Quote from: varakann on March 20, 2013, 01:06 pmI think the "brain is only electrical impulses, love is only serotonine, taking care of your relatives is just oxytocine etc" interpretations are incomplete, because it only answers how it's done not even what is done and most importantly why it is done? Consider an analogy where somebody opens a piano for the first time, at first everything would be big mess. Soon he would see little hammers responding to the black and white keys, he would see piano strings vibrating and a wooden box amplifying the sound. Everything now seems clear to him, he even succeeds to produce the sound by simply raising and releasing these tiny hammers, bypassing the keys, thus rendering he's theory, that piano is just little hammers inside a box a true one.But what conclusions can be made about the music or the function of an instrument in a society just knowing whats inside a piano? Can we say about Beethooven's music that its just a little hammers? Does these tiny little hammers move by themselves? Is there any other instruments that doesn't have hammers but can also make sound? Can MUSIC be played on any instrument, or is the definition of music that it is played on piano? What will happen to a piano when it has broken down beyond repair and can not be used anymore? Is it sad? Why should it be? How can it be? Does music cease to exist because there is no piano anymore? It's the exact same with life, if we grow older and older there are less and less melodies suitable for this old instrument and at one point there is none that can be played all. At that point life leaves the body, music leaves the piano, every beautiful moment created every note ever played will be there, nothing is lost, nobody has died, life just needs new instruments every now and then. Peace!So in essence, your position is that the attributes we assign to objects based on our internal comprehension of the objects, is more real than the physical matter that composes them. Yes, if that is your belief, then life after death appears to be a possibility.I believe the opposite -- that the only thing of importance is physical matter. It comes down to this -- I do not believe that anything unreal exists. It's all matter. We may not have detected it all yet or understand it all yet, but it's all physical matter (or the equivalent energy), and things that would break laws we've never seen broken before seem extremely unlikely to me.Life after death breaks thermodynamics and conservation of energy, unless the soul has some measurable amount of mass to it that leaves the body after death -- seems extremely unlikely. But again, by your beliefs, you're perfectly justified in your opinion.All I'm really saying is that to me, your position looks naive and uneducated. To you, my position looks pretentious and closed-minded. It's all just a matter of perspective, really.