“There is no conclusive evidence of life after death. But there is no evidence of any sort against it. Soon enough you will know.”

—  Robert A. Heinlein , Time Enough for Love

So why fret about it?
Source: Time Enough for Love (1973)

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "There is no conclusive evidence of life after death. But there is no evidence of any sort against it. Soon enough you w…" by Robert A. Heinlein?
Robert A. Heinlein photo
Robert A. Heinlein 557
American science fiction author 1907–1988

Related quotes

Bertrand Russell photo

“Not enough evidence God! Not enough evidence!”

Bertrand Russell book Religion and Science

As quoted in Wesley C. Salmon's "Religion and Science: A New Look at Hume's Dialogues," Philosophical Studies 33 (1978), p. 176.
Also in the New York Times article So God's Really in the Details? (May 11, 2002) by Emily Eakin: "Asked what he would say if God appeared to him after his death and demanded to know why he had failed to believe, the British philosopher and staunch evidentialist Bertrand Russell replied that he would say, 'Not enough evidence, God! Not enough evidence.'
The original source of this quote is an article by Leo Rosten published in Saturday Review/World (February 23, 1974) which features an interview with Bertrand Russell. There, Rosten writes http://www.unz.org/Pub/SaturdayRev-1974feb23-00025: "Confronted with the Almighty, [Russell] would ask, 'Sir, why did you not give me better evidence?'"
Disputed

“Before you have faith you must believe, and before you believe there must be evidence of some sort to persuade the mind. Faith is remembering that evidence and holding to it against all that seems to challenge or contradict it.”

Samuel Youd (1922–2012) British writer

The Prince in Waiting

Karl Pearson photo

“The absence of the improbable, the redundancy of the probable, is just as much conclusive evidence against conformity with scientific law as the too frequent occurrence of the improbable itself.”

Karl Pearson (1857–1936) English mathematician and biometrician

"The Scientific Aspect of Monte Carlo Roulette" (1894)

Heinrich Müller photo

“You are a very interesting case, General. Do you know what fat file of evidence we have against you here?”

Heinrich Müller (1900–1945) German police official and head of the Gestapo

To General Walter Dornberger, 1944. Quoted in "Gestapo: Instrument of Tyranny" - by Edward Crankshaw

“Witzel starts out with the intention of pitting the linguistic evidence of place-names and river-names against the evidence of archaeology; and he ends up having to try and argue against, or explain away, this linguistic evidence, since it only confirms the archaeological evidence.”

Shrikant Talageri (1958) Indian author

The Rigveda: A Historical Analysis (2000), Chapter 7 : The Indo-European Homeland

“The evidence of the Avestan meters confirms to the hilt the conclusions compelled by the evidence of the Avestan names: namely, (...) that the Early and Middle Books of the Rigveda precede the period of composition of the Avesta.”

Shrikant Talageri (1958) Indian author

Talageri 2009:80
The Rigveda and the Avesta (2008)

Tryon Edwards photo

“Credulity is belief on slight evidence, with no evidence, or or against evidence. In this sense it is the infidel, not the believer, who is credulous. 'The simple,' says Solomon, 'believeth every word.”

Tryon Edwards (1809–1894) American theologian

Source: A Dictionary of Thoughts, 1891, p. 96.

Bill Moyers photo

“A free press is one where it's okay to state the conclusion you're led to by the evidence.”

Bill Moyers (1934) American journalist

Speech at the National Conference on Media Reform (15 May 2005) http://www.freepress.net/news/8120
Context: A free press is one where it's okay to state the conclusion you're led to by the evidence. One reason I'm in hot water is because my colleagues and I at NOW didn't play by the conventional rules of Beltway journalism. Those rules divide the world into Democrats & Republicans, liberals & conservatives, and allow journalists to pretend they have done their job if instead of reporting the truth behind the news, they merely give each side an opportunity to spin the news.

Related topics