Proof of Immortality, VII

Status
Not open for further replies.
halleyscomet said:
Nope. Wrong again Even mythologies such as Mormonism that claim human beings are celestial children who participated in a celestial war still have a starting point for the soul.

Many religions claim god or the gods always existed, but even religions where reincarnation is the norm have a point where a soul comes into existence either as a new creation or by splintering from something else.

http://www.hinduwebsite.com/reincarnation.asp
Click to expand...
Halley,
- Upon "Perfection," they reunite with the Source. They always exist -- either in or out of the Source. Then, I suggest that the Source is like an infinitely divisible bucket of consciousness, and more than one current self used to be Napoleon. I know that sounds crazy, but so does quantum mechanics -- where some physicists claim (or at least suggest) that the universe is conscious.
 
Mojo said:
For your existence to be a piece of information to be considered, it must be observable. You can only be observed while your body exists. The likelihood that your existence is observed right now is, at most, equal to the likelihood that your body exists right now.
Click to expand...
Mojo,
- The word "likelihood" in statistics refers to the probability of an event -- given a particular hypothesis. Given that each body can have only one finite existence, the likelihood that your body would exist right now is less than 10-100.
 
Jabba said:
Halley,

- Upon "Perfection," they reunite with the Source. They always exist -- either in or out of the Source. Then, I suggest that the Source is like an infinitely divisible bucket of consciousness, and more than one current self used to be Napoleon. I know that sounds crazy, but so does quantum mechanics -- where some physicists claim (or at least suggest) that the universe is conscious.
Click to expand...


*blink*

*blink*

My goodness. You READ something.

/me faints from shock.

Regardless, that’s just one version of the concept. Even then, can the soul really be said to “exist” in any meaningful way if it’s part of a larger entity?

Is a drop of water still a drop of water if it falls into the ocean?

Can Michelangelo’s “David” be said to have “existed” in any meaningful way when it was still a block of marble untouched by human hands?

Your concept of “always existing” is an ever shrinking proposition. Even then you have offed us NO evidence to support your ******** about statistics proving immortality.
 
Jabba said:
Given that each body can have only one finite existence, the likelihood that your body would exist right now is less than 10-100.
Click to expand...

What is so magical about right now? What is so magical about my body, or yours, and not Empress Matilda's? Constantly committing the Texas sharpshooter fallacy will not desensitize your critics into accepting it as a valid argument.
 
Last edited:
Jabba said:
Mojo,
- The word "likelihood" in statistics refers to the probability of an event -- given a particular hypothesis. Given that each body can have only one finite existence, the likelihood that your body would exist right now is less than 10-100.
Click to expand...

And what is the likelihood of your body existing if you add an immortal soul to it? Exactly the same, plus you’ve added another unlikely (and unevidenced) element to your equation which means that your current existence is far less likely if you have an immortal soul.
 
Jabba said:
- Re a) They are if the jury agrees with them.
Click to expand...


No, they are not. Juries aren't even allowed to consider anything that isn't a fact backed up by personal knowledge.


If human selves have only one finite life to live during all of time, what is the likelihood that your time would be right now?
Click to expand...


100%

Your definition of "right now" is self-referential. Whenever you ask the question will always be "right now."

Understand that.
 
Last edited:
Jabba said:
- Read Halley's referral.
Click to expand...



The link I provided does nothing to defend you web of lies and nonsense. All it does is refer to one reincarnation variant that you’re twisting to vaguely excuse your illiterate and nonsensical balderdash.

For five years you have offered nothing but prideful nonsense. When called on it you’ve responded with a pretense of confusion.
 
Wait...

It's more logical that I have unlimited 12 year old scotch in my cabinet than I only have a limited amount of 12 year old scotch.

You see if there is an unlimited 12 year old scotch makes there being a bottle of scotch in there right now more likely. I mean what are the odds that I would open my cabinet at the tiny slice of time there is a bottle of scotch in it? Much more likely that the scotch is immortal.

This calls for an experiment.

*Checks my cabinet* Oh I made myself sad.
 
JoeBentley said:
Wait...

It's more logical that I have unlimited 12 year old scotch in my cabinet than I only have a limited amount of 12 year old scotch.

You see if there is an unlimited 12 year old scotch makes there being a bottle of scotch in there right now more likely. I mean what are the odds that I would open my cabinet at the tiny slice of time there is a bottle of scotch in it? Much more likely that the scotch is immortal.

This calls for an experiment.

*Checks my cabinet* Oh I made myself sad.
Click to expand...

I think this calls for a larger test group, this could be very important.

*checks cabinet* No scotch. But Old Forester 1870! I wonder...
 
Loss Leader said:
100%

Your definition of "right now" is self-referential. Whenever you ask the question will always be "right now."

Understand that.
Click to expand...
Jabba has spent the last five years wilfully refusing to understand that, and a lot else that's equally fatal to his "argument".
 
Jabba said:
Mojo said:
For your existence to be a piece of information to be considered, it must be observable. You can only be observed while your body exists. The likelihood that your existence is observed right now is, at most, equal to the likelihood that your body exists right now.
Click to expand...

Mojo,
- The word "likelihood" in statistics refers to the probability of an event -- given a particular hypothesis. Given that each body can have only one finite existence, the likelihood that your body would exist right now is less than 10-100.
Click to expand...


So, according to your "estimate", the likelihood that your existence is observed "right now" is less than 10-100, whether or not your "self" is immortal.
 
Last edited:
Jabba said:
Halley,
- Upon "Perfection," they reunite with the Source. They always exist -- either in or out of the Source. Then, I suggest that the Source is like an infinitely divisible bucket of consciousness, and more than one current self used to be Napoleon. I know that sounds crazy, but so does quantum mechanics -- where some physicists claim (or at least suggest) that the universe is conscious.
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with a human self being immortal? An infinitely divisible bucket of consciousness, whatever that means, is not a human self in any meaningful sense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom