Quoting the great philosopher Woody Allen, "I do not believe in an afterlife, although I am bringing a change of underwear." May we all be similarly prepared. Our upcoming discussion will focus on pondering the imponderable --  belief systems that animate our respective understanding of and relationship with the universe. 

The lead article ( What happens When You Die? ) offers a highly simplified, stripped-down menu of perspectives on the afterlife. The nature of the subject lends itself more to conjecture than answers. As such, just be aware of any doctrinal certainty that might have arisen out of your exposure to an early-stage pre-packaged orthodoxy -- religious or otherwise -- that may tend to narrow an otherwise open mind. We are certainly not limited to the cited versions, some of which may be regarded quite fanciful. Here they are (hold your applause until the end): 

Eternal Soul: Cartesian Dualism posits that a metaphysical soul, separate from the body, is the source of consciousness, such that the soul exists without reference to body, physical property or any sense of time; compared to Physicalism, providing consciousness being a function of internal biological processes;

Reincarnation: after death comes reincarnation; time and place perceptions do not apply under the Cyclic Universe theory i.e. the universe you have experienced and will continue to experience represents an infinite number of cycles, each containing a different version of you;

Eternal Return: you have already lived and will continue to live the exact same life; the supposition rests on the notion that time, being infinite, is applied to the inherent finiteness of anything in the universe e.g. the atoms in your body; central to Nietzsche's philosophy and has some applicability to the stoic notion of amor fati i.e. love of one's fate;

Simulated Universe: you don't exist and the Universe itself is a simulated environment; existence is but a program such that you could be recycled, erased, or stored in a hard drive a la' The Matrix;

Universal Consciousness: when you die, you transform from something into everything, having been released from the limitations of the human body, you rejoin the universal consciousness of the so-called panpsychic world-spirit;

Parallel Universes: you will continue to exist in an infinite number of parallel universes;

Religious Traditions (this one arbitrarily added to the list): the teachings, guidance or inspiration offered by any religious tradition, whether or not formally recognized. 

We may pause here to entertain and discuss your resonance with any of the above (or, for that matter, any other). Many of these versions have found their way into various religious, spiritual, or metaphysical thinking and, for that reason, are certainly candidates for discussion.  Short of that, however, we will entertain one other supposition i.e.  

Nothingness: after death, all conscious experience ceases; game over.

This last version was judged in the lead article as the "Most likely the scariest and most depressing after-death scenario. The thought that this life is the only thing that exists, and that after it comes an eternity of darkness, can be terrifying."

Says who? Is the notion of  "nothingness" really all that terrifying? What jumps out here, as compared to the alternative versions, seems to be the compelling need for some kind of permanence. Yet, consider, in the other scenarios, the reference to a "you" is so fundamentally different than what you know to be your current embodiment it might as well be a non-"you."  So, how exactly are these other scenarios any less terrifying? It's as if semantics are soothing the ego structure i.e. the afterlife versions are simply different ways to fool the current ego's need to launch itself into the forever.

We might then compare the anxiety attendant to death to the almost matter-of-fact serenity expressed by certain philosophers we've discussed. Greek philosopher Epicurus counseled, "death does not concern us, because as long as we exist, death is not here. And when it does come, we no longer exist." ( MM 10/2/17 Chasing Epicurus). Likewise, 18th century Scottish philosopher David Hume -- seeing the "self" as but a collection of perceptions in perpetual flux -- described his end days, "quite free from anxiety, impatience, or low spirits, and pass(ing) his time very well with the assistance of amusing books." ( MM 10/1/18 David Hume).

Still, though, there there seems to be some underlying drive for this sense of permanence. Yuval Noah Harari recently wrote of the extraordinary efforts of scientists for whom death isn't a divine decree but merely a technical problem to be solved ( Harari). Others seek a kind of permanence through their work. Woody Allen, though, is having none of that. When asked if he hoped to live forever in the memory of moviegoers, he answered, "I'd rather live on in my apartment."