tsig
a carbon based life-form
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2005
- Messages
- 39,049
[Merged] Immortality & Bayesian Statistics
- Thread starter Jabba
- Start date
- Status
godless dave
Great Dalmuti
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2007
- Messages
- 8,266
That analogy would apply to one brain that was somehow attached to two bodies.
If you're talking about consciousness being separate from the brain, just so.
George
Banned
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2004
- Messages
- 397
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive , Co-Ordinator,, Russell's Antin
Until it did...then it could not.
dlorde
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2007
- Messages
- 6,864
Yes, but only if none of the others contained themselves...Slowvehicle said:
What was the topic again?
Oh yes; I seems to me that you could have immortal consciousness if you redefine time in terms of your consciousness of it... would that be cheating?
Ladewig
I lost an avatar bet.
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2001
- Messages
- 28,828
I would also add that it helps to redefine immortal as well.
And redefine prove and statistics and evidence.
Jabba
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2012
- Messages
- 5,613
- Still trying to indicate exactly what it is that I think is immortal.
- Roughly, I'm claiming that each of "us" is immortal. I'm not claiming that our bodies are immortal, I'm claiming that our "selves" are immortal, our "individual consciousnesses" are immortal.
- And clearly, I'm just confusing people with my terms...
- For now, it seems like the best I can do is say that the "selves" to which I refer are the selves that keep returning -- according to those who believe in reincarnation, that go to heaven or hell -- according to Christians and that live one, short, life (at most) according to atheists.
- From Wikipedia:
Reincarnation is the religious or philosophical concept that the soul or spirit, after biological death, begins a new life in a new body that may be human, animal or spiritual depending on the moral quality of the previous life's actions. This doctrine is a central tenet of theIndian religions.[1] It is also a common belief of various ancient and modern religions such as Spiritism, Theosophy, and Eckankar and is found in many tribal societies around the world, in places such as Siberia, West Africa, North America, and Australia.[2]
- I haven't used "soul" or "spirit" to indicate the concept because I didn't want to inextricably tie the concept to religion.
- Roughly, I'm claiming that each of "us" is immortal. I'm not claiming that our bodies are immortal, I'm claiming that our "selves" are immortal, our "individual consciousnesses" are immortal.
- And clearly, I'm just confusing people with my terms...
- For now, it seems like the best I can do is say that the "selves" to which I refer are the selves that keep returning -- according to those who believe in reincarnation, that go to heaven or hell -- according to Christians and that live one, short, life (at most) according to atheists.
- From Wikipedia:
Reincarnation is the religious or philosophical concept that the soul or spirit, after biological death, begins a new life in a new body that may be human, animal or spiritual depending on the moral quality of the previous life's actions. This doctrine is a central tenet of theIndian religions.[1] It is also a common belief of various ancient and modern religions such as Spiritism, Theosophy, and Eckankar and is found in many tribal societies around the world, in places such as Siberia, West Africa, North America, and Australia.[2]
- I haven't used "soul" or "spirit" to indicate the concept because I didn't want to inextricably tie the concept to religion.
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive , Co-Ordinator,, Russell's Antin
Mr. Savage:
At the risk of being accused of being condescending, it has been clear for a while that you are trying to claim that the existence of the "soul" essentially proves immortality. What you do not realize is that most of us are aware of that--in fact, many of us predicted exactly that--but it does not help you, because all you are doing is asserting the existence of the "soul". For the existence of the "soul" to essentially prove immortality, you would need to demonstrate the existence of the "soul".
You have, as yet, not even begun this demonstration.
And, just as with the 14C issue in ShroudTM, and Shroud IITM the evasion upon which you have spent more than a year is only the first of your problems.
I will be interested to see what evidence you offer that the emergent property of consciousness should, properly, be understood to be the "soul" of metaphysiscs.
godless dave
Great Dalmuti
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2007
- Messages
- 8,266
The concept of a consciousness that is separate from a physical brain is inherently religious. Using a different word will not change this.
pakeha
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2009
- Messages
- 12,331
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
Why?
It's not as if everyone doesn't already know that you're talking about the religious concept of a soul.
In other words, you're claiming that individual consciousness is the product of something other than an individual brain. It seems to me, in light of this, that you need to forget about the immortality nonsense for now and concentrate on somehow demonstrating that disembodied consciousness exists.
Perhaps as part of this process you might like to attempt an answer to this earlier question of mine (which, like so many others, seems to be missing from your "comprehensive" list of unanswered questions):
Or should I assume that your earlier explanation that they're all in a big cosmic bucket somewhere still stands?
Sounds familiar . . .
No wonder our efforts here seem so futile
That's essentially because your "terms" all have special "definitions" which only exist in the Jabbaverse™.
Although I'd also be willing to have a little "side bet" on you being the only one here who is "confused" about what your terms actually "mean".
In addition to your now having ditched all attempts at pretending to take a scientific/mathematical approach to this topic, you further demonstrate that you have no understanding of the different ways that different philosophies view the concept of a soul (I refuse to use your weasel word - self - any more)
Your statement above implying that Buddhists, Christians and atheists disagree only on the eternal fate of this soul is ludicrous in the extreme.
Last edited:
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
self
consciousness
immortal
Immortality & Bayesian Statistics
"That part of a consciousness which is immortal"
consciousness
"Part of the overall concept of self"
immortal
"What a self is"
Immortality & Bayesian Statistics
"Round
Like a circle in a spiral
Like a wheel within a wheel
Never ending or beginning
On an ever spinning reel
Like a snowball down a mountain
Or a carnival balloon
Like a carousel that's turning
Running rings around the moon"
Like a circle in a spiral
Like a wheel within a wheel
Never ending or beginning
On an ever spinning reel
Like a snowball down a mountain
Or a carnival balloon
Like a carousel that's turning
Running rings around the moon"
Ladewig
I lost an avatar bet.
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2001
- Messages
- 28,828
and according to Jews. No afterlife in Jewish traditions.
pakeha
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2009
- Messages
- 12,331
Thanks, O Pharaoh!
I'm trying to make sense of Jabba's claim and your help was invaluable, nay, illuminating.
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2010
- Messages
- 32,124
Yes, we know. This is incredibly clear. You've been told it's incredibly clear.
No you're not. At all.
Yes, we know. What you've got to do is demonstrate that such a thing actually exists.
Whether it's tied to religion or not, that is still what you're talking about. And there is no evidence that such a thing actually exists. Unless you can provide some.
So, please, stop repeating that you're talking about what people who believe in reincarnation are talking about, and demonstrate that what people who believe in reincarnation are talking about actually exists.
dlorde
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2007
- Messages
- 6,864
I don't expect you to produce any evidence for these 'returning selves', so perhaps you could explain what properties they have that justify calling them 'selves' that are not already accounted for by properties of the brain?
In other words, describe these proposed phenomena in as much detail as you can, and distinguish their attributes from those associated with the bodily self. Any ideas of a mechanism or mechanisms for their support would also be welcome.
Loss Leader
I would save the receptionist., Moderator
Jabba
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2012
- Messages
- 5,613
Dave,
- I see your point...
Jabba, it's been clear from the start that what you think might be immortal is not the body but the consciousness/self/soul - whatever you are calling it. Nobody is confused about that, or by your terms.
We are only confused about why you think the consciousness/self/soul is immortal, and exasperated that you seem to be unwilling to explain any of your reasoning.
What we as humans observe:
Each person has one consciousness which commences prior to or at birth, develops over the life, is temporarily absent during sleep, can be changed by damage to the brain, and which ends at death.
What we as humans do not observe:
Any evidence that consciousness transcends death.
Any evidence that an individual consciousness has at any time been the consciousness of another person.
Where is your evidence for the idea that consciousness/self/soul is anything more than an emergent property of the brain?
In other words, this thread has now run to fifty pages, and we still don't have any idea what leads you to suspect that you can (essentially) prove immortality, or how you intend to do it. Don't you think it's about time you made some actual, substantive posts instead of quibbling about a confusion which doesn't exist, and theorising just how special a snowflake each of us are?
We are only confused about why you think the consciousness/self/soul is immortal, and exasperated that you seem to be unwilling to explain any of your reasoning.
What we as humans observe:
Each person has one consciousness which commences prior to or at birth, develops over the life, is temporarily absent during sleep, can be changed by damage to the brain, and which ends at death.
What we as humans do not observe:
Any evidence that consciousness transcends death.
Any evidence that an individual consciousness has at any time been the consciousness of another person.
Where is your evidence for the idea that consciousness/self/soul is anything more than an emergent property of the brain?
In other words, this thread has now run to fifty pages, and we still don't have any idea what leads you to suspect that you can (essentially) prove immortality, or how you intend to do it. Don't you think it's about time you made some actual, substantive posts instead of quibbling about a confusion which doesn't exist, and theorising just how special a snowflake each of us are?
- Status