The chipping away at mortality argument

The chipping away at mortality argument is the argument that by little bits and pieces others theories are shown to be false, leaving the identireplica theory, continuum theory, multiplicity theory -- superimmortality to be true by way of the resulting logical evidence.

For example there is a lot of evidence that souls or the equivalent do not exist. But people believe in them because they are taught to believe in them by religions and their culture. Consequently any theory of immortality based on a soul is not going to be true if there are no real souls only one that do not produce immortality like in dreams, imagination, movies, and experience machines.

Another chip in the soul theory is that even if soul did exist then it would have to be proved that the ixperiencitness is maintained with the soul.

On the other hand there is the theory that there is no life after death for any one. There are many experimental cases "chips in the theory" that show that this position is accepted without question like the soul theory. It is part of their belief system. It is like the soul theory but at the opposite extreme of belief. This theory is poorly defined as is the soul theory. what is necessary for life after death continuousness or continuity of the body, of consciousness, of memories, which is it? There is no agreement for this. If you have no way to determine if a case of life after death has been created then you have no way to be scientific about it.

Is a revived person after he has drowned for a a few minutes life after death? What about extending the period of death; from minutes to years? If not the original then who is it? under what conditions will it be the same person? What if the revived person needed new matter, is this then the same person? By using the definition of the same person he has to have the same body and matter. This would not have to the case be if you make the unscientific claim that there can be a certain exact percentage of matter that can be replaced in the revived person. this leads to the problem of how much matte can be replaced and how fast and have the same person. Even if you determine if you have the same person will this actually be the a case of life after death for the original?

If it is all the same matter but the brain structure is that of someone else is this someone else or is it the original? He will behave differently and actually say that she is not the original. If it is someone else then is is a case of life after death for this other person? Or is this the creation of a brand new person? With the right structure and functioning of the body you can create any behavior thus any set of memories totally different from the original.

When one piece of evidence or one argument does not supply overwhelming proof, numerous arguments together can by chipping away at all parts of the other theories With these pieces of the puzzle a whole coherent theory can be formed that leads to a scientific understanding of life after death and immortality.