[Merged] Immortality & Bayesian Statistics

[pakeha]

- Unfortunately, I'm still not sure what "scare quotes" are. Is "..." a scare quote? Is '...' a scare quote? Or, what?

Have you worked out the meaning of scare quotes?

- I have a sense of "self" that was with me when I entered first grade, was with me when I went on active duty and was still with me when I retired. Whether a process, or illusion or what, my sense is that this self, or this aspect of my self, has remained the same throughout my life and environment and personal changes. That's the self that I think is immortal.
- I had thought that at least many of you understood what I was referring to. But now, everyone seems to be denying the existence of this sense of continuation -- saying that there is no sense in which the self, or an aspect of the self, remains the same during a lifetime.
- Who, here, accepts that there is such a sense?

The thing is, Jabba, consciousness is an emergent property of a live brain.
This means that the consciousness of the first-grader Jabba has no continuity or relation to the consciousness of the retired Jabba, except via memories.

 

[Giordano]

- I didn't ask if you accepted that there is a continuous self. I asked if you accepted that there is a sense of a continuous self, and I even granted that it may be an illusion.

I still think that I am me. But I realize that the "me" has changed over the years. When I was 18 I did not want to have kids; now my kids are true treasures to me. When I was 8 years old I did not like girls, now I am thrilled that I live with one. if these fundamental aspects of "me" are trivial to your definition of a "self" what is a "self?"

Also, people have pointed out that "continuous" is very different from "unchanging." A river is continuous, but the Mississippi looks quite different where it begins and where it ends. You have repeatedly referred to "unchanging." Have you altered your meaning?

 

[Humots]

Jay,
- If I understand what you mean, I agree to the extent that1/infity does not equal zero, and the (theoretical) sum of the separate probabilities would equal one.

I don't think that you understand what is meant, Jabba.

"1/infinity" does equal zero, in the sense that limit of 1/x as x goes to infinity is zero. However, 1/infinity is not valid as a probability.

The actual sum of the separate probabilities has to equal one in a valid probability distribution. The sum of the separate probabilities in jt512's example sum to one, as can be shown using first-year college calculus.

- Though, if left to chance, the separate probabilities would all be the same...

What on Earth does this mean?

- Surely, I'm not using the right terminology -- but hopefully, you'll know what i mean anyway.

If you do not use the right terminology, we can only guess at what you mean.

Using the right terminology is the difference between speaking sense and speaking nonsense.

 

[Jabba]

I have a sense of a continuous self, but not an unchanging self.

- Once again, I suspect that you and I are on the same page. In addition, your expression of what I'm referring to may be the best I've heard...
- My claim is that we all have a sense (whether illusion or not) of a continuous core self whose features are constantly changing.

 

[Giordano]

- Whether a process, or illusion or what, my sense is that this self, or this aspect of my self, has remained the same throughout my life and environment and personal changes.

You just said that earlier today. But now you are claiming a continuous self that changes. Which is it?

 

[Jabba]

- Deleted

 

[Loss Leader]

Originally Posted by Jabba:
- I didn't ask if you accepted that there is a continuous self. I asked if you accepted that there is a sense of a continuous self, and I even granted that it may be an illusion.


- But do you accept that we have the the sense of a continuous, core self?

I've answered you twice. And I quoted my first answer in my second answer. I accept that healthy people feel an illusion of a continuous self.

 

[Giordano]

What is the "core" self if my feelings about parenthood and marriage are not part of it? What is more core than that? You are right, I still can't fly by waving my arms. Any other aspect to my core?

 

[Giordano]

I've answered you twice. And I quoted my first answer in my second answer. I accept that healthy people feel an illusion of a continuous self.

Only twice? I think Jabba likes larger "numbers," like infinity.

 

[Jabba]

- So anyway, does anyone disagree that we have the sense of a continuous core self whose features are constantly changing?

 

[Giordano]

- So anyway, does anyone disagree that we have the sense of a continuous core self whose features are constantly changing?

What are you trying to do here? You are ignoring all the answers people have given you. You already know what we think.

 

[PixyMisa]

- My claim is that we all have a sense (whether illusion or not) of a continuous core self whose features are constantly changing.

And then we die.

 

[Slowvehicle]

- So anyway, does anyone disagree that we have the sense of a continuous core self whose features are constantly changing?

Good evening,Mr. Savage!

I wonder why you are so bent upon polling the breeze and trimming your sails to group opinion? You are aware, I think, that your "sense of a continuous core self" (do note the scare quotes, indicating that I am using that term because you do, not because I think it meet) is an infelicitous construction, stony ground in which reality cannot find purchase. Why do you care what we believe?

Where does it get us, in your promise to "essentially prove" "immortality"?

Are you, at this late date, going to settle for the "sense" of "immortality"; that comforting belief that "you" (or your "sense" of "you") will outlive your body, and in fact, outlive the universe itself?

Are you, instead, going to claim that the "sense of continuous core self" (even though it is a characteristic of consciousness as an emergent property of a neurosystem) only exists because the "continuous core self" is "really" "immortal"?

Where are you going with this?

Why will you not simply stop dancing, and, with a flourish, present the evidence (the objective, practical, empirical evidence) for the very existence of this "continuous core self" ("consciousness"/"soul") that is so necessary for your scheme?

 

[Humots]

- So anyway, does anyone disagree that we have the sense of a continuous core self whose features are constantly changing?

Does this mean there is some core to the self that does not change, but all the features of the self do change?

If so, what exactly constitutes this core?

Is the core a set of features that never change?

Is the core a fixed set of features that can change, but the set remains constant throughout life, with no features gained or lost?

Even if some kind of "core" exists in some form, so what? That does not make it anything other than an emergent property of a neurosystem.

Jabba, you keep asking, "does everyone agree that ..., does anyone disagree that ...". It sounds like you are trying to slip something past us.

For example: "I previously asked if everyone agreed that ..., and since only a few people specifically said that they disagreed, I assume that everyone else agrees."

For the record, I withhold agreement. I need to know more about this continuous core self.

 

[John Jones]

- So anyway, does anyone disagree that we have the sense of a continuous core self whose features are constantly changing?

Yes. Next question?

 

[Loss Leader]

- So anyway, does anyone disagree that we have the sense of a continuous core self whose features are constantly changing?

I have the sense of being jerked around by a puppeteer who doesn't quite know how to work the strings.

 

[xtifr]

I have the sense of being jerked around by a puppeteer who doesn't quite know how to work the strings.

Couldn't have put it better myself!

It sounds so much like he's finally agreed with what we've all been trying to tell him, but we saw that fail earlier when he accepted "emergent process" only to reveal that he didn't actually understand what those words meant.

Jabba: barring memory loss, amnesia, or something like that, I would agree that there is a subjective sense (a personal feeling) of a continuous self. I don't know if I'd describe it as a "core". It's simply a feeling of continuity. I remember what I did yesterday, and I remember why and how I felt at the time. If that's what you mean, then maybe we agree on this point, unless there's some further misunderstanding I'm overlooking.

That's about as much as I can offer you at this point.

 

[zooterkin]

- So anyway, does anyone disagree that we have the sense of a continuous core self whose features are constantly changing?

And you would refer to this 'core' as a soul?

 

[Mojo]

It sounds so much like he's finally agreed with what we've all been trying to tell him...

He's just trying to restate his original claim in a way that implies that we agree with him.

 

[Mojo]

And you would refer to this 'core' as a soul?

Core blimey!