J R Molloy wrote:
> From: Replicant00@aol.com <Replicant00@aol.com>
> >Just because we can fantasize about reincarnation does not make it plausible.
> >We can say "someday we may find out the moon is made of cheese", but it won;t
> >make the moon any more cheesy than it really is.
> >I see absolutely no reason to believe in an afterlife. None. Zero. Worse, if
> >it was true, it is of no use if we can't remember it, so what's the point of
> >this fantasy anyway?
>
> If we _can_ remember it, does it then acquire a point? What point?
Of what use is your belief in your current temporal life; how do you know, as opposed to imagine, that there exists a distinct substance having the attributes denoted by "Replicant"? Introspect: don't you find that every referent of the pronoun "I" is a memory, and that you cannot perceive any object called "Replicant" except a complex of images and associations referred to the past of this non-existent object by means of recollection?
There is no difference whatever psychodynamically between recalling the past of your postulated current existence and recalling a postulated personal existence that existed in the past. Who you once were, now are, and will be may all be involuntary fantasies which do not exist in "your" consciousness but simply in the stream of "a" consciousness.
And, if the above it untrue, what empirical evidence can you cite to falsify it?