Proof of Immortality III

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jabba said:
Monza,
- Interesting.
- Superficially, at least, I should say, instead, that our brains are the receivers of what consciousness transmits...
Click to expand...


You have no evidence that it is received from somewhere else, and no evidence of any entity that transmits it. Nothing but your desire that some such entity should exist.

You are begging the question again.
 
Last edited:
Jabba said:
- I'm suggesting that our brains do not produce the consciousness, they receive it as a self...
Click to expand...

This is a different definition of consciousness than everyone else is using, and not at all supported by evidence. Once again you are trying to equivocate your way into support for beliefs for which you can supply no proof.

You promised us you could prove immortality mathematically, to that degree of rigor. Simply making up stuff isn't any kind of proof, much less one that rises to mathematical rigor.
 
Mojo said:
You have no evidence that it is received from somewhere else, and no evidence of any entity that transmits it. Nothing but your desire that some such entity should exist.

You are begging the question again.
Click to expand...
Mojo,
- Mostly, I'm claiming that we don't have to conclude that the brain produces consciousness -- it could be receiving consciousness. Like a radio receives radio waves.
 
JayUtah said:
And if you could show evidence of that, then you could conclude it. Otherwise you're still just equivocating and making stuff up.
Click to expand...


And, because the stuff he's making up is the very thing he's trying to demonstrate the existence of (i.e. an external entity whose existence is independent of the body) he's begging the question.
 
Jabba said:
Mojo,
- Mostly, I'm claiming that we don't have to conclude that the brain produces consciousness -- it could be receiving consciousness. Like a radio receives radio waves.
Click to expand...

This is like saying that a bomb does not produce an explosion, or a tree does not produce fruit; they just snatch it out of the nether realm.
 
Jabba said:
Mojo,
- Mostly, I'm claiming that we don't have to conclude that the brain produces consciousness -- it could be receiving consciousness. Like a radio receives radio waves.
Click to expand...


You don't get to impose your desired conclusion as part of your premises.
 
JayUtah said:
This is a different definition of consciousness than everyone else is using, and not at all supported by evidence. Once again you are trying to equivocate your way into support for beliefs for which you can supply no proof.

You promised us you could prove immortality mathematically, to that degree of rigor. Simply making up stuff isn't any kind of proof, much less one that rises to mathematical rigor.
Click to expand...
Jay,
- I never promised, or even said, that I could prove immortality mathematically. I said that I thought that I could virtually (or, essentially?) prove it mathematically.
- Later, I decided that I shouldn't be so specific, and dropped the immortality claim. In this last 'chapter,' I've been claiming that I think I can virtually prove that OOFLam is wrong -- which would include possibilities other than immortality.
 
If consciousness is like a radio signal that our brains receive, why is each and every iteration of consciousness unique to the brain that is receiving it? Why is there no documented evidence of anyone tuning into Jabba's consciousness the way anyone in range can tune their fm dial to 90.9 and get WBUR. All at the same time, and everyone is receiving the exact same broadcast. And yet that NEVER happens with consciousness. Your analogy fails.
 
Jabba said:
I never promised, or even said, that I could prove immortality mathematically. I said that I thought that I could virtually (or, essentially?) prove it mathematically.
Click to expand...

Weasel words.

Later, I decided that I shouldn't be so specific, and dropped the immortality claim. In this last 'chapter,' I've been claiming that I think I can virtually prove that OOFLam is wrong -- which would include possibilities other than immortality.
Click to expand...

Yes, we're all well aware of your various attempts to move the goalposts, specifically by means of false dilemmas. What makes you think you're going to be let off the hook?

This latest excuse is equivalent to claiming at first that you can "essentially" prove dog mathematically, but now you're saying we should be satisfied with a handwaving, question-begging claim for not-cat.

You have essentially agreed with my characterization of your arguments at ISF, on any topic, as nothing more than the same bag of worn-out tricks played for years. You equivocate. You argue false dilemmas. You beg the question. You argue in circles. You simply ignore the critics you don't wish to address. Here you're simply explaining the details of your latest false dilemma as if your critics haven't pointed out at length its inherent illogic. This is no different than your blood-on-the-shroud false dilemma.
 
Jabba said:
In this last 'chapter,' I've been claiming that I think I can virtually prove that OOFLam is wrong --
Click to expand...


But you're not trying to do that; you're just trying to disprove what you have termed the scientific model, which is by no means the only possible scenario in which we have a single finite life. And is something of a strawman.

... which would include possibilities other than immortality.
Click to expand...


Such as?
 
Last edited:
Jabba said:
Zoo,
- I'm trying to show that the self described above does not (as it would appear) cease, to never return.
Click to expand...
Well you've failed. The only way to show that is with evidence. All you are doing is defining you terms so you win, "The "self" is separate from the biological processes of the brain, therefore the self lives on after the brain dies. "

You can't win by assuming you've already won. Show evidence sufficient to persuade a reasonable person that such an incorporial self exists.

Incidentally, I've redefined "my money" as everything that's in your bank account. Please send it to me.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom