Afterlife

To determine the existence of an afterlife with absolute certainty is an impossible task. Nevertheless, it is possible to discuss this concept and how it is expressed in human beings. The aim of the following text is to analyse the concept of the afterlife and raise some key points of importance related to this phenomenon.

To understand the development of the concept of afterlife in humans, it is crucial to address the fact that  human beings are the only creatures to consider the idea of  an afterlife, as they are the only ones capable of conceiving their own death. This is not just due to the fact that human beings are ‘conscious’, but because they have a ‘first person’ perspective that ‘makes possible an inner life, a life of thoughts that one realizes are her own’ (Baker, 2007). This gives human beings the ability to philosophically examine the nature of existence, different from other creatures. Human beings are not capable of existing without a body, and this corporeal form becomes the object of the first person reference. According to the realization of a first person perspective and the body being an object of human reflection, the possibility of the idea of one's own death rises when the existence of biological dead is faced.

At this point, a cultural scientist (epidemiologist) would argue that religious notions are spread through human social groups and are acquired as part of a process of ‘cultural selection’. Religious notions are not only expressed in strictly and declared religious individuals. This is a strong factor that supports the presence of an afterlife in human ideas, especially because it plays a big role in shaping the way this afterlife is conceived.

Intrinsic to human reasoning, there are some phenomena that shape our understanding and considerations of reality. In the case of an afterlife, there are two key phenomena. The first of them is ‘promiscuous teleology’ and the other is the existence of intuitive ontologies. Human reasoning is characterized by a ‘promiscuous teleology’ a capacity that ‘causes us to see meaning and intentionality in everything that happens, we automatically postulate an agent as an explanation of various events; often this is some god-like concept’ (Pyysiäinen & Hauser, 2010). The human being sees its body and its ‘own’ as an object that needs an explanation or an intention. The purposeful values that we attribute to reality are strongly determined by intuitive ontologies: non-deliberate reflections which we have evolved, a ‘set of expectations about the kind of things to be found on the world.’ (Boyer, 2000). 

These two factors describe a human behaviour in which there is a need to answer the question, what is going to happen to me after I die? And by means of its intuitive ontologies, it will try to describe the process in a set of categories.

There are different sets of categories that may fit under the afterlife process, but only one, and probably the most important, will be discussed. It is the notion of the existence of a metaphysical part of human beings. This describes the way that biological death is not the ‘end’ as there is a being that escapes the physical changes.

Helen de Cruz says: ‘We reason about other people’s actions not in terms of their bodily properties but in terms of invisible mental states, such as beliefs, desires, and intentions. As a result, we can easily imagine disembodied minds.’.  This phenomenon is also highlighted by Bering. He analyses a study with an emphasis on determining the attributes that humans give to a dead mouse. Young children were demonstrated to consider the mouse's mind as still active, even though they knew the biological functions –including the brain- were over.

The most remarkable finding was that the concept of an afterlife does not seem to be part of a cultural, social or religious education but it seems to be part of the natural default ‘setting’. This is supported by the fact that the adults and older children were not that likely to point out these attributes. It is therefore possible to state that the idea of the existence of a ‘disembodied’ existence after biological death is possible without a religious paradigm informing part of the process.

According to the previously stated ideas, it is possible to suggest that the intuition of an afterlife breaks social barriers. It is inherent in human beings, and needs to be addressed outside just a religious view. This concept is ‘meta-religious’ and requires an embracing insight.

The afterlife, or its contrary, the end of existence in the biological dead continue to be a plausible ideas for religious and secular individuals. It is too hard for humans to consider any other kind of alternative for our existence, due to our Intuitive ontologies.

Therefore the afterlife makes up part of the existential paradigm. Human beings are incapable of embracing the idea of what is to exist or not after biological death and try to give a value to it in any of its expressions, even if it is the debatable ‘non-existence’. 

Julian Santamaria

Want to write for us?

If you would like to submit an article for consideration, please contact thephilosophytakeaway@gmail.com

Search This Blog