[Merged] Immortality & Bayesian Statistics

[jond]

No. A trillion times no.

If you have two distinct brains, no matter how similar, you have two distinct minds.

For the brains to be identical in every respect, they would have to be in the same location as well as having the same internal structure. Since that is obviously impossible, the brains will be subject to to different experiences, and so produce different (as well as distinct) minds.

This. Short, sweet, to the point, and guaranteed to be ignored by Jabba.

 

[Slowvehicle]

Such is the cost of losing one's Least Critical Poster™ status. Welcome to invisibility, Trusty Transporter of Things.

Oh, well--at least it's a color I look fabulous in...

 

[jsfisher]

I see don't see what you did there.

 

[John Jones]

- I'll see if I can explain my reasoning re question #1.
- If you don't believe that the very same physical characteristics would produce the same consciousness/self, you seem to believe that the difference between them is not caused by physical differences.

After two or more years trying to prove the Tablecloth of Jesus, and at least 15 months on this thread trying to prove immortality via Bayesian statistics, you've got nothing with a capital NOTHING.

Why do you keep wasting everybody's time, given that you are 70+ years old, and are nearly void of any knowledge of the topics?

You claim to have studied the issue 20, 40, or however many years, and still have no concept of evidence, science, mathematics, or falsifiability.

 

[Aepervius]

- I'll see if I can explain my reasoning re question #1.
- If you don't believe that the very same physical characteristics would produce the same consciousness/self, you seem to believe that the difference between them is not caused by physical differences.

Oh the emergent property right off the moment they are created equal might be identical, but they are not *the same entity*. And once created they diverge immediately by virtue of having different experience.

Really it sounds as if you are pretending that two brain with the identical physical structure would be the same and only one person. Well, No.

But you are not alone in the philosophical confusion, reading the threads about tele-transportation a lot of people confuse identical , and same. You may have an identical brain in all physical property, but it isn't the same person. The original one died.

 

[Aepervius]

Oh, well--at least it's a color I look fabulous in...

Now you have me jealous here, I was first with that invisible mantle, after all except for one or two post I have been pretty much ignored from the start

 

[Slowvehicle]

Now you have me jealous here, I was first with that invisible mantle, after all except for one or two post I have been pretty much ignored from the start

SOME people cannotwear anything...

 

[pakeha]

Joe,

- I'll try to ignore the *sigh* and answer your basic question.

1) My answer isn't very good -- I think we can call it "post hoc." Or maybe, a good (or bad) SF story.
2) I'm suggesting in my theory that there is such a thing as consciousness, which may be an emergent property of totally physical activity, but is itself "mental" and totally non-physical and non-physically existent prior to its physical "entrance." The brain is its "stargate" into physical existence, and determines its physical capacity. ...

...In one post, you appear to have undone any and all progress and reverted back to your original claim. Is this what you are doing?

Mental doesn't mean non-physical, Jabba.
Please explain why you think consciousness is non-physical.

 

[Jabba]

No need. I'll do it for you.











So, those are all the people who answered your question.





Well, we can just ask all those people listed above if they accept that what appears to be a continuous self during a lifetime was not determined by anything physical.

I was one of those people, so I'll go first: NO!

LL,
- Thanks. I do appreciate your summarizing.
- But consequently, I need to ask for another favor. Could you go back and summarize the different questions and comments re my two questions. Obviously, there's a lot of redundancy in the different responses -- so, if you could do the lumping for me, I'd be eternally (really, just for a long time) grateful.

 

[George]

LL,
- Thanks. I do appreciate your summarizing.
- But consequently, I need to ask for another favor. Could you go back and summarize the different questions and comments re my two questions. Obviously, there's a lot of redundancy in the different responses -- so, if you could do the lumping for me, I'd be eternally (really, just for a long time) grateful.

So you're at this nonsense again are you.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

As explained repeatedly to you, brains with the very same physical characteristics, including the very same synapses and action potentials (ions and ion flows) in the same neurons, would produce the same thoughts (mental consciousness if you wish).

Actually, we can't be 100% sure of that. We don't know for sure what, if any, role quantum events have on the operation of the brain.

 

[Garrette]

LL,
- Thanks. I do appreciate your summarizing.
- But consequently, I need to ask for another favor. Could you go back and summarize the different questions and comments re my two questions. Obviously, there's a lot of redundancy in the different responses -- so, if you could do the lumping for me, I'd be eternally (really, just for a long time) grateful.

Best man in the fight, proud researcher with decades at the job, and can't be sussed to keep track of the responses to his own question which he treats as important (notwithstanding that the question he asked isn't the question he wanted answers for).

Poe would be proud.

 

[Aepervius]

Actually, we can't be 100% sure of that. We don't know for sure what, if any, role quantum events have on the operation of the brain.

We are actually relatively sure that the neuron & synapse are vast enough that quantum event do not matter. Consider that we are not on nm scale, but rather 1000 time bigger and more. There hasn't been , to my knowledge, anybody which presented evidence of any quantum effects in biological matter at that size.

 

[Garrette]

--snip--

There hasn't been , to my knowledge, anybody which presented evidence of any quantum effects in biological matter at that size.

There are studies that say otherwise, and there are scientists who agree that this indicates immortality of the selfish soul. You needn't bother asking for citations.

[To pre-Poe the potential Jabba comment.]

 

[godless dave]

LL,
- Thanks. I do appreciate your summarizing.
- But consequently, I need to ask for another favor. Could you go back and summarize the different questions and comments re my two questions. Obviously, there's a lot of redundancy in the different responses -- so, if you could do the lumping for me, I'd be eternally (really, just for a long time) grateful.

They're the same as the last time we discussed them.

 

[Garrette]

They're the same as the last time we discussed them.

This isn't effective debate, godless dave. If you go to the trouble of summarizing for him, it is possible you will use a phrasing that can be twisted to allow an interpretation of agreement on some fringe element allowing Jabba to proceed as if he has won the point.

That would be effective debate. Don't thank me. We're all learning here.

 

[godless dave]

Here's an idea, Jabba. How about you take ten minutes to read the last two pages of posts?

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

We are actually relatively sure that the neuron & synapse are vast enough that quantum event do not matter. Consider that we are not on nm scale, but rather 1000 time bigger and more. There hasn't been , to my knowledge, anybody which presented evidence of any quantum effects in biological matter at that size.

People have essentially been saying that if we had brains which were structurally identical and were fed identical sensory data, then they'd respond identically. I think your "relatively sure" is enough of a question mark (although the current hypotheses about quantum effects in the brain aren't talking about neurons and synapses being directly effected) that we can't say with 100% certainty that two identical brains with identical input would react in identical ways.

And, quantum in origin or not, there is experimental data that brain activity is mathematically chaotic, or on the edge of chaos.

 

[jsfisher]

This just in: Snow has again fallen in Schenectady. Jabba will have updates at 11.

 

[jond]

This. Short, sweet, to the point, and guaranteed to be ignored by Jabba.

I should apply for the challenge...