diver dan,

I didn’t realise we were all supposed to answer that question, sorry. I figured the, “Goodness knows!”, at the end of the article suggested that the author didn’t hold much hope for an answer, anyway.

And why me specifically, by the way? I don’t think anyone else has answered it, apart from you. But since you want my answer so badly, I’ll give it my best:

Does living by such faith have any ultimate meaning or value beyond this finite existence?

Firstly, it’s not actually clear to me what Scott MacInnes is referring to here when he says, “such faith”. Is he talking about religious faith? Is he referring to this “something great and indomitable about the human spirit” which he mentions just prior to asking his question? Or is he referring to the ponderings he quoted earlier in the piece?

Secondly, it’s not clear to me what he means by, “ultimate meaning or value beyond this finite existence”. For something to have an “ultimate meaning or value beyond this finite existence”, one would assume that some transcendent purpose or measurement of value (e.g. the divine) is required. But not all of us believe there is anything of the sort.

Sorry, diver dan, I can’t give you much of an answer. The author will have to clarify what exactly he’s talking about. As it stands, however, I suspect my answer would be a simple ‘no’.

Having opened death's door and had a butchers, I'm here to say, as a returned witness, there is a life after this one and where the only thing you can take with you are your memories and the love of family and friends!

That being so, it's a good idea to amass a huge store of both! But particularly the positive ones! And if you must believe in something, then believe in the mighty irrefutable truth!

Truly, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the gates of heaven. Quote unquote.
Alan B.

AJPhillips

Your such a slippery animal aren't you AJP. :-|

You question my interest in your answer to the question asked at the end of the article. My interest is based on the observation that you took the time and the interest to comment on this, the existential abiding question of life after death. Surely, for one short moment in worldly time, you could take this particular question at face value, and issue a "useful" answer.

The question is a simple and clear one: Both Alan B and myself both recognise it's simplicity.

Let us call "death" the part of the question describing the transition between this life and the next, (according to your personal belief system).

Q. what is your view on the next life after death, based on the belief system you hold most popular now?

diver dan,

The question was unclear and I explained in great detail why. Despite this, I still gave what I suspected my answer would be. There is nothing “slippery” about that.

<<You question my interest in your answer to the question asked at the end of the article.>>

Yes, because it made no sense, and it still makes no sense, even after your explanation.

<<My interest is based on the observation that you took the time and the interest to comment on this, the existential abiding question of life after death.>>

Only I didn't. What I did was suggest to Scott MacInnes that if he's going to use his own definitions for labels, then he should state that from the outset.

<<Surely ... you could take this particular question at face value, and issue a "useful" answer.>>

How can I when it is so unclear what the author is asking? I raised legitimate questions regarding the clarity of the question. There was no face value to take it at, and I explained why.

<<Let us call "death" the part of the question describing the transition between this life and the next, ...>>

There was no part of the question describing “death”. The author spoke of a kind of faith.

<<So, by “such faith”, the author meant “death”>>

Nope. Still don't see it. Faith has nothing to do with death, and nor do I see how the author sufficiently defined it as such.

<<Q. what is your view on the next life after death, based on the belief system you hold most popular now?>>

(That I "hold most popular"?)

That bears absolutely no relation whatsoever to what the author asked, but I'll answer it anyway:

My view is that there is no evidence for life after death.

Now, why would I evade such a simple and obvious answer?

Sorry, diver dan, but you don't get to call me “slippery” when I raise genuine concerns regarding the clarity of a question, only to pretend that it was crystal clear, and then present to me a completely different question.

Oh, I think I see it now, diver dan!

If I squint, cock my head to the side, and hold my tongue a certain way,

“Does living by such faith have any ultimate meaning or value beyond this finite existence?”

could be interpreted to be,

“Does a belief in the afterlife have any grounding in reality?”

If that's what the author meant, then his question was so poorly worded that I cannot bring myself to take any responsibility for the confusion - not even out of politeness or as a gesture of goodwill - and can only assume that an otherwise-articulate author was attempting to sound insightful and give his question an air of profundity that simply isn't there.

No, again, I don't believe there is life after death. There is simply no evidence for it. Near-death and out-of-body experiences have perfectly rational, neurological explanations.

AJPhillips.

If slippery offends, then I'll rephrase it; I have long ago observed you fanatical attachment to precise English . :-))

But following on from your explanation of the vagaries of the authors question, and your final relenting to answering an interpretation of the question (in question), suggested by myself, I want to challenge your answer now!

A.
**No, again, I don't believe there is life after death. There is simply no evidence for it. Near-death and out-of-body experiences have perfectly rational, neurological explanations.**

Q.
Since no living person once dead, (eg blown to pieces on the battle field type dead), has returned to tell the tale, would you consider that it may be possible for an eternal existence after physical death, for the part of us that is the consciousness ?

Be careful how you answer this question.