JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
No one agrees with you, Jabba. Please stop begging; it's childish. If you'd like to know why they disagree with you, I suggest you read the thread.
Cont: Proof of Immortality, V for Very long discussion
- Thread starter Dancing David
- Start date
- Status
No one agrees with you, Jabba. Please stop begging; it's childish. If you'd like to know why they disagree with you, I suggest you read the thread.
Oh Jesus Waterbending Christ.
And we're the ones getting thread nannied over bad argumentatives.
jond
Illuminator
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2006
- Messages
- 3,440
How astonishing that with an infinite number of potential selves, you can't find a single one who agrees with you.
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive , Co-Ordinator,, Russell's Antin
Sounds like the first line of a Steeleye Span song...
Last edited:
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Standard Jabba Evasion Technique #23: Stall the discussion for everyone while you poll occasional contributors to the thread for explicit responses to your latest tempest-in-a-teapot notion.
While you wait for those people to answer, spend some time reading and responding to the many posts written in response to your claims. Maybe that will help you remember whether people have said something or not.
Belz...
Fiend God
You know full well that no one agrees with you. I don't believe for a second that you have such a poor memory.
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
Return of the befuddled old man routine.
godless dave
Great Dalmuti
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2007
- Messages
- 8,266
Also notice the bait and switch: treating "there are an infinite number of potential selves" as equivalent to "at the time of the Big Bang, the odds of your particular self existing are 7 billion over infinity".
Last edited:
Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
As far as I can remember, neither of them cared about that particular red herring. They were concerned with the basic error in your formula, so didn't really worry about your made up numbers, as the root flaw made them all irrelevant.
More recently, jt512 pointed out that dividing anything by infinity results in zero, so this argument is a dead end regardless of what he thinks about souls.
calebprime
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2006
- Messages
- 13,001
They have worked their will on John Barleycorn
But he lived to tell the tale,
For they pour him out of an old brown jug
And they call him home brewed ale
Proof of immortality right there.
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive , Co-Ordinator,, Russell's Antin
Inorite?
Loss Leader
I would save the receptionist., Moderator
Nobody even agrees that there are things called "selves" to begin with, let alone an infinite number of them.
The self is not an unchanging thing. It is a process of a working neurosystem.
Are there an infinite number of "going 60 mph"?
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
More specifically, the scientific hypothesis for the sense of self does not feature the concept of the self as a distinct countable entity. Hence it is meaningless to ask how many of it there are, or "potentially" how many of it there are.
This is still a vital question because it illustrates the concept of the sense of self under the scientific hypothesis. Yes, it's a silly meaningless question. That's the point. The sense of self under the scientific hypothesis is congruent to the property of "going 60 mph." The question isn't and never was about how many things exhibit the property. It's whether a property is enumerable in the abstract. It is not.
Nothing has changed. Despite Jabba's admission that he doesn't understand his critics, he has made no effort to understand. His efforts are still squarely focused on foisting onto the scientific hypothesis his own concept of a soul. In order for his equation -- another thing he admits not understanding -- to give him the number he seeks, he has to pretend the scientific hypothesis is something other than it is.
The Sparrow
Graduate Poster
So, just for my kicks, what is Jabba pushing for?
1. 7 bazillion over infinity means its not possible he exists (somehow)
2. therefore must be 7 bazillion over some fixed number, like.....dunno, 10 bazillion?
3. therefore.............how does he get to immortal?
1. 7 bazillion over infinity means its not possible he exists (somehow)
2. therefore must be 7 bazillion over some fixed number, like.....dunno, 10 bazillion?
3. therefore.............how does he get to immortal?
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
That's about it. His arguments for immortality are non-sequiturs and have no substance.
They never have.
Loss Leader
I would save the receptionist., Moderator
I particularly never understood how he got to point 3. If there are a finite number of souls, it still doesn't mean any one of them has to be used more than once.
The human race must have started at some point (because we're the only ones who have souls, I guess) and it can end more easily than is polite to admit.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
So badly, inescapably wrong is his "mathematical proof" for immortality that debates break out among his critics about which of its several individually fatal flaws is the most fatal. This is why he has to support this Dumpster fire of an argument by blatantly emotional manipulation such as Befuddled Old Man.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Because unlike you, he started with point 3 and then tried to smack-talk the competition. "All I need is a reasonable alternative."
The typical fringe argument goes something like: "You believe in a theory A. I believe in a theory B, which is an alternative to A. Rather than provide proof for B, I'm going to argue vaguely that A is unlikely. Since B is a reasonable alternative to A, it holds by default as A fails." He's not trying to prove immortality, he's trying to cast as much doubt as possible on the straw man alternative he labels OOFLAM and claims we all hold. It doesn't have to be an actual rebuttal that makes sense. It just has to engender doubt. So "maybe" it's seven billion over infinity, but it's certainly a Very Small Number. You agree with me, right?
The whole misdirection with Bayes -- which Jabba doesn't understand at all -- is to try to lend an illusion of objective credibility to the all the smack talk.
Mojo
Mostly harmless
He's trying to prove that he's immortal by claiming that if souls exist it is impossible that he exists. He has so far failed to spot the basic problem with his argument.
- Status