Proof of Immortality, VII

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jabba said:
jond,
- If you figure likelihood from a singularity before the big bang, according to most scientific perspectives, the likelihood of either the current existence of a particular body, or a particular body plus a particular self, is virtually zero.
Click to expand...

Lets put numbers to it:
Likelihood of your body: .000000000001
Likelihood of soul: .01
Likelihood of Body & Soul: you do the math, it is impossible for that number to be more likely than your body alone.
 
Also Jabba do you plan on addressing your continued claims that people are agreeing with you when they are not? Or will you just ignore that as well and continue to falsly attribute arguments and agreement to people?
 
Jabba said:
- In my opinion, there was a very reasonable possibility -- prior to any inclusion of implications from my current existence -- that there would be something more than what we now consider to be physical. My opinion is that the probability of such is really much greater than .01, but using .01 still works in the formula. In fact, .0000001 would work.
Click to expand...
Your "opinion" is not a rational method of estimation.
 
Jabba said:
jond,
- If you figure likelihood from a singularity before the big bang, according to most scientific perspectives, the likelihood of either the current existence of a particular body, or a particular body plus a particular self, is virtually zero.
Click to expand...
This statement simply recommits a number of the fatal errors in logic you've demonstrated you cannot fix.
 
Jabba said:
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Worthless until you justify your numbers.

stevea,
- In my formula, I allow that P(~H) is .01. In the past, I've presented what I consider to be "some evidence" for immortality (the official H is OOFLam, i.e. each of us "selves" has Only One Finite Life (at most)).
- I think that, in part, you're suggesting that even .01 is a big overstatement -- at least. Is that right?
Click to expand...
No it's not right. The objection is that you aren't following any detectable or rational method for assigning values to any of the quantities in your model. Asking people to agree to the magnitudes or supply their own guesses is not rational estimation. You're simply pulling arbitrary numbers out of your bunghole and pretending they mean something.

When you do this while also claiming to be a "certified statistician," the only real response we can offer is hearty laughter.
 
Jabba said:
jond,
- If you figure likelihood from a singularity before the big bang, according to most scientific perspectives, the likelihood of either the current existence of a particular body, or a particular body plus a particular self, is virtually zero.
Click to expand...

"Virtually zero" is meaningless from a scientific perspective.
 
Jabba said:
Robo,
- Most of us here have agreed that a perfect copy of my brain and body would not bring me (my sense of self) back to life.
Click to expand...


But nobody has agreed with your claim that this is because there would be something present in the original that would be missing from the copy, or that the copy would be somehow different from the original.

Pretending that people have agreed with you on this point is therefore dishonest.
 
Last edited:
Jabba said:
- In my opinion, there was a very reasonable possibility -- prior to any inclusion of implications from my current existence -- that there would be something more than what we now consider to be physical. My opinion is that the probability of such is really much greater than .01, but using .01 still works in the formula. In fact, .0000001 would work.
Click to expand...


How did you arrive at the figure of 0.01?
 
Jabba said:
jond,
- If you figure likelihood from a singularity before the big bang, according to most scientific perspectives, the likelihood of either the current existence of a particular body, or a particular body plus a particular self, is virtually zero.
Click to expand...


In other words, if your argument disproves the materialist hypothesis under which all that is required for your existence is your body, it also disproves the hypothesis that you have an immortal soul in addition to your body.
 
Jabba said:
- How about 10-100?
Click to expand...

Multiply that by .01 and you get an even bigger number.

ETA: it doesn’t matter what numbers you pull out of your nether regions. You cannot get around the fact that your body existing is more likely than your body and a soul.
 
Last edited:
Mojo said:
But nobody has agreed with your claim that this is because there would be something present in the original that would be missing from the copy, or that the copy would be somehow different from the original.

Pretending that people have agreed with you on this point is therefore dishonest.
Click to expand...
- You've all agreed that it wouldn't bring me back to life. The new sense of self would not be ME.
 
Jabba said:
- How about 10-100?
Click to expand...

How about any number you're just making up out of thin air? One piece of random nonsense is as good as another.

Your statements are so detached from reality you could have said "At least two" and it would have been just as valid, which is to say not valid at all.
 
Jabba said:
- You've all agreed that it wouldn't bring me back to life. The new sense of self would not be ME.
Click to expand...

We have all agreed that the duplicate would self identify as Jabba, which means there is no difference.
 
Jabba said:
- You've all agreed that it wouldn't bring me back to life. The new sense of self would not be ME.
Click to expand...

That's a lie. A bold faced lie. Not one person has said that.

Hell even in your world, you haven't tricked somebody into making some surface level agreement to that. Even using your dishonest definition of "agree" it would still be a lie.
 
Jabba said:
- You've all agreed that it wouldn't bring me back to life. The new sense of self would not be ME.
Click to expand...


It would, at the moment it was created, be identical to you as you were at that particular moment. There would be nothing different about it, nothing missing. The soul that your argument requires does not exist under materialism. Your argument therefore fails to disprove materialism.
 
Jabba said:
Robo,
- Most of us here have agreed that a perfect copy of my brain and body would not bring me (my sense of self) back to life.
Click to expand...

I've been introduced to a wonderful phrase that I think describes Jabba's ideas wonderfully.

Fractal wrongness.

It's wrong from every conceivable angle and from every level of detail. A high level overview shows it to be wrong. Every detail you drill down to is wrong in some fundamental, catastrophic manner.

NIRi3cb.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom