And let it be known I'm not the one who's professing uncertainty here ... Albeit the one thing I can be most certain of, is the fact that I don't know.

__________________
So when the body dies, and consciousness departs, where do "we" go? ... Off to define another "reality" perhaps?

How can you be certain of that? Perhaps everything you have said is absolutely correct? Maybe you really do "know", unlikely though it seems.

See how easy it is to make such paradoxical statements? Why you've probably even heard the one we used to ask in confirmation class, "If God is all powerful, can He make a rock so heavy that even He can't lift it?". Such statements like "I am certain of my uncertainty about everything", or "This statement is a lie" are simply nonsensical verbal paradoxes. They are not in any way indicative of deep thinking. Sorry.

Actually this is more in line with the Socratic method, which begins with admitting you don't know ... Now, maybe I was mistaken when I heard somebody repeat Socrates' little gem, when he said, "I must be the wisest man on earth because I know that I don't know," to mean that of a certainty truth can be known, even in the absolute sense -- or, at least acknowledged -- if you can discern the difference between knowing and not knowing within yourself. And yet this is where it all takes place madam, within "one's mind."

__________________
So when the body dies, and consciousness departs, where do "we" go? ... Off to define another "reality" perhaps?

It is nice to know that you have finally come around to agreeing what others here have been saying for a long time.

And I don't think that is quite what is meant by 'the socratic method'. It merely refers to teaching by asking questions, rather than simple lecturing. It does not imply that the teacher does not presume to know the answers, though it doesn't rule out that possibility. The idea is more to direct students into asking the right kinds of questions.

Nevertheless, I am truly thrilled that you have come to the conclusion that you know (almost) nothing with certainty. I wonder if this means that you will be more cautious about what you proclaim as "truth".

This universe came out of nothing, the way that particles and antiparticles come in and go out of existence. The anthropic principle should be evidence enough as to why we are here. A universe incapable of supporting life wouldn't have life, thus we wouldn't be in it wondering why we were in it, we would be in this one, arguing why we are. There simply shouldn't have to be any reason. The laws that require reason are just a property of a nonsensical universe.

There could be God that can do the undoable like "This is a lie" is the same as saying "This isn't the truth" which makes sense. He proved you wrong there goozleberry. In a nonsensical universe having laws. If there is a God, then He is a mathematician.