Materialism could be defined as something like “nothing but particles exist.”
Religious believers would claim otherwise (life after death, etc, continuing existence as a non-physical entity, the “soul”, “spirit”, etc.)
Of course in philosophical analysis, anything can be considered on a ‘hypothetical’ basis.
There’s also the argument (John Searle*, Bertrand Russell** et all) that an immaterial entity can not be realised unless it materialises.
Of course, if it materialises, it would need to have been composed of something, but if it was composed of something it could not have been immaterial (non-physical).
The point of the argument is that an independently existing immaterial entity is a logical contradiction within itself.
Religious belief (e.g. afterlife) does not address this issue at all, at this analytical level.
Even the deepest elements in theology fail to consider this logical contradiction.
Is anyone able offer a theoretical model for disembodied existence?
Obviously it has to be theoretical, because once you’re dead, you can’t report back. Even if you continue to exist, there’s still no way to report back.
Some people swear blind they can talk to the dead.
Sure they can, but it’s getting the dead to talk back that’s the difficult part.
Guest blogger Jim Dorans
There is also the argument that when the religious attempt to substantiate a claim “There is a creator deity” with another claim “It is immaterial” they are committing an ad hoc fallacy.
NB this blog is sponsored by Freethought.city not AAI
Image by Pixabay