[Merged] Immortality & Bayesian Statistics

[Garrette]

Aww..."demanding" is harsh. Say, rather, "...looking down his nose at anything that isn't..."

Careful. If monza isn't an Ami then your imported beer might be Bud Lite.

 

[Slowvehicle]

Careful. If monza isn't an Ami then your imported beer might be Bud Lite.

Well, he did say, "beer"...so I'm not worried.

 

[Garrette]

Well, he did say, "beer"...so I'm not worried.

My first real laugh since Akenhaten counted universes. Well done.

 

[Akhenaten]

It beggars belief that you still seem to think that all of us here who oppose you are in constant communication with each other.

The funny thing is, most of us are. We're sitting with our laptops in my living room eating nachos right now. Loss Leader is hogging the salsa and Slow Vehicle is demanding imported beer. By the way, Akhenaten, someone said you were on the way here with some gyros? Bring extra tzatziki sauce.

You want fries with that?​

 

[Giordano]

The funny thing is, most of us are. We're sitting with our laptops in my living room eating nachos right now. Loss Leader is hogging the salsa and Slow Vehicle is demanding imported beer. By the way, Akhenaten, someone said you were on the way here with some gyros? Bring extra tzatziki sauce.

Monza is also sitting on "my spot" on the couch. Get off; I sit there!

 

[pakeha]

3) If identical brains did produce the same self (the kind of "self" that I've been referring to), would this one self be looking through two sets of eyes?

No.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Alright lets try to look at this another way that will be completely ignored.

Let's run a little thought experiment here. Let's say we lived in a world were the identical twins, that is two separate human being formed from a single fertilized egg, had never occurred. The idea of two human beings with identical genetic makeup was just... never even considered as a possibility.

Then one day but some amazing fluke the first pair of identical twins is born. Two people with identical genetic structures were born for the very first time.

In this hypothetical world we would struggle as to how define "identity" when face with then unconsidered possibility of two people with identical genetic makeup. Since "different identity" and "different genetic makeup" had been up until this point in perfect 1:1 sync, we would never have had to consider any difference between the two. Now we would. This would be difficult. It would be hard for us to incorporate this.

But not impossible.

So if right this second in some super-duper sekrit lab someone a scientist is being hit by the first cloning ray creating an identical duplicate of him with identical memories... this event would freak out current understanding of identity and "sameness."

But we would get over it.

Out of all the silly philosophizer navel gazing the hand wringing of "Identity" is one of the silliest. We create categories based on shared qualities. If we learn one of those qualities is no longer shared it would take time for us to readjust how we form those qualities. There's no grand mystery of the universe here.

 

[zooterkin]

3) If identical brains did produce the same self (the kind of "self" that I've been referring to), would this one self be looking through two sets of eyes?

- If you're talkin about the same kinda self as I am, the answer is yes. I still don't know who's on my page.
- I think that loss leader is on my page, and I used to think Dave was...
- Mostly, I wanted to know that some of you guys were on the same page -- talkin about the same self -- before I started explainin why I think that there should be an infinite number of such selves. I know it's gonna be hard, even if you're on the same page...

- I'm talkin like this cause this is the way I usually talk...

Loss Leader,
- I know you're gettin tired of doin favors for me, but do you think there are others here on the same page?

Replying to your own posts? It's almost as if you can't see anyone else's...

 

[Filippo Lippi]

All part of an "effective debate."

 

[Monza]

Monza is also sitting on "my spot" on the couch. Get off; I sit there!

I was just keeping it warm for you.

 

[John Jones]

Isn't it about time for another Fringe Reset?

Behold the Opening Post:

- I think that I can essentially prove immortality using Bayesian statistics.
- If this belongs in a different thread, or has already been done, please let me know. Otherwise, I'll present my case here.
--- Jabba

Skeptics To Jabba:
Essentially prove immortality using Bayesian statistics
Repeat:
Essentially prove immortality using Bayesian statistics!

Editorial comment: Please to prove immortality by any falsifiable means you can that doesn't involve faulty logic, faith in scripture, or magical thinking.

I know you can't, and probably won't even acknowledge the issues, but I want this on the record. After all, I'm one of those 'dishonest and incompetent' scientists.

 

[Slowvehicle]

OK, so I have been off the 'net all day--long story--unexpectedly moving my mother into a manged care facility.

No word from Mr. Savage today?

 

[Akhenaten]

OK, so I have been off the 'net all day--long story--unexpectedly moving my mother into a manged care facility.

No word from Mr. Savage today?

Since Mr. Savage appears to have nominated his very own self as today's Least Critical Poster™ and as such is only replying to that self-same very own self, it seems likely that there will be some delay until the Emergency Anti-Recursive And Chronic Hubris Erasure™ team arrives.



ETA: My thoughts are with you and your family, my friend.

 

[Slowvehicle]

<snip>
ETA: My thoughts are with you and your family, my friend.

TY, Mighty One (may you post forever!)

All is well, and much is good--just one of those "If this is to happen it happens TODAY" situations.

 

[Jabba]

No.

- That's the point. The kind of self that I'm referring to would be looking through two sets of eyes. You and I are on different pages. The "self" to which you're referring, and the one to which I'm referring, are not the same.

 

[Mojo]

- That's the point. The kind of self that I'm referring to would be looking through two sets of eyes.

The kind of selves everyone else is referring to also look through two sets of eyes (if we're talking about two selves).

ETA: You now seem to be arguing for the existence of single selves that have more than one simultaneous body. Got any evidence for them?

 

[Jabba]

Absolutely everyone in this thread understands what you mean by a "self" or soul...

- Pakeha doesn't. And by saying "'self' or 'soul'," you don't seem to either.

 

[Jabba]

No, not in the way Jabba's talking about. He literally means that one consciousness would share 2 brains. Those two brains would be like 2 robots being controlled by 1 computer - that computer being the "self". Unlike you and I who experience the world looking out of 2 eyes (I assume, unless you've had a terrible accident or a birth defect, in which case I apologise for my crass insensitivity) there would be a "self" who experiences the world looking out of 4 eyes. The two different brains experiencing different stimulus would be irrelevant, because it would be just the one "self" experiencing both sets of stimuli.

I think it's reasonable to say that nobody, other than Jabba, believes this to be anything other than utterly preposterous.

- But, you do understand what I'm talking about.

 

[Mojo]

And by saying "'self' or 'soul'," you don't seem to either.

Your "self" concept is indistinguishable from what is meant by "soul".

 

[Loss Leader]

- Pakeha doesn't. And by saying "'self' or 'soul'," you don't seem to either.

I don't think you do, either. If one soul could simultaneously exist looking through two sets of eyes, then either:

1. There is no need for infinite souls, as just a couple would do the job; or

2. The soul is not born with the body, so there is no method of creation of infinite souls.

I don't even think you know where you are in your own equation. Are you on the "scientific" side where everything has to align with observable reality as best understood now; or are you on your made-up side where you are just imagining one of multiple possibilities?