ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 2nd March 2018, 07:02 AM   #121
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Less room for error in made-up numbers?
Belz,
- With which numbers do you disagree?
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 07:04 AM   #122
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Springwood, NJ
Posts: 29,373
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
jond,
- I'm claiming -- like the reincarnationists
Which reincarnationists? Can you cite them please?

Quote:
-- that your self is more than your memories.
How are you defining "self" in this case? Before, you've said it's consciousness and self-awareness so that would include memories and continuity.

Quote:
It's this "more" that I think might continue to exist, and recur in different brains.
I'd have to see some evidence for this "more" you've yet to define.
RoboTimbo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 07:06 AM   #123
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Springwood, NJ
Posts: 29,373
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Belz,
- With which numbers do you disagree?
Which ones haven't been simply made up by you?
RoboTimbo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 07:21 AM   #124
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,388
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Give me your specifics -- either numbered, or one at a time.
I did that back in June. You already said you couldn't address them, and have no plans to. I don't understand why I'm obliged to keep repeating myself for someone who already conceded.

Quote:
And, don't tell me to go look for myself for your specifics...
I linked the post every day for six months. And yes, I expect you to go back and read the parts of the argument you may have skipped. No one is obliged to coddle someone who brags about ignoring others' contributions.

Quote:
you've written about as much as everyone else combined, and each post is full of name-calling.
Calling you names would violate rules 0 and 12 of the member agreement. You don't seem to have reported any of my posts for moderation. You allowed Caveman to be so rude he got suspended, on the grounds that what he was saying had merit. Therefore I don't care if you accuse me of being rude. Give me the same consideration.

Quote:
That's why I can't keep up...
If you can't keep up with what I've already written, why are you asking for more?

Quote:
\Anyway, do you accept...
I've spoken at length -- great length, according to you -- about what is wrong with your argument. Stop asking distractive questions about the periphery. The problem is that you don't understand what any of the fomrulas are trying to do.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 07:25 AM   #125
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,388
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
I'm claiming -- like the reincarnationists
You haven't defined this group of people or laid out their beliefs. You just refer to the name and leave the underlying concepts blank. In contrast your critics have told you what various common beliefs are among, say, the Dharmists, and you do not address those. You have not defined what you think reincarnation is or does, and when you do that in part, you contradict yourself.

Quote:
-- that your self is more than your memories.
But the soul in your model isn't even that. It has no attributes, according to you, and it does not retain memory.

Quote:
It's this "more" that I think might continue to exist, and recur in different brains.
And we seem to be back to where the soul requires the human body in order to have any sort of measurable existence, which puts the efficacy of the soul in your model only a slight step above materialism. Further, if the body is now the distinguishing factor, then you can't claim continuity across incarnations, which is what you have previously argued in your probabalistic model.

Once again you're contradicting yourself from point to point in your argument, wanting to have your cake and eat it too.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 07:25 AM   #126
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,873
Originally Posted by RoboTimbo View Post
I would need to see some evidence that it's possible.
Jeez he already told you that his evidence is that his claim is...
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 07:29 AM   #127
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,388
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
The claim is that the new brain does share my sense of self -- it just (in most cases) does not share any (conscious) memories.
Then you have no evidence that it is the seat of memory.

Quote:
I used to hypnotize people. Twice I age-regressed them back to "previous lifetimes," and they came up with something. I sort of suspect that they just made up their stories, but then, it could be that hypnosis allowed them to access unconscious memories...
No, you didn't "age regress" anyone. That purported use of hypnotism was debunked long ago. Consult, for example, the woks of Elizabeth Loftus.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 07:33 AM   #128
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,388
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
With which numbers do you disagree?
Obviously, all of the ones that are just made up. In your argument, that's all of the numbers. You call them "estimates," but you were told what science and statistics considers an estimate. Your numbers are not estimates. In some cases you purport to compute or calculate those numbers, but the methods you apply are simply ad hoc rationalizations. They may fool the uninformed people you have tended to seek as an audience, but here you have to actually demonstrate rigor.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 07:45 AM   #129
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 21,574
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
Fine! You are free to think that. Does it make your current brain more likely to exist?

Hans
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- No.
Fine!

- Under OOFlam, your sense of self is assumed to be a function of your current brain.

- In your belief (~OOFlam), it is something that cooperates with your current brain, let's call it a soul.

Thus, in both cases, your sense of self, in order to be experienced, depends on the existence of your current brain.

Therefore, OOFlam and ~OOFlam are equally likely, PROVIDED a soul is always available when a brain is spawned. If not, OOFLam is more likely (since we must assume that some potential brains somehow fail for the lack of an available soul).

Thank you. I think we made progress.

Hans
__________________
If you love life, you must accept the traces it leaves.
MRC_Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 07:56 AM   #130
godless dave
Great Dalmuti
 
godless dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,266
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Maybe so.
- That would make a lot of sense. But so far, the more I think about it, the less I see room for error.
- I've noticed that you've been absent since 2/21. Since I've been making a lot of claims in that period, I've also been hoping that you didn't disagree with those particular claims. I suspect that was just wishful thinking -- but, can you tell me, specifically, where (I don't assume it's singular)you still disagree with my argument?
I don't see where you've made any new claims. As before, I disagree with your whole approach. I think you are misusing Bayes Theorem.
__________________
"If it's real, then it gets more interesting the closer you examine it. If it's not real, just the opposite is true." - aggle-rithm
godless dave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 07:59 AM   #131
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,388
Originally Posted by godless dave View Post
I don't see where you've made any new claims. As before, I disagree with your whole approach. I think you are misusing Bayes Theorem.
<Jabba mode>
Which variable in Bayes' theorem do you disagree with?
</Jabba mode>

JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 08:03 AM   #132
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,873
*Jabba stands in front of his house which has burned down, fallen over, been caught in a landslide, eaten by termites, and then washed away by a flood.*

Jabba "Please show me exactly where in my house a socket was was not properly grounded."

Jabba your entire argument is functional random nonsense from top to bottom. We're not going to handhold you through nitpicking the details.

There is no reincarnation, there are no souls, there is no mathematical probability that makes your existence more likely to be eternal than finite.

You are wrong. Wronger than wrong. Fractually wrong. Not even wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 2nd March 2018 at 08:05 AM.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 08:15 AM   #133
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by RoboTimbo View Post
I would need to see some evidence that it's possible.
Robo,
- Not that anecdotal evidence is necessarily reliable, but there is all sorts of it -- which I discussed in a previous chapter.
- Look up "reincarnation," "OOBE" and "NDE."
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 08:22 AM   #134
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Springwood, NJ
Posts: 29,373
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Robo,
- Not that anecdotal evidence is necessarily reliable, but there is all sorts of it -- which I discussed in a previous chapter.
As you've said, it isn't reliable. There's all sorts of evidence for Bigfoot and leprechauns also.

Quote:
- Look up "reincarnation," "OOBE" and "NDE."
Why would I do that?
RoboTimbo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 08:32 AM   #135
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,388
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Robo,Not that anecdotal evidence is necessarily reliable, but there is all sorts of it -- which I discussed in a previous chapter.
You didn't discuss any of it. I went through the bibliography and actually read the papers. And for each of them, I outlined what its principal scientific flaw was. And there were many flaws. "Confirmation" of a claim, for example, was in most cases just asking the parents whether they believed the claim.

Predictably, you pretended as if that entire analysis didn't exist. And I knew this day would come -- the day when you would pretend you had made a decent showing of the evidence, when in fact you just threw a bunch of pseudoscience at the forum and ran away.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 08:35 AM   #136
jond
Illuminator
 
jond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,252
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
jond,
- The claim is that the new brain does share my sense of self -- it just (in most cases) does not share any (conscious) memories.
- I used to hypnotize people. Twice I age-regressed them back to "previous lifetimes," and they came up with something. I sort of suspect that they just made up their stories, but then, it could be that hypnosis allowed them to access unconscious memories...
If it shares your sense of self, it should self identify as you. As others have pointed out, your definitions lack any kind of rigor and constantly change to try to prop up whatever point you are trying to make. Just as you waffle between accepting that the self is a process the brain does and a separate entity.

As for your anectdoe about hypnosis and past lives, you yourself admitted that its most likely made up stories, so why present it.

As for OBEs, remember where you left off the last time you brought up your most convincing case? I do.
jond is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 08:39 AM   #137
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,873
Jabba,

You have refused to directly address a single one of your opponent's arguments. You have repeatably dishonestly misrepresented your opponent's claims. You have on multiple occasions falsely claimed people agree with you when they don't. You have on multiple occasions made up excuses as to why you can't participate in the thread you started. You have not made one single, verifiable statement of fact. You continually make claims and never back them up. You constantly ask for answers to questions you have already received multiple times. You have openly and fully admitted your ulterior motives for this discussion and expect people to pretend you haven't.

At no point have you argued honestly.

Where exactly are you getting off acting like you can make demands of anyone or dictate the behavior of this thread?
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 08:49 AM   #138
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
Fine!

- Under OOFlam, your sense of self is assumed to be a function of your current brain.

- In your belief (~OOFlam), it is something that cooperates with your current brain, let's call it a soul.

Thus, in both cases, your sense of self, in order to be experienced, depends on the existence of your current brain.

Therefore, OOFlam and ~OOFlam are equally likely, PROVIDED a soul is always available when a brain is spawned. If not, OOFLam is more likely (since we must assume that some potential brains somehow fail for the lack of an available soul).

Thank you. I think we made progress.

Hans
Hans,
- I assume that you're being facetious about the progress, but we might have actually moved a little...
- I need to tinker with your opening statement. I wouldn't just say that my sense of self is a function of my current brain -- in ~OOFLam, it likely has an existence outside of any brain.
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 08:52 AM   #139
jond
Illuminator
 
jond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,252
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Hans,
- I assume that you're being facetious about the progress, but we might have actually moved a little...
- I need to tinker with your opening statement. I wouldn't just say that my sense of self is a function of my current brain -- in ~OOFLam, it likely has an existence outside of any brain.
On December 27, you explicitly agreed that the materialist position is that it is a function of your brain.
jond is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 08:55 AM   #140
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Hans,
- I assume that you're being facetious about the progress, but we might have actually moved a little...
- I need to tinker with your opening statement. I wouldn't just say that my sense of self is a function of my current brain -- in ~OOFLam, it likely has an existence outside of any brain.
hans,
- I now need to tinker with my own statement -- I made a mistake.
- I'll be back.
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 08:57 AM   #141
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Springwood, NJ
Posts: 29,373
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Hans,
- I assume that you're being facetious about the progress, but we might have actually moved a little...
I agree. I don't think you've learned anything.

Quote:
- I need to tinker with your opening statement. I wouldn't just say that my sense of self is a function of my current brain -- in ~OOFLam, it likely has an existence outside of any brain.
I'm going to further tinker with yours. -- in materialism, the brain produces a process we recognize as a sense of self. There are memories and continuity which cease when the organism dies.

In Jabba's NOT(materialism), there is a separate soul which has no properties and is undetectable but which houses our memories, sense of continuity and self but they still cease when the organism dies as if there were no soul at all.

Do you disagree with any of that?

Last edited by RoboTimbo; 2nd March 2018 at 08:59 AM.
RoboTimbo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 08:58 AM   #142
jond
Illuminator
 
jond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,252
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
hans,
- I now need to tinker with my own statement -- I made a mistake.
- I'll be back.
Are you finally going to go back to the link? You will find that you spent several weeks arguing that the body is what is so unlikely. You will also find that on December 30 you agreed that you need a soul in addition to your body to get to immortality.
jond is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 09:13 AM   #143
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,388
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
...it likely has an existence outside of any brain.
And it is the nature of that proposed existence that you keep equivocating from point to point. You argue on the one hand that it's continuous and persistent, such that you can consider as equivalent all the times that it may be incarnated. And then on the other hand you argue that it has no attributes, does not transfer memory, or seem to have any other existence other than your nominal claim. You're variously (re)defining this existence not to arrive at a working definition of the soul, but simply to avoid points of refutation on a day-to-day basis.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 09:14 AM   #144
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
Fine!

- Under OOFlam, your sense of self is assumed to be a function of your current brain.

- In your belief (~OOFlam), it is something that cooperates with your current brain, let's call it a soul.

Thus, in both cases, your sense of self, in order to be experienced, depends on the existence of your current brain.

Therefore, OOFlam and ~OOFlam are equally likely, PROVIDED a soul is always available when a brain is spawned. If not, OOFLam is more likely (since we must assume that some potential brains somehow fail for the lack of an available soul).

Thank you. I think we made progress.

Hans
Hans,
- I assume that you're being facetious about the progress, but we might have actually moved a little...
- I need to tinker with your second statement. "In your belief (~OOFlam), it (your sense of self) is something that cooperates with your current brain, I'll call it a soul" -- but, it doesn't necessarily depend upon a brain.
- In ~OOFLam, my sense of self/soul likely has an existence outside of any brain.
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 09:18 AM   #145
jond
Illuminator
 
jond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,252
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Hans,
- I assume that you're being facetious about the progress, but we might have actually moved a little...
- I need to tinker with your second statement. "In your belief (~OOFlam), it (your sense of self) is something that cooperates with your current brain, I'll call it a soul" -- but, it doesn't necessarily depend upon a brain.
- In ~OOFLam, my sense of self/soul likely has an existence outside of any brain.
But your current existence DOES have a brain. And we can manipulate every aspect of your sense of self by altering that brain, chemically or physically. Further, you have in the past stated that your soul requires your brain to communicate with others.
jond is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 09:22 AM   #146
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,388
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
I'll be back.
When you come back, please revisit this list.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...postcount=3198

As before, this is a question treating first the breadth of your argument, not its depth. The acceptable response will be a single post containing all the responses to each of the numbered fatal flaws. Each response should be one or two sentences describing how the final form of your argument will address the flaw. The post should not contain excerpts from other posts, multicolored "maps" or dialogues, or anything similar to the other distractionary items you previously tried to include. Just the answers I ask for. I intend you to spend no more than one hour on this task. I specifically do not intend this to be simply another springboard for your immediate rush for irrelevant detail.

I suspect you will ignore this request. And that's fine, because we have in hand already your statement conceding that you are unable to answer these questions. If that is still your position, we will consider this a confirmation of that.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 09:23 AM   #147
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Springwood, NJ
Posts: 29,373
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Hans,
- I assume that you're being facetious about the progress, but we might have actually moved a little...
I agree, you don't seem to have learned anything.

Quote:
- I need to tinker with your [hilite]second[/hilite] statement. "In your belief (~OOFlam), it (your sense of self) is something that cooperates with your current brain, I'll call it a soul" -- [u]but, it doesn't necessarily depend upon a brain.[/u]
- In ~OOFLam, my sense of self/soul likely has an existence outside of any brain.
I'll tinker with your second statement a bit.

In Jabba's NOT(materialism), there is a soul which has no properties, is undetectable and manifests nothing. Sometimes it needs to be attached to an organism and sometimes it needs to be detached from an organism, depending on which fatal flaw Jabba is failing to rebut.

Do you disagree with any of that?
RoboTimbo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 09:24 AM   #148
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 21,574
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Hans,
- I assume that you're being facetious about the progress, but we might have actually moved a little...
- I need to tinker with your opening statement. I wouldn't just say that my sense of self is a function of my current brain -- in ~OOFLam, it likely has an existence outside of any brain.
Oh, we made progress. Perhaps you didn't notice.

Perhaps it has existence outside a brain in ~OOFLam, but it is OOFLam you are trying to disprove, and you just agreed that whatever a soul is, it does not increase the likelihood of the brain existing, which means that ~OOFLam has at best a likelihood EQUAL to OOFLam.

Which part if this do you not agree with?

Hans
__________________
If you love life, you must accept the traces it leaves.
MRC_Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 09:26 AM   #149
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,388
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
In ~OOFLam, my sense of self/soul likely has an existence outside of any brain.
You refuse to describe the particulars of this alleged existence. Which is to say, your descriptions of it vary from post to post, and often contradict each other.

Would you agree that the sort of free-form speculation you're engaged in here, without reference to supporting fact, means that P(R) must necessarily be very low? You're asking us to believe, in the absence of fact, that the thing you imagine but cannot precisely define is actually an operative concept. Further, would you agree that, absent any clear definition of nature and method in R, calculating P(A|R) for any event A is fundamentally impossible?
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 09:30 AM   #150
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,388
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
You have on multiple occasions made up excuses as to why you can't participate in the thread you started.
Indeed. Upon further reflection, I'm going to press Jabba on this.

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
...each post is full of name-calling.
It's a very tall claim to say that each post is full of name-calling. I'm going to make you substantiate this. I stipulate that in the past 48 hours I've made several posts to this forum. Please link to three of them that you allege contain name-calling. I will make sure they are reported for moderation, so that your claim can be tested.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 09:37 AM   #151
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 76,590
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
js,
- I think you're just saying that reincarnation is impossible?
Even according to you, reincarnation doesn't make you immortal.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 09:42 AM   #152
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 76,590
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Monza,
- Please point me to where I made these contradictory statements.
They were highlited in the post that Monza re-posted. You saw it and responded to it.

Quote:
- The claim is that the new brain does share my sense of self -- it just (in most cases) does not share any (conscious) memories.
Without memories it has no ability to even have an impression that it's the same self as the other "life". Ergo, he's not you.

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Belz,
- With which numbers do you disagree?
The only one you keep trotting out. 1/10100 is made up. You have not justified it.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 09:43 AM   #153
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 76,590
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Hans,
- I assume that you're being facetious about the progress, but we might have actually moved a little...
Stop trying to gaslight your critics. Nobody, lurker or otherwise, is fooled.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 09:48 AM   #155
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator
 
jsfisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,192
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
jt,
- Do you accept that the formula I'm using is appropriate for evaluating complementary hypotheses? That's
- P(H|E) = P(E|H) x P(H)/(P(E|H) x P(H) + P(E|~H) x P(~H)).
That formula does follow from the basic Bayes Theorem. However, you do not have a complementary hypothesis. The H you have is that of a materialistic reality. Immortality is not the complement of that. It is just one of the possibilities.

