Darrow's Argument on Consciousness and Memories Darrow’s best argument against the idea that our consciousness and memories survive after the death of our physical beings: does his argument stand up to cross-examination? One of the key conceptions attacked by Clarence Darrow as he sets about rejecting the idea that human beings are immortal is the conception that our consciousness and our memories survive after we physically cast off the mortal coil; this really ties in with Darrow’s contemptuous dismissal of the idea that souls can exist. Darrow appears to be a strict empiricist and holds that there is no evidence that a soul comes into being the instant that a human life comes into being. Life, in Darrow’s estimation, is nothing more...The end:
.....n ancient soul that just so happens to inhabit a new bodily form. All in all, Darrow wants us to believe that, because the mind can deteriorate in old age to the point that we forget everything even whilst we are still alive, we are foolish to believe that minds and consciousness survive us in death. However, this is a wrong way of looking at things: if there is no evidence that souls exist, then there is also no evidence that they do not exist. Given this fact, we are foolhardy to dismiss notions – such as the idea of post-mortem consciousness and ideas – simply because we have no tangible proof of their presence in the universe. Works Cited Darrow, Clarence. “The myth of the soul.” Pp.38-45 (additional information not provided by client).