Cont: Proof of Immortality, V for Very long discussion

[godless dave]

- I am. But, I only have so much time, I'm trying to put together a map, and adversaries are piling on. And also, some adversaries are being too unfriendly again.
- Some of my adversaries have provided a list or two of disagreements. I can't remember where they are, but I can probably use them on my map if someone will point me to them...

You could just scroll up a couple posts.

 

[jond]

- I am. But, I only have so much time, I'm trying to put together a map, and adversaries are piling on. And also, some adversaries are being too unfriendly again.
- Some of my adversaries have provided a list or two of disagreements. I can't remember where they are, but I can probably use them on my map if someone will point me to them...

And, rather than whine about how mean posters are, why not put your limited time to better use and actually address their points? If you did that, you would find your adversaries would become far less mean. Of course, you will still be shown that you are wrong, which it appears you equate with being mean.

 

[John Jones]

- I am. But, I only have so much time, I'm trying to put together a map, and adversaries are piling on. And also, some adversaries are being too unfriendly again.
- Some of my adversaries have provided a list or two of disagreements. I can't remember where they are, but I can probably use them on my map if someone will point me to them...

I'm not about to help you establish another website of lies.

 

[Belz...]

- I am. But, I only have so much time, I'm trying to put together a map, and adversaries are piling on. And also, some adversaries are being too unfriendly again.
- Some of my adversaries have provided a list or two of disagreements. I can't remember where they are, but I can probably use them on my map if someone will point me to them...

More dishonesty by you. I can't say that I'm surprised.

 

[JayUtah]

- I am. But, I only have so much time...

Which you use almost entirely simply to repeat yourself ad nauseam. Your critics are under no obligation to endure the consequences of your poor use of the available time.

I'm trying to put together a map...

A plan which can serve no purpose other than to permit you to lie about the debate, which you have a documented history of doing with such enterprises. Your critics are under no obligation to indulge you in an endeavor calculated to misrepresent them.

...and adversaries are piling on.

Irrelevant. You were well aware of what response you would received when you started this debate. Your critics are under no obligation to withhold criticism to accommodate your discomfort with the venue you chose.

And also, some adversaries are being too unfriendly again.

You are not entitled to be coddled. Posts which you believe violate the Member Agreement should be submitted for moderation. Otherwise do not attempt to moderate the debate yourself.

I can't remember where they are, but I can probably use them on my map if someone will point me to them...

I reject this excuse entirely. Your memory is irrelevant, since your critics' posts are easily discovered by scrolling back through the debate. In the past you've had no problem assembling lengthy anthologies of prior posts in order to make a point. Since you are demonstrably capable of reviewing the thread, your critics are well within their rights to demand you do so in order to save them having to repeat themselves or indulge your laziness.

 

[Belz...]

Irrelevant. You were well aware of what response you would received when you started this debate.

Plus, we know exactly what happens when one tries to have a one-on-one debate with jabba, and that "what" is "exactly what's happening when he has a ten-on-one debate."

 

[JayUtah]

Plus, we know exactly what happens when one tries to have a one-on-one debate with jabba, and that "what" is "exactly what's happening when he has a ten-on-one debate."

Indeed, we have seen that Jabba fares no better in a highly regimented debate than he does in this comparative free-for-all. That he has multiple critics is not the reason he cannot cope with the debate as it exists here.

Further, he seems hell-bent on making his "map," which past behavior suggests will simply be a version of this debate edited to make it seem like Jabba is winning. He demands that his critics be "friendly" to him while all the while planning a move that the vast majority of his critics deem deeply insulting and offensive.

Indeed part of the reason this debate seems to rage unabated is that Jabba has one set of ground rules for himself and a different one for his critics, and he won't play ball unless people accept his foisted ground rules. It's no different than his Shroud thread, where he tried to foist the ground rule that he would address no one who didn't first stipulate that he had reasonable evidence. Sadly his attempt to win by foisting the rules of debate is also something we see a lot in fringe argumentation.

 

[Mojo]

- But, there is a sense of self that continues through one’s lifetime (for the most part)

How do you know? Seriously, how do you know?

Because if there wasn't, Jabba couldn't be immortal.

 

[Mojo]

Because if there wasn't, Jabba couldn't be immortal.

And just in case anyone is tempted to think that Jabba couldn't possibly resort to such blatantly circular reasoning:

Mojo,
- You're right. I just claim that if everything is physical, more than one finite lifetime per self is extremely unlikely. More than one finite lifetime per self would seem to require something non-physical.

Just to be absolutely clear here, Jabba: you aren't posting this as a reason to suppose that immaterial souls exist, are you?

Mojo,
- Again, I worry that I don't understand your question (because the answer seems obvious). I am posting this as a reason to suppose that immaterial souls exist.

 

[Jabba]

How do you know? Seriously, how do you know? You're only aware of your sense of self NOW. You couldn't begin to try to determine whether it's the same sense of self you had a second ago. For all you know, it might be re-created every few seconds and you wouldn't be able to notice...

I didn't address this part of Jabba's statement but I agree with Argumemnon.

- But whatever it is I'm currently experiencing, it is currently continuing and I wish it to continue -- and allegedly, once this body dies, I'll never experience it again...

 

[godless dave]

- But whatever it is I'm currently experiencing, it is currently continuing

The most we can say is that it seems to be currently continuing because it has access to your memories.

 

[Belz...]

- But whatever it is I'm currently experiencing, it is currently continuing and I wish it to continue -- and allegedly, once this body dies, I'll never experience it again...

You're missing the point. You'll never experience NOW again even if you're still alive tomorrow.

 

[JayUtah]

- But whatever it is I'm currently experiencing, it is currently continuing...

H is perfectly able to explain this continuity. Memory yet another emergent property of a functioning brain. You recall prior experience subjectively, as if from a first-person perspective.

...and I wish it to continue

Science doesn't care what you wish for.

Nevertheless, cognition is also another emergent property of a functioning brain. Your brain is able to integrate memory of cause and effect to predict likely outcomes of future repeated causes. Regardless of what you wish, it is reasonable to conclude that at all future times in your mortality you will experience some sort of sense of self.

The ongoing integration of environmental perception with past experience from a subjective perspective, including emotional responses, is as good a description as any of the sense of self under H. The only reason you would have to consider that somehow magical is if you denied the effects of complex or chaotic systems. You can't predict what your sense of self will be like in a year or ten years. This doesn't stop it from being cause-and-effect traceable to known causes. Conflating predictability with traceability is a common error.

-- and allegedly, once this body dies, I'll never experience it again...

It follows from H that you had no sense of self until your physical organism achieved sufficient coherence to produce an emergent effect. It further follows from H that any time the neurophysical components of your physical organism lose that coherence, an alteration can occur in the sense of self. Altering an entity means altering some of the properties it exhibits. And after complete dissolution of that neurophysiology, you will stop manifesting a sense of self and all other emergent properties.

The notion that a property should be observed exactly only when the entity it belongs to actually exists isn't rocket science. You cannot seem to shake this notion of "emergent property" as somehow still equivalent to a soul.

 

[Belz...]

Science doesn't care what you wish for.

Worse: reality doesn't care what you wish for.

 

[Hokulele]

- But whatever it is I'm currently experiencing, it is currently continuing and I wish it to continue -- and allegedly, once this body dies, I'll never experience it again...

The self is not continuous. It can be changed chemically or physically. It can be interrupted. Continuity of self is simply an illusion.

 

[jond]

- But whatever it is I'm currently experiencing, it is currently continuing and I wish it to continue -- and allegedly, once this body dies, I'll never experience it again...

How unthinkably rude of reality to not check with Jabba about what he wants before determining how processes work!

 

[MRC_Hans]

- But whatever it is I'm currently experiencing, it is currently continuing and I wish it to continue -- and allegedly, once this body dies, I'll never experience it again...

It is continuing as long as your body and brain functions. After that, it will stop. The good news is that you won't know.

Hans

 

[Filippo Lippi]

The self is not continuous. It can be changed chemically or physically. It can be interrupted. Continuity of self is simply an illusion.

Number 1 in a long list of recent posts that will be ignored

 

[The Sparrow]

It would not be missing. The perfect physical replica would have also have a sense of self in exactly the same way the original did.

Yes, this exactly.

Too bad it will be ignored.

 

[Jabba]

- But whatever it is I'm currently experiencing, it is currently continuing and I wish it to continue -- and allegedly, once this body dies, I'll never experience it again...

The most we can say is that it seems to be currently continuing because it has access to your memories.

- Whatever it is, it is continuing and it's meaningful. And, according to OOFLam, it never existed before and will never exist again. And, whatever it is, it will be missing from the perfect replica of my brain.
- That's why it's cause and effect untraceable.