Death is not the end. There is life after life. Through the course of history, these ideas have become so engrained in contemporary thought that the mere suggestion of facing a true and utter end to our existence is disconcerting and even preposterous to some of us. Death can't be the end. We want to see our loved ones again. We want to go on living. We want to know that we live through this finite life here on Earth to achieve something more at the end besides death. It can be quite daunting to think that one minute we are here, and the next we are not, but is this notion of an afterlife actually built on real evidence or just a preference for comfort?

I. Near-Death Experiences

Near-death experiences, or NDEs, are one of the most common forms of supposed evidence for an afterlife. The stories of close encounters with death, seeing a light at the end of a tunnel, and being greeted by loved ones or religious figures have become pop culture cliches. Believers in an afterlife often invoke these experiences in defense of their views, but with Christians claiming to have caught a glimpse of the Christian afterlife, Muslims claiming to have seen the Islamic afterlife, and Mormons claiming to have witnessed the Mormon afterlife, who are we to believe?

In the late 1970s, James E. Whinnery, major general of the Air National Guard and doctor of biophysical chemistry, conducted experiments with hundreds of pilots in g-force chambers to study tunnel vision [1]. Whinnery discovered that pilots would lose consciousness as the test chambers approached high speeds and too much blood began to be pulled from the subjects' brains as a result. He noted that the longer the pilots were unconscious, the closer they came to brain death, and the closer they came to brain death, they began to have near-death experiences.

The explanation for NDEs may be right in its name. When the brain experiences trauma, such as losing blood or oxygen, serotonin and endorphins are released, which cause a euphoric feeling or a sensation of being at peace. Confusion, disorientation, and blackouts are also known to occur at the loss of consciousness, which may explain the visual hallucinations in NDEs. From an evolutionary standpoint it is not at all surprising that our brains have evolved to induce a kind of psychotropic state when under stress, providing calm and comfort as we slip out of consciousness.

NDEs may be very vivid and convincing, but there are many problems that arise from relying on them as any evidence of an afterlife. As already mentioned, whose version of the afterlife would they support? If NDEs are simply natural processes set in motion by our brains failing, it would explain the variety of different NDEs, as each would be a reflection of the beliefs held by the individual, or even of the dominant beliefs within their culture that may subconsciously influence them. And if the 'wrong' religion's NDEs are delusions, who's to say all of them aren't delusions? Where are the testimonies of aborigines who converted after meeting Jesus in a NDE?

Additionally, if NDEs are real, why do they never seem to provide any practical and useful information to the recipient? If a loved one or deity has a chance to meet you briefly from the other side, why wouldn't they take the opportunity to warn you of future problems, like contracting a deadly disease, getting into a fatal car wreck, or so on? Near-death experiences tell us nothing about the reality or falsity of an afterlife, though they do tell us quite a bit about the human brain.

II. Past Life Regression

Past life regression, or PLR, is a kind of therapy using hypnosis that allegedly calls up memories of a person's previous life. This is usually introduced as evidence for reincarnation, a form of an afterlife where once a person dies, their soul or spirit passes on to another body, and they are reborn into another life. Occasionally stories will surface of adults, and even children, who relay events of an unrelated deceased person's life in startlingly detailed fashion. But how these memories of a past life are stored to later be recollected is a mystery even to believers, since a different body means a different brain too. The idea that the soul may store the memories is pure speculation, founded in a concept (the soul) that is entirely faith-based, lacking any verifiable evidence.

Aside from all the assumptions, the method used to dig up these memories is also suspect. Hypnosis cannot be used to completely control a person's mind, but it can influence them, especially if they are susceptible believers in it. Just as a magician may guide an audience member to act foolish on stage under hypnosis, a therapist can guide a patient to think in a certain way with leading questions. What might seem like a stunning recollection of a past life involving a real person may be unintentionally (or sometimes intentionally) planted memories.

Psychologist Robert A. Baker conducted studies on PLR that revealed belief in reincarnation as the single greatest predictor of having past life memories while under hypnosis [2]. His experiments also showed that question framing plays a large role in acceptance of PLR. Selecting three separate groups, Baker told the first group that they were about to receive an exciting therapy to uncover their past lives, he told the second that they were testing a therapy which "may or may not" work, and he told the third group that the therapy was crazy and does not usually work in normal people. Group 1 reported 85% success in PLR, group 2 reported 60%, and group 3 reported a measly 10% rate of success. Just as with NDEs, PLR is no credible evidence for an afterlife and it relies heavily on several unfounded assumptions.

III. The Irrationality of an Afterlife

Not only is there an absence of evidence for any afterlife, but the concept itself is quite absurd and irrational as well. Beliefs like the afterlife betray insecurity and fear on the part of our species. What concern do we have for a beforelife? The only reason people find past life memories interesting and worth defending is because reincarnation assures them of another life after this one, not just a beforelife. An afterlife is more appealing because we are very linear-thinking creatures, and as stated previously, few of us like to think that death might be the end all. We don't really care much for a beforelife, since it doesn't give us the same comfort and assurance that an afterlife belief does.

In every way that we understand life in this universe, death is the end of it. Just think of the signs we look for that might point to life on other planets. Living things are self-sustaining, they grow, they reproduce, respond to stimuli, and much more. Once all these processes have stopped with death, the idea that they might function again afterwards in some undemonstrated alternate dimension is nothing but an article of faith, contrary to experience and reason, and totally lacking in evidence. To suggest life after death is to redefine life into a nebulous and practically useless idea.

Our body turns to mush after we die, the brain ceases all electrochemical activity, and eventually our atoms are dispersed into the world and rearranged into other things. There is no evidence that any part of us survives death in a way that retains our memories, personality, consciousness, or anything of the sort. Because we don't regularly see bodies popping out the dirt and flying through the sky to an afterlife, believers claim that the part of us which survives death is an unverifiable, invisible, and incorporeal thing called a soul or spirit. While this effectively moves the goal post, it doesn't make an afterlife any more of a reality. Instead it adds a faith-based assertion to another faith-based assertion, like explaining how Santa Claus can visit every house on Earth on one night by proposing a magical potion that allows him to slow the passage of time for everyone but himself. Speculation is fruitless when piling it onto an irrational, evidence-less concept.

IV. All for the Peace of Mind

The thought that a single accident tomorrow could put an end to all the plans and aspirations we have for our lives is not a comfortable one. Neither is the thought that we may never see our loved ones again. Perhaps reasons like these are why an afterlife has been invented and why the belief in it has become so widespread. Fear compels many people to prefer comfortable fantasies to cold realities, as there are more than a few persons who have even convinced themselves that they will never die at all. Yet if faith is all it takes, we should expect to see more vigorous oldtimers in their thousands. However, truth is not affected by reassuring preferences, nor by faith, and I would rather believe what is true and has evidence and reason on its side than settle with whatever may put my mind more at ease.

So what is the purpose of this life, if it's the only one we get? I have never really understood the thinking behind such a question, because regardless of an afterlife or the belief in afterlife, we all choose what we want to live for, stand for, and die for on a daily basis. The purpose of life is what we choose to make of it. Some of us make poor or immoral choices and some of us make great and moral choices, but there is no real indication that an afterlife has anything to do with the route we take. There are criminals and charlatans in every religion, and there are upstanding people who believe this life is our only one. There is still plenty of meaning and purpose to be found in this life alone, among all our loved ones, friends, and family. If we make sure they know that we love them and we make the most of our time here while we can, no afterlife is necessary to comfort us. The afterlife is devoid of evidence, contrary to reason, and can only offer superficial comfort.

1. Kotler, S. (2005) Extreme States. Discover Magazine. Retrieved Nov. 3, 2010.
2. Baker, R. (1992) Hidden Memories: Voices and Visions From Within. Prometheus Books: Buffalo, NY.