Reincarnation as a trivial scientific fact

[Turgor]

As an experiment, after a brisk walk on a cool morning remove your clothing and jump into bed. It doesn't take long before warm air is wafting from the covers. Feel your skin it will be cold.

Sorry, but i have to get to work in the morning.

An atomic reaction is taking place within your body changing water to what it was made from H2O (gas).

No. The change from liquid water to water vapour is a phase change, and has nothing to do with "An atomic reaction". Did you mean nuclear reaction?

This heated excreting gas is made up of miniature nuclei containing a nucleus that has all the information of its parent. Contained in that water cell that changed to gas is the complete (including Memory) make up of you.

This aura (or con zillions of you) are now on an adventure of Evolution. Some of these will mutate on the body and can be detected by smell. If a bathing doesn't take place a good magnification will show things with legs (bed mites) (probably they will be Earths next dinosaur. Others of you are been dispersed where ever you are or go (its this Aura that a tracking dog homes in on).

Like Crop Circles an accumulation or Aura in a packed state can manifest into ghost. Most of these particles amalgamate with the Earths centrifugal force and are taken aloft to become the nucleus of a water cell (rain drop).

The moment you die a measurable 3/4 troy ounce of your make up including memory is recycled by the brain (reverse evolution were the orbiting nuclei of the nucleus is sped up in which each cell or particle is smaller than the last).

This 3/4 ounce of energy does not stay on Earth but is whisked out into space to be used some where, some time, some how by something. It comforts me to know that their will always be a part of me tucked away some where out there.

How do you come up with all this nonsense?

 

[dafydd]

As an experiment, after a brisk walk on a cool morning remove your clothing and jump into bed. It doesn't take long before warm air is wafting from the covers. Feel your skin it will be cold.

An atomic reaction is taking place within your body changing water to what it was made from H2O (gas). This heated excreting gas is made up of miniature nuclei containing a nucleus that has all the information of its parent. Contained in that water cell that changed to gas is the complete (including Memory) make up of you.

This aura (or con zillions of you) are now on an adventure of Evolution. Some of these will mutate on the body and can be detected by smell. If a bathing doesn't take place a good magnification will show things with legs (bed mites) (probably they will be Earths next dinosaur. Others of you are been dispersed where ever you are or go (its this Aura that a tracking dog homes in on).

Like Crop Circles an accumulation or Aura in a packed state can manifest into ghost. Most of these particles amalgamate with the Earths centrifugal force and are taken aloft to become the nucleus of a water cell (rain drop).

The moment you die a measurable 3/4 troy ounce of your make up including memory is recycled by the brain (reverse evolution were the orbiting nuclei of the nucleus is sped up in which each cell or particle is smaller than the last).

This 3/4 ounce of energy does not stay on Earth but is whisked out into space to be used some where, some time, some how by something. It comforts me to know that their will always be a part of me tucked away some where out there.

Troll.

 

[wollery]

Troll.

Hopefully.

 

[dafydd]

I'm convinced! Hitler has been reincarnated as a goldfish.

 

[wogoga]

... PAY ATTENTION!

1) Consistent, consequential materialism entails that a fundamental difference between two materially identical humans cannot exist.

2) The video shows in a very simple and comprehensible way that two identically cloned humans would consider themselves as fundamentally different from each other (and would not be willing to commit suicide, even if the other clone could replace them in a 100-percent perfect way).

3) So with respect to real life, there is a fundamental difference between you (or the transporter-machine inventor) and an identical clone.​

That's all what I've said in the part you replied to.

Cheers, Wolfgang

Spamming with and replying to off-topic nonsense may be considered an insidious way of combatting the content of a thread (if not intended as humorous diversion, or as a way to keep the thread alive)

 

[Wowbagger]

2) The video shows in a very simple and comprehensible way that two identically cloned humans would consider themselves as fundamentally different from each other (and would not be willing to commit suicide, even if the other clone could replace them in a 100-percent perfect way).

The transporter-clone scenario is not problematic for materialist/reductionist thinking. You've made an exact duplicate of the person, complete with duplicated consciousness and memories, etc.

But, since it is a duplication, and not a transferal: Of course the original person is not going to want to be destroyed! That's not proving non-materialism. That's merely acknowledging that conscious is not easily transferable. (even if it is entirely material)

The transporter-clone scenario is, however, inherently problematic for the non-materialist, the one who believes in a soul, or something similar. They have to answer the question about "what is missing?".

If one made an exact duplicate of all the material components of a human (all sub-atomic particles, etc.), does that mean one has a "soul" and the other does not? If not, then what went missing? If so, then how could a non-material soul be copied by strictly materialistic means?

 

[WhatRoughBeast]

1) Consistent, consequential materialism entails that a fundamental difference between two materially identical humans cannot exist.

Trivially untrue. A materialist believes that memory is stored via a physical process. Since distinct persons have different experiences, their different memories make them fundamentally distinguishable. On a materialist basis.

2) The video shows in a very simple and comprehensible way that two identically cloned humans would consider themselves as fundamentally different from each other (and would not be willing to commit suicide, even if the other clone could replace them in a 100-percent perfect way).

1) It shows no such thing. It asserts it. There's a difference.

2) In fact, I agree with the assertion. As i have said, you need to read more science fiction.

3) So with respect to real life, there is a fundamental difference between you (or the transporter-machine inventor) and an identical clone.

That's all what I've said in the part you replied to.

My injunction to PAY ATTENTION derives from your failure to do so to the thread which you twice adapted. The OP on thread "The Star Trek Transporter Enigma" starts by stating

Let's suppose that the fictional Star Trek transporter works like this:

A computer records the identity and position of every particle of your body as the transporter disassembles it, and the particles are stored locally in some sort of storage space, or perhaps annihilated by conversion to energy.

You will note that this process destroys the original as part the encoding which makes duplication possible. There is no inconvenient original left hanging around. Therefore, both of your adaptations are irrelevent to the video.

And I still have problems with your use of the term "real life". Thought experiments, no matter how well animated, are not real life. And once again, I will point out that by the terms of the video, your psychron belief cannot be true, since the video states (or at least strongly implies) that an indefinitely large number of duplicates can be created.

Other than that, I agree with you that "there is a fundamental difference between you (or the transporter-machine inventor) and an identical clone". Just as long as the terms of the video are maintained. Speaking strictly as a materialist, you understand.

 

[wogoga]

Logical consistency

1) Consistent, consequential materialism entails that a fundamental difference between two materially identical humans cannot exist.​

Trivially untrue. A materialist believes that memory is stored via a physical process. Since distinct persons have different experiences, their different memories make them fundamentally distinguishable.

"Different memories" for "materially identical humans"?

There is no inconvenient original left hanging around. Therefore, both of your adaptations are irrelevent to the video.

Ever watched the video? Ever seriously dealt with philosophical problems?

Cheers, Wolfgang
www.pandualism.com

 

[dafydd]

"Different memories" for "materially identical humans"?




Ever watched the video? Ever seriously dealt with philosophical problems?

Cheers, Wolfgang
www.pandualism.com

When are you going to get round to proving that reincarnation is a trivial scientific fact?

 

[WhatRoughBeast]

"Different memories" for "materially identical humans"?]

Ah. I see. You are, technically, correct. But since location is part of the description of any material object, "materially identical humans" are inseparable, and are not physically realisable.

I had assumed (silly me) that your phrase referred to 2 humans who are physically identical at some time, such as the instant of duplication in the video. My point was that they would immediately begin to diverge physically due to their different environments. Even given identical environments, their innate radioactivity would cause immediate divergence. And truly identical environments are harder to come by than you might think. Shielding both individuals from cosmic radiation, for instance, is really hard, and such radiation will leave traces. From a materialistic point of view, of course.

Ever watched the video? Ever seriously dealt with philosophical problems?

Indeed I did, and indeed I have. As I have repeatedly remarked, you need to read more science fiction.

But first, since you seem unwilling to address the issue, let me repeat my point about your not paying attention. The semi-quotes which you presented were based on a situation in which an original is scanned, and destroyed in the process, and a duplicate or duplicates is then constructed. The video which you admire so much is based on a process which constructs a duplicate while the original is unharmed. So your statement

On the one hand, consistent reductionist-materialist reasoning leads to conclusions such as:

If you think there is an experiencing self and that this will die in the transporter, you are inconsistent. You are just suffering from delusion. (adapted from)​

One is not consistent if one thinks that something essential about one's identity (or experiencing self) would be lost if one stepped into the transporter. (adapted from)​

is simply wrong within the context which you reference.

And as for thinking about the consequences of the video, some are quite clear. At the end of the video, the protagonist believes that she has demonstrated that she is separate from the original, and not constrained by the original's past. And you seem to agree with this proposition.

Let's call the original person the alpha, while the copy is the beta. The alpha and the beta are clearly seperate entities, since there was a period (before the alpha got blenderized) when they could stand side by side, and I believe that I have established that they were materially different after some very short interval.

Even after the unfortunate demise of the alpha, the beta has no name. After all, the alpha was born of her mother and then died. A death certificate can be reliably issued. The beta, under current law, has no right to the possessions of the alpha, and indeed has no right to any part of the alpha's identity. No driver's license, no credit cards, no nothing. And the beta should be very thankful that she lives in a society which protects her basic rights. Even though she has no iestablished dentity, the machinery of our society will punish anyone who harms her. She, or her corpse, would be referred to as a Jane Doe, but the prosecution would proceed regardless.

 

[Aepervius]

Wogoga I have no idea where you get your idea about materialist. But they are downright wrong.

If one suppose only matter exists *THEN* it stands automatically that two non-distinguishable human even at the moment of their duplication without even counting divergence, will be two different human. They will not be "identical" except in the sense that every single of their memory will be non distinguishable. Thereein lies the difference non distinguishable does not mean identical.

In other word, if you were the one being duplicated, then somebody kill you , the duplicate would be NON distinguishable from you, and for all purpose within the universe nobody would be able to tell that you were killed and destroyed, *BUT* you would definitively feel the death and cease to exists, whereas your duplicate would go on.

Anything else would either suppose a non material entityn being transfered, OR will congruate the "self" with your interreaction with the universe as opposed to the feeling of each clone (which would mean it does not matter which one you kill or if you kill neither, you would consider both interchangeable).

Anyway the bottom line is your theory that the two human are identical is definitively false. We have many thread on that.


And naturally after the first nanosecond the divergence begins, if only by virtue of isotopic change.

 

[WhatRoughBeast]

Ever seriously dealt with philosophical problems?

Another problem with the video is moral culpability (or guilt, for the more judgemental). Per the video, I could : leave a trail of rape, pillage and murder in my wake, use the copier and destroy the original me. As the protagonist believes, and you seem to agree, the beta has no obligation to pay the alpha's debts, and the alpha is dead.

Is this really your idea of a serious philosophical position?

Just curious.

 

[Aepervius]

Another problem with the video is moral culpability (or guilt, for the more judgemental). Per the video, I could : leave a trail of rape, pillage and murder in my wake, use the copier and destroy the original me. As the protagonist believes, and you seem to agree, the beta has no obligation to pay the alpha's debts, and the alpha is dead.

Is this really your idea of a serious philosophical position?

Just curious.

Well to be honest, if one assume the two are different persons, with the same memory, then indeed the beta has no shame or price to pay and the alpha suicided.

 

[wogoga]

A daring conjecture

Finally I've found a (hopefully) not too unreasonable hypothesis for J.F. Kennedy: Nine and half months after JFK's death, Anthony David Weiner emitted his first cry.

Cheers, Wolfgang

From Cagliostro (via Houdin and Houdini) to Randi - an interesting question!

 

[phunk]

My rough estimate is that around 6 million people were born 9 months (plus or minus 2 weeks) after jfk died. How'd you pick him?

 

[wollery]

My rough estimate is that around 6 million people were born 9 months (plus or minus 2 weeks) after jfk died. How'd you pick him?

Cherry picking, the same way he picks every other "reincarnation" of a famous person.

 

[Aepervius]

Those well known person msut be very special to be reincarnated so often and in so many persons, as opposed to your average anonymous vagrant which seem to be reicarnated : zero time. Maybe they had multiple personality disorder and now all those personality are being reincarnated in different person at the smae time .

 

[GeeMack]

Those well known person msut be very special to be reincarnated so often and in so many persons, as opposed to your average anonymous vagrant which seem to be reicarnated : zero time. Maybe they had multiple personality disorder and now all those personality are being reincarnated in different person at the smae time .

I'm the reincarnation of JFK.

No, no. I'm the real reincarnation of JFK.

You're all wrong. I am the reincarnation of JFK.

[Bill Cullen voice] Will the real reincarnated JFK please stand up?

 

[yomero]

Finally I've found a (hopefully) not too unreasonable hypothesis for J.F. Kennedy: Nine and half months after JFK's death, Anthony David Weiner emitted his first cry.

Cheers, Wolfgang

From Cagliostro (via Houdin and Houdini) to Randi - an interesting question!

On August, 1916, Irish nationalist Roger Casement was executed by the English. That was 9 months before JFK's birth. Besides his patriotic activities for Irish independence, Casement is remembered for his struggles against human rights abuses in Congo and Peru. There were imputations of homosexuality and pedophilia aimed to disarm those advocating commutation of Casement's death sentence.

It's obvious, all 3 are or were left-leaning, involved in politics, and had scandalous sex lives. It's the same soul from Casement, to JFK, to Weiner.

ETA: 9 months before Casement was born, Sam Houston died .on Jul. 26, 1863. There's also some nice gossip about Sam's first wife.

 

[CaveDave]

I'm the reincarnation of JFK.

No, no. I'm the real reincarnation of JFK.

You're all wrong. I am the reincarnation of JFK.

[Bill Cullen voice] Will the real reincarnated JFK please stand up?

Wonder how many will catch that, w/o Google?

Pretty obscure.

Dave