Philosophy Thread

Primary discussion forum. Also, feel free this use as a hangout for fans of the funny non-story based comics.

Moderator: Mod Squad

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby Blood Lord » Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:14 pm

I'm interested by it. How did you come across this belief?
Snafu Gold Card Member!

User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 19018
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 5:21 pm
Gender: None specified

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby noxux » Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:28 pm

Well I get into it because I hardly can find any other belief more realistic than this one. The one of hell and heaven is not 100% sure but I find that one more like a imaginary place that people made up because no one never have been in "Hell" or "Heaven". The one of the deep sleep is one that I believe that it can be true because those people who suposely "die" for ten minutes and then come back to life for a shock charge to the heart siad that they only look at a light and then a nothing. The rencarnation (I believe it's true but not a 100%) is the one that I believe because it have show that those images you see in dreams are people from past lifes and I study more like Indian religion that show how rencarnation works.
"The best thing about life is not knowing what will happen, what we do shows who we are" -иохчх
Pabst:"Aww, you're no fun Noxux.
A Fight in a Flash
I am a very tall midget
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2013 8:02 pm
Location: Floating in outer space
Gender: Male

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby EagleMan » Mon Jun 17, 2013 4:08 pm

What do you think the soul does in a new body? Does a person inherit memories? Personality?

Also... unfortunately a lot of people in a near-death experience (NDE) only see what they expect to see. If you honestly believe you will see a bright light, that's what you will see. Lots of people see Jesus, or Vishnu, or Allah. Some people see nothing, others have even abandoned their religion to become atheists after an NDE. The point is that an NDE is basically just a "death high" that can't really be counted on as evidence of anything. If your body starts to shut down, your brain is going to have some wacky things happen to it, and if you survive you'll be able to tell others what happened.

Can you elaborate what you mean though by not believing in it 100%? You either believe in something or you don't generally speaking, since belief is not a matter of knowledge (e.g. if I ask someone if they believe in me, and the answer is "I don't know" or "I'm not sure", their real answer is "no").
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 13880
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 4:24 pm
Gender: None specified

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby noxux » Mon Jun 17, 2013 4:23 pm

Eagleman to answer your question No I don´t think it inhert memories but when dreaming it see some images of the people past lifes also nothing in the world is a 100% sure all is 99.9%, like which is the biggest star early they believe it was the sun, now is one called like Veget or something like that. The only thing that everyone is a 100% sure is that we exist and nothing else can prove that wrong.
"The best thing about life is not knowing what will happen, what we do shows who we are" -иохчх
Pabst:"Aww, you're no fun Noxux.
A Fight in a Flash
I am a very tall midget
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2013 8:02 pm
Location: Floating in outer space
Gender: Male

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby EagleMan » Mon Jun 17, 2013 4:30 pm

What makes you (mostly) sure that the images of people in our dreams (the ones we don't know at least) are from past lives?

Also there's a difference between the matter of knowledge and belief. You either believe in something or you don't. You can believe in God, even if you aren't sure about the evidence for him. Think of it in a scientific example. I have a hypothesis, and I believe it to be true. It is possibly knowledge may later contradict my current hypothesis, and then my belief will change, but it is one I currently believe in. I cannot half-believe a hypothesis. One either believes there is a god or there isn't - a god cannot half-exist. A person does not half-reincarnate.

So from what I've read, it seems like you believe in reincarnation, even if you remain open to your belief changing in the face of new evidence.

Additionally, me or you existing is not a 100% thing. Especially when applied to you or anyone else here, at least from my perspective. You may be interested in reading up on solipsism.
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 13880
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 4:24 pm
Gender: None specified

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby noxux » Mon Jun 17, 2013 4:41 pm

Yeah maybe I will read something but Eagleman have you seen the 5 perspectives of people. Duelist, Ideologist, Physicalist and those are all that I know. I am a Ideologist I believe more in the soul than the body itself.
"The best thing about life is not knowing what will happen, what we do shows who we are" -иохчх
Pabst:"Aww, you're no fun Noxux.
A Fight in a Flash
I am a very tall midget
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2013 8:02 pm
Location: Floating in outer space
Gender: Male

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby Blood Lord » Mon Jun 17, 2013 5:41 pm

EagleMan wrote:Can you elaborate what you mean though by not believing in it 100%? You either believe in something or you don't generally speaking, since belief is not a matter of knowledge

You can believe something is true and still have doubts about it. I think that's what he is getting at.

noxux wrote:The rencarnation (I believe it's true but not a 100%) is the one that I believe because it have show that those images you see in dreams are people from past lifes and I study more like Indian religion that show how rencarnation works.

Hmm. So have you done much studying into the Indian Religious beliefs and philosophies?
Snafu Gold Card Member!

User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 19018
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 5:21 pm
Gender: None specified

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby Sentios » Mon Jun 17, 2013 6:34 pm

EagleMan wrote:It's not the same, though I could see why you'd bring that up. My brain is a vessel for me. Wherever that vessel goes, "I" go. If that vessel is taken out of my head, then I go with it. If an exact copy, Vessel and Brain B, is placed where I used to be, I am still in Vessel A.


Then if your brain was replaced in sections "you" would exist in multiple locations? That seems even less convincing.

Let's go full ship of theseus here and suppose that rather than a brain transplant, or even multiple brain transplants which resulted in you have a new functionally exact copy of your brain in your skull, you instead had nanomachines which were injected into your blood which replaced only a small percentage of your brain matter with something else over the course of 5 years. At what point would you consider yourself to become not you through this scenario even though 'you' would make up a majority of the brain for half the process?
Wizard Status. 5 more years
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 7892
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:46 pm
Location: The RP Graveyard
Gender: None specified

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby noxux » Mon Jun 17, 2013 8:01 pm

Hmm. So have you done much studying into the Indian Religious beliefs and philosophies?

I used to study it but it was like 3 years ago, now I don't remember much.
"The best thing about life is not knowing what will happen, what we do shows who we are" -иохчх
Pabst:"Aww, you're no fun Noxux.
A Fight in a Flash
I am a very tall midget
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2013 8:02 pm
Location: Floating in outer space
Gender: Male

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby EagleMan » Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:21 pm

Sentios wrote:
EagleMan wrote:It's not the same, though I could see why you'd bring that up. My brain is a vessel for me. Wherever that vessel goes, "I" go. If that vessel is taken out of my head, then I go with it. If an exact copy, Vessel and Brain B, is placed where I used to be, I am still in Vessel A.


Then if your brain was replaced in sections "you" would exist in multiple locations? That seems even less convincing.

Let's go full ship of theseus here and suppose that rather than a brain transplant, or even multiple brain transplants which resulted in you have a new functionally exact copy of your brain in your skull, you instead had nanomachines which were injected into your blood which replaced only a small percentage of your brain matter with something else over the course of 5 years. At what point would you consider yourself to become not you through this scenario even though 'you' would make up a majority of the brain for half the process?

This is not purely a philosophical question, but also one of science. So are you convinced that whole brain replacement with an exact copy would still constitute the original person being gone? (Even if no one else realized it).

So replacing the brain bit by bit is an entirely different matter, because it means we run up against the wall of current scientific knowledge, and we have to address the question of what actually is consciousness, rather than being able to ignore that issue in a whole-brain scenario.

Science can answer this question, but only to an extent. Generally the prefrontal cortex is responsible for most of your personality. So if every bit of your brain except your prefrontal cortex was replcaed, we can easily still say that you are you. After all, a person is still them even if they have a leg replaced with a bionic one, or a heart with someone else's heart, so we can extend this to the brain, where if you replace parts that are not responsible for your personality.

Because consciousness is an emergent property, we get into a fuzzy realm that as I said, the whole-brain scenario avoids. If you start to replace the prefrontal cortex, then at some point the person who was "you" disappears. Currently we lack the precision to say when such a thing would happen, because consciousness is not something you can point out as starting here and ending there, but presumably at 100% replacement of the prefrontal cortex, it would then be safe to say that you are now gone and something else is in your place.

A ship is the sum of its parts. A ship is not just its motor, or just this plank or that one. It is all of it. If you had to, you could not reduce what is "the ship" to just one part. However, you can do the same with humans, that is, we can reduce the person to just a few parts of the brain. A finger does not hold equal claim in being you as your prefrontal cortex does, but any part of a ship is as much a part of the ship as any other part - their claims are equal. This is not the case in humans, where the prefrontal cortex is most of who we are. So if everything but that was replaced, then I am still me. But if that gets replaced, even if it's the only thing replaced in my entire body, then whatever takes my place is no longer me.
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 13880
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 4:24 pm
Gender: None specified

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby noxux » Mon Jun 17, 2013 11:39 pm

I will add one more philosphy topic: Time Travel. If people want we can talk now or later.
"The best thing about life is not knowing what will happen, what we do shows who we are" -иохчх
Pabst:"Aww, you're no fun Noxux.
A Fight in a Flash
I am a very tall midget
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2013 8:02 pm
Location: Floating in outer space
Gender: Male

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby Mir@k » Tue Jun 18, 2013 12:34 am

I want to see the conclusion of the conversation above first though...
Image
DeviantArt | Tumblr | Twitter
Image
"Bang and Abscond"
24 Karat
Snafu Gold Card Member!

User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 1338
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 3:00 pm
Gender: Female

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby EagleMan » Tue Jun 18, 2013 12:36 am

What about time travel? If you offered up how you think time travel works I might agree or disagree.

There are a few possible ways time travel could work, the most important thing though is for that idea to maintain a consistent logic to it.
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 13880
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 4:24 pm
Gender: None specified

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby noxux » Tue Jun 18, 2013 1:47 am

First we finish this after life topic and then we start time travel. The time travel will be talked about paradoxes and wyas to time travel but let's finish this first.
"The best thing about life is not knowing what will happen, what we do shows who we are" -иохчх
Pabst:"Aww, you're no fun Noxux.
A Fight in a Flash
I am a very tall midget
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2013 8:02 pm
Location: Floating in outer space
Gender: Male

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby EagleMan » Tue Jun 18, 2013 2:05 am

Well Sentios can respond whenever he wants. It's not like this topic is for just me and him. Benefit of a forum is that we can carry out multiple conversations easily.

And that's why I said on time travel there's only a few ways it might be possible, because you have to avoid paradoxes.
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 13880
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 4:24 pm
Gender: None specified

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby noxux » Tue Jun 18, 2013 3:32 pm

Well, if we are going to talk about if time travel is real or not that will be hard to explain depending on how it will work.
"The best thing about life is not knowing what will happen, what we do shows who we are" -иохчх
Pabst:"Aww, you're no fun Noxux.
A Fight in a Flash
I am a very tall midget
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2013 8:02 pm
Location: Floating in outer space
Gender: Male

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby EagleMan » Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:08 pm

You brought it up. I've already talked about time travel plenty before so I've worked it out for myself. If you want to bring up how you think it works we can discuss that, but I'm not going to sermonize people.
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 13880
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 4:24 pm
Gender: None specified

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby Sentios » Tue Jun 18, 2013 7:20 pm

EagleMan wrote:This is not purely a philosophical question, but also one of science. So are you convinced that whole brain replacement with an exact copy would still constitute the original person being gone? (Even if no one else realized it).

So replacing the brain bit by bit is an entirely different matter, because it means we run up against the wall of current scientific knowledge, and we have to address the question of what actually is consciousness, rather than being able to ignore that issue in a whole-brain scenario.

Science can answer this question, but only to an extent. Generally the prefrontal cortex is responsible for most of your personality. So if every bit of your brain except your prefrontal cortex was replcaed, we can easily still say that you are you. After all, a person is still them even if they have a leg replaced with a bionic one, or a heart with someone else's heart, so we can extend this to the brain, where if you replace parts that are not responsible for your personality.

Because consciousness is an emergent property, we get into a fuzzy realm that as I said, the whole-brain scenario avoids. If you start to replace the prefrontal cortex, then at some point the person who was "you" disappears. Currently we lack the precision to say when such a thing would happen, because consciousness is not something you can point out as starting here and ending there, but presumably at 100% replacement of the prefrontal cortex, it would then be safe to say that you are now gone and something else is in your place.

A ship is the sum of its parts. A ship is not just its motor, or just this plank or that one. It is all of it. If you had to, you could not reduce what is "the ship" to just one part. However, you can do the same with humans, that is, we can reduce the person to just a few parts of the brain. A finger does not hold equal claim in being you as your prefrontal cortex does, but any part of a ship is as much a part of the ship as any other part - their claims are equal. This is not the case in humans, where the prefrontal cortex is most of who we are. So if everything but that was replaced, then I am still me. But if that gets replaced, even if it's the only thing replaced in my entire body, then whatever takes my place is no longer me.


I take issue with your suggestion that science supports your claims. According to the science, your consciousness doesn't even make decisions for you. http://exploringthemind.com/the-mind/br ... you-decide

Consciousness seems to be a secondary function of the brain at work, that's why this is philosophy discussion and not a science discussion. If two brains were to have identical neural interconnections at a given point in time, there is nothing in science to my knowledge to suggest those brains would think they're different people at that point in time.
Wizard Status. 5 more years
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 7892
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:46 pm
Location: The RP Graveyard
Gender: None specified

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby Glacial Expanse » Wed Jun 19, 2013 10:40 pm

EagleMan wrote:To imagine it another way to keep the premise the same, imagine you went in for an experiment and were put under anesthesia. When you wake up, an exact clone of you has been made - but how do you know who is who? Neither of you know who is the original. There are 2 of you now. Were you 2 people all along? No. Clearly not. The 2 yous get into a fight and the original dies. The original existed past when his copy was made - so clearly he was still "him", but now the clone can easily assume his place in life. But you're dead. The clone is alive. You are dead and your consciousness is gone. So clearly that other thing is not truly "you" in the meaningful sense - the sense being that your consciousness is continued.

No offense, but this sounds like a bad comic book plot! Does anyone remember the Clone Saga?
This too shall pass.
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 1021
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 12:11 am
Location: Here & Now
Gender: Male

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby Vegedus » Thu Jun 20, 2013 6:07 am

It's an exaggerated example, it doesn't have to be a plausible thing that could happen. It's just meant to illustrate an idea. Like how Schrödingers Cat is a very specific, weird set-up meant to show an odd property of quantum physics.
Image
Will make apocalypse themed fiction for food
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 10248
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 4:46 pm
Location: Denmark, at world's end
Gender: Male

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby EagleMan » Fri Jun 21, 2013 4:32 am

Sentios I wasn't talking about free will. Has your entire argument been that they wouldn't think they were different people? This may have been an issue of miscommunication.

I've already said as much in many examples what you said. I was just trying to illustrate that they are in fact different people, and that continuity of consciousness matters. I said on many occasions that to the outsider observer, and even to the clone (or gradual replacement of the brain), they might not notice the difference, but it would still matter to the original because they would either be gone (or gone at some point) because the chain would be broken. Practically speaking it doesn't matter that they're "different", because the replacement functions identically as the original and was hopefully seamlessly transitioned to, but on a philosophical level it does matter.

Any other topics you're interested in Noxux?
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 13880
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 4:24 pm
Gender: None specified

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby Sentios » Fri Jun 21, 2013 6:29 pm

EagleMan wrote:I've already said as much in many examples what you said. I was just trying to illustrate that they are in fact different people, and that continuity of consciousness matters. I said on many occasions that to the outsider observer, and even to the clone (or gradual replacement of the brain), they might not notice the difference, but it would still matter to the original because they would either be gone (or gone at some point) because the chain would be broken. Practically speaking it doesn't matter that they're "different", because the replacement functions identically as the original and was hopefully seamlessly transitioned to, but on a philosophical level it does matter.


I agree that an exact clone of another person would be a different person, but only because their experiences would diverge upon waking up (even if only due to differing chance occurrences). They are different people because their experience diverges, if you killed and disposed of the original before the clone woke up the 'consciousness' in question would be the same as the original's making them the same person. The chain of consciousness you rely on for your point of view isn't even the primary driving force of the brain, yet you don't acknowledge that it can be paused and resumed whether after a simple night's sleep or during brain repair procedure with out becoming something different. Philosophically the events I'm describing are no different from going to sleep.
Wizard Status. 5 more years
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 7892
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:46 pm
Location: The RP Graveyard
Gender: None specified

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby Vegedus » Sat Jun 22, 2013 12:37 pm

I think you were quite clear here:
Sentios wrote:
Vegedus wrote:I don't think consciousness == being awake, in this case. It's more the sense of self, your identity that is stake. Whatever we call that we are so afraid of losing when we die. You can lose any part of yourself, a limb, your body, your intellect, but you're still you, right? Our consciousness is the thing that is us, perhaps hidden somewhere in the brain, or in our non-physical soul if you're religious. That thing presumably does not disappear when we sleep. One could argue that it does, but then, then sleep is just as terrible as death, the person that wakes won't be 'you'.


That is exactly what I'm suggesting though, it's impermanent death and rebirth.

Basically, there's no meaningful distinction between sleep and temporary death, in your mind. Which, while I don't agree with it, is a reasonable stance to hold. Without knowing what exactly consciousness and self is, as science still understands precious little about the brain, it's a hard question to answer. Really, it's a matter of definition. If we define the self as Eagleman does, as something that is uniquely stored in this one brain in my skull, such that even an identical brain wouldn't have it, then yes, that self would be gone if we replaced the brain with a computer. Your definition differ. Which kind of self actually exist inside us is hard to tell. Instinctively, we all feel a sense of self, and are inclined to assume we are unique, or have a soul, an innate "me", but instincts are often mistaken.

Also, I forgot to reply to this:

Mir@k wrote:Exactly Veg, it's closing the mind. Only way from preventing people from bringing down the only thing that allows some humans to cling to life, while at the same time barring the pursuit of truth or knowledge. Personal choice.

As an atheist, I have some trouble with the idea that without religion, one cannot live life fully. As an existentialist, I have further trouble with the idea that life cannot be lived despite meaninglessness. I believe life is fundamentally meaningless, pointless even, but that does not hinder me from enjoying it. In fact, there's a tremendous amount of freedom to be found in this belief.

That said, it would only be closed-minded of me to assume everyone could embrace such a belief. I don't doubt many people have their quality of life improved by religion and denying their faith would do them no good. If I had absolute proof that god didn't exist, would I show it to the world? Maybe, maybe not. Oddly, the best example I have of this is from Scrubs. Doctor Cox is trying to persuade Laverne, in so many words, that god doesn't exist. Laverne responds that she doesn't care about his arguments, she needs her beliefs to get through the misery and death. Which is, fair enough. If that's how people feel about their faith, that it's the only thing they have to hold on to, it's fair that they're protective about it. However, from this side of the fence, atheism really isn't so bad. Humans are made of sterner stuff, just taking their faith away isn't enough to kill them, I'd say.
Image
Will make apocalypse themed fiction for food
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 10248
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 4:46 pm
Location: Denmark, at world's end
Gender: Male

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby noxux » Wed Jul 03, 2013 1:11 am

Well let's start a new topic: Do all see the same colors.
"The best thing about life is not knowing what will happen, what we do shows who we are" -иохчх
Pabst:"Aww, you're no fun Noxux.
A Fight in a Flash
I am a very tall midget
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2013 8:02 pm
Location: Floating in outer space
Gender: Male

Re: Philosophy Thread

Postby The Mad Doctor » Wed Jul 03, 2013 6:32 am

The color of the light reflected on an object is based on the wavelength of the light. So yes, I suppose. Unless some of us is colorblind.
Image
Not Space Jesus
User avatar
offline
 
Posts: 2108
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 7:31 pm
Location: Self-Exile, need to be gone for a while
Gender: Male

PreviousNext

Return to Snafu General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests