‘Through Valley of the Shadow of Death’: Death In-Between and Betwixt “Life After Life” in Mind Uploading Immortality

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The topic addressed (life after life in immortality) can be understood as a key issue within Christian eschatology. The author aims to show how Teilhard de Chardin's "Omega Point" and the "principle of emptiness" can help to understand the transitional phase between biological mortality and digital immortality. To do so, the author seeks to expand and delve into the very limits of death.

The text is well structured and the writing of the body of the text is clear. It is well written and formally correct. It has an appropriate and theologically precise language.

The title is appropriate to the content of the text and the summary reflects very well the main idea and the thematic that will be addressed throughout the article.

In addition, the author resorts to relevant sources and studies for the substantiation of what is exposed in the article. The interpretation of the literature cited is correct and pertinent. The bibliographical references are relevant to the chosen topic.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. We sincerely appreciate your 
thoughtful assessment and are truly grateful for your acceptance of the manuscript as it stands.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper is valuable and discusses the boundary between life and death by connecting the mind-uploading technology, which is deeply discussed in transhumanism, to Teilhard de Chardin's Omega Point. In particular, the connection between the mind-uploading technology and the Omega Point is considered meaningful. The references cited in this paper are appropriate, and the arguments that follow are solid. However, I do not think that this paper is sufficient to be published in an academic journal. I suggest revising the following parts.

This paper does not sufficiently connect the explanation of the mind-uploading technology in the first part and the Omega Point in the second part. Therefore, it seems that there are two articles. I want the author to conduct more research on the second part and connect both parts.
This paper's basic argument is that the analysis of Teilhard de Chardin's death, related to Omega Point, has a connection to mind-uploading technology. However, I cannot find sufficient arguments on how the analysis of death on page 7 is connected to mind-uploading technology. The author needs to develop more analysis of death to communicate with mind-uploading technology. 

The following is a minor point. In academic writing, the first-person subject is not used. However, this paper contains a lot of first-person subjects (we). Please revise it to be more objective. Please refer to the writing method of this journal for the direct quotation and footnotes in line 233 and modify them. Also, correct the name 'Teilhard de Chardin' instead of 'de Chardin.' Thank you.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

In academic writing, the first-person subject is not used. However, this paper contains a lot of first-person subjects (we). Please revise it to be more objective. Correct the name 'Teilhard de Chardin' instead of 'de Chardin.'

Author Response

We sincerely thank you for taking the time to review this manuscript and for providing valuable feedback. 
Your thoughtful comments and suggestions have been greatly appreciated and have helped to improve 
the quality and clarity of our work.
Below are our detailed point-by-point responses below, addressing each of the reviewers’ comments. The 
corresponding revisions and corrections have been made in the manuscript and are clearly indicated using 
track changes in the resubmitted files for your convenience. We hope that the revisions adequately 
address the concerns raised and meet the expectations of the reviewers and editorial team. Thank you 
once again for your careful consideration and constructive feedback.
Comment (1): This paper does not sufficiently connect the explanation of the mind-uploading technology in 
the first part and the Omega Point in the second part. Therefore, it seems that there are two articles. I 
want the author to conduct more research on the second part and connect both parts.
This paper's basic argument is that the analysis of Teilhard de Chardin's death, related to Omega Point, has 
a connection to mind-uploading technology. However, I cannot find sufficient arguments on how the 
analysis of death on page 7 is connected to mind-uploading technology. The author needs to develop more 
analysis of death to communicate with mind-uploading technology.
Response (1): We have given careful and rigorous attention to the connection between mind uploading (MU) 
and Teilhard de Chardin’s reflections on death in relation to the Omega Point. The focus is not on the Omega 
Point itself as a conceptual endpoint, but rather on the notion of death as a transitional space — the "death 
gap" — to emphasize that death is both non-negotiable and biologically inescapable. It is a critical prerequisite 
for any revolutionary transformation of being. In this context, it is not possible to reach the Omega Point or to 
attain a new mode of consciousness within a digital or computational framework, without first passing 
through death. Death remains an indispensable and unavoidable threshold in the movement toward any 
radically transformed existence. 
Comment (2): The following is a minor point. In academic writing, the first-person subject is not used. 
However, this paper contains a lot of first-person subjects (we). Please revise it to be more objective. 
Please refer to the writing method of this journal for the direct quotation and footnotes in line 233 and 
modify them. Also, correct the name 'Teilhard de Chardin' instead of 'de Chardin.' 
Response (2): We have carefully followed the style of the journal and also corrected the name Teilhard de 
Chardin 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

As written, the thesis of the argument is rather obvious, given the various presuppositions of the author. As I understand the article, the main thesis is that death is part of a process of evolution in the (spiritual) consciousness of human beings. Mind uploading (MU) would no longer lead to death, which would mean consciousness would move into a perpetual state of stagnation--given that death is necessary for the evolution of consciousness. By itself, this argument does not seem to me to be compelling. However, what could potentially make the argument more compelling would be to drop the presupposition that MU would bring an end to the evolution of consciousness. There is a kind of "death" with MU, one which could be seen as a very significant movement in the evolution of human consciousness. True, it may not lead to "Omega Point" as conceived by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, but it could be argued that it could lead to something similar to this. Examining this potential problem with the argument may yield a more compelling thesis for the author.

Author Response

We sincerely thank you for taking the time to review this manuscript and for providing valuable feedback. 
Your thoughtful comments and suggestions have been greatly appreciated and have helped to improve 
the quality and clarity of our work.
Below are our detailed point-by-point responses below, addressing each of the reviewers’ comments. The 
corresponding revisions and corrections have been made in the manuscript and are clearly indicated using 
track changes in the resubmitted files for your convenience. We hope that the revisions adequately 
address the concerns raised and meet the expectations of the reviewers and editorial team. Thank you 
once again for your careful consideration and constructive feedback.
Comment (1): As written, the thesis of the argument is rather obvious, given the various presuppositions of 
the author. As I understand the article, the main thesis is that death is part of a process of evolution in the 
(spiritual) consciousness of human beings. Mind uploading (MU) would no longer lead to death, which 
would mean consciousness would move into a perpetual state of stagnation--given that death is necessary 
for the evolution of consciousness. By itself, this argument does not seem to me to be compelling. 
However, what could potentially make the argument more compelling would be to drop the 
presupposition that MU would bring an end to the evolution of consciousness. There is a kind of "death" 
with MU, one which could be seen as a very significant movement in the evolution of human 
consciousness. True, it may not lead to "Omega Point" as conceived by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, but it 
could be argued that it could lead to something similar to this.
Response (1): Through our revision, we have demonstrated that both mind uploading (MU) and Teilhard de 
Chardin’s eschatological vision could, in their respective frameworks, lead to a form of immortality. We are 
not disputing the possibility of immortality itself; rather, we are challenging the assumption that MU can 
bypass death. In our view, death is an essential and non-negotiable element in all transitions from 
biological existence to other modes of being, whether digital or spiritual.
Teilhard de Chardin’s own death offers an instructive perspective in this regard, underscoring the 
indispensable role of death in the ongoing human pursuit of immortality. Our focus, therefore, is not on 
what becomes of consciousness once it has been successfully uploaded into a digital substrate — at which 
point it could, arguably, be considered ‘resurrected’ in a new form — but on the transitional moment itself. 
This moment, which we describe as the "death space," marks the passage between biological embodiment 
and digital existence.
Our argument is not that MU would bring an end to the evolution of consciousness, but that any such 
evolution must, as with all meaningful transformations of being, pass through the necessary threshold of 
death. This death space is critical to understanding both the limitations and possibilities of future 
conceptions of immortality.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This revised version has been well revised to meet the reviewer's intention. I hope that this paper will be published and used well in the relevant academic circles.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The revisions are sufficient for publication.