[Merged] Immortality & Bayesian Statistics

[Akhenaten]

- 1) If the brains of two different people were exactly the same, would they be the same person in the sense that they would share experiences (IOW, would each person be looking through two sets of eyes)?
A. Yes.
B. Probably
C. No idea
D. Probably not
E. No

I see that you have no idea on the list.

How apropos.

 

[Akhenaten]

2) Is there a way in which a self, at least, appears to be the same self throughout life?
A. Yes.
B. No.
C. Don't know.

This is a new variation on truly effective debate, is it?

Random questions to unidentified readers, all of the answers to which (but one) you will ignore anyway.

Why don't you just get on with producing your evidence in support of the existence of souls?

 

[jond]

2) Is there a way in which a self, at least, appears to be the same self throughout life?
A. Yes.
B. No.
C. Don't know.

No.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

- 1) If the brains of two different people were exactly the same, would they be the same person in the sense that they would share experiences (IOW, would each person be looking through two sets of eyes)?
A. Yes.
B. Probably
C. No idea
D. Probably not
E. No

F) Of course not, that's a ridiculous idea.

Let's say I own a copy of My Little Pony on DVD and you own a copy of My Little Pony on DVD. The physical make up of those DVDs are the same. Now let's say that my house burns down and my DVD melts in the fire. Does your DVD melt, too? No? Then why would two things being the same mean that they had the same experiences?

Seriously, F is being kind.

2) Is there a way in which a self, at least, appears to be the same self throughout life?
A. Yes.
B. No.
C. Don't know.

If we define this thread as a "self", then the answer is unequivocally A.

 

[godless dave]

- 1) If the brains of two different people were exactly the same, would they be the same person in the sense that they would share experiences (IOW, would each person be looking through two sets of eyes)?
A. Yes.
B. Probably
C. No idea
D. Probably not
E. No

We've already discussed this. No.

 

[godless dave]

2) Is there a way in which a self, at least, appears to be the same self throughout life?
A. Yes.
B. No.
C. Don't know.

The same but not unchanged, as we discussed previously.

 

[Jabba]

I don't think anything implies anything. A word has a definition or it doesn't, and a word can have a much stricter technical definition than is commonly used. Implications are meaningless.

One frequently hears of people dying of heart attacks. Some of these "heart attacks" are actually ventricular tachycardia - which is completely different from the death of some heart muscle due to a blood vessel blockage. Common people might talk about "heart attacks," but cardiologists would never use the term to describe ventricular tachycardia.

So, you have defined the soul or "self" as being the transcendent individuality of a person. You have not defined it as immortal, one hopes, because you are trying to prove that it is immortal and defining your way to victory is cheating.

Everyone here understands what you mean when you say "self" or soul. Now, please, please, please move on to demonstrating that such a thing can outlive the body.

- From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/self
Self
1.
a person or thing referred to with respect to complete individuality: one's own self.
2.
a person's nature, character, etc.: his better self.
3.
personal interest.
4.
Philosophy .
a.
the ego; that which knows, remembers, desires, suffers, etc., as contrasted with that known, remembered, etc.
b.
the uniting principle, as a soul, underlying all subjective experience.



- From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/soul
soul
noun
1.
the principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans, regarded as a distinct entity separate from the body, and commonly held to be separable in existence from the body; the spiritual part of humans as distinct from the physical part.
2.
the spiritual part of humans regarded in its moral aspect, or as believed to survive death and be subject to happiness or misery in a life to come: arguing the immortality of the soul.
3.
the disembodied spirit of a deceased person: He feared the soul of the deceased would haunt him.

 

[dafydd]

- From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/self
Self
1.
a person or thing referred to with respect to complete individuality: one's own self.
2.
a person's nature, character, etc.: his better self.
3.
personal interest.
4.
Philosophy .
a.
the ego; that which knows, remembers, desires, suffers, etc., as contrasted with that known, remembered, etc.
b.
the uniting principle, as a soul, underlying all subjective experience.



- From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/soul
soul
noun
1.
the principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans, regarded as a distinct entity separate from the body, and commonly held to be separable in existence from the body; the spiritual part of humans as distinct from the physical part.
2.
the spiritual part of humans regarded in its moral aspect, or as believed to survive death and be subject to happiness or misery in a life to come: arguing the immortality of the soul.
3.
the disembodied spirit of a deceased person: He feared the soul of the deceased would haunt him.

Please take this to the religion forum, it has nothing to do with science. You believe in an immortal soul because you believe in an immortal soul.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I'll ask again so you can ignore it Jabba.

How does brain damage work within the concept of a soul?

 

[Jabba]

The same but not unchanged, as we discussed previously.

Dave,
- See, to me, in order to be the same, you would have to be unchanged -- or at least, that is one way to interpret the issue.
- But now at least, I'm pretty sure that you and I are on the same page regarding the "self" that I'm trying to conjecture about.

 

[godless dave]

Dave,
- See, to me, in order to be the same, you would have to be unchanged -- or at least, that is one way to interpret the issue.

I don't see how. We already talked about a DVD being the same DVD even after it was changed.

- But now at least, I'm pretty sure that you and I are on the same page regarding the "self" that I'm trying to conjecture about.

We've been on the same page for quite some time now.

 

[Jabba]

I'll ask again so you can ignore it Jabba.

How does brain damage work within the concept of a soul?

Joe,
- Can you change "soul" to "self"? If so, I can answer your question.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Joe,
- Can you change "soul" to "self"? If so, I can answer your question.

No! What the hell? "I have to change your question in order answer it." What can of nonsense is that?

Answer the question I asked. If there is a part of your mental process that is separate from the physical organ of the brain, how do you explain mental changes resulting from trauma to the brain?

 

[Jabba]

I don't see how. We already talked about a DVD being the same DVD even after it was changed.



We've been on the same page for quite some time now.

- I wasn't convinced before... Now, you've convinced me.
- But, I take it that you still don't see any difficulty in effectively communicating about this issue -- except, when it comes to communicating with me.

 

[godless dave]

- I wasn't convinced before... Now, you've convinced me.
- But, I take it that you still don't see any difficulty in effectively communicating about this issue -- except, when it comes to communicating with me.

Why would you think that?

 

[Jabba]

No! What the hell? "I have to change your question in order answer it." What can of nonsense is that?

Answer the question I asked. If there is a part of your mental process that is separate from the physical organ of the brain, how do you explain mental changes resulting from trauma to the brain?

Joe,
- That is not the question you asked.
- If you quit with the insults, and just ask that last question, I'll try to answer it. If you can't quit with the insults, I won't bother.

 

[JoeMorgue]

*sighs* Here I'll just quote the post you already ignored.

If mental activity can continue after death, how do you explain brain damage?

If a part of your brain is damaged you can lose a part of your mental functioning. So how exactly would damage to your entire brain, i.e. death, allow for any part of that same functioning to continue?

And what if while I'm alive I suffer brain damage. When I die does my spirit or my ghost or my angel get that damaged part of my mental process back? Are there ghosts and angels suffering from Alzheimer or in the afterlife?

Do lobotomized people have lobotomized ghosts? Does Phineas Gage's angel have its left frontal lobe back?

 

[Jabba]

Why would you think that?

- Cause, a long time ago, I started complaining about how difficult it was to communicate this stuff effectively, and no one seemed to agree with me...
- I need to get to my chores, so I won't be able to communicate for awhile...

 

[Slowvehicle]

- 1) If the brains of two different people were exactly the same, would they be the same person in the sense that they would share experiences (IOW, would each person be looking through two sets of eyes)?
A. Yes.
B. Probably
C. No idea
D. Probably not
E. No

Good morning, Mr. Savage!

Your question, as asked, is 'way too simplistic for the simplsitic answers you listed.

We have been through this before. Let us suppose, just for the sake of argument, that it were, in fat, possible to manufacture an atom-for-atom, molecule-for-molecule, neuron-for-neuron exact duplicate of a particular brain at a particular moment, and it were possible to "turn on" that brain and have it activate in media res, as it were (rather than trying to have the duplicate brain "develop" into an exact duplicate). At the very moment that the duplicate brain were "activated", the two brains would, inevitably, diverge, as they would, inevitably, be undergoing two different sets of experiences. It is no more possible to "build", or "develop", two identical brains than it is to grow two identical bonsai; or breed two identical dogs, or erode two identical rivers in identical watersheds.

What instances of "shared consciousness", of the "same brain" in "two different people" sharing the "same self", can you provide?

 

[pakeha]

- 1) If the brains of two different people were exactly the same, would they be the same person in the sense that they would share experiences (IOW, would each person be looking through two sets of eyes)?
A. Yes.
B. Probably
C. No idea
D. Probably not
E. No

What? I mean to say, what, what?
This has all been discussed, Jabba.
Remember?