Proof of Immortality, VII

[JayUtah]

- A particular loaf of bread is simply the result of chemistry. Your particular self-awareness would not be produced by a new combination of your exact chemistry

Yes it would, for the same reason that any number of loaves of bread exhibit the properties of bfread. That was the point of the analogy. And as usual, you're begging the question that self-awareness is individualized as a discrete. You know that's wrong because you won't answer any other questions that test your knowledge of what a property is.

...and therefor, would not be simply the result of your chemistry.

But that's what you're trying to prove. You don't get to assume it's true as part of the proof. One would have learned that in, oh, the seventh grade. Your proof doesn't fail because of some nuance you can easily talk your way around. It fails because it's illogical at the most fundamental level.

Additionally, the definition of materialism requires that the properties of identical material be identical. It specifically disallows externalities. If you're trying to talk about P(E|H), you must use H, materialism. Otherwise you're just falsifying a straw man.

 

[RoboTimbo]

- A particular loaf of bread is simply the result of chemistry. Your particular self-awareness would not be produced by a new combination of your exact chemistry -- and therefor, would not be simply the result of your chemistry.

Maybe it would help if you tell us what your claim is again.

LOL

 

[Monza]

Maybe it would help if you tell us what your claim is again.

LOL

And then tell us what you will attempt to do. Don't actually do it, of course. Just let us know you'll be back.

 

[zooterkin]

I'd be afraid that any attempt to reproduce me exactly would result in a JayUtah with a ghoatee.

"Soul" works fine.

Hans

This is about facial hair now?

 

[Loss Leader]

- A particular loaf of bread is simply the result of chemistry. Your particular self-awareness would not be produced by a new combination of your exact chemistry -- and therefor, would not be simply the result of your chemistry.

Try to think of it from the loaf of bread's point of view. It sees another loaf sitting there and says to itself, "Well, that's all fine and good but that smell it's giving off can't be my particular bread smell because my particular bread smell is over here."

You are just another loaf of bread. You can revel in your own feeling of distinct specialness all you like, but objectively you would be no different from an exact copy of you. Both would believe they were the one true Jabba and both would have missed the point entirely. The concept of "one true Jabba" doesn't exist. Every second, the person we called Jabba is measurably different from the one we called Jabba a second ago.

 

[The Sparrow]

....Every second, the person we called Jabba is measurably different from the one we called Jabba a second ago.

Sage words.

As someone with a bit of a mood disorder, I am not sure that manic Sparrow and depressed Sparrow are even really the same person.

 

[Belz...]

But at least then Jabba would have some support, plus you could use your agoniser on the rest of us to drive us away.

Nerd.









(we can smell our own)

 

[Belz...]

- So, you agree with me in that the combination of your particular sperm and ovum-- even if it encountered the very same factors in the womb -- would not produce your particular self-awareness. Your particular self-awareness must not be simply the result of chemistry.

Do you think you could stick to your OP? You're very far off-topic here.

You're not saying anything of value. Different circumstances lead to different outcomes. This is self-evident. But even if the circumstances and outcomes are exactly, precisely the same, you still get two people.

 

[Belz...]

- A particular loaf of bread is simply the result of chemistry. Your particular self-awareness would not be produced by a new combination of your exact chemistry -- and therefor, would not be simply the result of your chemistry.

The second loaf of bread isn't the same one as the first, either. It's an identical but separate loaf. Your logic doesn't hold.

 

[Belz...]

I am shocked...Shocked I tell you!

Your winning, sir.

 

[Dancing David]

Jabba seems to think the "self" is a separate thing that gets attached to a body at some point, and that the characteristics of the body - the genome or the shape of the brain or something - determine which self gets attached.

Like if you have two radios, both tuned to 89.3 FM, they'll both pick up the same transmission. They won't pick up two separate transmissions.

That's what he seems to be getting at but who knows.

I have pointed out to Jabba on a number of occasions that they just assume that their consciousness is the 'same' from moment to moment, all without proof. The 'self' is a transitory phenomena that is always changing.

 

[Dancing David]

- So, you agree with me in that the combination of your particular sperm and ovum-- even if it encountered the very same factors in the womb -- would not produce your particular self-awareness. Your particular self-awareness must not be simply the result of chemistry.

Category error, over generalization and a strawman.

When an ova and a sperm unite the body they produce is not 'determined' it is deterministic with being a straight down the rail process.
- identical twins start with the same set of genes but develop differently. ergo the genes in the zygote only partly determine the development of the organic body. They have two separate sets of self awareness.

Brains develop and mature in an environment which impacts their structure and functions, expose two identical brains (in identical bodies) to different environments and you will have two different sets of self awareness.

Jabba,
This is sophomoric inelegant and ham fisted argument on your part surely you can do better.

 

[Dancing David]

- A particular loaf of bread is simply the result of chemistry. Your particular self-awareness would not be produced by a new combination of your exact chemistry -- and therefor, would not be simply the result of your chemistry.

This is a silly line or argument, worthy of creationism and a two year old.

You have never demonstrated that your actual self awareness is the same moment to moment, but please continue to entertain us with these idiotic arguments.

 

[wea]

Every second, the person we called Jabba is measurably different from the one we called Jabba a second ago.

Same claim, same deafness, same I'll be back forever. Et voilà. Someone will believe there is no difference at least in his case.

 

[Loss Leader]

Sage words.

As someone with a bit of a mood disorder, I am not sure that manic Sparrow and depressed Sparrow are even really the same person.

I'm reminded of that Snickers commercial where Joe Pesci is yelling at everybody. Then they give him a candy bar and he turns into a regular guy. The tagline is, "You're not you when you're hungry."

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Nerd.









(we can smell our own)

I made a point (rather well I thought) about the reality of consciousness by using an episode of TNG as an example. I don't own my own Starfleet uniform...yet.

 

[JoeMorgue]

"Well there would be a difference...
"What's the difference?"
"Well the difference is they wouldn't be the same."
"How are they not the same?"
"Well they would be different."

 

[Mojo]

Category error, over generalization and a strawman.

When an ova and a sperm unite the body they produce is not 'determined' it is deterministic with being a straight down the rail process.
- identical twins start with the same set of genes but develop differently. ergo the genes in the zygote only partly determine the development of the organic body. They have two separate sets of self awareness.

Brains develop and mature in an environment which impacts their structure and functions, expose two identical brains (in identical bodies) to different environments and you will have two different sets of self awareness.

Jabba,
This is sophomoric inelegant and ham fisted argument on your part surely you can do better.^{[citation needed]}

FTFY.

 

[The Sparrow]

Your winning, sir.

I am ashamed to admit I didn't immediately get the reference. I do now though

 

[Belz...]

I have pointed out to Jabba on a number of occasions [snip]

That's redundant.