Original Image Source: Universal Pictures Angel of Death in Hellboy II
Since the dawn of consciousness, man has tried to understand and/or explain what happens to him after death. For thousands of years, philosophy, epistemology, medicine and religion, all dug deeply into the mind of man in an effort to better describe what happens to us after death.
Man is by nature a curious animal and isn't easily satisfied without some reassuring pat on the back or even a fake if you will nuance, that one's life has/may have/could have possibly some meaning in terms of some global existence, which continues even after death.
Of course the latter is the naturally born fruit of fear of death, which was always something to be consciously and subconsciously feared, as no indication whatsoever was ever given about what happens to people who die, after they die.
The simple, logical and terse conclusion that nothing happens after we die, has been mostly unacceptable by the majority, simply because if such was the case, life, as we know it, becomes fairly meaningless and man likes meaning. With his life, with the universe, with everything.
As a result, today, trying to sort through the monumental religious and philosophical nonsense which has resulted concerning the afterlife and the whereabouts of the dead, can truly be a daunting task, even after all these years. Choosing from Jesus and St. Peter meeting you at the Pearly Gates, to The Prophet welcoming you to the heaven of 129 virgins or Krishna and Brahman assigning future "guardians" who will assist you in your future reincarnations is not for the meek and the number of religious zealots who actively believe in some sort of afterlife or another, numbers by the billions.
Can there be a simple, logical and understandable explanation of what happens to the freaking DEAD? Yes, there can be, but it certainly won't satisfy the minds of idiots or religious loonies who subscribe without too much effort to the existing nonsense which circulates the globe.
To understand better such an explanation, two logical premises must be installed in-place apriori, to help the inquiring mind gain a deeper perspective of what awaits us after death.
Ergo, the two such major premises, have divided epistemologists and philosophers for hundreds of years and have resulted in an interesting ambivalence with regard to the afterlife, which actively continues till today. Let's repeat them here, for clarity:
For the above, there can be no other possibility. This is an either/or situation, so whether you like it or not, you will likely find yourself being a proponent of either 1) or 2). There's no middle ground. At least, no other alternative dictated by clear, precise logic.
Accordingly, a separate analysis can be performed, assuming either 1) or 2). Of course, the more interesting case would be 2), because 1) is fairly trivial by itself. So let's begin our logical analysis for each case, by seeing where each premise will lead. We begin with the first (and simplest) one:
Consciousness terminates after death
This clear, simple and logical premise continues to escape the collective consciousness of man, who tries desperately to cling to silly preconceived notions of some sort of divine existence which will shield him from the inevitable: eternal non-existence. This is really annoying, for many reasons.
Man has had innumerable mini-proofs that this is the case, from simple nasty bumps on the head which induce unconsciousness to general anesthesia, where in the absence of the five senses, there's no perception of surrounding space, whatever this space may or may not be. Not only absence of perception and space, but also absence of any related memory of the elapsed time interval of unconsciousness.
People who have undergone general anesthesia for example[1], have a full-well taste (and proof!) of what this means, yet when they wake up, they somehow forget all about it! When the body undergoes general anesthesia all the senses are shut-down and only the vital functions which sustain the body are maintained. In effect, under general anesthesia, the human body responds to its environment in exactly the same manner a corpse does, yet this tremendously simple situation escapes the inquiring mind as a viable solution for what happens after death.
Of course, after the anesthesia terminates, there is a body to "come back" to, so people are not that much afraid of it in general. Note however that it is not "consciousness" which leaves the body and then comes back to it, rather, it is the body which re-initiates the processes of consciousness. There's no "consciousness" leaving the body, for the simple reason that any such consciousness is implicitly associated with the functions of the body[2]. In simple words: Consciousness is a function of the healthy body, and not the other way around.
When you shut-down your computer, the CPU doesn't continue cycling in some other/different "phantom" space away from the computer itself. There simply isn't any computer operation done anywhere, when you shut-down the computer. The computer simply ceases to function.
Had the body been removed during general anesthesia by some gross procedure, like terminating all the vital functions which support it, like heart beat, breathing and blood flow, the situation would be essentially equivalent to physical death, yet people continue to be baffled by the stupidity of afterlife arguments, often even after such an experience.
Man's body, is the very same body which on the verge of consciousness shut-down, spontaneously generates all those reported Out-of-body or Near-Death-Experiences with all the weird associated lights and presences[3]. No matter what happens in these cases however, the important difference here is that the reporter did not die, after all. Otherwise there would be no experience to be reported. This is a major hint to the obtuse-minded, yet it is often ignored as well.
The most important argument here is extremely simple: Man's links to reality, the five senses, are essentially consciousness' reality surveying mechanisms[2]. Absent those mechanisms, there's nothing to be surveyed/perceived, for the tremendously simple reason that even if reality exists independently of man's consciousness, there is no incoming data about reality without these mechanisms after death.
If you put a blind, dumb and deaf man inside a huge, illuminated and loud room, he'd still report a huge black void. And yet, this man still has his consciousness, which is again different from the afterlife: In the afterlife, man doesn't even have the privilege of having the corresponding memory centers which allow him to retain his consciousness, because by definition these very centers have been already destroyed, by virtue of what death means, being part of his physical body.
To summarize: After death, not only man's links (five senses) with reality are permanently severed, but the corresponding memory centers which allow man to perceive his own consciousness and existence are also severed. What does one get in such a case? NOTHING.
Nature always works by analogy and in cycles. Always. One expects therefore, whatever state existed prior to birth, to also exist after death. Prior to birth there was nothing. For any one of us. Therefore what will exist after death is nothing. For any one of us. End of argument.
Now let us sidetrack a bit and assume for the sake of the argument that even though the five senses are completely destroyed and the corresponding memory/consciousness processing centers are also destroyed after death, "consciousness" continues to exist, in some form or another. This is a bit ludicrous, but we have to cover this alternative for the sake of completeness. Here we go, then.
Consciousness continues after death
During death there is certainly energy dissipation, so let's call this surviving "consciousness" a conscious, albeit dissipating, energy complex.
After death, input from the five senses has ceased, so no matter what this energy complex feels or does, it certainly cannot "see", "hear", "taste", "smell" or "sensually feel" anything related to its immediate environment, in the same sense that an alive individual can.
Even though sensory input has ceased, some may claim that this energy complex may have retained sufficient elementary organization in its atoms and molecules, in an energy form which may allow partial memories and/or fleeting past impressions, which may continue to be projected in it/perceived by it.
Further, some may claim that such a complex energy pseudo-conglomerate may conceivably have the capacity to re-organize itself and "re-learn" to acquire data from reality via a different mechanism, given sufficient time.
We are already in deep logical s*** with all this "re-organizing" energy complex. Energy in Nature tends to dissipate to zero, fast, because of entropy[4] and no scientist that this author is aware of including himself, knows of any form of energy which can "re-organize" itself in a form which allows any elementary form of interaction with reality in any form of conscious existence. At least none that has been documented so far. Ghosts and apparitions don't count. When you switch-off a light-bulb you don't expect the dissipating heat/energy from the lamp to "re-organize" itself into a poltergeist which happened to be travelling inside the electrical network at the time you switched the lamp off.
It is also reasonable to assume that in such a case, many different forms of energy then, must be conscious in some form or another, by analogy and using the same argument about "re-organizing" energy complexes. The Sun for example, would be conscious, and so would be the energy from a common household light-bulb. Nevertheless, let's play along with this silly scenario a bit, for the sake of the argument.
If this happens to be the case, we have an existence which is immediately "burdened" with many extremely complex tasks: First and foremost with identifying its very own id, if anything, never mind its immediate surroundings, which naturally play a vital role in helping the organism also explain its id via its relationship with its environment notwithstanding. Without knowing why you are somewhere, you can neither know who you are, nor whether you are indeed dead.
If this energy complex somehow manages to replicate all the vital perceiving functions of a regular human being after a brief initial period of total unknowing, the first thing it will perceive will be its own presence near a corpse: The body which hosted it, prior to its death.
Of course having no memory of who this consciousness was prior to its death, doesn't help much, either. How the heck is it supposed to identify its id? Simple: If you find yourself having no body, no memory whatsoever of who you are and at the same time being close to a corpse, you must be that corpse, right? Further, you are dead.
So what now? Well, the situation becomes highly simplified in a sense, in view of the fact that the "burden" of finding out who you are is enough to send you flying in different directions with a vengeance.
There does not appear to exist any easy way to determine your id, and even if you could deduce it by looking at the hospital tag on the corpse after they put you in the freezer, it won't do you any good. Even if you somehow determine that you were exactly John H. Doe, lying on the hospital bed, you are now dead and the corpse in front of you doesn't seem to be of much help with your memory of who you were.
You can try flying off to the local library to get hold of any possible record about John H. Doe, but no matter how much you find out, it is totally impossible to know everything you knew, once you were John H. Doe.
Even if you manage to acquire further data from your surroundings, like "see" or "hear" stuff therein, you'll find that it won't do you much good to start accumulating data, again, as if alive, because you have no body now, hence you cannot interact with your immediate environment. No matter how loud you yell at the doctor, he won't hear you.
If that was this author, the next natural thought which would enter his modified "energy-complex" mind, would be to ensure further "time" in this state, to at least try to figure things out better. Particularly in view of the fact that he would now be some form of energy which dissipates fast, hence the natural course would be to seek movement towards a source of energy to replenish his "energy" reserves.
Personally this author would choose to go into the hospital-ceiling's fluorescent lamps. A pleasant bath in free-energy mercury ions, or jump into the hospital's electrical outlet/circuit for a free roller-coaster riding free electrons. Or fly-off towards the Moon or Sun to replenish/recycle. Can't be all that bad.
