded into good or bad over the lifetime of the body it serves. Think of newborn babies. They're not born good or evil ( ... )

pscion November 19 2007, 21:59:25 UTC

So you are a proponent of the Tabula Rasa, or Blank Slate philosophy, wherein a person is born completely neutral and devoid of certain qualities like morals, and the person that they become is completely dependent upon their environment and upbringing. Nature vs. Nurture, if you will.

Some would argue the exact opposite, that no matter what life you might have been thrust into, you would still be you to a very large extent. Some people use your example of Twins to actually argue for this theory: Sometimes, twins, separated at birth, will grow up with certain uncanny similarities, like a favorite song, or favorite foods, or certain religious or moral stances, in common, despite the fact that they are living in completely different environments. Some might debate that this is merely coincidence, but it's interesting to postulate that perhaps there is something inborn into us, and wonder where it comes from ( ... )

mavrax November 20 2007, 00:41:08 UTC

Hmm, now you have contradicting arguments. Your final bolded statement supports my theory that what makes us us is determined by the paths we choose in life. However, in your second paragraph you suggest that your self is already defined at birth, before any paths are chosen ( ... )