Talk:Ethics/Life after death

DEFCON 3
And what about DEFCON 3? In heaven? Does his soul have a stock identifier? (discuss • contribs) 16:40, 7 December 2023 (UTC)


 * In theory there is an earlier step of judicium divinum that would be missing from the diagram, which is, of course, not sufficiently detailed, and that would be military relevant situations in which judicium divinum is brought about by something one would on Earth describe as the military. Of course heaven cannot be conquered and the devil is the theoretical enemy who would try this anyway, even though doomed to fail. I could explain why the devil is doomed to fail, but that is definitely unsuitable for public debate or extremely metaphorical. Interestingly the additional step of judicium divinium leads, at the given level of detail, to the very same result as the judicium divinum shown in the diagram. The reason is that there is nobody able to make war on heaven. One would have to be able to attack in order to meet the defenders of heaven, so the effect is only more rigorous screening of immigrants. Of course one would have to really want to go to heaven, before one could see this as disturbing news, that immigrants may be rejected for one reason or the other. To really want to go to heaven is, of course, the recommended perspective. See Pascal's wager. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 17:05, 7 December 2023 (UTC)


 * And what is it the devil is not allowed to do? Is political opposition to the goals of heaven prohibited? In heaven? Does his soul have a stock identifier? (discuss • contribs) 19:36, 7 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Political opposition in most cases falls under freedom of opinion and freedom of thought, but omniscience requires that you cannot insist on being collectively intelligent stupid against better understanding that has been adequately explained to you. You are still not a terrorist (the proper translation of devil is terrorist), but the omniscient assembly will at some point refuse to hear an opinion that it has eliminated as a possible option and you cannot respond to that with aggression, because aggression will fail. What the devil would have to do would be armed entry into heaven without permission and with the intention to use arms, but that would be an impressive feat. Any sort of -warfare against omniscient politics can also easily fall under the rubric 'terror'. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 19:49, 7 December 2023 (UTC)


 * And why then is the devil doomed to fail, if the devil is apparently any type of terrorist? In heaven? Does his soul have a stock identifier? (discuss • contribs) 10:56, 20 December 2023 (UTC)


 * The simple explanation is that omniscience and omnipotence are difficult to beat and that the ultima ratio in heaven is that God is omnipotent: Heaven is not very good at surrendering, because it is seen as a complete failure of civilization merely to attack heaven. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 11:03, 20 December 2023 (UTC)


 * But it is apparently not possible to attack heaven? In heaven? Does his soul have a stock identifier? (discuss • contribs) 11:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC)


 * The Quran affirms the existence of jinn, for example. One would need a jinn or devil, or, of course, an angel, to be able to attack heaven. Angels would be most suitable to attack heaven, but also most extremely unlikely to be available as deserters. The mere thought is simply illogical, because one is civilized, even more so, because it is not possible to succeed. One would have to find a very stupid angel or one would have to find a jinn at all and the jinn would have to be stupid, too. Stupidity is, however, not a trait to be expected. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 11:25, 20 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Why is it a complete failure of civilization to attack heaven? In heaven? Does his soul have a stock identifier? (discuss • contribs) 12:00, 20 December 2023 (UTC)


 * God represents the Good, thus heaven is civilization and therefore you are against civilization, if you are against heaven. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 12:08, 20 December 2023 (UTC)


 * One could compare an attack on heaven to a terror organization trying to gain control of planet Earth from the United Nations, only much more powerful and far more in control than the United Nations are today. It is very difficult to imagine that this could be successful in any meaningful sense and the United Nations would most probably also not be able to understand that the attacker could have any acceptable argument in favor of this activity. The Good would in this case, for instance, be represented by the Sustainable Development Goals. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 12:33, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Bilocation
Is it true that bilocation does allow you to be in several places at once in heaven?


 * Yes, sure. How else would you intend to get there? It is pretty much the same effect that allows you to get there at all. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 08:52, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

How does bilocation get you into heaven?


 * In politically correct language, the soul does not have a location, if you do not choose a location. You can choose to have one location or to have multiple locations. In heaven that is little more than, so to speak, the intent to be at a given place, but there are, of course, limits to how many places one can sensibly occupy at the same time. Bilocation is certainly not itself the entrance ticket to heaven, but if you were allowed to, you could bilocate in heaven while still being alive, which is likely to become more common at some time in the past, watching along the timeline, so to speak. (See "The Peaceable Kingdom") --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 10:21, 23 December 2023 (UTC)


 * And in non-politically correct language souls do have a location where you can go and watch what they do? In heaven? Does his soul have a stock identifier? (discuss • contribs) 11:26, 23 December 2023 (UTC)


 * You can, of course, bilocate to Heavenly Jerusalem, Kingdom of Heaven and watch the change of the guards. Souls are immaterial, however, and they remain invisible, unless you develop the right type of sight into a higher plane of existence, so to speak. The guardian angels will, however, generally be glad to be of assistance and offer advice on the necessary curriculum, if you are interested in souls. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 11:39, 23 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Suppose I want to take my soul with me? In heaven? Does his soul have a stock identifier? (discuss • contribs) 11:44, 23 December 2023 (UTC)


 * In principle there is nothing to stop you from materializing your soul in something that any human doctor would identify as a human body. That, however, would be the end of bilocation, until you change back to immaterial state and that means you would have to walk by foot whereever you wanted to go. It would also mean that there would be restrictions on the places where this exact type of material body can exist. I don't have to explain that this is not a very commonly selected option. (See "Can the soul come back to this world?") --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 11:50, 23 December 2023 (UTC)


 * You are "out of your right mind" to want to walk by foot, so to speak. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 13:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Is the address actually useful in heaven?
Is the address actually useful in heaven? --Irgend so einer (discuss • contribs) 12:27, 24 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Yes and No. It was not meant as an actual address, where you could send a letter to, but it actually means enough so you could ask your way. Heavenly Jerusalem serves a well-known purpose and it is built from sapphires, jewels, and rubies. That tells the initiate where you want to go, but as an address it is too unspecific. At first I had considered to add "Olympus" as a middle part to the address, but that is in Greece and would have been from another religion, so it would not have served any purpose, but wouldn't have been exactly wrong either, besides being in Greece. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 12:38, 24 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Admittedly, if you want to go to Greenland (where the sapphires are, so to speak), Greece is a little unspecific. The place is too large to have a single address. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 13:21, 24 December 2023 (UTC)


 * One may also find a logo there that looks similar to that of the International Olympic Committee, so there is another seeming relationship to Greece and Mount Olympus, but it's, of course, not the IOC. It's about the light of civilization, not the Olympic flame. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 12:00, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Can you get remarried?
Are you really divorced in heaven and can you get remarried? --Manni R. Eviel (Anti-pattern) (discuss • contribs) 12:38, 25 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Marriage is a contract with the partner, the state and/or the church. It depends on those parties what they think applies. The Holy See is likely to answer that question with a new set of rules once they require these rules, meaning once they are there. It is not likely that anybody will enforce any part of the contract in heaven, however. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 12:51, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Are souls immortal?
What exactly means immortal? How long can souls exist? --Irgend so einer (discuss • contribs) 04:49, 26 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Due to the nature of souls they have no limitation to their lifetime. There are some theoretical threats and risks, but nothing that really occurs and these theoretical problems can also be taken care of. The greatest risk to a soul is, so to speak, gambling. See Pascal's wager. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 04:59, 26 December 2023 (UTC)


 * What exactly should one avoid to do? --Irgend so einer (discuss • contribs) 06:36, 26 December 2023 (UTC)


 * One can literally sell one's soul to the devil, even though the devil is usually encountered in actions by persons who fail to employ sufficient ethical standards, thus does not exist as a specific entity, only as a result of 'collectively intelligent stupid' action of a larger group. Consequently one can trade one's soul for high efficiency or another advantage. There is, however, nobody one could buy it back from, since the devil usually does not exist as an entity. And, of course, the entity that could give back a soul is not the devil, even if you met one, then the entity that is a danger to your soul is the guard at the Heaven's Gate, usually described as Saint Peter. Of course the policeman at the entrance is the person denying entry, not the terrorist you should not have cooperated with. Trivial. As an example building the egyptian pyramids was very efficient and people had at least building accidents and/or health issues that were completely avoidable, because the pyramids are utterly useless, and some of the workers were poorly paid foreigners, so the pharaos are prototypical examples. (See "What if I feel insecure about my qualification?) --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 07:03, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Peaceable Kingdom
Can one win against the Peaceable Kingdom? --Irgend so einer (discuss • contribs) 18:12, 26 December 2023 (UTC)


 * What must be distinguished is ability and meaning. Winning against a convergence criterion is losing, not winning. Of course it is possible to itentionally fail to meet a convergence criterion, but if that entails the potential to lose Pascal's wager then that is not a logical choice, especially under the circumstances of not well-defined criteria and an obvious motivation to strive for high ethical standards, that should be apparent to almost anybody with a speech center. Of course it depends on how you define speech. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 18:21, 26 December 2023 (UTC)


 * "Speech center" can in heaven have the informal, non-standard dual meaning of a faculty of philosophy, debate and ethics, one might add. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 18:27, 26 December 2023 (UTC)


 * You are "out of your right mind" and lacking a speech center, if you cannot understand Pascal's wager, so to speak. Both together, of course, does make ascending to heaven logically difficult. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 13:43, 27 December 2023 (UTC)


 * You also have to be "out of your right mind" to want to walk the "path" by foot, when there is transportation through the Peaceable Kingdom towards the Kingdom of Heaven. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 14:58, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Bribes?
Can't I just bribe myself into heaven, if others can request my presence? --Manni R. Eviel (Anti-pattern) (discuss • contribs) 08:43, 31 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Surprisingly, the attempt is punishable. --Private lecturer (celestial) (discuss • contribs) 08:45, 31 December 2023 (UTC)