Proof of Immortality III

Status
Not open for further replies.
The words are redundant. People (who in order to be people, must already exist) have one finite life. There is no need to add the tautology of "at most"; the statement of one life already says one life (not two or more). People (actually existing people) do not have less than one life (so not no lives).
 
Jabba you cannot force the rest of us to play your silly word games.

People have on finite life and don't have souls. Make up all the news acronyms you want, it won't change that.
 
Agatha said:
The words are redundant. People (who in order to be people, must already exist) have one finite life. There is no need to add the tautology of "at most"; the statement of one life already says one life (not two or more). People (actually existing people) do not have less than one life (so not no lives).
Click to expand...
Agatha,
- But you would never exist if your parents had never met.
 
Yes, but given that I do exist, I have one finite life. Non-existent people have no lives, but non-existent people are not part of the scientific model; the model addresses what is and what was, not what isn't and has never been.
 
Jabba said:
Agatha,
- But you would never exist if your parents had never met.
Click to expand...

But they did, which means the likelihood of her existence is considerably more than zero. Further, once her parents conceived her, there was no chance of her being anyone other than Agatha because the "who" you are talking about is a process that has developed over the course of her life. When she dies, that process will stop. Unless and until you provide evidence to the contrary, you have nothing.
 
Jabba said:
Agatha,
- But you would never exist if your parents had never met.
Click to expand...

But they DID meet.

Go beyond 2 parents and you need 4 grandparents and 8 great grandparents and 16 great great grandparents.

Follow that back to Roman times and there are several trillion people who have to bump rude bits just to produce you.

That's more people than have ever existed over the entire history of the human race. Therefore you cannot possibly exist, since there were never enough people to produce you.

Explain that.
 
Mojo said:
What about someone who each day appears to wake with little or no memory of what has happened before? Can their consciousness really be considered to be continuous, or do they die each night and a different person awakes in the morning?
Click to expand...

Were you thinking of one particular person?
 
Jabba said:
Dave,
- You left out two words from OOFLam: "at" and "most." Was that dedliberate?
Click to expand...

I left them out because they didn't matter to what I was saying. People who have fewer than one life to live aren't people.
 
Agatha said:
I thought about that after I posted, but I haven't fully thought it all through or done any reading yet. I would say (before I've looked into the question) that memories are only one part of consciousness - there's the person's personality, their likes and dislikes and so on - their characteristics.
Click to expand...


One of the odd things about this discussion is that pretty much all the things that make our consciousness what it is are environmental rather than genetic, and Jabba's argument relies on the "self" being generated outside the body, but Jabba persists with arguments like "if your parents had never met..."
 
Jabba doesn't have an argument. He has a collection of excuses and special pleadings.
 
Okay and?

You're still gonna die. You're not going to come back.

This is all desperate digging in meaningless semantics and categorization and word games from people afraid to die.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom