This is a blog authored by students in a course on the philosophy of death at Otterbein University in Westerville, OH. Students will be posting about the issues and readings they are thinking about during their semester. Among the questions they will be addressing are these: Do we have reason to think we survive our deaths? Is immortality something to be wished for or feared? What is the proper attitude to have toward the deaths of others? Is grief a healthy emotion, or something best avoided? How should we think of our own deaths? Should we be afraid? Content? What are the appropriate ways to treat the bodies of people who have died? Other questions may arise along the way, so if you have found your way here from the internet somewhere, stay a while and offer a comment on the posts. Here are some of the things we will be reading: Todd May, Death John Perry, A Dialogue on Personal Identity and Immortality George Saunders, Lincoln in the Bardo Caitlin Doughty, From Here to Etern...
I think that the reason Gretchen does not believe in an after life is because she is a philosopher and believes in something once it is proven true and that is why they are having the debate. I agree with the claim that since our bodies can express certain psychological characteristics that our bodies and souls are connected but Gretchen's argument against what Sam says in the dialogue is normally that souls are immaterial and cannot be certain they exist which is true and makes this whole dialogue pretty pointless to me because Sam is not going to be able to prove souls exist to Gretchen's satisfaction because they are immaterial and cannot be seen.
ReplyDelete"I can understand the uncertainty Gretchen feels about what happens with our souls after death, but would not expect most to feel the same way she does."
ReplyDeleteThis raises a question that is somewhat fundamental to how each individual philosophizes about people: Cartesian vs phenomenological analysis. That is, the perception of the world as the sum of many objects acting upon one another versus the study of consciousness and the study of the world through what we can learn from conscious experience and of the phenomena thereof. That is, as it relates to the original poster's question, does it matter if people agree with Weirob? In other words, does intersubjective agreement constitute substantial evidence to believe something? If not, for what *does* it count?