So, no, you cannot use that formula.
__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group.

"He's the greatest mod that never was!" -- Monketey Ghost

Last edited by jsfisher; 2nd March 2018 at 10:00 AM.
jsfisher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 09:52 AM   #156
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator
 
jsfisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,192
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
js,
- I think you're just saying that reincarnation is impossible?
No, that isn't what I was saying.
__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group.

"He's the greatest mod that never was!" -- Monketey Ghost
jsfisher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 10:13 AM   #157
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,343
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
jond,
- I'm claiming -- like the reincarnationists -- that your self is more than your memories. It's this "more" that I think might continue to exist, and recur in different brains.
And your amazing evidence is?
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn
And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch
You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager
Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar
Dancing David is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 10:15 AM   #158
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,343
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
jond,
- The claim is that the new brain does share my sense of self -- it just (in most cases) does not share any (conscious) memories.
- I used to hypnotize people. Twice I age-regressed them back to "previous lifetimes," and they came up with something. I sort of suspect that they just made up their stories, but then, it could be that hypnosis allowed them to access unconscious memories...
Not that there is any good evidence that it does...




__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn
And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch
You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager
Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar
Dancing David is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 10:16 AM   #159
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,343
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Robo,
- Not that anecdotal evidence is necessarily reliable, but there is all sorts of it -- which I discussed in a previous chapter.
- Look up "reincarnation," "OOBE" and "NDE."
Nope that is all crappy research and wishful thinking
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn
And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch
You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager
Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar
Dancing David is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 10:26 AM   #160
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,388
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
They were highlited in the post that Monza re-posted. You saw it and responded to it.
But by asking for it he gets to make his critics run around doing various clerical things instead of arguing the substance of his argument and its flaws. It's the classic hamster wheel. Shucks, guys, I just don't remember and don't feel like going back to re-read the thread. Could you all just say all the things all over again? I promise I'll remember them until tomorrow when I pretend again to be all flustered and forgetful. Contrast this with the laser-beam accuracy he can muster in finding all the posts that seem to lead to a "gotcha!"

Quote:
Without memories it has no ability to even have an impression that it's the same self as the other "life". Ergo, he's not you.
This is important to Jabba's argument. Jabba is correct in claiming that a person only exists in any conceivable way under materialism for the century or so in which his brain is alive. He then goes on to present that in a probability context where the potential field for human existence is modeled as 140 million discrete centuries in a uniform distribution, leading to a miniscule likelihood, given a person, that this would be the century that person would occupy. We've discussed at length what's wrong with that argument. Jabba is uninterested.

In contrast, Jabba claims that under his model existence is thought of as a soul that has always existed and will always exist. Therefore he insinuates that it can be incarnated in any number of those 140 million centuries, and that all such incarnations are functionally equivalent. Thus in his model, given a person, the likelihood that this would be the century in which that person would exist approaches tautology because that person existed in more than one century, and perhaps all centuries. That rationale relies upon equivocating the distinctions among persons and kinds of existence. It relies specifically on saying that all incarnations of Jabba are statistically equivalent events, even though elements of his description of a disembodied soul contradict that equivalence.

Quote:
The only one you keep trotting out. 1/10100 is made up. You have not justified it.
I'm sure he believes he has. He has explained where he got it. It seems that in Jabba's mind there is a distinction between simply choosing a number arbitrarily, and naming a number provided with a nonsensical rationale. Jabba does not seem to consider the latter as "making up" a number.

Jabba's original argument tried to introduce the nonsensical concept of "virtual zero." This, in his argument, was a magical entity that exhibited exactly and only all of the properties of finite numbers that he needed to satisfy his proof, and simultaneously exactly and only all the properties of infinity for the same purpose. It was a magical concept that let him, as he is wont to do, simply define his way to success.

Now that he has realized he cannot foist this made-up concept, he's resorted to a finite number that's obviously very small and would differ from zero only negligibly for most purposes. In choosing a finite number he avoids all the problems that infinity causes in his argument. But now he's just trying to sweep under the carpet all the problems a finite number causes. Specifically he's trying to avoid the prospect that useful, valid finite numbers ultimately have rational, finite, discrete derivations -- and he has none for this one. He chose it to be arbitrarily close to zero, and upon no other criterion.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:10 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.