Ninavism - The Philosophy of Immortality
Ordering a Book
Feedback Form
1. Technological Immortality
2. Final Immortality
3. Life Creation and Propagation
4. Life Centres in the Universe
5. Reincarantion Combined with Resurrection
6. Complete Model of Immortality
7. Postimmortality
8. History & Evolution of Immortality
9. Ninavism
10. Supernatural Forces
11. Problem of Evil
12. Epistemology
13. Methodology
14. Compatibilities of Immortalities
15. Heaven(s) & Hell(s)
16. Implementation of Final Immortality
17. Implementation of Present Immortality
18. Paradoxes & Puzzles of Final Immortality
19. Animals & Plants
20. Atheism
21. Population Control
22. Gays
Glossary of Terms
About Web Site
Chapter 12


Summary of Chapter

Religious texts, philosophies, and literature deal extensively with Immortality. More recently, science and technology started investigating the possibilities of creating Immortality. All those sources form together the knowledge of Immortality. Epistemology of Immortality is the theoretical analysis of justification and validity of this knowledge.

Comparing Philosophical, Religious, and Scientific Knowledge

The Philosophy of Immortality is anchored upon traditional religious knowledge, but it also complements and adds to it. Philosophical and religious knowledge are similar in some respects - they are both based upon beliefs. In addition, they both rely upon indirect verifications of Immortality by benefits at present, and its direct scientific verification in the future. Both Ninavism and traditional religions consider Immortality as real. There are some differences between philosophical and religious accounts of Immortality. Religious knowledge is grounded in Holy books and revelations. Philosophical knowledge accepts the principles of Holy books, but considers some details as inaccurate and incomplete. Philosophical extensions to knowledge of Immortality are based to a large extent upon feelings of believers.
      Ninavism does not rely upon miracles because they cannot be verified experimentally. However, philosophy does not reject traditional religious miracles in the past and in the future. Science cannot prove that miracles did not happen in the past, and that they will not happen in the future. Science can only argue that miracles do not happen in the present. The limitations of science are due to the nature of scientific knowledge. The occurrence of miracles in the past or in the future might be due to supernatural events, but also due to one-off natural events, such as the external parallel universe passing over the visible one once in a million years. This is a possibility considered by cosmologists that cannot be eliminated by science.
      The areas that scientific knowledge cannot predict reliably are Human Goals of the distant future, like in 10 million years. No scientist can predict the level of technological capabilities of mankind that far ahead. The Humans of Future might be able to do things that look like miracles in the present. Science has severe limitations in its knowledge - it only says about events that can be predicted with a high level of probability. Philosophies and religions do not have these restrictions. They talk about events that, from the current level of knowledge, look supernatural or like miracles, but might be perfectly natural in the future.
      There are many contradictions between various accounts of Immortality. If philosophical and religious knowledge had been like science, the contradictions would have been removed by conducting experimental verifications. In view of both Ninavism and religions, scientific verification of Immortality will be done in the future, but because it is not available now, the contradictions between various accounts of Immortality cannot be decisively resolved. Philosophy and religions need to live with that. It is possible to minimize those contradictions, and it is one of the main goals of Ninavism.

Science of God(s)

The established methodology in science is conducting experiments and confirming hypothesis or theory by verification. Science calls it asking questions to Nature, and getting answers in the form of experimental results. Some scientists treat this methodology as proof of their superiority over those who do not ask, but it is not. The experimentations by scientists is a proof of their limitation. Scientists are prepared to modify theories if experiments show inconsistent results. They treat readiness to modify theories as a proof that they are clever. However, this is rather proof of their restricted knowledge. If they were clever, they would not have to change any theories. Limitations of scientists are not absolute, but rather relative.
      Existence and non-existence of science in subjects depends on the level of their advancement. For example, stones do not have science because they do not think; they are dead. Animals are not scientists because they are too limited. God(s) know everything. They do not need to experiment like scientists. God(s) are not scientists because they are too clever for that. Men in Heaven are similar to God(s). They do not need to experiment because they know everything. In 10 million years' time, when Final World is near, research institutions will gradually close. Scientists will have to find new jobs. There will be no research in Heaven(s).

Religion of God(s)

Similar to science, the existence of religion in subjects also depends on the level of their development. For example, stones do not have religion because they do not think. Animals are not believers because they are underdeveloped. Each belief implies incomplete knowledge. Since God(s) know everything, they do not need to believe. They simply know what is true and what is not, without belief. People in Heaven are like God(s), knowing everything. They do not need to believe in anything because they see everything.
      Faith is the most important part of any religion, but not the only one. Religions also teach respect to God(s), morality, etc., but without belief, there would not be religion. Religion exists only in the intermediate stages of life, such as in Humans of Present. The conclusion that there is no religion in Heaven(s) might be astonishing to traditional religious believers. There is worship in Heaven in the sense of the respect to God(s), but there is no faith as it is currently on the earth.
      The transition from earthly to non-earthly existence will be probably gradual. In 10 million years, when the coming of Final Word is imminent and knowledge of Immortality has become scientific, the places of worship and people serving them will slowly disappear. There will be no need for them. This will occur in any method of creating the Final World, by Humans of Future, Aliens, Nature, or traditional Supernatural Forces. In present times, when Final Immortality is still remote, there is an obvious need for places of worships and for clergy, but they need to be prepared that they will not last forever. This does not negate the reality of the Supernatural Forces they represent.

Science and Religion of Future Humans

Humans of Future are not God(s) in an absolute sense; they are treated as Supernatural Forces by current age people, but this is relative. Humans of Future are much more knowledgeable than Humans of Present, but with less power than God(s). In 10 million years, Humans of Future will not be experimenting and believing, because they will know everything. Science and religion will disappear, or rather they will merge. Science and religion are needed only for creatures whose knowledge is partial. They exist when knowledge needs to be extended. Once knowledge is complete, there will be no science and no religion, only knowledge. Humans of Future will be able to prove scientifically Present Immortality, and build the Final World alone, or with the help of Aliens or traditional Supernatural Forces.

Science and Religion of Present Humans

In present times, both scientists and believers are limited. If so, then what is the difference between them? The answer lies in the level of their precision. Scientists are much more accurate than believers, because they systematically restrict themselves to limited knowledge. They methodologically do not accept knowledge that is doubtful. Believers cannot verify their beliefs experimentally. Believers are much less accurate than scientists because they accept doubtful knowledge.
      The question arises: if beliefs are doubtful, why are they not rejected? The answer is that belief are much too important to be rejected or suspended. Retaining doubtful religious knowledge is more beneficial than rejecting it. If everyone was a scientist since antiquity, and refrained from any religion due to its being doubtful, then humanity would still be living in the stone age, because the doubtful beliefs were and are powerful forces of progress. One can look at some societies with weak beliefs to see that. Therefore, keeping unproven beliefs is rational and not, as some claim, irrational.
      Present society on the earth is characterized by the separation of tasks between science and religion. Scientists know better what is known. Religious leaders know better what is not known. The two groups cannot replace each other at the present time. Some scientists and clergy tried to destroy each other in the past, with bad results. Science and religion will eventually merge, but it might take 10 million years. In the meantime, they need to be separated and not obstruct each other.

Natural Versus Supernatural

In view of the Philosophy of Immortality, there is no contradiction between supernatural and natural. They are relative to the level of knowledge. What is supernatural to people with small knowledge, is natural to those with high knowledge. Ninavism supports both supernatural and natural, and there is no inconsistency in that. Supernatural is a special case of natural. One can wonder whether there is sense in using the term 'supernatural' at all. The answer is yes. It is convenient to use the word 'supernatural' for those natural events that are hard to explain at present levels of knowledge.
      In absolute terms, everything is natural. In an absolute sense, the supernatural does not exist. For example, God(s) are not supernatural; they are natural. They appear supernatural to humans whose knowledge is limited. Whatever God(s) do is natural. For example, raising from dead and Resurrection done by God(s) is perfectly natural to them because they know how to do it. It is supernatural to humans in the present age because they do not have sufficient knowledge and technology to do it. Miracles in an absolute sense do not exist. What is a miracle, is natural to God(s).

Restrictions on Supernatural

Supernatural does not mean unlimited. Supernatural Forces must comply with the Laws of Nature, even if some acts of Supernatural Forces look non-natural. What is supernatural to humans is natural to them. Supernatural Forces do not have unlimited powers. They are restricted in what they can do.

Logic and Rationality

Theologies of some traditional religions depict Supernatural Forces as not complying with the Laws of Logic. If Supernatural Forces are above logic, then any rational knowledge about them is impossible. All rational reasoning is based upon the rules of logic. If logic is rejected, then rational reasoning is impossible in relation to Supernatural Forces. Does it mean that any knowledge about Supernatural Forces is impossible? The answer is no. In traditional theologies, the knowledge of Supernatural Forces is possible; not by rational reasoning, but rather by revelations (such as in Holy books) or lucky guesses. Ninavism supports the notion of traditional Supernatural Forces, but limits their power. They comply with both the Laws of Nature and Logic. More details about the limited power of Supernatural Forces and their logic is presented in the chapter PROBLEM OF EVIL.

Principle of Immortality

The Principle of Immortality is formulated in just two words: IMMORTALITY EXISTS. The Principle does not state any details of Immortality. It only says that living creatures have Immortality, without specifying how it looks, its place, duration, whether all organisms have it or just some of them. The Principle does not say whether Immortality exists in present times, or in the future, or as a Reincarnation, or as a Resurrection, or any combination of them. It does not state anything about natural or Supernatural Forces. The Principle does not explain what is the cause of Immortality, and who is responsible for it.
      The Principle of Immortality cannot be proved in current times by experimentation in a scientific, repetitive way. However, the Principle is strongly justified by human feelings. The truth of the Principle is based upon belief, like in religion. Is the belief in the Principle of Immortality a religion? The answer is yes and no. Yes, because the belief in the Principle of Immortality is part of all existing religions. No, because religions normally contain much more than the Principle.
      Since the belief in the Principle of Immortality by itself is not an existing religion, the question arises whether this belief in itself can become a future religion? Possibly yes, but the problem with such religion is the justification for the Principle itself. All existing religions provide an explanation or background for the belief in the Principle of Immortality. However, if the belief in the Principle by itself is the religion, then there is no specific justification for the Principle, except belief by itself. This is based upon human's feelings which is an important justification, but without any further arguments and surroundings provided by existing religions.
      The next question arises, why would the followers of existing religions be tempted to omit details of Immortality and Supernatural Forces, leaving just naked the Principle of Immortality as the only thing to believe? The reason for omissions is that the details of Immortality and Supernatural Forces frequently lead to paradoxes and contradictions. Once those details are abandoned, the paradoxes and contradictions disappear, and this has a strong appeal.
      The degree to which details of Immortality and Supernatural Forces are omitted by religions is variable. Some partial details are accepted, some are rejected, and some are left as undecided. Many believers accept Immortality and Supernatural Forces as existing objectively, but at the same time, admit that human concepts of Immortality and Supernatural Forces are not 100% true, not perfect.
      The Principle of Immortality is the minimum content of any model of Immortality. The Principle is present in all models developed by Ninavism: Final Immortality, Present Immortality, and CMI (Complete Model of Immortality). Models normally contain much more than this Principle, but still it is treated as the fall-back, as a backup if everything else fails. Ninavism considers the Principle of Immortality to be true. However, the truth of the Principle is not axiomatic; it is not assumed. Rather its truth is verified indirectly.

Immortality Agnosticism

Agnosticism is the view that Supernatural Forces and Immortality are unknown. It has a long tradition in the history of religions. The most common reason is that the nature (essence) of Supernatural Forces and Immortality are unknown. The other reason is that details cannot be verified by repetitive experience. Still another one is that some details of Supernatural Forces and Immortality are paradoxical or contradictory. There are many different versions of Agnosticism. It can be complete, where everything regarding Immortality and Supernatural Forces is considered unknown. Or it can be partial, where only some of the details are unknown.
      The Principle of Immortality abandons all details of Immortality. Is omitting details of Immortality the same as Agnosticism? Yes, partially. It is not complete Agnosticism as long as the Principle itself is not abandoned. Complete Agnosticism considers even the Principle of Immortality as unknown. Ninavism defines Immortality Agnosticism as a belief in the Principle of Immortality itself, combined at the same time, with the belief that some details of Immortality are, to a large extent, unknown; this is partial Agnosticism. Immortality Agnosticism has many versions, degrees, and levels depending on how many details of Immortality are considered to be unknown.
      The highest degree of Agnosticism is declaring that validity of the Principle of Immortality is unknown. This is complete Agnosticism, where all the details of Immortality and even the Principle itself, are unknown. Most major religions are partially Agnostic. For example, all religions which are split into sects consider some details of opposite sects to be Agnostic. However, major religions do not like calling themselves Agnostic, because this would be understood as almost complete Agnosticism, whereas those religions are Agnostic in just tiny aspect of their beliefs.
      Partial Agnosticism by individual members of a religion is a normal and acceptable view within most religions, as long as it is not openly promoted. Agnosticism is usually not accepted as an official teaching of most religions. This is due to fact that the majority of members in any given religion believe that all or most of the details of Immortality professed by that religion, are known, and are not Agnostic. Immortality Agnosticism has its disadvantages, like undermining the positive arguments of existing religions, the lack of appeal to human feelings, and the ease of falling into Atheistic Agnosticism. However, Immortality Agnosticism also has some advantages, such as the ease of explaining paradoxes and contradictions between religions.
      The desire to promote and develop a multiplicity of details of Immortality has its source in human subjectivity. Human knowledge structures are based on this world experience, not other world experiences. This world shapes human knowledge, not the Immortal World. Human feelings are based upon interactions within this world, not upon interactions within the other world. Therefore, the details of Immortality modelled on this world have much more appeal to humans, rather than something that is unknown, or known only a little.

Beyond Principle of Immortality Towards Fully Grown Beliefs

The bare Principle of Immortality is not appealing to the imagination. Humans are used to illustrations of abstract principles in the form of examples. Details of Immortality provide that illustration. The need for illustrations is the result of inherent human subjectivity. Humans are grown in this world; the only illustrations appealing to human feelings are also from this world. The details of Immortality are modelled upon this world. The dependence of humans upon this world is caused by ingrained subjectivity. Aliens who live on a planet with completely different characteristic than on the earth, are subjective to their planet. They are restricted in the modelling of Immortality upon conditions existing there. All living organisms in the universe, whether on this planet or any other, are fundamentally restricted by conditions in which they grow and where they evolve.
      Humans form religions full of details of Immortality which are an imitation of their own world. They are all incorrect in the sense that they are not 100% accurate. However, the approximated details of Immortality are correct in a sense that, without them, the picture of the Immortal World is even more distorted. The richness of the details of Immortality has a strong appeal to humans' feelings, even if those details are not completely accurate. It is confusing to many people to say that something is only partially correct. People like certainty. Since abandoning all details of Immortality would be a greater distortion of the truth than treating all details of Immortality as completely accurate, therefore psychologically it is better to treat all details of Immortality as absolutely correct. This is exactly what many religions are doing. They present their teachings as fully correct, even if they are not 100% accurate. This is human subjectivity.
      If all major religions are correct relative to non-religious views, then which religion is the best approximation? This is disputed; religions are competing. They all try to show that their depiction of Immortality is the best. The Philosophy of Immortality is the extension of religions. Ninavism tries to show that models of Final Immortality, Present Immortality, and CMI are the best approximations.

Verification of Immortality Beliefs

Human knowledge forms a network of ideas. The ideas themselves and the interconnections between them require verification or formal acceptance, which is a type of restriction imposed on the creation of ideas and connections between them. If ideas are not controlled, they grow into falsity. This applies to scientific knowledge as well as to Immortality beliefs. Multiplicity of Immortality views might be seen as a strength rather than as a weakness. The more Immortality views, the more possibilities of Immortality. On the other hand, the same multiplicity of views can create confusion because people do not know which view is correct, or better.
      Unrestricted growth of Immortality knowledge creates divisions, splits the groups and weakens the faith. For all those reasons, the Philosophy of Immortality and religions have self-imposed limits over their growth. Direct scientific experience is not a valid verification method for Immortality at present. Religions use other criteria to limit their growth, such as revelations. Some of the methods are administrative or political, others intellectual. Ninavism uses mainly indirect methods of verification.

Direct and Indirect Verification of Knowledge

The truth is most commonly verified by comparing knowledge with reality. For example, criminal courts check the testimony of each witness with other accounts to confirm that one's description is actually matching reality. The correspondent definition of truth is the agreement of a statement or description with reality. This is a direct verification of knowledge. However, in many cases, it is very difficult to establish what actually the reality is. Many cases are much more complicated than simple truths tested in criminal court. Scientific truth is frequently so complicated that one cannot see any reality behind it. Immortality truth is even more complex because it cannot be tested by ordinary individual experience, like in science.
      There are many limits imposed on the growth of human knowledge. The type of restriction depends on a particular area of knowledge. The most common form of control is verification of knowledge by means of direct experience, such as observation or measurement. This approach is used in empirical sciences, such as physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, etc.
      Science also accepts truths that are not directly verified. Different forms of restrictions are used in Immortality beliefs. Like a science, Immortality knowledge cannot grow unrestricted into falsity. Immortality beliefs are, to a large extent, not based on direct experiments. Lack of direct experimental verifiability is the essential feature of Immortality beliefs. Immortality that could be verified by direct observation or measurement, would not be a religion, but a science. Immortality is not experimentally tested, but believed. However, Immortality still needs to be verified indirectly. Models of Final Immortality, Present Immortality and CMI, presented by Ninavism are verified both indirectly and directly.

Stages of Immortality Verification

Both Ninavism and traditional religions support direct verification of Immortality by observation in the future. However, the timing is different. Ninavism supports the view that for all models developed in this book, Final Immortality, Present Immortality and CMI, the timing for the ultimate verification is 10 million years. Traditional religions are less specific regarding a timetable. Some religious groups assume it is imminent, others that it is unknown, indeterminate. Ninavism does not argue with that, but rather treats it as a compatible view. The initial stage of Immortality verification is done in a few ways. The most important one is evaluating the benefits of Immortality for individual believers and the entire society. There are a number of benefits - it is indirect verification. This method is the main verification procedure used by Ninavism to all models developed in this book.

Benefits of Immortality Beliefs

The most important benefits of Immortality beliefs are the happiness, morality and strength of society. All of them depend on Immortality details.


The influence of the belief in Immortality on happiness proceeds along many paths. The most obvious one is the fear of death. All, or almost all humans and animals fear death. Like all fears, this affects happiness. People who do not fear death, or who fear it to a lesser extent, are happier than those who fear death a lot. It is well known from psychology that Immortality beliefs reduce the fear of death, and therefore increase happiness.
      The fear of death refers mainly to one's own death, rather than the death of others. Grieving is unhappiness due to the death of another person. The death of someone close, such as a child or beloved spouse causes enormous grief and reduces happiness. People with strong belief in Immortality cope much better with the death of a child or spouse when they are convinced that the deceased person is not actually completely dead, but rather lives on in a different world.
      People with strong beliefs in Reincarnation as part of their Immortality alleviate unhappiness due to inborn unfairness, by the conviction that in the next life, in the next Reincarnation, they will be born into much better conditions, with talents. The multiple successive Reincarnations compensate for the unfairness in any one particular life, by providing advantages in other lives. Thus, strong believers in Reincarnation are frequently happier than those who believe in only one life, particularly if that life is unfair. They are also happier than disbelievers, who only despair of their own disadvantages, but can do little about it.


The link between morality and belief in Immortality is obvious. Most traditional religions believe that quality of Immortality depends upon moral conduct in this world. Good moral behaviour is rewarded in Immortality and bad is punished. All models developed by Ninavism explicitly support the link between morality and Immortality. People who believe in Immortality have a very strong incentive to behave in a morally correct way before death. On the other hand, disbelievers frequently do not care about morality as long as nobody discovers their misdeeds.
      Some historical religions did not specify the connection between moral conduct and Immortality. Of those most notable are Australian Aborigines and the Aztecs of Mexico. Both of these proved to be bad. In Aboriginals, the lack of care about morality has led to a lack of discipline that is clearly visible until now, and is one of the causes of the disadvantages in the whole group as compared to European invaders of Australia whose discipline is much higher. The Aztec religion vanished very quickly. This was partly caused by the military conquest of Spain, but also due to the weakness of their morality stance. This can be compared with the military conquest of India by England. The Hindu Immortality beliefs have strong links between morality and Immortality. Their religion survived the English conquest, and to a large extent, the earlier Muslim invasion.

Sin and Guilt

The religious concept of sin is a powerful moral idea. It is connected with guilt. After committing a sinful act, many people feel a sense of guilt. This prompts them to improve their lives and not to sin again. Feeling of guilt is socially beneficial. Some religions did a great job in the past in instilling a sense of guilt in entire societies and cultures. It was a powerful force of progress in reducing dishonesty and corruption. It is better if people feels too much guilty, rather than not sufficiently guilty. The guiltier people feel, the better they behave. The best behaving society is the one where everyone feels guilty all the time, even if it is psychologically uncomfortable. On the other hand, if people are perfect, then they do not need to feel guilty. A society of perfect people will be available only in the Final Immortality. On this earth, almost everyone is not perfect.

Strength of Society

The strength of Society is somehow a general entity, but some aspects of it are sufficiently clear to describe. Beliefs in Immortality have a strong influence on the sense and purpose of life for individuals and for the entire society. Immortality provides motivation to create a better society. This, in turn, leads to strong and coherent societies with a clear vision for the future. The belief in Immortality has an impact on goals that governments are setting. Disbelievers have no motivation to care for future generations because, in the far future they will be dead, and not benefit directly from any improvements of life in the following generations. Disbelievers have no interest in setting national goals for the far future because nobody will reward them for their efforts when they are dead.

Communal Verification of Immortality

Science is not developed by all people, but rather by selected ones. Many men do not understand science, instead relying on individuals with special abilities in the area of rational thinking. Immortality beliefs sometimes rely on people with special abilities in other areas of thinking, in irrational areas that are based more on the heart rather than on rational reasoning. Like supporters of science, Immortality followers who do not have special abilities in thinking, depend on people who have these abilities. All types of truth, scientific, Immortality, mathematical, etc. are decided by individual people however frequently those people disagree whether or not a particular knowledge is true or false. So, who is right? Is it possible to decide the truth and falsity by voting?
      In the scientific community, the idea of voting on truth or falsity has been traditionally rejected out of hand. Many scientists claim that there is no need to vote; that experiments can decide everything. However, closer analysis of this claim shows that it is not that simple. It is correct that in simple cases, experiments can give a definite answer. However, it is also true that in complex cases, the results of experiments are not clear, that experiments need to be interpreted in a subjective manner. It is well known that frequently the truth in science is established by consensus. This is a sort of informal voting confirming that the majority of scientists in a given field agree that a particular knowledge is true or false. For example, consensus is very common in medical science.
      Verification of Immortality's truth also depends, to a large extent, on consensus. Immortality knowledge depends on acceptance by feelings of a large number of people. This knowledge resembles democracy where people decide by informal voting what is Immortality knowledge. Immortality truth depends on the benefits it brings, which is a communal experiment. Models of Final Immortality, Present Immortality, and CMI, are verified by Ninavism in a communal way even though they are proposed by individuals.


Revelations are the methods of verifying Immortality by drawing inferences from Sacred texts and from views of God(s), Avatars, or Prophets.

Holy Books

All major religions have Sacred texts that describe Immortality. Their truth is treated differently than the truth of scientific books. It is normal and acceptable to challenge the truth of scientific books by proposing different theories that are not referring to the original text, but rather to objective reality. With religious books, it is not normal to challenge them that way. The truths of religious books are frequently the starting point for building around and upon them Immortality truths.
      Religious books resemble the axioms of a mathematical deductive system, such as geometry. Mathematicians normally do not challenge the truth of geometrical axioms. They rather build other mathematical truths around and upon them. The mathematical axioms of a geometrical system are based upon very simple human intuitions. They are not challenged because of the simplicity and clarity of the intuition.
      Holy books are also based on human feelings. It is not feelings of just one or two people; Holy books are collective works. They were written by a large number of people. Before being accepted as Sacred texts, they were read hundreds of times by many men, who verified the validity of the statements with their own feelings. The fact that a text achieved a status as a Holy book is the communal confirmation of religious feelings of an entire society and culture. Holy books reflect historical feelings.
      Immortality feelings are different to human intuitions that support mathematical axioms. Immortality feelings are much more complex. For this reason, Immortality truths are also more complicated than geometrical axioms. Because of that complexity, religious books are frequently imprecise. The essence of Holy books is what counts, rather than the details. The overemphasis of details in Holy books leads to dogmatism that is the rigid literal treatment of Sacred texts. This attitude is not supported by Ninavism, while at the same time accepting general truths of Holy books.
      The Philosophy of Immortality treats Sacred texts as a secondary source of verification rather than the primary. This is due to the fact that the Sacred texts themselves are formulated on the basis of human feelings and social experiences. Holy books are frequently internally inconsistent. Sacred texts of different religions seem to contradict each other, particularly in the areas of Immortality. The explanation of that is part of Ninavism. Models of Final Immortality, Present Immortality and CMI try to reconcile Holy books of different religions.

God(s), Avatars, and Prophets

Another method of the verification of Immortality knowledge are the views and feelings of individuals with special skills, gifts or insights, such as God(s), Avatars, or Prophets. They decide, to a large extent, what is Immortality knowledge and what is not. As with Sacred texts, supernatural views are largely unsystematic, incomplete, and cannot be repeated on demand. For this reason, Ninavism does not use directly those views to verify the details for models of Immortality. However, views of God(s) and Prophets are still considered to be important and they are used to formulate the general ideas of the models of Immortality.

Reality of Immortality

Critics of the indirect verification of Immortality claim that increases in happiness, morality, and the strength of a society due to beliefs is caused by the mere imagination of Immortality, not due to the reality of Immortality. They say that Immortality exists only subjectively, in the human mind alone; that there is nothing in reality corresponding to the imagination of Immortality. To counter that, one needs to note that the Immortality belief is not the belief in imagined Immortality, but the belief in a real one. People are not getting happier, more moral, and increase the strength of their societies by believing in an imagined Immortality. People increase their happiness, morality and the strength of societies only when they believe that Immortality is real.
      The belief in Immortality is different to the belief in a temporary fantasy depicted by a fiction movie. When people watch a movie they know it is fiction, it is not real. Despite this, they still increase happiness by temporarily believing in fiction, which they know is an illusion. With Immortality, people increase happiness only when they think that the belief is real. They do not increase happiness when they think that their belief is fiction. Some people think that it would be good if Immortality beliefs were true, but they themselves do not believe. The imagination that Immortality beliefs are good without a strong conviction about their reality is not sufficient to increase happiness, morality, or the strength of a society. Beliefs need to be strong and convincing in order to work, to make a positive verification of Immortality.

Death Terror

Psychologists say that the concept of Immortality permits humans to cope with terror; the Immortality is a mental adaptation, a response to the fear of death. Based on that psychological finding, some philosophers go one step further, claiming that people wish Immortality, but it actually does not exist objectively; that Immortality is purely subjective, in a human's mind only. The Philosophy of Immortality accepts psychological findings that humans fear death. Ninavism also supports the view that people wish to have Immortality and that they create subjective ideas. However, the Philosophy of Immortality also maintains that behind that subjective idea, Immortality exists really and objectively as well.
      Ninavism supports the view that beliefs are partly rational and partly irrational. The irrationality of beliefs is a justified method of acquiring the knowledge of Immortality. Critics of Immortality, on the other hand, usually restrict themselves to rational arguments. They normally do not use irrational arguments to dismiss Immortality. However, if they say that they do not believe in Immortality, they are on an equal footing with believers, because disbelief is irrational.

Truth of Principle of Immortality

The discovery of Immortality, the realization that life does not finish after death, has helped to transform apes into humans. It was the most momentous discovery in human history. For this reason alone, Immortality is true, even if not all of its explanations are satisfactory. The details of Immortality described by various models and religions cannot be verified by direct experience in the present time. This is one of the reasons why there are many contradictions between different accounts of Immortality, even inside the same religion. Since the truth of the details of Immortality cannot be definitely established, critics have concluded that Immortality as a whole is not true. This conclusion is not correct. The details of Immortality are not important. What is important is the Principle, the general idea of Immortality, regardless of the details. The truth of Immortality is established in many ways other than through the accuracy of its details.
      The details of Immortality offered by various models and religions are just an illustration of the Principle of Immortality. Illustrations are the only way that humans are able to understand Immortality. The Principle of Immortality is abstract and not comprehensible without practical illustration, without some details. These details in themselves are not important. If some or even all the details of Immortality, as presented by models and religions, are not accurate, the Principle of Immortality is still true, because it is verified indirectly by its benefits.
      The details of Immortality are needed to evaluate the benefits. People cannot evaluate happiness, morality or the strength of a society on the basis of the Principle alone. They cannot say that the Principle makes them more or less happy or moral. However, when they see the details of Immortality, they are able to evaluate the benefits of the beliefs. Models of Final Immortality, Present Immortality and CMI, as proposed by Ninavism, are the exemplifications of the Principle of Immortality. They help to understand the Principle. Models offer as little detail as possible, but some details need to be supplied, or else the models are meaningless and impossible to verify.

Disbelief in Immortality the Biggest Distortion of Truth

Competing Immortality beliefs might all be partially true and false at the same time, because the exact nature and details of Immortality offered by each view are not precise, or are unclear. It is almost certain that none of the views is completely accurate in description of Immortality. Most Immortality views are true because they offer something that leads to an unknown Immortal life. Without an Immortality belief, there is no Immortal life. Lack of Immortality is the bigger distortion of truth than poorly described Immortality. Each view of Immortality is better than the rejection of Immortality, which is Atheism. This applies to all models of Immortality developed by Ninavism.

Spirits and Souls

The term 'spirit' has multiple meanings. Ninavism uses this word with a psychological or material meaning. According to this understanding, most organisms have spirits, perhaps even single cell bacterium. When the bacteria develop into higher order animals and into humans, spirits develop together with bodies. When organisms die, the spirits die together with the body. The spirit is the psychological entity that is investigated by science. Subjective ideas created in human brains are a part of spirits; they are of immense importance to religions. Spiritual life refers to subjective ideas about deceased people and about Supernatural Forces. They are all psychological entities investigated by both science and religion. Psychology prefers to avoid the words 'spirit' and 'spiritual', using instead the term 'consciousness' to describe subjective ideas inside human brains. Spirits and the spiritual life are a part of consciousness related to beliefs and religion.
      The term 'soul' describes a different entity to the spirit. Ninavism treats the soul as a mainly religious concept that is outside the scope of present-day science. There are many concepts of souls. The earliest religions, like Animistic and Australian Aborigines have one concept of the soul; Indian religions have another. Christianity uses still another idea. Ninavism presents its own concept of the soul that can be implemented in several different ways, depending on the model of Immortality. In some models, the soul is material, in others, it is technological, and in others, it is spiritual, like in traditional religions. The technological soul is not based upon any distinct ontological substance as it is in the traditional soul. It is rather a functional entity. More details are in the chapter IMPLEMENTATION OF PRESENT IMMORTALITY. The concept of the soul is not of primary importance to Ninavism, which can be formulated without it. The concept of the soul is used for convenience, because it is well known from traditional religions.
      The terms such as 'spiritual world', 'spiritual substance', 'spiritual body', and 'spiritual hardware', refer to various entities that are not exactly spirits, but rather somehow resemble them. The terms 'spiritual' and 'spirituality' are used to denote something in analogy to spirits. This means objects that are usually subjective, but sometimes are thought to exist objectively. The term 'Holy Spirit' means a Supernatural Force or God; it has nothing to do with the spirit understood in a psychological way. The term 'Ancestral Spirits' means the souls or ghosts of ancestors; this is part of Ancestor Worship and has little to do with psychological spirits. The terms 'Spiritism' and 'Spiritualism' are names of philosophical and religious movements that attempt to establish contacts with deceased people. In the terminological convention adopted by Ninavism, Spiritism and Spiritualism deal with souls rather than spirits.

Key Points of Chapter: