The question of what happens to us after we die remains as mysterious now as it always was. Some think that death amounts to total annihilation of the self; others adhere to certain religious traditions, which teach that the immaterial soul (and, in some traditions, the resurrected body) can ultimately survive death. So how are we to judge between these radically different views of what happens to us in death? What would it mean for the self to persist beyond the destruction of the body? Is there room in a scientific account of the mind for the existence of an immaterial soul? John and Ken see the light with Richard Swinburne from the University of Oxford, author ofMind, Brain, and Free Will.
Part of our seriesVisions of Immortality．
“下一个是什么?虚无!”约翰是这么说的，但肯没有这么快就同意。几千年来，人们一直相信来世;如果说他们是错的，那就有点奇怪了。但约翰说，来世的概念纯粹是一种安慰——人们相信这个想法是因为他们不喜欢死亡的概念。不过，肯说，并不是所有关于来世的想象都能让人感到安慰，如果一个人一开始就认为没有上帝、没有灵魂或类似的东西，那么来世的想法听起来就会很荒谬。So, asks, John, what if thereisan afterlife after all? What’s the basis for such a belief? Ken has never been there! But, Ken says, it’s not a matter of evidence – there is no evidence for belief in an afterlife or something else entirely as of today; rather, it’s a matter of faith. John might just have to be an agnostic on this matter. After some debate of reasonable and unreasonable expectations, John’s curiosity about what an afterlife might be like is spiked, and the pair decides to explore the topic further.
John and Ken introduce Richard Swinburne, Emeritus Professor of Philosophy at the University of Oxford and author ofMind, Brain, and Free Will．约翰问身为基督徒的理查，是否有过他不确定是否有来世的时候，或者是否死后仍有生命这一事实总是显而易见的。理查德说，他从来没有确信过没有来生，他认为来生的概念是基督教的一部分，相信基督教是一种真正的宗教是有独立的理由的。约翰问理查，为什么在历史上，相信来世的人如此普遍。理查德认为，一厢情愿可能是一个答案，但更重要的是，人们倾向于认为，如果没有来世，今生发生的事情是如此微不足道，人们做什么是对的，做什么是错的，都无关紧要。人们是否遭受痛苦并不重要。还有一种流行的观念是，我们在生活中做的好事应该以某种方式得到奖励，做的坏事应该受到惩罚。于是，人类寻求对特定行为重要的肯定，理查德认为这是一种错误的思维方式;帮助穷人的逻辑是因为他们穷;说真话的逻辑，因为这是真话，因此说真话是正确的。 It is not because of some ulterior motive that one will be benefitted at some later point.
John, Ken, and Richard continue the discussion of the idea of an enduring self by welcoming audience participation. The main point the discussion centers on is Richard’s controversial proof of the soul, taking the example of identical twins whose brains are split and switched. They also respond to questions such as what the relationship between the mind and the soul is and why, instead of machinations about the afterlife, we don’t just listen to the near-death experiences that countless people have had.
