Proof of Immortality II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jabba said:
- Does my current existence allow for the possibility that I always exist?
Click to expand...
Even if it did, your alternative model is far less likely than the one supported by all the evidence.

Do you have any evidence that the "possibility that you always exist" is anything more than something you wish to be true?
 
Pixel42 said:
Your current, single, existence is consistent with the accepted scientific model. No alternative model is necessary, let alone more probable. The fact that you remain unable to grasp the basic error you are making even after two years of having it patiently explained to you is your problem, not the scientific model's.
Click to expand...
- But, is it consistent with, "I cannot not exist?"
- If so, is the probability of "I cannot not exist" less than 1/1080!?
 
Jabba said:
- Does my current existence allow for the possibility that I always exist?
Click to expand...


It can allow for something without suggesting it. For example, your current existence allows for the existence of rice pudding and income tax, but suggests neither.
 
Jabba said:
- But, is it consistent with, "I cannot not exist?"
- If so, is the probability of "I cannot not exist" less than 1/1080!?
Click to expand...


Before you existed there were about 13.5 billion years during which you didn't exist, so the proposition that you cannot not exist is clearly wrong.
 
Mojo said:
It can allow for something without suggesting it. For example, your current existence allows for the existence of rice pudding and income tax, but suggests neither.
Click to expand...
- I'll try the simple answer. My current existence has a bearing upon whether I cannot not exist. It has no bearing upon rice pudding.
 
Mojo said:
Before you existed there were about 13.5 billion years during which you didn't exist, so the proposition that you cannot not exist is clearly wrong.
Click to expand...
- Do you know that I didn't exist all those 13.5 billion years?
 
Jabba said:
- But, is it consistent with, "I cannot not exist?"
Click to expand...
It is consistent with your existence.

It was consistent with your non-existence before you were born.

It would have been consistent with your non-existence if some other combination of sperm and egg than the one which produced you had occurred at the moment of your conception.

It will be consistent with your non-existence after you are dead.
 
You are the one who is simply wrong, Jabba. You always have been. If there was any possibility that you were the one who is right you would surely be able to quote at least one scientist or philosopher who agreed with you.
 
Jabba said:
Dave,
- This could be where I have to agree to disagree... You're simply wrong.
Click to expand...

How so?

We have abundant evidence that homo sapiens didn't exist before 1 million years ago. We know for a fact that homo sapiens didn't exist before 5 billion years ago. So, even without looking at your birth certificate, we can conclude with confidence that you did not always exist.
 
Pixel42 said:
It is consistent with your existence.

It was consistent with your non-existence before you were born.

It would have been consistent with your non-existence if some other combination of sperm and egg than the one which produced you had occurred at the moment of your conception.

It will be consistent with your non-existence after you are dead.
Click to expand...
- Sure, but my current existence does not eliminate the possibility that I cannot not exist -- nor does the evidence otherwise.
- If I'm right about that, we can submit the post probability of "A," to Bayes.
 
godless dave said:
How so?

We have abundant evidence that homo sapiens didn't exist before 1 million years ago. We know for a fact that homo sapiens didn't exist before 5 billion years ago. So, even without looking at your birth certificate, we can conclude with confidence that you did not always exist.
Click to expand...
- Is it possible that I existed as something other than a homo sapien, or any other life-form, or matter in general?
 
Pixel42 said:
You are the one who is simply wrong, Jabba. You always have been. If there was any possibility that you were the one who is right you would surely be able to quote at least one scientist or philosopher who agreed with you.
Click to expand...
- I can, but it's not worth the effort. We'd get into a new argument about their credibility, or what they meant, etc.
- Whatever, do you think that current evidence eliminates the possibility that my "self" cannot not exist? If so, I think that I should just agree to disagree.

- Does anyone on this forum believe that current evidence does not allow us to eliminate the possibility that I cannot not exist?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom