[Merged] Immortality & Bayesian Statistics

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jabba said:
Slowvehicle,
- Multiple me's isn't quite the same as immortality, but once you start thinking about it, where do you stop? How many me's would be the limit? If I can be repeated once, why not twice? Etc.
- And certainly the various theories about reincarnation assume some sort of immortality, and actually include a continuity of existence between physical lifetimes.
Click to expand...

Reincarnation doesn't exist either, but I'm glad that you are beginning to realize that immortality does not exist.
 
Akhenaten said:
Those aren't theories, Jabba. They're religious beliefs at best and desperate fear of death at worst. (probably the same thing, when all's said and done)
Click to expand...

Any attempt to bring science into religion is doomed to ignominious failure. 'Theories' about reincarnation? Fairy stories would be nearer the mark.
 
Toontown said:
Yeah, come to think of it, I have about one chance in 500 lifetimes, if the lottery lasts that long.

Wow. I had no idea how different that was from impossible.
Click to expand...

If you don't see how that's different from impossible, then I can't help you.

Toontown said:
Did you know I'm giving you the 0.00000....1 chance, just so you'll have a leg to stand on? I could make a case for 1/infinity.
Click to expand...

I doubt that very much.
 
Toontown said:
Akhenaten said:
Please see:

The rest of everything.​
Click to expand...


Utter gibberish, apparently pretended to vaguely allude to a vast understanding of everything, which you do not, of course, possess.
Click to expand...


True wisdom is less presuming than folly. The wise man doubteth often, and changeth his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubteth not; he knoweth all things but his own ignorance.

- Nepherkheperure Waenre Akhenaten​


I think you're getting me mixed up with someone else.
 
Toontown said:
If you have something better, I'm sure everyone would be fascinated.

Either your unique brain is the only brain that could ever light up your jungle, or it's not the only brain that could ever light up your jungle, loosely speaking. There is no excluded middle, and there is no precise verbal definition of what "light up your jungle" means. It's what you are experiencing.
Click to expand...

Which rather colloquial invocation of the Texas Sharpshooter has...what...to do with "immortality"?
 
Call me old-fashioned, but if I see a thread entitled 'Immortality & Bayesian Statistics' then I foolishly expect the proposer of the concept to actually address it. Toontown said earlier in the thread that this was not about immortality. Go figure.
 
dafydd said:
Reincarnation doesn't exist either, but I'm glad that you are beginning to realize that immortality does not exist.
Click to expand...

Not a sure thing, but very likely true.

Incarnation, however, apparently does exist, and may result in a sentient experience, with widely varying results. Sorry yours has been such a bitch, but don't worry. Your jungle is going dark soon, and I'm quite confidently told by the old man with the crutch and the wisdom that the jungle only lights up once per customer.

See, there's this existence cop who enforces the The Law Of Identity.

1=1. But only once. I think is how that works. I don't think it's actually been encoded, but I'm sure the existence cop enforces it quite well.

 
Jabba said:
Slowvehicle,
- Multiple me's isn't quite the same as immortality, but once you start thinking about it, where do you stop? How many me's would be the limit? If I can be repeated once, why not twice? Etc.
- And certainly the various theories about reincarnation assume some sort of immortality, and actually include a continuity of existence between physical lifetimes.
Click to expand...

Mr. Savage:

The problem is that multiple iterations of the consciousness that you, personally, are experiencing now are not, in any way, "immortality". An annual plant, that buds, blooms, goes to seed, and dies in a season, only to do it again next year, is not "immortal".

Not to mention that your scenario does not seem to allow the multiple iterations to share any memory, or consciousness, of the previous iterations.

Nor to consider what it might mean to experience "multiple iterations of a unique brain" when each independent iteration develops in a different milieu.

Further, the proper question is not, "...where do you stop... " assuming that your brain may happen many times, but "Why start assuming so, with no evidence?"

I will address the idea of reincarnation being a solution when you demonstrate the existence of whatever it is you want to claim exists, outside the brain, to be reincarnated.

BTW, thank you for your response.
 
dafydd said:
Jabba and his one man fan club never explain that. One would think that it was crucial to their argument, but as nobody knows what their argument actually is it's hard to judge.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately for your latest pathetic gambit, the target wasn't drawn around the bullet hole. The bullet hit the target. A target about the size of a penny, from a firing position about 14.7 billion light years away.

But then, the above is only true assuming the unique brain hypothesis, so your gambit doesn't even work if that's true.

I'll give you the (0.00000.....1) chance of being dead bust wrong in that particular way, because I'm a nice guy, and because I'm waiting for the temp to warm up for my bike ride. But I could take that way of being wrong away from you too.
 
Last edited:
godless dave said:
Jabba, I'll repeat the objection I posted on the very same page:



You keep making the mistake that highly unlikely is equivalent to impossible. It isn't.
Click to expand...
Dave,
- Jut to make sure -- I assume that you do not consider a likelihood of one over infinity close enough to impossible to pretty much waive the difference. Is that correct?
 
Jabba said:
Dave,
- Jut to make sure -- I assume that you do not consider a likelihood of one over infinity close enough to impossible to pretty much waive the difference. Is that correct?
Click to expand...

You haven't shown that the likelihood of someone existing is one over infinity.
 
Toontown said:
Unfortunately for your latest pathetic gambit, the target wasn't drawn around the bullet hole. The bullet hit the target. A target about the size of a penny, from a firing position about 14.7 billion light years away.
Click to expand...

A target which was sitting right next to another target the size of a penny, which was sitting right next to another target, which was sitting next to another one.
 
Slowvehicle said:
Mr. Savage:

The problem is that multiple iterations of the consciousness that you, personally, are experiencing now are not, in any way, "immortality". An annual plant, that buds, blooms, goes to seed, and dies in a season, only to do it again next year, is not "immortal"...

BTW, thank you for your response.
Click to expand...
Slowvehicle,

- You're welcome.

- Per usual, I need to take this one baby step at a time. Mostly, I need to make sure that I understand what you're saying.
- If our number of iterations were infinite, would you consider that immortal?
 
Toontown said:
Unfortunately for your latest pathetic gambit, the target wasn't drawn around the bullet hole. The bullet hit the target. A target about the size of a penny, from a firing position about 14.7 billion light years away.

But then, the above is only true assuming the unique brain hypothesis, so your gambit doesn't even work if that's true.

I'll give you the (0.00000.....1) chance of being dead bust wrong in that particular way, because I'm a nice guy, and because I'm waiting for the temp to warm up for my bike ride. But I could take that way of being wrong away from you too.
Click to expand...

Still foundering on the prediction hurdle...
 
Jabba said:
Slowvehicle,

- You're welcome.

- Per usual, I need to take this one baby step at a time. Mostly, I need to make sure that I understand what you're saying.
- If our number of iterations were infinite, would you consider that immortal?
Click to expand...


Which bit of 'multiple iterations of the consciousness that you, personally, are experiencing now are not, in any way, "immortality"' is giving you the most trouble?
 
Toontown said:
Sorry. I could explain, but having just been informed of the actual purpose of this discussion forum, I've completely lost interest.
Click to expand...

So, you're going to stick with obscure allusions and vague assertions, rather than actually attempting to explain what you're talking about?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom