[Merged] Immortality & Bayesian Statistics

[Akhenaten]

Jay,
- I may be misunderstanding your point, but I've always said that as long as you guys aren't androids, immortality applies to you guys (and everyone else) also.

In what way are androids (and in fact, everything else in the Universe) excluded from being immortal?

 

[Sideroxylon]

In what way are androids (and in fact, everything else in the Universe) excluded from being immortal?

They would lack a Platonic psyche. Don't mind the intervening millennia and what they have brought to understandings of consciousnesses.

 

[Jabba]

What limits grains of sand that doesn't limit observers?

- For one thing, lack of an emergent property.
- You are an emergent property. So am I. Your particular consciousness -- the one that, at least, appears to span your whole lifetime -- is an emergent property. (I'll try "particular consciousness" for awhile, instead of "observer.")

- Otherwise, your particular consciousness had no preexistence of any kind. That being the case, what was the probability (likelihood) that it would come into existence when it did?

 

[Mojo]

- For one thing, lack of an emergent property.
- You are an emergent property. So am I. Your particular consciousness -- the one that, at least, appears to span your whole lifetime -- is an emergent property. (I'll try "particular consciousness" for awhile, instead of "observer.")

Yes, but what emergent property do "observers" have?

 

[Mojo]

In what way are androids (and in fact, everything else in the Universe) excluded from being immortal?

None of them are potentially infinite (except Volkswagens).

 

[Mojo]

- You are an emergent property. So am I. Your particular consciousness -- the one that, at least, appears to span your whole lifetime -- is an emergent property. (I'll try "particular consciousness" for awhile, instead of "observer.")

Now is the woodcock near the gin. What is a "particular consciousness" (or "observer", "self", "soul", or whatever other term for it you might "try for awhile") an emergent property of?

 

[PixyMisa]

- For one thing, lack of an emergent property.
- You are an emergent property. So am I. Your particular consciousness -- the one that, at least, appears to span your whole lifetime -- is an emergent property. (I'll try "particular consciousness" for awhile, instead of "observer.")

And? There's no connection between that answer and the question asked.

- Otherwise, your particular consciousness had no preexistence of any kind.

It's a function of the brain. Yes, it didn't happen before the brain existed, because it's a function of the brain.

That being the case, what was the probability (likelihood) that it would come into existence when it did?

Given what? Given a newborn baby in the developed world, something like 0.98. (Accounting for infant and child mortality and severely debilitating disorders.)

 

[godless dave]

- For one thing, lack of an emergent property.

Why does that make a difference.

- You are an emergent property. So am I. Your particular consciousness -- the one that, at least, appears to span your whole lifetime -- is an emergent property. (I'll try "particular consciousness" for awhile, instead of "observer.")

- Otherwise, your particular consciousness had no preexistence of any kind. That being the case, what was the probability (likelihood) that it would come into existence when it did?

Exactly the same as the likelihood that my physical body would come into existence when it did, since one is a product of the other.

 

[Slowvehicle]

Jay,
- I may be misunderstanding your point, but I've always said that as long as you guys aren't androids, immortality applies to you guys (and everyone else) also.

Good Morning, Mr. Savage!

Perhaps, before you simply assume your conclusion that "immortality" applies to me (or anyone), you should consider demonstrating that "immortality", in fact, exists.

What practical, empirical, objective evidence do you offer for the existence of "immortality"?

 

[Mojo]

It's a function of the brain. Yes, it didn't happen before the brain existed, because it's a function of the brain.

And it won't continue after the brain ceases to exist, for the same reason.

 

[Slowvehicle]

None of them are potentially infinite (except Volkswagens).

Cower before my infinite army of immortal Type 2 Transporter Androids!

 

[Loss Leader]

Otherwise, your particular consciousness had no preexistence of any kind. That being the case, what was the probability (likelihood) that it would come into existence when it did?

I hate to make a comment like this, because it is almost always ignored. As far as science can tell, our existences may be a foreordained part of the universe.

You have never explained how you have excluded the possibility that we live in a deterministic universe - that the movement of every atom is a necessary byproduct of the creation of the universe. If we were to run the universe over again from the start, we would get exactly the same result every time.

I know of no way to test for a deterministic universe, let alone to figure out how likely one is. Since you cannot determine the odds of a clockwork universe, you cannot figure out the odds of your existence.

How does your math account for that?

 

[Mojo]

Jay,
- I may be misunderstanding your point, but I've always said that as long as you guys aren't androids, immortality applies to you guys (and everyone else) also.

Why shouldn't "androids" have souls selves observers particular consciousnesses as an emergent property of whatever they have that performs the function of a brain?

 

[Sideroxylon]

And it won't continue after the brain ceases to exist, for the same reason.

So ice crystals cease to exist too after they melt?

 

[Mojo]

So ice crystals cease to exist too after they melt?

Yes, in exactly the same way that the brain ceases to exist after the brain ceases to exist.

The molecules that made up the ice crystals will still exist after they melt, but the crystals won't. And any emergent properties that the ice crystals may have had as a result of being crystalline will have vanished along with the structure.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Yes, in exactly the same way that the brain ceases to exist after the brain ceases to exist.

The molecules that made up the ice crystals will still exist after they melt, but the crystals won't. And any emergent properties that the ice crystals may have had as a result of being crystalline will have vanished along with the structure.

That is a jolly shame then.

 

[Akhenaten]

They would lack a Platonic psyche. Don't mind the intervening millennia and what they have brought to understandings of consciousnesses.

I believe you have touched upon the soul of the matter.

 

[Akhenaten]

What limits grains of sand that doesn't limit observers?

- For one thing, lack of an emergent property.

Observers don't have emergent properties. They are an emergent property.

Of brains, which are for all intents and purposes just as finitely variable as grains of sand.

- You are an emergent property. So am I. Your particular consciousness -- the one that, at least, appears to span your whole lifetime -- is an emergent property. (I'll try "particular consciousness" for awhile, instead of "observer.")

Why not call them ftangpoofles and see if that legitimises your baseless argument?

- Otherwise, your particular consciousness had no preexistence of any kind.

I'm once again reminded to ask you about post-existence.

Where are all the souls/selves/observers/particular consciousnesses/ftangpoofles of the 100+ billion people who have lived and died up to now?

That being the case, what was the probability (likelihood) that it would come into existence when it did?

Less than ∞:1, which is all that matters.

 

[Akhenaten]

None of them are potentially infinite (except Volkswagens).

And ftangpoofles.

 

[Akhenaten]

Cower before my infinite army of immortal Type 2 Transporter Androids!

I, for one, welcome our new immortal Type 2 Transporter Android overlords.