Why Can Organism Or Body Not Be Identical With A Living Being?

Moreover, how to explain the fact that during the clinical death many people feel like the soul is leaving the body, and they may have a look at themselves from the another side, or see the dead relatives, or see the wonderful and pleasant light. Even though this process cannot be clearly explained by medicine, with Graves’ explanation of the soul whereabouts these visions are impossible.

McMahan 's The Metaphysics of Brain Death presents a case for the distinction between the body as the organism and the mind as the person. In defining this “mind-body dualism” (sec. 0, abstract), McMahan 's distinction brings forth a greater implication in the criterion for the death of a person, exploring the “dominant conception of brain death” which reasons that the loss of capacity for consciousness, caused by irreversible damage to the whole brain or brain stem, is sufficient for such a declaration as a persons ceasing to live (sec. 1, pars. 1-3). McMahan does not oppose the argument of brain death on the grounds of capacity for consciousness, but rather uses this to present that “the death of the entire brain is not equivalent to

“In the short stories about life after death, the souls often floats above the good-bye moment, hovering over police cars at highway accidents, or clinging like a spider to hospital-room ceiling. These are people who receive a second chance, who somehow, for some reason, resume their place in the world”(20).

In his article “Indicators of Human hood”, Fletcher distinguishes the traits that comprises a living human. He proposes that what makes the essence of a man is not only his sense of time, futurity and past, but also his ability to relate to others, communicate and have the quality to change and balance rationality and emotion. Fletcher argues that it’s these qualities that contributes to the wholeness or “humanness” of a person. In contrary, the Webster Mediterranean dictionary argues that life is the quality that separates a functional and vital organism from a dead body. Based on this definition, life can be an organismic state that is capable for life- surviving functions, such as the capacity for growth and metabolism. That said, these two definitions of life are important when considering whether a dead-brain person is a functional human living or a dead body.

Mary Roach’s 2003 novel “Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers” dives into the mysterious world of a cadaver's life after death. Using a strong persuasive voice, Roach informs us about the options we have for our bodies after we die along with how to come to terms with death while we're still living.

M.J. Stephey gives the thoughtful opinion about the experiment after the death. M.J. Stephey explores some scientific topics about death such as “near-death” experiment, perception, and technology. The point of this article is to discover things that might happen to human after they are dead. There is a project used to try and verify people’s claim of “near-death” experiment. After a person dies, his or her brain activity cease. They are brought back to life from that period, which may be a few minutes or over an hour. On the other hand, the technology changes how people view death as. The author includes theoretical assumption and his he is pushing the boundaries of science.

There are four major points outlined by the author. The first one is the central role of consciousness in the traditional mind-body problem. The relationships between mind and body cannot be explained without the proper comprehending of consciousness and its role. The second one is the incorrect approaches utilized by the modern reductionists. Their examples and analogies are inapplicable to the mind-body problem. The third one is that experience of any specie or organism has a highly subjective character. Therefore, people cannot even image what it means to be a bat. The fourth one is the need for determining the optimal balance between comprehending the objective physical processes and beings’

Over a long period of time and many debates, many different philosophers have explained the notion of the explanatory gap in many different ways. Associated with this, the notion of “The Hard Problem” has been introduced by the philosopher David Chalmers. Although there are many distinctive versions of the explanatory gap, they can all be related back to the notion of “The Hard Problem”. The explanatory gap can be argued in three versions; two of them are epistemic and one is a priori. In the most vague of terms, the explanatory gap is essentially the gap between how physical properties give feeling to how they are experienced by one’s sensations. Aside from this, the explanatory gap has the inability to explain how consciousness occurs. Even

The infinite theoretical duel between the duality of our mind and body by philosophers has been one that has been replete with a magnitude of different philosophical theories that try to posit our existentiality. Consequently, these theorists try to find the answers to the causality of how the mind and the brain truly interact: Are we our synapses, or are we something more than that? However, one theory that has been of interest to many recent scientists and philosophers alike is one that has been around since its conception by a famous mathematician and philosopher named Rene Descartes. This theory is called substance dualism; and accordingly, this theory tries to solve the mystery of how these two complex disparate entities can

As human beings, we are unique in our awareness of death. “We know that we will die, and that knowledge invades our consciousness…it will not let us rest until we have found ways, through rituals and stories, theologies and philosophies, either to make sense of death, or, failing that, to make sense of ourselves in the face of death.”

For as long as humans have been around, people have been questioned about the meaning of life, but more than that, what happens after life? In the Buddhist perspective, reincarnation is seen as a rebirth. So, Buddhism doesn’t teach reincarnation, Buddhism believes in rebirth. Reincarnation and rebirth can be seen as the same concept, however, reincarnation is the idea of the existence of a spirit separate from the body. When this body dies, the same spirit goes into another body and continue to evolve. Rebirth in the Buddhist conception is not the transmigration of a soul or spirit, but the continuity of a process in which successive lives are connected between each other by means of causes and conditions. This process doesn’t only occur when we die, it’s present in our daily lives because, as humans, we’re in a constant change, every moment of our lives only happens once, and each moment of what is going to happen is determined by our actions of the past. Rebirth is like moments, in order to evolve, we need to pass through some bad moments to accomplish the happy moments. The bad moments have a connection with the happy moments, but they are not identical, however, they are linked. On this paper, my goal is to delve into the topic to understand more about rebirth on the Buddhist perspective.

Phenomenal consciousness is defined as simply the raw experiences that we have. These experiences can be hearing sounds, seeing colors, feeling emotions and sensing sensations. Throughout this course we’ve been introduced to different types of phenomenal consciousness as defined by different philosophers. The philosophers and authors we’ve discussed have provided several different views, some of which coincide with each other and some even disagree with one another.

Evidently something causes sensations, as Berkeley points out they are constantly appearing, altering and ceasing to be. If physical objects are nonexistent, and ideas cannot be causally active, he insists that “incorporeal active substance or spirit” is all that remains (35; sec. 26). Spirit is defined as unified, possessing two powers: the understanding and the will, the first which “perceives ideas” while the second “produces and otherwise operates about them” (35; sec. 27). Berkeley examines his own spirit as the next contender for the cause of his sensible ideas, rejecting this proposal on the basis that he does not bring about

The question of consciousness and how it works is one that is debated over by philosophers with no theory being the clear answer. These theories range from different kinds that take diverse views and approaches in attempting to solve the case of consciousness. One such theory is Tye’s representational theory of consciousness, which makes the claim that phenomenal character is one and the same as representational content that meets certain further conditions. While the theory has its merits, it also has many faults that keep it back from being a suitable response to satisfy the question of consciousness. This will be shown by exploring what Tye’s representational theory of consciousness is and what it means for consciousness, the flaws and objections to Tye’s theory, and lastly how Tye’s theory works with the view of externalism, creating the theory of phenomenal externalism. Together, these points will display the positives as well as the negatives to Tye’s theory of consciousness.

The succeeding transmutation of Death incorporates weakening the mystery of its supposed powers, and lessening it to a source of uncircumscribed pleasures instead of fear. Rest and sleep are shown metaphorically as pictures of