Only a belief in embodied existence after death is philosophically justifiable. Discuss Essay

1- Christian whimsy in resurrection- outline Jesus resurrection later on death- attach to hicks stem of the replica. 3- The only meaningful stylus to parley virtually survival by and by death is to say that nouss can be reunited- Peter Geach 5- Characteristics and memories can be changed and falsified- Bernard William Descartes say My essence consists solely in the detail that I am a view affaire.This, if true, implies that our consciousness is break-dance from our bodies and so we mustiness be able to embody without said bodies. This of course would indeed strain the educational activity as bodiless sprightliness after death would be possible. Indeed, at that place atomic number 18 m any(prenominal) who dispute this wrinkle and one who would agree with the given statement is Bernard William who subscribes that characteristics and memories can be falsified. He would designate that because our memories can be lost and adapted with certain drugs, accidents and illnesses such as Alzheimers the main part of what makes us- us is the merge amongst our callers and our physical form (our bodies).It would thence follow that the only plausible after-death- make upence would be corporal. It is the first point made by Descartes and many early(a)s which this essay will work towards as it will be pressd that bodiless existence is as philosophically plausible, if non more so than embodied. Many would claim that Christianity can be used to argue both sides of this issue. An example of where it may be used to support embodied liveliness after death is in the resurrection stories. In Thessalonians 4, we find a much talked about quote among philosophers ..Since we debate that Jesus died and roseate again..through Jesus, God will bring with him those who contribute died.This verse gives us a set free idea that the early Christians believed in full, embodied resurrection. Although it is un make as to whether or non more or less would buil d also hold with a unembodied after animation earlier judgment day and resurrection, many solemn Christians only accept the embodied resurrection at the end of days. The verse tells us that at first Jesus followers didnt recognise him, as he had changed someway but the main message is of to the full embodied resurrection. However, due to the complexity of the bible, it is rugged to completely understand whether or not at that place is a state between death and resurrection and many may tonicity the controversy is far from philosophically scarceifiable. at that place has of course also been a dour tradition of belief in disembodied time to suffer. The Greek philosophy Plato believed we have crumble souls which leave our bodies at death in order to join an opposite. In the Phaedo, he recorded a response from Socrates to a foreland put forward by Crito In what fashion are we to veil you? Platos answer clearly shows his belief in the after bearing. It is important to u nderstand that Plato believed in the soul because he believed innate association must just be memories from forward existences.Furthermore, Plato was part of the chain of thought that says that everything has an inverse but they are always in a vibration, hot becomes shabby for cold to then become hot and lifetime things die just for new life to emerge. Believing in the cycle of opposites makes it clear wherefore Plato would have believed in some kind of disembodied soul. Returning to the question put to Plato mentioned at the start of this product line, we visualize his response makes his belief in the afterlife clear. He imagines that I am the abruptly body he will entrance in a little bandage but when I drink the acerbate I shall no languisher go along with you, but shall go off and cease for some happy state of the call forthOn the other hand, however, The philosopher Peter Geach was a strong believer that any talk of life after death where the soul and body are separate is wholly meaningless. Geach described the idea of a separate soul and body as a savage superstition and he believed that the aesthesis of Plato and Descartes had given the superstition an undeservedly long lease of life. Geach, along with many other modern philosophers argue that the idea of a separate body and soul has come from misunderstanding of scriptural language. In his book, What do we think with, Geach wrote persuasion is a critical activity of a man, not any part of him, material or immaterial.This shows preferably clearly Geach believed that a human is a single entity which needs to think, rather than a body and a separate mind which just happens to have consciousness. Geach believed that the only average theory of the soul was the Aristotelian idea that the soul is the form of a living(a) body. Many would say that Geachs argument is fairly week as on that point is little recount to punt it up and he seems to be piggy-backing off other philosophers, nam ely Aristotle. Reincarnation, or rebirth (afterlife in a physical form),are a make feature at the heart of Hindu beliefs. Hinduism teaches that every person has an essential self known as an atman. They believe the Atman to be eternal and something which seeks to be united with God.Hindus believe that God manifests himself in the atman if each individual, and through a bite of births, deaths and rebirths, the person comes to understand a relationship of the atman with God. Once this realisation of unity is reached, the atman no longer needs to continue in the cycle and so is released (moksha). For the Hindu, physical bodies are nothing more than a container for the atman, the atman which holds the persons nature. This essence that after going round the cycle a few times, the atman (or soul) is released from the container and moves on to disembodied life after death. Hinduism is the oldest spiritual tradition in the world and there is evidence that it flourished long before recor ded account in India which means that the idea of a separate body and soul could have been the original belief.Descartes is one of the closely renowned philosophers and dualists and his belief on life after death was that what makes us, us is our ability to think our consciousness. His conceivability argument leads us to oppugn whether or not we need our bodies at all. The argument was laid out with 3 steps, it begins with the premise that a intellection thing can imagine existing without a body. The argument goes onto say that anything which can be conceived is possible and from this that if X can exist without Y then X and Y arent uniform. The result of the argument is that a thinking thing is not identical with its body and so, they must be separate.Descartes most famous quote to sum his arguments up is that I think, therefore, I am For Descartes, world able to think about not having a body, but not beingness able to conceive of not thinking at all means our minds must be separate from our bodies and therefore, if we are to believe in an afterlife then there is no logical reason why our minds would die with our bodies. Many believe this Is a fantastic argument for disembodied life after death as it gets the antonym thinking about not thinking and so leaves them at a blank. I feel that the strongest argument covered in this essay is that put forward at the start and the end.For many, the fact that we cannot think of our minds not existing is a far stronger argument than that of say, Peter Geach as looking back over prehistoric scriptures is just handle copying off of someone in a test who has made their answers up, we would just be looking at something which may or may not be true. While I was slightly swayed by the first argument in party favour of the given statement, due to its use of past events and a tradition of belief, however in then end, I have kept up(p) my view that it is just as philosophically feasible to think of a disembodied life after death then an embodied one., possibly more so.