Proof of Immortality, VI

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mojo said:
How the hell is that agreeing with SOdhner? The reason your calculation comes up with an "unimaginably small" value for the likelihood of your existence is that YOU ARE CALCULATING IT AS IF H IS WRONG.
Click to expand...

Damn, how did you manage to see through such an airtight deception??
 
Great Minds

And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
--Jesus Christ

Everything has a natural explanation. The moon is not a god, but a great rock, and the sun a hot rock.
--Anaxagoras

A common soldier will make an empire, but he will eventually meet his fate and be condemned to the Great Rock.
--Nostradamus

Let there be sound, and there was sound
Let there be light, and there was light
Let there be drums, and there was drums
Let there be guitar, and there was guitar
Let there be rock!
--AC/DC



Anyway, my claim is that this emergent property of self is what sets me apart. Rocks don't have such an emergent property.
--Jabba
 
Seriously, Jabba, are you now reduced to pretending that you are agreeing with people when you are in fact contradicting them?
 
carlitos said:
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
--Jesus Christ

Everything has a natural explanation. The moon is not a god, but a great rock, and the sun a hot rock.
--Anaxagoras

A common soldier will make an empire, but he will eventually meet his fate and be condemned to the Great Rock.
--Nostradamus

Let there be sound, and there was sound
Let there be light, and there was light
Let there be drums, and there was drums
Let there be guitar, and there was guitar
Let there be rock!
--AC/DC



Anyway, my claim is that this emergent property of self is what sets me apart. Rocks don't have such an emergent property.
--Jabba
Click to expand...

How long did you have to dig for those quotes? Or do you have a ready encyclopedia of historical sayings by topic?
 
Argumemnon said:
How long did you have to dig for those quotes? Or do you have a ready encyclopedia of historical sayings by topic?
Click to expand...

The Jesus one I knew, just had to google for the phrasing. Same for AC/DC. Maybe 5 minutes total. I only have a couple of hours per day for this, you know.
 
Dave Rogers said:
Ah, a new wrinkle. This argument suggests that it's not the fact that you have a specific sense of self, but the fact that you have a sense of self at all, that sets you apart from rocks. However, that doesn't set you apart from every other person who has a sense of self. So the whole "Would a copy of me be different to me" is irrelevant; an exact copy of you would have a sense of self, and thus would not be set apart any more or less than you specifically are.
Click to expand...


It would set him apart if the perfect copy of him was a rock.

But then Jabba would also be a rock, so it wouldn't set him apart.
 
Jabba said:
- In a human, there is an emergent property that would be different between the original and the copy. There is no such property in VWs.
Click to expand...

Jabba what are you doing and who do you think you are fooling?

You don't know what an "emergent property" is. We spent the better part of a month trying to explain what one was to you a year or so back.

You can't throw something we had to explain to you and you never showed any actual signs that you understood back in our faces as some magic word you think is gonna win you points.

Jabba said:
Is the part I've hilited the claim that you think no one accepts?
Click to expand...

Nobody accepts any of your claims.

Jabba said:
VWs have no unifying emergent property. A particular VW has no indigenous identity. A human does.
Click to expand...

Again you don't know what an Emergent Property is.

Jabba said:
- And, that's what OOFLam (H) accepts.
Click to expand...

Nobody cares what OOFLam accepts because OOFLam is just made up nonsense that you invented.

H and ~H are still talking about the same experience. They just disagree about it's nature -- and, that's exactly what the formula claims.
Click to expand...

Your formula is nonsense that makes up something you think needs explaining and then doesn't actually explain it.

I keep repeating myself, but so does everyone else -- and, I keep saying that I don't know that I can state my case re this sub-issue any better than I already have...
Click to expand...

Jesus Christ.

STOP STATING YOU CASE AND START PROVING IT!

FOR THE ABSOLUTE LAST TIME THE PROBLEM IS NOT HOW YOU ARE "STATING" YOUR STANCE! THE PROBLEM IS THAT YOUR STANCE IS UNSUPPORTED NONSENSE!

There is no magical way for your to phrase this nonsense that's going to magically make us all agree to it.

Jabba said:
- By that, do you just mean that no one accepts my answer to the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy -- or, is there something more?
Click to expand...

I don't think you understand the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy enough to understand you are breaking it.

Jabba said:
- No. By, "H and ~H are still talking about the same experience" I don't mean to say that two identical brains would produce identical senses of self. I'm still saying that there is a difference between experience and nature. It's as if two people are looking at the same sign in the distance -- they just disagree about what it says.
Click to expand...

"So by the the thing I just said I don't mean the thing I just said, I mean the exact opposite of the thing I just said."

Jabba said:
I accept that I haven't proven anything -- though, I think that I've supported each of my claims to which you refer in your list.
Click to expand...

You've proven nothing. You've supported nothing. You've explained nothing. You've made no effort to prove anything. You've made no effort to support anything. You've made no effort to explain anything.

You stated the same vague, contradictory "stances" over and over and tried to create a set of debate rules you can't lose under because they require your opponents to agree you're right before they argue.

Also, I've given what I still think is justification re not committing the sharpshooter fallacy -- if I have a real point, you don't see it...
Click to expand...

Nobody is failing to see anything Jabba. Stop putting your unwillingness to defend your statements on others.
 
Jabba said:
Dave,
- I accept that I haven't proven anything -- though, I think that I've supported each of my claims to which you refer in your list.
- Also, I've given what I still think is justification re not committing the sharpshooter fallacy -- if I have a real point, you don't see it...
Click to expand...


This is an interesting point I have seen come up many times, usually when discussing things with conspiracy theorists; they seem to believe that opinions carry the same weight as facts. It may related, but they also seem to have no clear distinction between objectivity, subjectivity, and inter-subjectivity. They most often fail to distinguish between views that are objective, and inter-subjective, usually leading to assuming that what the majority believes must be true, and therefore they need to find ways to make their opinions at least appear to be part of the majority belief.

Jabba, do you believe that agreement indicates something being true?
 
Hokulele said:
This is an interesting point I have seen come up many times, usually when discussing things with conspiracy theorists; they seem to believe that opinions carry the same weight as facts. It may related, but they also seem to have no clear distinction between objectivity, subjectivity, and inter-subjectivity. They most often fail to distinguish between views that are objective, and inter-subjective, usually leading to assuming that what the majority believes must be true, and therefore they need to find ways to make their opinions at least appear to be part of the majority belief.

Jabba, do you believe that agreement indicates something being true?
Click to expand...

Indeed. Jabba seems to think that the second he somehow manages to trick someone into making even the most meaningless surface level agreement with him he no only magically wins the arguments his statements also just magically turn into facts.

It's the same role this mythical "Pool of neutral voters" he made up in his head seems to fulfill.
 
Last edited:
I've stayed in this game so long because I know Jabba is going to twist anyone dropping out into a win; that "the skeptic" just couldn't stand up to his amazing debate style and ran away with his tail between his leg.

I'm almost resigned to accepting that that is how Jabba is going to twist it no matter what and just giving up.
 
JoeBentley said:
I've stayed in this game so long because I know Jabba is going to twist anyone dropping out into a win; that "the skeptic" just couldn't stand up to his amazing debate style and ran away with his tail between his leg.

I'm almost resigned to accepting that that is how Jabba is going to twist it no matter what and just giving up.
Click to expand...

Fortunately the jury can read your, JayUtah's, et al's responses that Jabba ignores. Oh, and there was yet another one today. I'll have to remember to add SOdhner's response today to the list of posts where Jabba asked a question and then ignored the response.
 
Jabba,

What saddens me most is the way you're using your time. You have called the forum your hobby and that's fine. It's mine, too. But there are other forums you could go to in order to educate yourself. Then you can come back with actual knowledge. Take a week to go to Hindu or Buddhist forums. Find out how they think reincarnation works. Find out what they think you take from one incarnation to the next. Then you don't have to guess.

The best part is it's still your hobby. You're still on a forum, trading information back and forth. And you'll be making progress.

Your unwillingness to do this, to me, seems rude. It's so easy to do and would help you so much, that it makes no sense that you would refuse. It makes it seem like you just want an unending argument for the sake of your own amusement with no regard for anyone but yourself.
 
godless dave said:
Yes, there is a difference between experience and nature. The experience is the same in both H and ~H. The nature of the experience in H is that two identical brains would produce two identical senses of self.
Click to expand...
- Yeah. Where I perceive a disconnect is that you accept that I would not be brought back to life by my duplicate, but don't accept that as a difference between my original and my duplicate.
 
Jabba said:
- Yeah. Where I perceive a disconnect is that you accept that I would not be brought back to life by my duplicate but don't accept that as a difference between my original and my duplicate.
Click to expand...

What does "being brought back to life" has to do with said difference? Do you understand that you now is not the same you from five seconds ago? If you'd respond to people's request for you to explain that we'd at least be getting somewhere.

Stop complaining that people don't agree with you, or pretending that they do, and tell us what the difference is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom