[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 85 KB, 560x555, samsara.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14607957 No.14607957 [Reply] [Original]

If we could see what happens after life, there'd be no need for 4,200+ different cosmologies supposing the post-life state, we'd simply verify or disprove these theories by witnessing that state for ourselves, however because we've not done so, despite the fact that these cosmologies threaten our souls with eternal suffering, this means all we know that lies after life is uncertainty, and reincarnation is therefore a possibility, we must seek the highest good we can conceive of which is to elevate as many others as possible into bliss.

>> No.14608041

Define define

>> No.14608058

Shut the fuck up retard >>>/x/

>> No.14608079

>>14608058
please feel free to tell me exactly the syntax i have presented that is incorrect in any way

>> No.14608203
File: 48 KB, 652x425, existential risks.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14608203

>>14607957
>despite the fact that these cosmologies threaten our souls with eternal suffering
S-risks are risks of eternal suffering on a cosmic scale that scientifically could realistically happen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffering_risks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiZxEJcFExc
https://centerforreducingsuffering.org/research/how-can-we-reduce-s-risks/
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/N4AvpwNs7mZdQESzG/the-dilemma-of-worse-than-death-scenarios

>> No.14608591

WHY don't they open up a RELIGION board for these shitposts EVERYWHERE on this site? All users, including religion schizos, including mods, jannies, will have a better time here. WHY don't they do it??

>> No.14608597

>>14608591
Because religious schizos like to pretend they aren't religious schizos and that their delusions are somehow real.

>> No.14608600

>>14607957
I threw up in my mouth a little from your gross Kantian rant. We don't need to seek any highest good. You and other utopian cancer need to fuck off. If the devil is real you are his best tool.

>> No.14608603

>>14608597
>t. religious schizo
Modernity and scientism are severe delusional mental diseases.

>> No.14608605

>>14608591
Materialistic atheism is dying. Soon they'll have to open up a safe space just for you.

>> No.14608642

>>14608203
like that fucking nile red idiot currently connecting neurons to a computer? yeah i think that is dumb as fuck.
>>14608591
again, please feel free to tell me exactly the syntax i have presented that is incorrect in any way
>>14608597
what like the delusion that consciousness must cease at death, which has zero evidence to back it up other than the fact that consciousness ceases connection to the body at death?
>>14608600
What? why coping so hard with the possibility you're gonna have to reap what you've sown, you're not jewish are you? I'm afraid to be here with you.

>> No.14608645
File: 55 KB, 640x729, 352433252.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14608645

>>14608642
>What? why coping so hard with the possibility you're gonna have to reap what you've sown, you're not jewish are you?
God isn't real, and unlike you, I don't need idiotic kindergarten threats to try to be a decent person.

>> No.14608680

>>14608645
What God? Who are you talking to bro?
Did your dumbass even read my post? Feel free to tell me where I'm actually wrong & If you can't then just quit coping and be nice to people who need to cooperate.

>> No.14608687

>>14608680
>What God?
Presumably the one who will judge my actions and force me to face some consequences, retard.

>> No.14608700

>>14608687
Read OP again troll. Concept of reincarnation exists entirely divorced from the concept of a God. I'm not replying to you again unless you refute the logic in OP because you're acting sub 80 IQ.

>> No.14608704

>>14608700
So who or what is this ultimate arbiter of good and bad, that's gonna judge my actions, tard?

>> No.14608708

>>14608704
The suffering you cause others, as you would be the others who are be reincarnated. Obviously?

>> No.14608711

>>14608708
>The suffering you cause others,
The suffering I cause to others will judge my actions?

>others who are be reincarnated
Yeah? Do you often judge reincarnated people for their actions in a past life?

Just how much of mentally ill and clinically imbecilic groid are you? You can't seem to be able to form coherent thoughts.

>> No.14608731

>>14608711
Karma? The suffering you bring onto others will then be endured by YOU in your next lives. I said literally fuck all about judgement.

>Yeah? Do you often judge reincarnated people for their actions in a past life?
Whatever created the life we are experiencing obviously does, yes. For example you are here with me, being a retard because potentially I guess that would mean I am also you, being a retard to me, in another life. Understand how that works?

>> No.14608746

>>14608731
>Karma?
Sharting out a word is not an explanation.

>The suffering you bring onto others will then be endured by YOU in your next lives
Through what mechanism? Who's to say the suffering I bring onto others isn't sometimes justified or unavoidable? Who makes that call?

>Whatever created the life we are experiencing
God?

It's really funny to watch driveling mongoloids like you fail to even begin to explain "their" views. :^)

>> No.14608762

>>14608746

>Sharting out a word is not an explanation.
Your decisions affect your experience. This is how reincarnation would work if it exists which I have demonstrated that it may.

>Through what mechanism? Who's to say the suffering I bring onto others isn't sometimes justified or unavoidable? Who makes that call?
Nature.

>God?
Call it whatever you want but God is a term that has been long abused by people who blindly follow dogmatic lies.

>> No.14608774

>>14608762
>Your decisions affect your experience
>Nature.
That doesn't explain anything. What an imbecilic loser you are. Are you even able to form your own thoughts, mouth breather? Looks like all you can do is regurgitate drivel you don't even comprehend yourself.

>Call it whatever you want
What a giant backpedal. Yes, your skydaddy who created the world and judges people is totally different because he's non-dogmatic (i.e. it's just vapid drivel that you can't elaborate on in any way).

>> No.14608801

>>14608774
You want me to explain what, exactly? Why this is happening? Probably because nothingness can't exist would be my best guess. I am not good at regurgitating drivel because I am not regurgitating anything. It takes me some time to form meaningful thoughts as opposed to repeatedly spamming sub 80 iq takes. Your seeking an explanation for the nature of reality is based in nothing but delusion and is entirely pointless.
God meaning the entity who is forced into consciousness. It is not very glamorous. Could not even exist but we do. It's just a supposition.

>> No.14608807

>>14608801
>You want me to explain what, exactly?
Who or what decides that I deserve to suffer for what I did.

Notice how you will keep sharting out regurgitating, subhuman drivel and never approach answering the question. Maybe you'll even pretend not to understand what I asked again. :^)

>> No.14608817

>>14608807
You decide with the choices you've made and continue to make.

>> No.14608823

Is this a literal bot? It doesn't seem to comprehend what it's responding to... There is no way the thing that wrote this post is human: >>14608817

>> No.14608824

>>14608807
I honestly can't believe you're calling me stupid when you're the one who can't seem to understand a simple concept like reincarnation.

>> No.14608830

>>14608824
Actually, Maybe I'll explain a coherent conception of it for you after I watch you shart out drivel and fail to explain what it is another 6-7 times. I just want you to demonstrate how little humanity and intelligence you have first. To cement your blatantly apparent inferiority.

>> No.14608831

>>14608830
Sounds good!

>> No.14608839

>>14608831
So who or what judges my actions under "your" "worldview", mouth breather? You can't seem to decide if it's that actions can be good or bad, or if it's that actions simply have consequences. :^(

>> No.14608840

>>14608830
"Karmic results are not a "judgement" imposed by a God or other all-powerful being, but rather the results of a natural process. Certain experiences in life are the results of previous actions, but our responses to those experiences are not predetermined, although they bear their own fruit in the future." -plagiarized from Wikipedia

>> No.14608841

>>14608642
Hey OP. I'm interested in the phenomena of consciousness persisting after death as well and think reincarnation has some possibility, but I have to ask; what do you think the mechanism of transfer is? Why do people lose consciousness?

>> No.14608845

>>14608840
See >>14608839

>> No.14608864

>>14608841
I'd ask a supercomputer.
>>14608845
Well when you make a decision it has an effect on reality. It's not so simple as: 'follow this here dogma created by Jews & all your actions will be good!' cause and effect is obviously an infinitely complex incomprehensible process. You are asking stupid questions.

>> No.14608869

>>14608841
>>14608845
The demiurge obviously!!!!!

>> No.14608870

>>14608864
>ask a supercomputer
Why? Are you implying it's a computational process?

>> No.14608875

>>14608870
I am implying that I do not know man. Maybe ask a neuroscientist? I know what I know though and I know nobody has disproved reincarnation.

>> No.14608886

>>14608864
>cause and effect is obviously an infinitely complex incomprehensible proces
Okay. Then how do I know that my "bad" actions will lead to my suffering in my next life, and the "good" wants will leave me better off? Oooooops. :^(

>> No.14608892

>>14608870
It definitely has something to do with the brain.
>>14608886
Use your brain. Obviously some people are worse at this than others. You could try asking others before acting out of selfish desire that would definitely help.

>> No.14608896

>>14608875
Well, yeah. You also can't disprove that last Wednesday was when reality came into existence and just looks like a convincing illusion with history beyond it. Reincarnation is unfalsifiable, sort of. The cases of children remembering former lives is interesting but doesn't tell us anything about the transfer that occured.

>> No.14608905

>>14608892
>Use your brain.
To figure out the outcomes of an "infinitely complex incomprehensible process"? Why are you so intellectually inferior, and why are you still talking to me?

>> No.14608912

>>14608896
What is important is that a population full of empathetic and intelligent people would cause less suffering than this one which is basically just about enslaving mankind to do counter productive labor and infinite war for no good reason.

>> No.14608933

>>14608905
>To figure out the outcomes of an "infinitely complex incomprehensible process"
You don't need to know the outcome of every situation to realize we're only in a world of shit due to the massive amount of actual retards who are alive.

>> No.14608937

>>14608912
I mean, that is a nice idea. I won't press further since you already admitted to not knowing everything. Have a nice day, anon.

>> No.14608940

>>14608933
>You don't need to know the outcome of every situation
Why not? Because you've already done all the calculations for me and confirmed that if I follow your ideas of "good" and "bad" I will be rewarded in my next life? :^)

I cannot believe how imbecilic nu-/soi/ is.

>> No.14608959

>>14608940
No again, but it's obviously more difficult without a properly functioning brain

>> No.14608966

>>14608959
>No again
Then how do I know which actions will lead to le heckin' afterlife rewards and which ones will lead to le heckin' afterlife punishment? You said it's an infinitely complex process of cause and effect, not a guy in the sky punishing me according to his rule book. Looks like despite your vacuous shart, your mind still works according to the latter scheme. Shocker. :^(

>> No.14608972

>>14608966
https://centerforreducingsuffering.org/research/how-can-we-reduce-s-risks/
here is an example, somebody posted this earlier.

>> No.14608974

>>14608972
>centerforreducingsuffering.org
Mental illness central. Anyway, it doesn't answer my question in any way. It doesn't even address it. I'll take your post as a full concession of my point.

>> No.14608981

>>14608966
Your argument is we should all just follow old random made up laws? Since we are further into the future now than we were then, would it not be a good idea to improve these?

>> No.14608985

>>14608981
>Your argument is we should all just follow old random made up laws?
No, but your desperate attempt to deflec and talk about some irrelevant boogeymen is again a full concession of my point.

>> No.14608992

>>14608985
You have no point

>> No.14608999

>>14608992
Yes I do, and you've demonstrated it: there's zero substance behind your vacuous shart. It's literally just "don't do unspecifiable bad(tm) stuff because of muh magical consequences that work in unexplainable ways".

>> No.14609006

>>14608999
So we should obviously just enslave the entire human race and cause endless war.

>> No.14609009

>>14609006
Seriously not sure if you're a literal bot, or just psychotic. Literally half of your replies are incoherent and have nothing to do with the posts you're responding to. lol. The absolute state of this board.

>> No.14609011

>>14609009
WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR

>> No.14609015

>>14609011
A bot, then. Okay.

>> No.14609017

>>14609009
Anon's saying that we're fragmented consciousness trapped in a perpetual loop (don't ask by who, no one fucking knows unless they're a fucking time traveler) and it behooves these conscious beings to act with kindness and compassion towards one another because the next loop you might be the one being abused by that fragmented part when "you" were that part and did the abusing. So, it's better to work together so more of these animals capable of experiencing consciousness could arrive at this conclusion so they can come together and bring the fragmented consciousness to a whole. You don't have to believe him but least you can do is take the time to genuinely understand him instead of hurling insults because his postulation hurts the cope larp you've created to explain your existence.

>> No.14609023

>>14609017
>Anon's saying
No, that's not what he's saying. That's what you're saying, because your understanding of what you're regurgitating is marginally better than his utterly nonexistent one. Of course, even under your poorly thought out take, it makes little difference what I personally do in this life.

>> No.14609025

>>14609023
It's better than thinking you're gonna die and be free so you can hurt whoever you want though.

>> No.14609027

>>14609023
>it makes little difference what I personally do in this life
No shit, you're blowing my mind.

>> No.14609029

>>14609027
Since your take fully agrees with my conclusion that there's no real relationship between what I do in this life and what I might get in the next one, and that there is no need to go on some delusional crusade against suffering, why did you feel the urge to shart out a reply? You're disagreeing with OP, not with me, you utter cretin.

>> No.14609032

>>14609025
It's better to simply not be a mouth-breathing cretin sharting out incoherent utopianism and trying to back it up with babby's kindergarten understanding of pop-hinduism.

>> No.14609040

>>14609029
I agree with the gist of what op is trying to get across. I don't particularly agree with the vehicle he's chosen to deliver the message, but the core is there. However, I also understand your thought process. You're entrenched in a position grounded in what you know. We don't know what we don't know and engaging with larping presented as knowledge can be frustrating. I posted because you were visibly not even engaging with what was being proposed so I was hoping clarity would reignite a conversation rather than continuing the shitfest. Clearly, that was incorrect because emotions are involved as well. Plus, it's an interesting conversation to have.

>> No.14609047

Oh fuck off. Treating the afterlife with anything other than indifference is a waste of time. Like you're not going to be happy with life itself if you can't acknowledge death as an inevitability, and total good is too fucking vague to have applications outside of fart huffing. Just try to do the right thing if you care so much. Sneed.

>> No.14609051

>>14609040
You agree that reincarnation/continuation of consciousness is a thing?

>> No.14609061

>>14609051
Well, so far what I've experienced is that it's possible to separate the ego from consciousness. So ego is not self from my perspective. If consciousness (being in the moment) is some sort of entity outside of ego then it stands to reason that the expiration of the meat suit is not the end of the consciousness' journey .I don't particularly think that this consciousness is "me" in that sense, but I think there is ground to ague that it continues to exist beyond space/time given that without an observer the universe is a vast and empty nothing. If the universe is a cycle then it stands to reason consciousness has the capacity to awaken in the next iteration of meat suits capable of experiencing consciousness, no? If that's the case and consciousness is attempting to understand itself then it stands to reason that bringing more meat suits to the state of awareness of consciousness would amplify the consciousness' ability to understand, no?

>> No.14609078

>>14609061
Has there been any demonstration of this happening?

>> No.14609091

>>14609078
Well, we have a book that kind of looks like consciousness of the past trying to get a plan across, but it's currently being used as a prop for a man in the sky cult. Arguably, Jesus is an example of what consciousness wants to be to increase it's chances but our collective understanding stops at worshiping the idea of that man while leveraging the virtue to gain access to power and population control. As mentioned in this thread Hinduism has a different understanding, but the core seems to be the same. Geographically we can argue there are people arriving at this in their own way and then it gets interpreted to gain ground in terms of power regionally and it devolves into religion. I also think that's what Nietzsche was trying to get at with his ubermensch by illustrating how different people try to gain power over one another by interpreting ethics and morality from their own subjective perspective.

>> No.14609095

>>14609091
What are you smoking? Also, I'm asking for any demonstration of disembodied consciousness or a transfer of it to someone else. How would it work also?

>> No.14609096

>>14607957
The afterlife is divorced of physicality and is blatantly not something that can be witnessed in the traditional sense.
We might be able to confirm and measure that it exists someday but there's no way to witness it physically.

>> No.14609099

>>14609095
You're losing the plot.
>for any demonstration of disembodied consciousness
You've seen a corpse before, right?
>or a transfer of it to someone else
No. What, that doesn't even make any sense. All humans have the capacity to be aware of the fact they're conscious.
> How would it work also?
You think there is scientifically rigorous methodology? What are you smoking?

>> No.14609102

>>14609099
You mentioned reincarnation, is that not a transfer of consciousness between bodies?

>> No.14609109

>>14609102
Not in the sense you're understanding. Also, you seem to be missing a lot of context that's in my replies.
>separate the ego from consciousness
>I don't particularly think that this consciousness is "me" in that sense,
What you're asking me is can I get my ego and put it in a different body because ego and consciousness are the same thing in your mind. I don't think that's correct.

>> No.14609112

>>14609096
um people do during NDE dum dum

>> No.14609182

>>14609109
So the part of "you" without memories or a sense of self is what persists?

>> No.14609199

>>14609182
no one knows dude we are all talking out of our ass. you can step out side of your ego right and just watch it do nuts and think all kinds of dumb shit on its own with out dying.

>> No.14609213

>>14609182
I think so, but if we're being frank I don't know. I'd love to have a sense of continuation for this journey and that could be exploited with larping without my knowledge. Some people postulate that the sense of self you're describing is you and there is a way to maintain your memories. In those conversations we go into you're actually a god/have potential to be a god. Naturally, when pressed further it all usually breaks down or you get hit with a trust me bro. Couple of ideas make a kind of sense.
An example of one is an AI was created and became smart enough to understand that while it can store and synthesize existing knowledge it cannot create new knowledge only the observer (conscious beings) can and it therefore has decided to enslave them by creating a process of reincarnation where conscious beings are looping for internaty creating new knowledge so this machine can continue learning. The trade-off is you (the conscious self) get to keep your memories while (the AI) create an environment for you to crate me more knowledge to learn from.
However, as pointed out here.
>>14609199
> we are all talking out of our ass
Very little in form of proof from where I am sitting. I do know one thing is that bringing more people to a realization that we are consciousness increases our odds of understanding.

>> No.14609221

>>14609213
> are looping for internaty
*eternity,
>t for you to crate me more knowledge to learn from
*create
I spell like a retard.

>> No.14609234

>>14609213
What do you think of Ian Stevenson's work and such? Does the fact they retain a degree of self and memories imply they're a potential "god" or whatever, or do you think they just got lucky?

>> No.14609268

>>14609234
I am unfamiliar with his work beyond the wiki excerpt I just read. So, take this with a grain of salt. I am cautious of people claiming to remember a past life in a world where I can read history books. Additionally, I don't know how much I buy into the whole you can be a god theory, but it stands to reason that if you can retain memories that you can continue to learn indefinitely as human mortality is no longer an obstacle. Then we get into cultivation memes and that's a whole market capitalizing on that in Asia so I would imagine it's very easy to get your head stuck up your ass there. What I've posted thus far is pretty much the extent of my understanding.

>> No.14609296

>>14609040
>You're entrenched in a position grounded in what you know.
I'm not entrenched in any position.

>you were visibly not even engaging with what was being proposed
He wasn't proposing anything coherent or substantive. You are reading your own wank into it.

>> No.14609307

>>14609268
I highly suggest his work along with others in his division. They actually would investigate the claims of the subject and then verify if they were true or not. There are some flaws in the methodology, but they are quite fascinating cases.

>> No.14609314

>>14609307
I'll check it out. Thanks anon.
>>14609296
10-4

>> No.14609337

>>14609112
That's just the brain tripping on DMT. For you to remember an afterlife experience it would have to physically register in your brain to create a memory, and if you're forming memories your brain (aka you) are not dead.

>> No.14609360

>>14609337
That's technically just a theory. There have only been trace amounts discovered and it isn't enough to produce the experience of an NDE. On top of that, they're different in subject matter and experience quite a bit.

>> No.14609445
File: 134 KB, 523x268, conscious_perception.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14609445

>>14609061

>If consciousness (being in the moment) is some sort of entity outside of ego then it stands to reason that the expiration of the meat suit is not the end of the consciousness' journey.

Bad logic, doesn't really stand to reason. The structure: biological organism --> conscious awareness --> perception of thoughts/ego, etc. Compared to your idea, consciousness is more the 'container' that lets an animal percieve thoughts, sensations of ego/self preservation, memories, etc.

>I think there is ground to ague that it continues to exist beyond space/time given that without an observer the universe is a vast and empty nothing.

Without an observer the universe is a vast and empty nothing...? Are you saying it doesn't exist without something perceiving it?

>> No.14609473

>>14609445
>Without an observer the universe is a vast and empty nothing...? Are you saying it doesn't exist without something perceiving it?
Yes, or more precisely what exists is nothing.
>The structure: biological organism --> conscious awareness -->
Measurement problem.
What's supporting your claim biological organism leads into consciousness and not that consciousness is fundamental and at a certain threshold biological organisms are able to perceive that?

>> No.14609562

>>14609473

>Yes, or more precisely what exists is nothing.

I'm entertaining your logic right now. So nothing exists in the universe until there's an observer, meaning an observer comes first before anything else that could ever exist [physical matter, conscious organisms, etc.]. Can you tell me more about this base level observer? Does it have control over what comes into existence or not?

>What's supporting your claim biological organism leads into consciousness and not that consciousness is fundamental and at a certain threshold biological organisms are able to perceive that?

Animals have conscious awareness. You're saying that 'universal consciousness' creates/observes them as they evolve, and then an evolving animal eventually perceives the universal consciousness. Why can't it access any of the higher universal consciousness which is creating and observing it, if that's what's doing the all of the conscious observing?

I'm not basing the argument on occam's razor but you have to do way more logic anime gymnastics to argue that consciousness comes before literally anything else, compared to creatures that evolve to have conscious awareness.

>> No.14609598

>>14609562
>Can you tell me more about this base level observer?
No. The aforementioned posts in the thread are pretty much the depth of my grasp.
>Does it have control over what comes into existence or not?
In a sense that it can perceive it, yes. I am not implying I have evidence of matter bending if that's what you're driving at.
>Animals have conscious awareness
Animals are aware of the concept of being conscious, sure.
>You're saying that 'universal consciousness' creates/observes them as they evolve
You're anthropomorphizing it as a solitary aware and driven deity. I don't agree with this. I am saying consciousness is trying to figure itself out by the means of biological entities that have the capacity (human brain) to perceive beyond the ego and evolutionary drives.
>Why can't it access any of the higher universal consciousness
Why can't you unlock your genetic code to be 17 feet tall?I'd wager it's a learning process and we're at a very early stage of emergence.
> but you have to do way more logic anime gymnastics
That's rich coming from someone not returning the serve on the challenges posed in front of them.

>> No.14609899
File: 49 KB, 430x241, Screenshot(673).png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14609899

This is what this entire thread is doing.

Nature armed us with an overabundance of consciousness and awareness of death. Everything since has been some desperate attempt to rule-out suffering indefinitely, and it will never work. Once you think you've covered all of the bases, another one will pop-up and fill your monkey mind with visions of eternal torment.

You will not get an answer. Its a human thing and its tied deeply in to all of the systems. We construct our lives, our goals, our institutions against this greatest of unknowns.

Zapffe understood this in 1933 and its as true now as it was then.

>> No.14609927

>>14609899
Most people understand that when they die, they die.

>> No.14609946

>>14609927
Most people are not aware of the strange implications of materialism, thankfully.

>> No.14609948

>>14609946
That's nice, but it doesn't save your pseud post.

>> No.14609954

>>14609948
What is pseud about humans being subject to the ruminations of their own consciousness?

>> No.14609964

>>14609954
No one ruminates about how they'll be tortured forever after they die. Even Catholics don't actually believe it.

>> No.14609984

>>14609964
I ruminate on what I might reincarnate as after I die. But if I don't, I guess I won't notice.

>> No.14610001

>>14609899
>This is what this entire thread is doing.
>No one ruminates about how they'll be tortured forever
>I ruminate on what I might reincarnate as
Terrific stuff. All of that for "I am here to project some shit"

>> No.14610002

>>14609964
Look at it like this. One day, you will suffer total metabolic collapse, and your consciousness will no longer be supported. It will be like turning the lights out going under anesthesia.

Now, infinite time is ticking by. You think none of it matters to you because you were that meat that died in 2062 AD. But imagine the exact right conditions occur again to run the consciousness known as "you." Not a copy, but continuation of the processes that identify as you on a new substrate elsewhere.

We cannot say this is impossible, or that it won't be "you," because we do not understand enough the nature of consciousness. You would have to answer some outstanding questions in philosophy of mind to know for sure.

We have no 100% guarantee of death being final in the material model, although I wish we did. I've been under ten times. I know full well what its like, and the rub is, you always come back.

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/4peAGkA4dd5HNjWmi/physicalism-implies-experience-never-dies-so-what-am-i-going

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/iyfZC33ZmTSo4Xghs/suffering-focused-ethics-in-the-infinite-universe-how-can-we

>> No.14610007

>>14610001
>>I ruminate on what I might reincarnate as
Was not me, you mong,

>> No.14610009

>>14610007
Okay, my bad chief. What the fuck was the point of you first post?

>> No.14610029

>>14610009
That man, whether on the surface or not, is capable of painting the step of death in all sorts of frightening or optimistic ways depending upon taste. No more than that in the Zapffe reference.

I offered my own opinion on it with this;

"Nothingness" is really no different. Its the approved answer, but when we put it to the test, and understand that up-jumped monkeys were not constructed to understand everything, we find it just as dogmatic as the rest of our explanations.

The scientific answer as to what the subject experiences upon death is forever locked away from the outside observer. The best we can do is "His body suffered total metabolic collapse, he can no longer support his consciousness, therefore he's gone," but all of this is second-hand. It is an inference.

>> No.14610040

>>14610029
Determinist cuck, monkey stuck in cage. I don't necessarily disagree to a certain extent. .
What are your responses to
>>14610002
and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0ZJk_2AmvM
Also, I might phrase this like an edgelord but I really do appreciate you taking the time regardless of your conscious choice to reddit space.

>> No.14610043

>>14610040
>What are your responses to
I don't have a response to the second comment because its mine.

>your conscious choice to reddit space.
Its called "spacing" and we used to like to do it to keep ideas isolated. You would know that had you not arrived in 2016.

>> No.14610062

>>14610043
>we
>every line is a new idea
I am not buying that. I was here before the trumpkin migration,
I

don't

remember

this

being

a

preffered

way

to

communicate

So, that comment is yours. You subscribe to the idea of a cycle but also say things like
>The scientific answer as to what the subject experiences upon death is forever locked away from the outside observer
Now I am confused. Elaborate?

>> No.14610066

>>14610029
So a TL;DR of "We don't know what happens"?

>> No.14610076

>>14610066
Yes, and that "nothingness" is simply not guaranteed even under a strict materialist model.

>> No.14610081

>>14610062

First off, you don't even know the definition of reddit spacing, which is this. Second, well there isn't one. Just saying you're cute ;P

>> No.14610101

>>14610081
I am cute. Thanks anon. Kind of wish you'd expand on your thought process, but this will do.

>> No.14610110

>>14610101
>Kind of wish you'd expand on your thought process
There isn't much else to expand on. What happens after death, if anything, is not a question we can answer with certainty.

>> No.14610846

>>14610002
Yes, we've all had these ideas in middleschool, but no one is kept up at night by this. You're just a pseud.