Immortality

Rating:
Summary: http://www.infidels.org/infidels/products/books/
Review: "_Immortality_ is a compilation of numerous authors, ancient and modern, who address the question of whether or not there is a life after death. Edwards provides an excellent seventy page introduction which guides the reader through other relevant philosophical issues, such as the nature of the vehicles' for survival of bodily death, the mind-body problem, the traditional Christian concept of bodily resurrection, the evidence and arguments for and against reincarnation, and the relationship between belief in God and belief in survival of bodily death--where Edwards stresses an often overlooked fact that one can believe in either without believing in both (Voltaire, for example, was a deist who believed that the universe had a Creator because he accepted the argument from design, but rejected belief in life after death; and many modern-day parapsychologists who believe they have evidence for survival are also atheists). Edwards also emphasizes that mind-brain dependence does not entail the truthof a strict materialism that contends that mental states are identical to brain states; thus arguments against reductionist materialism are irrelevant to the factuality of the dependence of consciousness on the brain. _Immortality_ includes essays on life after death from such prominent historical thinkers as Plato, Lucretius, Tertullian, Descartes, Hume, Voltaire, and Kant to contemporary philosophers, parapsychologists, and theologians. _Immortality_ is clearly written andwell-structured, allowing both a historical survey of differing opinions on the issue and an evaluation of the state of the evidence and arguments today from authors with opposing viewpoints."

Rating:
Summary: A good overview of philosophical approaches to the topic
Review: "_Immortality_ is a compilation of numerous authors, ancient and modern, who address the question of whether or not there is a life after death. Edwards provides an excellent seventy page introduction which guides the reader through other relevant philosophical issues, such as the nature of the vehicles' for survival of bodily death, the mind-body problem, the traditional Christian concept of bodily resurrection, the evidence and arguments for and against reincarnation, and the relationship between belief in God and belief in survival of bodily death--where Edwards stresses an often overlooked fact that one can believe in either without believing in both (Voltaire, for example, was a deist who believed that the universe had a Creator because he accepted the argument from design, but rejected belief in life after death; and many modern-day parapsychologists who believe they have evidence for survival are also atheists). Edwards also emphasizes that mind-brain dependence does not entail the truth of a strict materialism that contends that mental states are identical to brain states; thus arguments against reductionist materialism are irrelevant to the factuality of the dependence of consciousness on the brain. _Immortality_ includes essays on life after death from such prominent historical thinkers as Plato, Lucretius, Tertullian, Descartes, Hume, Voltaire, and Kant to contemporary philosophers, parapsychologists, and theologians. _Immortality_ is clearly written and well-structured, allowing both a historical survey of differing opinions on the issue and an evaluation of the state of the evidence and arguments today from authors with opposing viewpoints."

Rating:
Summary: This book contains strawman arguments for Karma and Rebirth
Review: I was very disappointed when I read chapter 20: Karmic Tribulations by Paul Edwards. The chapter is concerned with a version of karma that is very simplistic and highly speculative. The simplistic version of karma being argued against can be found in the first sentence: "The Law of Karma asserts that the world is wholly just, where justice is equated with retribution or, more accurately, with appropriate rewards and punishments for all morally significant acts"(Immortality, p. 200). It should be said that justice, retribution, rewards and punishments are not proper terms in relation to karma. They connote a legalistic-social point of view which isn't related to the stronger, more well developed conceptualizations of karma.

Karma, in a nutshell,is causality that includes feedback. An example would be vocalizing a thought (causal output)and consciously registering that vocalization via the ear (casual input). All intentional acts (either psychological or physical) can be considered causal outputs and these causal outputs can be said to influence and interact with other systems (mind-brain-body-other living and non-living systems)to a minimal or maximal degree. These interactions, in turn, inevitably influence the agent of intention immediately, some time after, or in the distant future. The effects are not mutually exclusive and they are dependent upon the conditions of the agent and the surrounding systems and their resistance or malleability to change.

Edwards also states "To begin with, the Law of Karma has no predictive value whatsoever"(Immortality p. 3). He then uses a very complex example to illustrate his point. The example includes a number of agents that experience death because of a plane crash. He fails to recognize the significance of intention in relation to death. First of all, these people would not have met death on an airplane if they did not intend to fly on the airplane. Nor would that have intended to fly if they hadn't had a primed disposition to fly somewhere, which is result of past experience and conditioning. Percentages can be applied to each causal factor(including intention and dispositional traits)that lead to the event which included the plane crash and deaths. Without the intention and dispositional traits of the specific people in question the event of plane crash and death could not have happened. To say otherwise is simply attempting to use counterfactual thinking (imagining alternative scenerios and outcomes that might have happened, but didn't). Edwards is right to say that, "The Law of Karma has no predictive value whatsoever" (Immortality, p. 203). In this particular example it doesn't, but nor does any other law of physics. The best form of prediction comes from using statistical probabilities. The reason for this is epistemic. The system is simply too complex and chaotic. The same can be said about the mind-body-social complex. It is a very chaotic system, but that doesn't mean that the occurence is entirely unpredictable. Statistical predictions can be made in relation to the event of suffering. This is done frequently in psychology. Certain types of intentional acts and dispositional traits produce suffering on a regular basis. If this didn't happen psychology would be reduced to mere speculation.

I have illustrated two examples in which Edwards does not grasp the strong version of karma and instead puts forth strawmen. The rest of the essay on Karma runs the same course. I would suggest that he study karma in it's complex forms and argue against them if he wants to convince anyone that karma is a bogus concept. Until then, he is merely taking an active role karmic-belief innoculation.

;;;

Rating:
Summary: A great book!
Review: This is not a debunking work, but one to broaden our outlook into what other possibilities may exist. Who knows for sure? This book will make your brains do overtime, expand the mind, soothe the soul and caress the spirit. Paul Edwards has done an excellent job with this anthology of great thinkers.

Rating:
Summary: A good overview of philosophical approaches to the topic
Review: This text works well in college classes and for general readers interested in the range of views (pro and con) on the issue of life after death.