Proof of Immortality, VI

Status
Not open for further replies.
- We need to go even slower...
- Trying to find the words that will force us onto the same page...
- Here's how I perceive your position. Just tell me where I'm wrong.
- Each of you guys think that your particular self, as a process, can "proceed" only once. And, in that sense, a perfect replica of your brain would produce a copy of your process, but not the same process and not the sense of self that is you. If you had passed, a perfect copy of your brain would not bring YOU back to life.
 
Jabba said:
- We need to go even slower...
Click to expand...
No, "we" don't.

- Trying to find the words that will force us onto the same page...
Click to expand...
Try to find words that will make 1+4=7.

- Here's how I perceive your position. Just tell me where I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
Tell me where you didn't understand it the last 7492 times you were told.

- Each of you guys think that your particular self, as a process, can "proceed" only once.
Click to expand...
Do not put words in others' mouths. You can be as wrong as you want to be but don't try to make everyone else be.

And, in that sense, a perfect replica of your brain would produce a copy of your process, but not the same process and not the sense of self that is you. If you had passed, a perfect copy of your brain would not bring YOU back to life.
Click to expand...
Does a copy of a Volkswagen going 60 mph go the same 60 mph as the original or is it a different 60 mph? If I slow my Volkswagen from 60 to 30 and then back up to 60 again, is it the same 60 mph it was going before?
 
Jabba said:
- Each of you guys think that your particular self, as a process, can "proceed" only once. And, in that sense, a perfect replica of your brain would produce a copy of your process, but not the same process and not the sense of self that is you. If you had passed, a perfect copy of your brain would not bring YOU back to life.
Click to expand...

It would be more precise to say the process happens only as long as the brain exists and is functioning, and the brain, like everything else, only exists once for a finite amount of time.
 
Jabba said:
- We need to go even slower...
- Trying to find the words that will force us onto the same page...
- Here's how I perceive your position. Just tell me where I'm wrong.
- Each of you guys think that your particular self, as a process, can "proceed" only once. And, in that sense, a perfect replica of your brain would produce a copy of your process, but not the same process and not the sense of self that is you. If you had passed, a perfect copy of your brain would not bring YOU back to life.
Click to expand...

No.


...and please stop trying to tell use what we think.
 
Jabba said:
- We need to go even slower...
Click to expand...

You mean slower than zero?

- Trying to find the words that will force us onto the same page...
Click to expand...

You're not listening. The problem isn't the words, it's your idea. You're quite simply and entirely wrong.

- Here's how I perceive your position.
Click to expand...

Stop repeating your claims.

- Each of you guys think that your particular self, as a process, can "proceed" only once.
Click to expand...

Unsupported assertion.

And, in that sense, a perfect replica of your brain would produce a copy of your process, but not the same process and not the sense of self that is you. If you had passed, a perfect copy of your brain would not bring YOU back to life.
Click to expand...

How is that different than the previous 7492 times you've posted this? We understand you perfectly.
 
Jabba said:
- We need to go even slower...
- Trying to find the words that will force us onto the same page...
Click to expand...

No. You're trying to find words that will force us on to your page, in a book that doesn't even exist. That's not going to work.

Jabba said:
- Here's how I perceive your position. Just tell me where I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

Where you're wrong is in taking your own opinions and trying to re-state and distort everyone else's opinions so they look like they're the same, then claiming that everyone agrees with you.

Jabba said:
- Each of you guys think that your particular self, as a process, can "proceed" only once. And, in that sense, a perfect replica of your brain would produce a copy of your process, but not the same process and not the sense of self that is you. If you had passed, a perfect copy of your brain would not bring YOU back to life.
Click to expand...

No. That's what you think you'd like us to think, because it's the nearest thing you can conceive of that's still consistent with the concept of a unique and immortal soul. I personally think that the self is a process arising from a functioning brain. A perfect copy of me might in principle create a process that proceeds identically, and in such an instance (a) both of the copies would think themselves to be the self that is me, and (b) there would be no way of determining - or, even, defining - which was right.

Dave
 
Jabba said:
- We need to go even slower...
- Trying to find the words that will force us onto the same page...
- Here's how I perceive your position. Just tell me where I'm wrong.
- Each of you guys think that your particular self, as a process, can "proceed" only once. And, in that sense, a perfect replica of your brain would produce a copy of your process, but not the same process and not the sense of self that is you. If you had passed, a perfect copy of your brain would not bring YOU back to life.
Click to expand...

Jabba, we have been standing still for a couple of years. Any slower and we go backwards.

These questions have been answered countless times. If you still don't get it, you never will: An identical copy would be you. If the copy was the only one alive, it would be you. If both were alive, it would be ... messy.

Hans
 
Jabba said:
- We need to go even slower...
- Trying to find the words that will force us onto the same page...
- Here's how I perceive your position. Just tell me where I'm wrong.
- Each of you guys think that your particular self, as a process, can "proceed" only once. And, in that sense, a perfect replica of your brain would produce a copy of your process, but not the same process and not the sense of self that is you. If you had passed, a perfect copy of your brain would not bring YOU back to life.
Click to expand...
Completely and utterly wrong as usual.

Please do as I advised and reread JayUtah's post until you understand it.
 
Jabba said:
- Each of you guys think that your particular self, as a process, can "proceed" only once. And, in that sense, a perfect replica of your brain would produce a copy of your process, but not the same process and not the sense of self that is you. If you had passed, a perfect copy of your brain would not bring YOU back to life.
Click to expand...



Well, Jabba, color me impressed. Instead of simply adding some words on to "process" to allow you to ignore it and treat it as a thing, you've now graduated to simply redefining "process" to mean "thing".

It does not mean that.

A process cannot proceed only once any more than a car can go 60 mph only once. It has no identity to replicate.

Also, once again, there is no static sense of self. Are you the same person you were 40 years ago? Did that person love his grandchildren? Did he enjoy the same television shows? Did he spend the same amount of time on the internet? No, he didn't. You today are not the same "you" as existed forty years ago, nor will you be the same in forty minutes. The feeling that you are is an illusion developed over at least six hundred million years of evolution in order to cope with large amounts of data. That's all it is.
 
Jabba said:
a perfect replica of your brain would produce a copy of your process,
Click to expand...
Yes, because that's what a perfect replica is.
but not the same process
Click to expand...
Yes, because a copy is not the same item as the original, though it may be identical (as it would be if it were the postulated perfect replica).
and not the sense of self that is you.
Click to expand...
Why not? To the copy, it would feel the same way as the sense of self of the original does to the original.
If you had passed,
Click to expand...
Passed what? Go? You mean died?
a perfect copy of your brain would not bring YOU back to life.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by 'YOU', exactly? Be precise.
 
Loss Leader said:
Well, Jabba, color me impressed. Instead of simply adding some words on to "process" to allow you to ignore it and treat it as a thing, you've now graduated to simply redefining "process" to mean "thing".

It does not mean that.

A process cannot proceed only once any more than a car can go 60 mph only once. It has no identity to replicate.

Also, once again, there is no static sense of self. Are you the same person you were 40 years ago? Did that person love his grandchildren? Did he enjoy the same television shows? Did he spend the same amount of time on the internet? No, he didn't. You today are not the same "you" as existed forty years ago, nor will you be the same in forty minutes. The feeling that you are is an illusion developed over at least six hundred million years of evolution in order to cope with large amounts of data. That's all it is.
Click to expand...

Just a note (for charity): Jabba, you don't have to believe the above. You are free to believe you have a soul.

But the above is the paradigm you have, by your own design, avowed to disprove. So you must address it as it is. One reason you are not getting anywhere is that instead of providing contrary evidence, you are trying to modify the opposing standpoint. (Another might well be that you lack such evidence.)

Hans
 
Jabba said:
- We need to go even slower...
Click to expand...

No. Five years of your stubborn entrenchment have aptly proven that going slower is the wrong thing to do. In fact, I insist we go faster. I insist you take one hour and provide one or two sentences to respond to each of these points, any one of which is fatal to your argument. Until you can assure us there is light at the end of the tunnel, no one should feel obliged to follow you on your trudging, repetitive journey.

Trying to find the words that will force us onto the same page...
Click to expand...

The problem with your argument is not a nuanced choice of words. The problem with your argument is that it is fundamentally broken at the conceptual level. Further, you have no interest in getting onto the same page. Your argument is predicated mostly on trying to fool people into agreeing that they are on your page when they adamantly are not.

Here's how I perceive your position. Just tell me where I'm wrong.
- Each of you guys think that your particular self...
Click to expand...

Right here. That's your first and fundamental error. You keep trying to conceive of the self in materialism as a discrete, countable entity. It isn't. A process is not a thing no matter what linguistical tap dance you apply.

If you had passed, a perfect copy of your brain would not bring YOU back to life.
Click to expand...

Jabba, did I not just write -- not less than a few hours ago -- about how you take your critics' carefully outlined lines of reasoning and crap all over them with ham-fisted nonsense like "bring ME back to life?" You're just trying to shove your soul concept into a single pronoun that you think you don't have to defend.

We've been all through this many, many times before at all speeds slow and fast. If you don't know by now wherein your critics disagree, then you are either entirely trolling or you have a serious cognitive impairment. There really aren't many other explanations left for your inability or unwillingness to follow the debate.
 
wea said:
Which is the probability distribution ("testable information") for a soul involvement in the mental process you are relying on to apply the maximum entropy principle?
Click to expand...

What does that even mean? The maximum entropy distribution for a probability space with two outcomes, under no further constraints, is trivially 50/50.
 
Jabba said:
- We need to go even slower...
- Trying to find the words that will force us onto the same page...
- Here's how I perceive your position. Just tell me where I'm wrong.
- Each of you guys think that your particular self, as a process, can "proceed" only once. And, in that sense, a perfect replica of your brain would produce a copy of your process, but not the same process and not the sense of self that is you. If you had passed, a perfect copy of your brain would not bring YOU back to life.
Click to expand...

- are you going to read any of the numerous responses which explain where you are going wrong?

- are you going to respond, meaningfully, to any of the numerous responses which explain where you are going wrong?

- if not, why are you pretending to be part of a discussion?
 
JoeBentley said:
Bob: "Two plus purple equals potato!"
Ted: "That makes no sense."
Bill runs into the conversation: "Ted I need to take you for task for how you are mathematically refuting Bob's equation."
Click to expand...

More like:

Bob: "1 + 1 = 10"
Ted: "No, 1 + 1 = 9"
Bill runs into the conversation: "Actually 1 + 1 = 2."
John runs into the conversation: "Stop [insert whiny terms for getting your nonsense refuted, such as thread-nannying or "gotcha"-ing]! We clearly got closer to the right answer than Bob, and that is such an amazing achievement to be proud of, we should get a medal rather than being refuted. How dare Bill do such a thing..."
 
caveman1917 said:
More like:

Bob: "1 + 1 = 10"
Ted: "No, 1 + 1 = 9"
Bill runs into the conversation: "Actually 1 + 1 = 2."
John runs into the conversation: "Stop [insert whiny terms for getting your nonsense refuted, such as thread-nannying or "gotcha"-ing]! We clearly got closer to the right answer than Bob, and that is such an amazing achievement to be proud of, we should get a medal rather than being refuted. How dare Bill do such a thing..."
Click to expand...

No, Joe had it right.
 
Jabba said:
- We need to go even slower...
- Trying to find the words that will force us onto the same page...
- Here's how I perceive your position. Just tell me where I'm wrong.
- Each of you guys think that your particular self, as a process, can "proceed" only once. And, in that sense, a perfect replica of your brain would produce a copy of your process, but not the same process and not the sense of self that is you. If you had passed, a perfect copy of your brain would not bring YOU back to life.
Click to expand...

godless dave said:
It would be more precise to say the process happens only as long as the brain exists and is functioning, and the brain, like everything else, only exists once for a finite amount of time.
Click to expand...
Dave,
- Can you suggest a more precise way to say, "If you had passed, a perfect copy of your brain would not bring YOU back to life."?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom