Cont: Proof of Immortality, V for Very long discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
JayUtah said:
I think a person who manages to keep alive the same failed argument for going on five years is probably willing and capable of playing the long con. I predict it's a faux flounce. He'll wait a month or so until everyone else loses interest and wanders into other threads. Then he'll be back with "new" information (or with the same-old, same-old) expecting to snare a fresh audience for his antics.
Click to expand...


Here's the last time it happened. October 2014:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=10293062#post10293062

And here's the reset, posted in a new thread ("I would have continued the old one, but I haven't been able to find it -- and, this one does have a significantly different conclusion...") in March 2016:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11198401#post11198401
 
Mojo said:
Here's the last time it happened. October 2014:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=10293062#post10293062

And here's the reset, posted in a new thread ("I would have continued the old one, but I haven't been able to find it -- and, this one does have a significantly different conclusion...") in March 2016:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11198401#post11198401
Click to expand...

Well? Did it have a significantly different conclusion?
 
Jabba said:
As you also might expect, I can't resist repeating the basic idea -- i.e., seems like there has to be an infinity of potential selves/"souls" (whatever they are). And, if so, OOFLam must be wrong -- given OOFLam, the likelihood of my current existence should be virtually zero. And, any reasonably possible alternative explanation should outweigh chance and luck by a long shot.
Click to expand...

I think I understand now what you're saying.
 
Mojo said:
That's no good: he needs a LCP who doesn't understand what he's saying so he can pretend that if people understood what he's saying they would agree with him.
Click to expand...
Actually he sometimes needs an LCP who seems to agree with some part of his argument. I bet he hangs his next reset on this "understanding".
 
theprestige said:
Actually he sometimes needs an LCP who seems to agree with some part of his argument. I bet he hangs his next reset on this "understanding".
Click to expand...


And if he does, he will have been successfully baited and hooked.

Jabba has stepped away from a losing argument. I cannot imagine any reason to reengage him.

I don't chase Jehova's Witnesses, shouting, "Tell me about your stupid theory of why we shouldn't celebrate birthdays!"
 
Loss Leader said:
Jabba has stepped away from a losing argument. I cannot imagine any reason to reengage him.
Click to expand...

I interpret the facts differently. I don't believe Jabba has stepped away from what he considers a losing argument. I believe he has stepped away from a particular body of commentators he no longer wishes to engage, because they no longer provide any sort of validation for him. He has not conceded his argument. He has merely spurned his critics.

I don't chase Jehova's Witnesses, shouting, "Tell me about your stupid theory of why we shouldn't celebrate birthdays!"
Click to expand...

No, but the experiment here is to reveal a true motive. If they tell you their theory and it make it sound altruistic, but then behave in a way that's inconsistent with their theory, you might take an interest in sounding out their real reasons.

If the argument is styled as "I may have something of great philosophical and mathematical interest," but the behavior is more like "Everyone please give me a round of applause," there will be ongoing interest in determining which is really the motive.
 
JayUtah said:
there will be ongoing interest in determining which is really the motive.
Click to expand...


Yes, but that's against the MA. Frankly, I hope Jabba is using this time to spend with his grandchildren. In the evenings, I hope he's going to BeliefNet or somewhere similar where people support each other's nonsense. Everyone deserves a little self-deception.
 
Well, that's a relief. It is good to know I don't have to worry about waking up as a sentient Dweezleblab in some faraway galaxy or universe. I would hate being a Dweezleblab. Or a Humonkey. Screw being a Humonkey. Or a barely sentient, devolved Humonkey. that would suck.

Being something like an Orca wouldn't be bad. But what are the odds?

We can all rest easy, secure in the knowledge that our one instantaneous flicker of sentience - in the midst of eternity, or aternity, or maybe just 50 trillion years or so - was only a freakish one-off anomaly, never to be experienced again.

Blessed nothingness, momentarily interrupted by an outlandishly unlikely series of events, will soon prevail forever.

This calls for an appropriate ode, or ballad, or whatever...

 
- I couldn't stay away for long. Though, I'm not sure how long I can stay around either.

- I think that I finally have a satisfactory answer for the Mt Rainier, Texas Sharp Shooter, bucket of sand issue. The simple answer is that we have no real reason to doubt their scientific explanations -- whereas, we do have real reasons to doubt the scientific explanation for my existence (actually, science has no explanation for my existence).
- I don't think that any of you agree with me about that, but I still do -- and, I still think that you guys don't agree because you can't, or aren't willing to, grasp the concept of "self" to which I'm referring. I perceive an aspect of me (my "self") that is not determined by my chemistry and cannot be replicated by replicating my chemistry.

- It's good to be back.
 
Jabba said:
- . The simple answer is that we have no real reason to doubt their scientific explanations -- whereas, we do have real reasons to doubt the scientific explanation for my existence (actually, science has no explanation for my existence).
- It's good to be back.
Click to expand...

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot does this double talk even mean?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom