>>4385181As I said, even if there's no such a thing as "nothing" that's only in the domain of physics.
You're employing semantics, not working with physics.
Also as I said, disregard a debate about the concept of "nothing", there IS such a thing as nowhere.
A building is a particular composition made of stone, concrete and glass, for example. The building's existence is the continuum of materials occupying a certain space in a specific organization in a determined time. If a piece falls off and is replaced, the continuum is maintained, but if every piece is demolished (let's say, all at once through demolition) then the continuum is broken an the building no longer exists.
Except, the pieces still exist. Right? Right... And yet, the building is NOWHERE for it no longer exists.
You could make a scatter plot of the remains and account for 100% of the pieces, but the building still would no longer exist, even though the pieces are there, because the continuum was interrupted.
Where is now the building? Nowhere.
Let's say the sun goes supernova right after you finished the scatter plot, and even the space the building used to occupy disappears because the entire planet is gone.
Where's the empty space where the building was? Well, not even that empty space exists now. No chance of rebuilding, so the building is for ever no longer existing.
What is the mind? A continuum that emerges from a physical brain.
One of the traits of it is a sense of self.
What happens to it once the physical brain from which it emerges decomposes?
Same thing that happened to the building.
>what do you suppose you experience after death?The exact same as the qualities we can claim a building that no longer exists has.
Why? what do YOU suppose you experience after death?
Because basically I'm saying that death is the end of all experience. You were nowhere and experienced nothing before your brain existed, so why would you be something and have experience after your brain is physically gone?