Seriously now, this author hopes that the reader sees the extreme nonsense which results from assuming that life continues after death. Such nonsense if often compounded by religious loonies, who will gladly insert their preferred scenario for such or such an after-life "consciousness".
Reincarnation advocates for example, particularly those from Anthroposophy[5], Buddhism[6] or Hinduism[7] will claim that this consciousness will now enter some sort of heightened awareness, with oodles of special "guardians" who will try to help it determine the id of its future incarnation, by examining its past transgressions and/or deeds. But does it matter? Better yet: Does it even make sense? Of course not. How successful can any kind of "guardian" be if they try to "guide" you through a future incarnation with you not even remembering who you were prior to your death? Not very much, cause you won't remember, so you won't care!
The entire reincarnation scheme collapses under its very own premise: There cannot be any sort of "gradual improvement" via reincarnation as a function of past deeds, if the consciousness which reincarnates, every time it does so, has absolutely no recollection of its past lives!
The Christians will claim that you will eventually reach the Pearly Gates, where you will either get into heaven or be ousted to hell. St. Peter will ask you all sorts of relevant questions about whether you actually were a good person, but guess what: You won't remember shoot, so you can simply tell St. Peter to go screw himself for all you care. The problem is that you won't even remember that and you won't even know that the one who's "speaking" to you is St. Peter. He might as well be Nosferatu the Vampire.
Orthodox Christians will go even further, by advocating the existence of various "demons" (telonia) who will pester you during your ascent to the Pearly Gates, by accusing you of your past transgressions, as you ascend. But the demons will accuse you of things which you have no recollection of, so what's the point? You've guessed it: None.
In general things get pretty bad under the assumption that life continues after death: Even if there exists a specific path the afterlife consciousness must follow in order to escape, be released or go to some sort of preferred "higher existence", and even if there exists an author who has written about it, and even if you become an expert in this life by reading all about it, it still won't do you any good, because after you are dead you won't recall any part of it!
If consciousness continues after death, under any semi-reasonable form, such a consciousness cannot be but a blind, deaf, dumb and non-self-perceiving conglomerate of random energy, which most likely will dissipate into nothingness a few minutes after death.
Don't be fooled by anyone who tells you otherwise.
Where are all the dead people?
Nowhere. Objectively speaking, there are no dead people "living" anywhere or in any sort of divine realm, except in one's mind, which, because of its tremendous imagining and dreaming powers, can create replicas of the living and the dead and populate its dreams.
Because all people can dream, all people's minds are potential "paradises", "hells" or "dead space" which can host the living and the dead by the thousands. The dead are simply dreaming replicas which are responsible for the well-known tricks of dream-interpretation or contact with the dead, but no matter what they do and what kind of information they convey to the living, they are always subject to the powers of the hosting mind, as such they are never independent sources of information or energy.
How do the dead get into one's mind? Using a similar technique that computer viruses use, when they replicate on computers. The human subconscious mind has an affinity for copying, retaining and magnifying relevant data from the world of the living and when a person dies, the memory of that person may organize itself into an energy "imprint"/complex which can survive into one's mind for many years, despite the actual person's total obliteration.
Memories of the dead are not the only inhabitants of one's dream space. There can also exist memories of the living as well as animals and other inanimate objects. The subconscious mind "builds" those memory replicas in a very detailed and efficient manner, based on the experiences of the living and possible contact with them (dead) while they were alive.
Certain living people can also induce their hosting in your mind with no effort on your part and this is essentially a variant of mesmerism.
Dream impressions from the dead in one's dream space can often be intense to the point of much excitement and seeming importance, but one only needs to remember that they are hosted in your mind, as such, if you disassemble your dream space (if you wake up that is) the dead will disappear as well.
Having a meaningful communication with those hosted memories (the dead) is tantamount to you having a conversation with your Barbi doll and taking your doll's sayings seriously. If your father has died for example several years ago, and you see him in your dreams carrying an important message, it's like a part of your mind having a conversation with you. Because the associated memory is part of your subconscious, the "message" from your dead father can be no more important than any part of your body communicating something to you. To take such a message seriously, is therefore utterly silly from any perspective.
Because humanity keeps going on and the alive always have dream capability with its associated spaces, the dead can continue to "exist" in people's minds as memories for very long periods, until the person whose dreaming space is violated dies in actual life.
This is the key point here: The dead, living in your dream space is a violation of your freedom of choice, hence the sooner you oust them from this space, the happier you'll be.
The place of the dead is in limbo and in non-existence. Not in your mind. They have no business there. Yet, even if the dead occupy your mind, they are no more than imaginary shadows of your own subconscious.
A note of caution: Although the above analysis is based on reason and logic, don't be tempted to think that suicide is an easy way out if your life is problematic. For details: On Suicide.