Actually it doesn't.
It is impossible to disprove with 100% certainty the existence of an afterlife for the following reasons:
- The existence of an afterlife is not a testable hypothesis, because no one has ever defined what consciousness is besides the basic mechanistic definition that it is electro-chemical data-processing in the brain, and no method to detect whatever it is besides electrochemical impulses in the brain, if it is anything besides this, has been created to detect it's continued existence after the physiological annihilation of the brain.
- Based on the logical deductions we can make based on the data we can infer, the probability of consciousness surviving the physiological cessation of brain functioning is nul. Since consciousness has only ever been demonstrated to exist in people who have brains and since consciousness has never been seen on people born without brains or who are severely brain damaged, then we can conclude that there is no variable responsible for consciousness extrinsic to the brain otherwise brainless people would exhibit consciousness.
- We cannot conceive the logical branching tree that would allow us to understand existence of consciousness without the existence of the brain, because we cannot conceive the variables that could be responsible for consciousness besides the electrochemical mechanism that gives rise to it. We cannot "solve" the problem of whether consciousness exists besides the brain because we cannot solve a problem for which the axioms are unknown, just like a physicist cannot determine the rate of temperature change in an object exposed to heat if he does not know the intensity of the heat being applied to the object and how thermally resistent the object in case is. Problems with axioms that are unknown cannot be solved.
Are you rejecting the possibility of a "magical dimension" based on either having our laws of physics and biology or having no laws at all? Doesn't that either/or seem illogical?
How is either/or illogical? Solving contradictions is the very definition of logic. Let me explain what I meant. We cannot conceive of an universe where beings can walk through walls defying the laws of physics or can survive without food, defying the laws of biology, because it goes against the logic of our universe, the only one we know to exist. Since this is the only universe we know to exist and since things work here in this way, an universe where things works differently is implausible given our logic and reason. So we must deny the existence of such an universe until we can comprehend it by laws that make sense in our reality. My second point is if that those things are possible there because logic doesen't apply there, then it is pointless talking about it because our thought is deductive and we can make no deductions about the properties of a system/universe where logic doesen't apply.
The title of your thread is "I Know for Fact There's No AFterlife. We are just waiting for the fact.
Post one fact proving an afterlife and I will post a fact proving the non-existence of an afterlife. The burden of proof is on you. You are the one claiming that something exists. I am simply denying until evidence is presented or until consciousness is proven to exist besides the electrochemical processing of the brain and a plausible logical mechanism for why this penomena does not require the brain to exist is proven despite all evidence to the contrary. Good luck.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
