Proof of Immortality, VI

Status
Not open for further replies.
Toontown said:
Well, I picked out the only thing vaguely resembling communication in your post.
Click to expand...
I forgive you.

[The inference of it is, you admit the thought experiment is silly,
Click to expand...
It was nuanced so you might not have caught it. It is no more silly than Jabba's premise or proof. I'll try to remember to italicize words for you in the future if you think it will help your understanding.

and it is possible, though not conclusive, that you know that your body's spacetime coordinates are not separable from your body and are not shared by any other doppelganger in any universe.
Click to expand...
You failed to answer the questions I actually asked. Try again. Which is me and who does the other one think he is?
 
Argumemnon said:
Er, Toontown, what is it that you're arguing for here?
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing for anything. I was initially arguing, quite successfully, against Loss Leader's Jabba-likelihood-multiplying many universes gambit , which was apparently taken to be an attack on the entire collective.

Then the collective began to attempt to adapt, and I responded disapprovingly to the attempted adaptations. As usual.
 
Last edited:
RoboTimbo said:
You failed to answer the questions I actually asked. Try again. Which is me and who does the other one think he is?
Click to expand...

The one that was originally you is still you, whether I know it or not, and the other one, if it has a lick of sense, has no idea which one it is.

All of which is glaringly irrelevant to my contention. Obfuscation is not argument or communication, and does not alter the fundamental nature of reality.

I only wish Donald Trump and his minions understood that.
 
Last edited:
Toontown said:
For years, in this thread and it's predecessors, multiple posters have been repeatedly defining consciousness as a process, with little if any question, including from you.
Click to expand...

Toontown said:
I did not even vaguely suggest it is not a process.
Click to expand...

So, were you just repeating what we have been telling Jabba for years? I have read the bold part as a dissent, but english is a foreign language for me ...
 
Toontown said:
Well, I picked out the only thing vaguely resembling communication in your post.

The inference of it is, you admit the thought experiment is silly, and it is possible, though not conclusive, that you know that your body's spacetime coordinates are not separable from your body and are not shared by any other doppelganger in any universe.
Click to expand...

Um, Jabba claims that they are. Your soul is separable from your body and can occupy many spacetime coordinates, even simultaneously.

So, are you agreeing with Jabba, or disagreeing with Jabba?
 
Toontown said:
I'm not arguing for anything. I was initially arguing, quite successfully, against Loss Leader's Jabba-likelihood-multiplying many universes gambit , which was apparently taken to be an attack on the entire collective.

Then the collective began to attempt to adapt, and I responded disapprovingly to the attempted adaptations. As usual.
Click to expand...

There is no "collective".
 
godless dave said:
So I think we can agree that, calculated right after the big bang, the likelihood of Jabba existing is a very small number, as is the likelihood of Mount Rainier existing.

So what?
Click to expand...
- If I'm a legitimate target, OOFLam must be wrong.
 
John Jones said:
So what? I thought OOFLAM was your straw man.
Click to expand...

It is. He's agreed that a body alone is more likely than a body & a soul, so at this point his OOFLam has zero connection to anything resembling actual science.
 
Toontown said:
The one that was originally you is still you, whether I know it or not, and the other one, if it has a lick of sense, has no idea which one it is.
Click to expand...
Congratulations. You seem to grasp the fundamental idea that there can be separate but identical objects and that they are not the same object, apparently about as well as one could expect. I had to be sure before directing you to explain it to Jabba. He has some odd notion about "looking out of two sets of eyes." Would you be a dear and disabuse him of the idea?

I only wish Donald Trump and his minions understood that.
Click to expand...
Another odd aside. You should check the titles of the threads you post in. You seem to have cross posted some political inanity here.
 
RoboTimbo said:
Explain the Texas Sharpshooter fallacy to me again for the first time. I want to be sure I'm understanding it like you understand it.
Click to expand...

He's already admitted that he can't overcome the fallacy and that he just has a feel for his idea without being able to explain it. Link.
 
Jabba said:
- If I'm a legitimate target...
Click to expand...

But you aren't, as it affects the Texas sharpshooter fallacy. Despite the many requests that you disclose your understanding of that fallacy and why it's a fallacy, you are assiduously unwilling to comply. This suggests you know your argument fails immediately on that point and you have no recourse.

Oh, sure, you delve into irrelevant examples of situations that don't commit the fallacy, but you beg the question that they are analogous to your proof. Your proof commits the Texas sharpshooter fallacy, no matter how many other hypotheticals you come with that don't.

...OOFLam must be wrong.
Click to expand...

"OOFLam" is your straw man. You have ever only considered materialism, not every way in which you might not be immortal. As I've stated dozens of times, you flip-flop across this false dilemma in order to avoid having to prove any singular claim. You just keep repeating that same false dilemma with your fingers firmly jammed in your ears. I assume you're doing it today to try to distract from your comically arrogant demonstration yesterday of just how little you really understand about mathematics and therefore how unlikely you are to have succeeded mathematically where your betters have failed.

Now quit fringe-resetting. I kindly responded to your last comprehensive fringe reset with a comprehensive rebuttal listing all its individually fatal flaws. You know it's there. You abjectly refuse to address it. This tells us your proof is wrong and that you know it's wrong.
 
abaddon said:
Um, Jabba claims that they are. Your soul is separable from your body and can occupy many spacetime coordinates, even simultaneously.

So, are you agreeing with Jabba, or disagreeing with Jabba?
Click to expand...

I was disagreeing with one of Loss Leader's obviously flawed contentions. That does not imply agreement with Jabba.

Jabba has plenty of detractors, and I've joined their ranks a few times.

However, as I've repeatedly stated down through the ages, there is one particular element of Jabba's pitch I have no problem with, and that is the {form) of the formula Jabba originally presented. That does not mean I agree with any numbers Jabba may have plugged into the formula, or any interpretative spin Jabba may have put on it.

I recognize that the formula is specifically tailored to a specific subjective viewpoint. I consider that viewpoint as valid as the objective viewpoint, and I've previously shown why. However, I have publicly asserted directly to Jabba that, while the formula may be valid and quite informative to the subjective user, depending on how it is used, it is useless for "virtually proving" any alternative to Jabba's interpretation of "H" to anyone else, partucularly those who do not acknowledge the validity of the subjective treatment. Jabba disagreed and went on to try to objectify the formula, if I recall correctly, which doesn't work.

Not bad for (subjectively) ruling out Jabba's interpretation of "H" though. But I already knew that, decades before Jabba showed up.
 
Last edited:
Toontown said:
The one that was originally you is still you, whether I know it or not, and the other one, if it has a lick of sense, has no idea which one it is.
Click to expand...
If it were an exact duplicate then it would think the exact same thing in regard to itself. IOW, both units would believe it was the original.


I only wish Donald Trump and his minions understood that.
Click to expand...
Um... so do I? But how in any way is that applicable in this thread?
 
wea said:
Every couple of weeks, three quarters of "you" are replaced. How are you going to assign a worldline to your "specific brain"? Is your brain an indivisible ("elementary") particle? Not to mention "consciousness", is it a trackable particle in your vision too?
I still think it's a process.
Click to expand...

I argue it is trick of memory and perception. There is a body, there is no self
:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom