Proof of Immortality II

Slowvehicle · 7th June 2014, 08:45 AM

This thread is a continuation of Immortality and Bayesian Statistics. This new thread has been formed in order to improve the forum's performance. The cut-off point of the previous thread was arbitrary. Feel free to quote from any older posts in this thread. It remains moderated for the time being. Thank you.

Posted By:Loss Leader

Originally Posted by jsfisher

For many people, it is simply the result of eating the wrong sorts of food. Broccoli or beans for some. That must be what Jabba is referring to.

Now, now...

HighRiser · 7th June 2014, 09:49 AM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- To what extent do you guys accept strong emergence?

As others have said; it depends on how you define strong emergence. Would you mind doing that?

Giordano · 7th June 2014, 10:42 AM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- Re #2: Sure.
- Re #1: This is where the words fail us (or maybe, they just fail me).
- Whatever. I’m claiming that each brain copy would produce a different “identity.” IOW, there is something about this sense of self that is not defined by brain chemistry.
- For the moment at least, I’m accepting that the identity could be defined by space/time coordinates -- but only at the instant of consciousness. I include the caveat(?) because each of us experiences (an, at least, illusion of) identity continuity over a lifetime. In the major sense, our identities appear to stay the same over our lifetimes. Our different “characteristics” change from instant to instant, but not our apparent identities.

Could you repeat that again? I'm not sure I got it the first 5 times you posted it. Maybe louder?

Giordano · 7th June 2014, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by xtifr

Yup, he made a concession! Dude! That's, like, unprecedented!

Well, ok, technically, he conceded that he might have to make a concession. But that's still very nearly almost progress! Or closer to being very nearly almost progress than we've seen in thousands of previous posts.

Well, he tried, but, of course, it wasn't actually evidence. And now, finally, we've very nearly almost gotten him to agree that it wasn't, and very nearly almost gotten him to admit that he might need a better argument. We've very nearly almost reached a tiny, incremental advance in the debate! I'm so excited!

Like I said before, I'm just here for the laughs.

I think you are too optimistic here. Every time in the past, ever time, I thought Jabba finally conceded what others told him about problem with his theory, his very next post bought us back to square one. I hope it has been fun for you, because I think that is all you will get out of Jabba.

xtifr · 7th June 2014, 10:54 AM

Originally Posted by Mojo

Any chance of a link to Jabba's attempt to provide evidence that the soul exists? I seem to have missed it among all of his sidetracks, evasions, and attempts to beg the question.

What, you missed the whole thing about how a copy wouldn't be the same individual as the original, and therefore there must be something mystical about consciousness, because it's not purely dependent on biochemistry? I thought that was a pretty significant part of the discussion.

I never said it was a good attempt (let alone good evidence).

Giordano · 7th June 2014, 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- To what extent do you guys accept strong emergence?

????? Oh, before you define it: why would I care?

abaddon · 7th June 2014, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by Slowvehicle

...and this has...what to do with the existence of the "soul", or its "immortality"?

Jabba will not answer.

Originally Posted by Slowvehicle

This is not our first rodeo, Mr. Savage.

What do you, personally, think you mean when you say, "strong emergence"?

If you are going to claim that the "soul" is a supervenient property, an "extra" not directly dependent upon the physical limitations of the system out of which the property emerges, and that that somehow lets you sneak the "soul" in as the metaphysical prize in an existential Cracker Jack^® box, then I, for one, deny it. Absolutely flat deny it. It's a "superproperty-of-the-gaps" argument.

Please do not ignore this question. An honest answer from you could save us four pages of pointless OT circular argument.

Jabba will not answer.

Originally Posted by John Jones

That is my recollection as well. He also referred to cases of alleged reincarnation, and past lives regression. IOW, woo.

Jabba will not answer.

Originally Posted by JoeBentley

Sadly it is common for people to think that bad evidence alluded to vaguely is somehow better then bad evidence outright stated.

Jabba will not answer.

Originally Posted by Mojo

To what extent do you define "strong emergence"?

Jabba will not answer.

Originally Posted by jsfisher

For many people, it is simply the result of eating the wrong sorts of food. Broccoli or beans for some. That must be what Jabba is referring to.

Jabba will not answer.

Originally Posted by Slowvehicle

TY. I had forgotten the "I'm Napoleon" arguments...

Jabba will not answer.

Originally Posted by Slowvehicle

Now, now...

Jabba will not answer.

Originally Posted by HighRiser

As others have said; it depends on how you define strong emergence. Would you mind doing that?

Jabba will not answer.

Originally Posted by Giordano

Could you repeat that again? I'm not sure I got it the first 5 times you posted it. Maybe louder?

Jabba will not answer.

Originally Posted by Giordano

I think you are too optimistic here. Every time in the past, ever time, I thought Jabba finally conceded what others told him about problem with his theory, his very next post bought us back to square one. I hope it has been fun for you, because I think that is all you will get out of Jabba.

Jabba will not answer.

I trust my answers are sufficient?

HighRiser · 7th June 2014, 11:13 AM

Originally Posted by abaddon

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

I trust my answers are sufficient?

Hope springs eternal... essentially.

Giordano · 7th June 2014, 11:18 AM

Originally Posted by abaddon

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

I trust my answers are sufficient?

True. But I suspect that we are not really talking to him. However you are right and I am very puzzled by why I post. Maybe I am used to being ignored in real life?

Slowvehicle · 7th June 2014, 11:23 AM

Originally Posted by abaddon

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

I trust my answers are sufficient?

So, whaddarya tryinta say, exactly?

Loss Leader · 7th June 2014, 11:23 AM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- To what extent do you guys accept strong emergence?

Jabba, really, another newly invented term?

Slowvehicle · 7th June 2014, 11:25 AM

Originally Posted by Giordano

True. But I suspect that we are not really talking to him. However you are right and I am very puzzled by why I post. Maybe I am used to being ignored in real life?

WHAT?

Slowvehicle · 7th June 2014, 11:26 AM

Originally Posted by Loss Leader

Jabba, really, another newly invented term?

Oh, it's a legitimate term; I am just unconvinced that Mr. Savage knows what it means.

abaddon · 7th June 2014, 11:39 AM

Originally Posted by Loss Leader

Jabba, really, another newly invented term?

Sure, why not. I am not extracting the michael here. Jabba really will not answer. You are stuffed, I am stuffed, Slowvehicle is stuffed, Giordano is stuffed, xtifr is stuffed, donn is stuffed, all of us are stuffed. Jabba will only interact with the one currently appointed. Not only that, you can't even guess who that might be because it frakkin changes from moment to moment.

So what exactly is it that we have before us? I can tell you. What we have is a bovine crapfest which is protected by mod and may not be identified for what it is.

Humots · 7th June 2014, 12:15 PM

Originally Posted by xtifr

Humots, you left of the "if" part of his second statement. He was actually using that second statement as a sort of reductio ad absurdum. Or at least that's how it reads to me.

You are correct.

Originally Posted by Jabba

It is that “part” of the self, or “sense” of the self, that I’m claiming cannot come from the chemistry of the brain – If it did, “I” would be brought back to life by producing an exact copy of my brain as it was when it first began to sense its self.

But his reductio ad absurdum was incorrect. He was saying that if the sense of self did come from the chemistry of the brain, he would be brought back to life.

No, he wouldn't. It would be, as we keep saying, an identical self but not the same self.

xtifr · 7th June 2014, 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- For the moment at least, I’m accepting that the identity could be defined by space/time coordinates -- but only at the instant of consciousness.

There is no "instant of consciousness". Consciousness is a process. It continues until it stops, like running.

Quote:

In the major sense, our identities appear to stay the same over our lifetimes.

Except when we switch bodies. Oh wait, that never happens, so this is not even slightly evidence of something not directly tied to a particular body and brain. So that doesn't even slightly begin to address the location issue.

Oh, and of course, people who suffer brain trauma and can no longer identify with their previous selves. Which again, puts the brain back dead center.

Originally Posted by Jabba

- To what extent do you guys accept strong emergence?

As defined in the Wikipedia article? Not at all. Not one bit. In fact, I would call it the boundary between religion and science. Science doesn't use the term "strong emergence" (and I'd never heard the term before reading that article) because the only form of emergence that's relevant to science is what WP calls "weak".

So-called "weak" emergence is not only the only type of emergence that's been demonstrated to exist, I believe it's the only kind that can be. Pretty much by definition.

Loss Leader · 7th June 2014, 01:10 PM

Originally Posted by Slowvehicle

Oh, it's a legitimate term; I am just unconvinced that Mr. Savage knows what it means.

Oh, there's very little chance he does because I just read the Wikipedia article and I still don't understand it - but at least this thread accidentally provided me an opportunity for education.

Slowvehicle · 7th June 2014, 01:51 PM

Originally Posted by Loss Leader

Oh, there's very little chance he does because I just read the Wikipedia article and I still don't understand it - but at least this thread accidentally provided me an opportunity for education.

Try this:

http://www.iep.utm.edu/emergenc/

Enjoy!

HighRiser · 7th June 2014, 01:53 PM

Originally Posted by Loss Leader

Oh, there's very little chance he does because I just read the Wikipedia article and I still don't understand it - but at least this thread accidentally provided me an opportunity for education.

I had learned a little about the philosophical aspects of emergence, and just got back from a little Wiki refresher reading. I suspect the "god of the gaps" argument is imminent.

John Jones · 7th June 2014, 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- To what extent do you guys accept strong emergence?

Nobody answer this until he defines his understanding of the term, or else Jabba will quote you as agreeing with him after re-defining the term. It's what he does.

John Jones · 7th June 2014, 02:04 PM

Originally Posted by abaddon

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

Jabba will not answer.

I trust my answers are sufficient?

You're prolly right, but he eventually abandoned his Table Cloth of Turin thread after being utterly unable to support his position.

IMO, he has even less evidence or logic for immortality than he did for the authenticity of the Turin Table Cloth.

What's up with that, Jabba?

pakeha · 7th June 2014, 02:05 PM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- IOW, there is something about this sense of self that is not defined by brain chemistry.

Jabba, remember how the sense of self is defined?
It's an emergent property of a functioning neurosystem.

Originally Posted by Jabba

- To what extent do you guys accept strong emergence?

What do you mean by strong emergence?

abaddon · 7th June 2014, 02:25 PM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- To what extent do you guys accept strong emergence?

Jabba, my father is 80 and he is in what is euphamisticly referred to as end of life care, or in other words shortly to be dead.

As a man in life, he had not a jot of violence to offer to anyone. He never raised a hand to me nor my siblings. It was my priviledge to speak to him heart to heart. But he knows he is done. He knows that it is a matter of time and he accepts it. Such is the way of things.

When the time comes, I will proudly step up and salute a deeply gentle, gentle man.

Where the hell are you going?

And I know you won't answer.

Jabba · 8th June 2014, 06:19 AM

- I had thought that you guys new about that weak/strong breakdown. I'm using the Wikipedia definition/description of "strong emergence." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergen...weak_emergence

Akhenaten · 8th June 2014, 06:22 AM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- I had thought that you guys new about that weak/strong breakdown. I'm using the Wikipedia definition/description of "strong emergence." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergen...weak_emergence

No you aren't. You're talking about immortal souls and they have nothing to do with any kind of emergence.

Slowvehicle · 8th June 2014, 06:46 AM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- I had thought that you guys new about that weak/strong breakdown. I'm using the Wikipedia definition/description of "strong emergence." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergen...weak_emergence

What do YOU, personally, think the Wiki says?

What do YOU, personally, think the Wiki means?

(Hint: if you are trying to sneak a "magic", transcendent, non-corporeal, non-neurosystem-dependent "special quality" in; that is, to point at "strong emergence" as the place where the "soul" you are claiming exists is, in fact, hiding; then, you know--now is time and waaaaay past time for you to lay out your evidence.)

BTW, that's a lovely tie you wore this morning...

ETA: have you read this?
http://www.iep.utm.edu/emergenc/

Garrette · 8th June 2014, 06:54 AM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- I had thought that you guys new about that weak/strong breakdown. I'm using the Wikipedia definition/description of "strong emergence." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergen...weak_emergence

1. As Ahenaten says, no you are not.

2. No you are not, because you have never raised it before; if you were using one side of a two sided coin, you would have realized we were using the other. This is you flailing about and finding something new, something you do not understand, to latch on to.

3. The sources for strong emergence as something separate from consciousness comprise a philosophy paper in a philosophy journal and possibly a book (not a peer reviewed article) by a physicist. I say possibly because descriptions of the book do not lead me to think that the physicist is saying what you claim.

Loss Leader · 8th June 2014, 06:58 AM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- I had thought that you guys new about that weak/strong breakdown. I'm using the Wikipedia definition/description of "strong emergence." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergen...weak_emergence

What do you believe is meant by "strong emergence", you handsome devil, you?

Jabba · 8th June 2014, 09:08 AM

- The reason I've resorted to even fewer and shorter posts is that I've promised my wife to give her needs more of my time. She has all sorts of cleaning, gardening and landscaping that she wants to do but that she needs help with...
- I hadn't said anything about it cause you guys haven't wanted to hear my excuses.

Slowvehicle · 8th June 2014, 09:18 AM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- The reason I've resorted to even fewer and shorter posts is that I've promised my wife to give her needs more of my time. She has all sorts of cleaning, gardening and landscaping that she wants to do but that she needs help with...
- I hadn't said anything about it cause you guys haven't wanted to hear my excuses.

Good Morning, Mr. Savage!

I am turly impressed with your familial dedication, and think that is a fine quality to exercise...

Why not take a break, marshal your arguments, gather your evidence, and, when you have all your ducks in a row, come back and present your actual evidence that the "soul" exists?

Loss Leader · 8th June 2014, 09:53 AM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- The reason I've resorted to even fewer and shorter posts is that I've promised my wife to give her needs more of my time. She has all sorts of cleaning, gardening and landscaping that she wants to do but that she needs help with...
- I hadn't said anything about it cause you guys haven't wanted to hear my excuses.

You are a fantastic husband and a really wonderful guy. How do you understand the concept of "strong emergence"?

George · 8th June 2014, 09:59 AM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- The reason I've resorted to even fewer and shorter posts is that I've promised my wife to give her needs more of my time. She has all sorts of cleaning, gardening and landscaping that she wants to do but that she needs help with...
- I hadn't said anything about it cause you guys haven't wanted to hear my excuses.

Quote:

An explanation offered in defence of some fault or offensive behaviour or as a reason for not fulfilling an obligation

http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dic...english/excuse

Filippo Lippi · 8th June 2014, 01:19 PM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- The reason I've resorted to even fewer and shorter posts is that I've promised my wife to give her needs more of my time. She has all sorts of cleaning, gardening and landscaping that she wants to do but that she needs help with...
- I hadn't said anything about it cause you guys haven't wanted to hear my excuses.

How very convenient. The honest thing to do would be to admit you haven't any evidence and then retire with a sliver of integrity. You can't even manage that.

pakeha · 8th June 2014, 03:03 PM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- The reason I've resorted to even fewer and shorter posts is that I've promised my wife to give her needs more of my time. She has all sorts of cleaning, gardening and landscaping that she wants to do but that she needs help with...
- I hadn't said anything about it cause you guys haven't wanted to hear my excuses.

Jabba, cleaning, gardening and landscaping are all great activities and well worth spending time on.
While you're doing them, why not ponder the nature of consciousness, which is an emergent property of a functioning neurosystem?

John Jones · 8th June 2014, 03:19 PM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- The reason I've resorted to even fewer and shorter posts is that I've promised my wife to give her needs more of my time. She has all sorts of cleaning, gardening and landscaping that she wants to do but that she needs help with...
- I hadn't said anything about it cause you guys haven't wanted to hear my excuses.

I'm skeptical by nature, and especially so when I read your posts.

You have so many reasons why you can't support your claims in the OP! You ought to write a book about it.

Appeals to your wife's needs only make your last 18 months of interlocution more obviously pointless.

Admit that you have failed to support your claims of immortality and the authenticity of the T-Shirt of Turin.

Tend to your wife, and be done with it.

Humots · 8th June 2014, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- Thanks, George. I hope you weren't kidding. But, that is a way to get me to respond -- flattery helps...

Originally Posted by Jabba

- The reason I've resorted to even fewer and shorter posts is that I've promised my wife to give her needs more of my time. She has all sorts of cleaning, gardening and landscaping that she wants to do but that she needs help with...
- I hadn't said anything about it cause you guys haven't wanted to hear my excuses.

Helping your family is a totally acceptable excuse for not responding.

Insufficient flattery is not. Nor is insufficient (as you measure it) respect.

Those are the excuses we don't want to hear.

Jabba · 9th June 2014, 06:22 AM

Originally Posted by xtifr

There is no "instant of consciousness". Consciousness is a process. It continues until it stops, like running.

- I should have said "first instant of consciousness." Would that help?

Mojo · 9th June 2014, 06:36 AM

No.

Slowvehicle · 9th June 2014, 07:11 AM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- I should have said "first instant of consciousness." Would that help?

Good Morning, Mr. Savage!

What a fine, thoughtful, and insightful question you have asked!

It is unfortunate that my answer must be, "No, it would not help."

What would "help", at this point, would be for you to provide concrete, practical, empirical, objective evidence that the "soul" exists, and is "immortal".

Thanks!

Akhenaten · 9th June 2014, 08:24 AM

Originally Posted by Jabba

- I should have said "first instant of consciousness." Would that help?

About as much as "We should move" would have helped the residents of Tunguska in the first instant of them noticing a really large meteorite or the crew of the Titanic saying "We ought to slow down a bit" in the first instant of their iceberginess.

You're flogging an eohippus, Jabba. Give it a rest.

7th June 2014, 10:54 AM	#5
xtifr Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 1,299	Originally Posted by Mojo Any chance of a link to Jabba's attempt to provide evidence that the soul exists? I seem to have missed it among all of his sidetracks, evasions, and attempts to beg the question. What, you missed the whole thing about how a copy wouldn't be the same individual as the original, and therefore there must be something mystical about consciousness, because it's not purely dependent on biochemistry? I thought that was a pretty significant part of the discussion. I never said it was a good attempt (let alone good evidence).
xtifr Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 1,299	__________________ "Those who learn from history are doomed to watch others repeat it." -- Anonymous Slashdot poster "The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore." -- James Nicoll

7th June 2014, 10:57 AM	#7
abaddon Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Republic of Ireland Posts: 23,499	Originally Posted by Slowvehicle ...and this has...what to do with the existence of the "soul", or its "immortality"? Jabba will not answer. Originally Posted by Slowvehicle This is not our first rodeo, Mr. Savage. What do you, personally, think you mean when you say, "strong emergence"? If you are going to claim that the "soul" is a supervenient property, an "extra" not directly dependent upon the physical limitations of the system out of which the property emerges, and that that somehow lets you sneak the "soul" in as the metaphysical prize in an existential Cracker Jack^® box, then I, for one, deny it. Absolutely flat deny it. It's a "superproperty-of-the-gaps" argument. Please do not ignore this question. An honest answer from you could save us four pages of pointless OT circular argument. Jabba will not answer. Originally Posted by John Jones That is my recollection as well. He also referred to cases of alleged reincarnation, and past lives regression. IOW, woo. Jabba will not answer. Originally Posted by JoeBentley Sadly it is common for people to think that bad evidence alluded to vaguely is somehow better then bad evidence outright stated. Jabba will not answer. Originally Posted by Mojo To what extent do you define "strong emergence"? Jabba will not answer. Originally Posted by jsfisher For many people, it is simply the result of eating the wrong sorts of food. Broccoli or beans for some. That must be what Jabba is referring to. Jabba will not answer. Originally Posted by Slowvehicle TY. I had forgotten the "I'm Napoleon" arguments... Jabba will not answer. Originally Posted by Slowvehicle Now, now... Jabba will not answer. Originally Posted by HighRiser As others have said; it depends on how you define strong emergence. Would you mind doing that? Jabba will not answer. Originally Posted by Giordano Could you repeat that again? I'm not sure I got it the first 5 times you posted it. Maybe louder? Jabba will not answer. Originally Posted by Giordano I think you are too optimistic here. Every time in the past, ever time, I thought Jabba finally conceded what others told him about problem with his theory, his very next post bought us back to square one. I hope it has been fun for you, because I think that is all you will get out of Jabba. Jabba will not answer. I trust my answers are sufficient?
	__________________ Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive? ...love and buttercakes...

7th June 2014, 11:13 AM	#8
HighRiser Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: High above Indianapolis Posts: 1,895	Originally Posted by abaddon Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. I trust my answers are sufficient? Hope springs eternal... essentially.
	__________________ Congratulations, you have successfully failed to model something that you assert "isn't noticeable". -The Man Science is not hopelessly hobbled just because it knows the difference between fact and imagination. -JayUtah

7th June 2014, 11:23 AM	#10
Slowvehicle Membership Drive Co-Ordinator, Russell's Antinomy Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls... Posts: 17,348	Originally Posted by abaddon Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. I trust my answers are sufficient? So, whaddarya tryinta say, exactly?
	__________________ "They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest "The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David "Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze

7th June 2014, 11:23 AM	#11
Loss Leader I would save the receptionist. Moderator Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Florida Posts: 27,909	Originally Posted by Jabba - To what extent do you guys accept strong emergence? Jabba, really, another newly invented term?
	__________________ I have the honor to be Your Obdt. S^t L. Leader

7th June 2014, 09:49 AM	#2
HighRiser Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: High above Indianapolis Posts: 1,895	Originally Posted by Jabba - To what extent do you guys accept strong emergence? As others have said; it depends on how you define strong emergence. Would you mind doing that?
	__________________ Congratulations, you have successfully failed to model something that you assert "isn't noticeable". -The Man Science is not hopelessly hobbled just because it knows the difference between fact and imagination. -JayUtah

7th June 2014, 10:42 AM	#3
Giordano Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 17,646	Originally Posted by Jabba - Re #2: Sure. - Re #1: This is where the words fail us (or maybe, they just fail me). - Whatever. I’m claiming that each brain copy would produce a different “identity.” IOW, there is something about this sense of self that is not defined by brain chemistry. - For the moment at least, I’m accepting that the identity could be defined by space/time coordinates -- but only at the instant of consciousness. I include the caveat(?) because each of us experiences (an, at least, illusion of) identity continuity over a lifetime. In the major sense, our identities appear to stay the same over our lifetimes. Our different “characteristics” change from instant to instant, but not our apparent identities. Could you repeat that again? I'm not sure I got it the first 5 times you posted it. Maybe louder?

7th June 2014, 10:52 AM	#4
Giordano Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 17,646	Originally Posted by xtifr Yup, he made a concession! Dude! That's, like, unprecedented! Well, ok, technically, he conceded that he might have to make a concession. But that's still very nearly almost progress! Or closer to being very nearly almost progress than we've seen in thousands of previous posts. Well, he tried, but, of course, it wasn't actually evidence. And now, finally, we've very nearly almost gotten him to agree that it wasn't, and very nearly almost gotten him to admit that he might need a better argument. We've very nearly almost reached a tiny, incremental advance in the debate! I'm so excited! Like I said before, I'm just here for the laughs. I think you are too optimistic here. Every time in the past, ever time, I thought Jabba finally conceded what others told him about problem with his theory, his very next post bought us back to square one. I hope it has been fun for you, because I think that is all you will get out of Jabba.

7th June 2014, 10:55 AM	#6
Giordano Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 17,646	Originally Posted by Jabba - To what extent do you guys accept strong emergence? ????? Oh, before you define it: why would I care?

7th June 2014, 11:18 AM	#9
Giordano Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 17,646	Originally Posted by abaddon Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. I trust my answers are sufficient? True. But I suspect that we are not really talking to him. However you are right and I am very puzzled by why I post. Maybe I am used to being ignored in real life?

7th June 2014, 11:25 AM	#12
Slowvehicle Membership Drive Co-Ordinator, Russell's Antinomy Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls... Posts: 17,348	Originally Posted by Giordano True. But I suspect that we are not really talking to him. However you are right and I am very puzzled by why I post. Maybe I am used to being ignored in real life? WHAT?
	__________________ "They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest "The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David "Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze

7th June 2014, 11:26 AM	#13
Slowvehicle Membership Drive Co-Ordinator, Russell's Antinomy Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls... Posts: 17,348	Originally Posted by Loss Leader Jabba, really, another newly invented term? Oh, it's a legitimate term; I am just unconvinced that Mr. Savage knows what it means.
	__________________ "They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest "The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David "Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze

7th June 2014, 11:39 AM	#14
abaddon Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Republic of Ireland Posts: 23,499	Originally Posted by Loss Leader Jabba, really, another newly invented term? Sure, why not. I am not extracting the michael here. Jabba really will not answer. You are stuffed, I am stuffed, Slowvehicle is stuffed, Giordano is stuffed, xtifr is stuffed, donn is stuffed, all of us are stuffed. Jabba will only interact with the one currently appointed. Not only that, you can't even guess who that might be because it frakkin changes from moment to moment. So what exactly is it that we have before us? I can tell you. What we have is a bovine crapfest which is protected by mod and may not be identified for what it is.
	__________________ Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive? ...love and buttercakes...

7th June 2014, 12:15 PM	#15
Humots Critical Thinker Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 413	Originally Posted by xtifr Humots, you left of the "if" part of his second statement. He was actually using that second statement as a sort of reductio ad absurdum. Or at least that's how it reads to me. You are correct. Originally Posted by Jabba *It is that “part” of the self, or “sense” of the self, that I’m claiming cannot come from the chemistry* of the brain – If it did, “I” would be brought back to life by producing an exact copy of my brain as it was when it first began to sense its self. But his reductio ad absurdum was incorrect. He was saying that if the sense of self did** come from the chemistry of the brain, he would be brought back to life. No, he wouldn't. It would be, as we keep saying, an identical self but not the same self.
Humots Critical Thinker Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 413

7th June 2014, 12:29 PM	#16
xtifr Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 1,299	Originally Posted by Jabba - For the moment at least, I’m accepting that the identity could be defined by space/time coordinates -- but only at the instant of consciousness. There is no "instant of consciousness". Consciousness is a process. It continues until it stops, like running. Quote: In the major sense, our identities appear to stay the same over our lifetimes. Except when we switch bodies. Oh wait, that never happens, so this is not even slightly evidence of something not directly tied to a particular body and brain. So that doesn't even slightly begin to address the location issue. Oh, and of course, people who suffer brain trauma and can no longer identify with their previous selves. Which again, puts the brain back dead center. Originally Posted by Jabba - To what extent do you guys accept strong emergence? As defined in the Wikipedia article? Not at all. Not one bit. In fact, I would call it the boundary between religion and science. Science doesn't use the term "strong emergence" (and I'd never heard the term before reading that article) because the only form of emergence that's relevant to science is what WP calls "weak". So-called "weak" emergence is not only the only type of emergence that's been demonstrated to exist, I believe it's the only kind that can be. Pretty much by definition.
xtifr Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 1,299	__________________ "Those who learn from history are doomed to watch others repeat it." -- Anonymous Slashdot poster "The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore." -- James Nicoll

7th June 2014, 01:10 PM	#17
Loss Leader I would save the receptionist. Moderator Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Florida Posts: 27,909	Originally Posted by Slowvehicle Oh, it's a legitimate term; I am just unconvinced that Mr. Savage knows what it means. Oh, there's very little chance he does because I just read the Wikipedia article and I still don't understand it - but at least this thread accidentally provided me an opportunity for education.
	__________________ I have the honor to be Your Obdt. S^t L. Leader

7th June 2014, 01:51 PM	#18
Slowvehicle Membership Drive Co-Ordinator, Russell's Antinomy Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls... Posts: 17,348	Originally Posted by Loss Leader Oh, there's very little chance he does because I just read the Wikipedia article and I still don't understand it - but at least this thread accidentally provided me an opportunity for education. Try this: http://www.iep.utm.edu/emergenc/ Enjoy!
	__________________ "They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest "The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David "Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze

7th June 2014, 01:53 PM	#19
HighRiser Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: High above Indianapolis Posts: 1,895	Originally Posted by Loss Leader Oh, there's very little chance he does because I just read the Wikipedia article and I still don't understand it - but at least this thread accidentally provided me an opportunity for education. I had learned a little about the philosophical aspects of emergence, and just got back from a little Wiki refresher reading. I suspect the "god of the gaps" argument is imminent.
	__________________ Congratulations, you have successfully failed to model something that you assert "isn't noticeable". -The Man Science is not hopelessly hobbled just because it knows the difference between fact and imagination. -JayUtah

7th June 2014, 01:57 PM	#20
John Jones Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Iowa USA Posts: 12,131	Originally Posted by Jabba - To what extent do you guys accept strong emergence? Nobody answer this until he defines his understanding of the term, or else Jabba will quote you as agreeing with him after re-defining the term. It's what he does.
	__________________ "Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave

7th June 2014, 02:04 PM	#21
John Jones Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Iowa USA Posts: 12,131	Originally Posted by abaddon Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. Jabba will not answer. I trust my answers are sufficient? You're prolly right, but he eventually abandoned his Table Cloth of Turin thread after being utterly unable to support his position. IMO, he has even less evidence or logic for immortality than he did for the authenticity of the Turin Table Cloth. What's up with that, Jabba?
	__________________ "Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave

7th June 2014, 02:05 PM	#22
pakeha Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 12,331	Originally Posted by Jabba - IOW, there is something about this sense of self that is not defined by brain chemistry. Jabba, remember how the sense of self is defined? It's an emergent property of a functioning neurosystem. Originally Posted by Jabba - To what extent do you guys accept strong emergence? What do you mean by strong emergence?
	__________________ How many zeros? Jabba

7th June 2014, 02:25 PM	#23
abaddon Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Republic of Ireland Posts: 23,499	Originally Posted by Jabba - To what extent do you guys accept strong emergence? Jabba, my father is 80 and he is in what is euphamisticly referred to as end of life care, or in other words shortly to be dead. As a man in life, he had not a jot of violence to offer to anyone. He never raised a hand to me nor my siblings. It was my priviledge to speak to him heart to heart. But he knows he is done. He knows that it is a matter of time and he accepts it. Such is the way of things. When the time comes, I will proudly step up and salute a deeply gentle, gentle man. Where the hell are you going? And I know you won't answer.
	__________________ Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive? ...love and buttercakes...

8th June 2014, 06:19 AM	#24
Jabba Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 5,613	- I had thought that you guys new about that weak/strong breakdown. I'm using the Wikipedia definition/description of "strong emergence." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergen...weak_emergence
Jabba Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 5,613	__________________ "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 è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor

8th June 2014, 06:22 AM	#25
Akhenaten Heretic Pharaoh Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia Posts: 29,692	Originally Posted by Jabba - I had thought that you guys new about that weak/strong breakdown. I'm using the Wikipedia definition/description of "strong emergence." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergen...weak_emergence No you aren't. You're talking about immortal souls and they have nothing to do with any kind of emergence.
	__________________ Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon

8th June 2014, 06:46 AM	#26
Slowvehicle Membership Drive Co-Ordinator, Russell's Antinomy Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls... Posts: 17,348	Originally Posted by Jabba - I had thought that you guys new about that weak/strong breakdown. I'm using the Wikipedia definition/description of "strong emergence." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergen...weak_emergence What do YOU, personally, think the Wiki says? What do YOU, personally, think the Wiki means? (Hint: if you are trying to sneak a "magic", transcendent, non-corporeal, non-neurosystem-dependent "special quality" in; that is, to point at "strong emergence" as the place where the "soul" you are claiming exists is, in fact, hiding; then, you know--now is time and waaaaay past time for you to lay out your evidence.) BTW, that's a lovely tie you wore this morning... ETA: have you read this? http://www.iep.utm.edu/emergenc/
	__________________ "They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest "The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David "Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze Last edited by Slowvehicle; 8th June 2014 at 06:48 AM.

8th June 2014, 06:54 AM	#27
Garrette Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 14,768	Originally Posted by Jabba - I had thought that you guys new about that weak/strong breakdown. I'm using the Wikipedia definition/description of "strong emergence." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergen...weak_emergence 1. As Ahenaten says, no you are not. 2. No you are not, because you have never raised it before; if you were using one side of a two sided coin, you would have realized we were using the other. This is you flailing about and finding something new, something you do not understand, to latch on to. 3. The sources for strong emergence as something separate from consciousness comprise a philosophy paper in a philosophy journal and possibly a book (not a peer reviewed article) by a physicist. I say possibly because descriptions of the book do not lead me to think that the physicist is saying what you claim.
	__________________ My kids still love me.

8th June 2014, 06:58 AM	#28
Loss Leader I would save the receptionist. Moderator Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Florida Posts: 27,909	Originally Posted by Jabba - I had thought that you guys new about that weak/strong breakdown. I'm using the Wikipedia definition/description of "strong emergence." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergen...weak_emergence What do you believe is meant by "strong emergence", you handsome devil, you?
	__________________ I have the honor to be Your Obdt. S^t L. Leader

8th June 2014, 09:08 AM	#29
Jabba Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 5,613	- The reason I've resorted to even fewer and shorter posts is that I've promised my wife to give her needs more of my time. She has all sorts of cleaning, gardening and landscaping that she wants to do but that she needs help with... - I hadn't said anything about it cause you guys haven't wanted to hear my excuses.
Jabba Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 5,613	__________________ "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 è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor

8th June 2014, 09:18 AM	#30
Slowvehicle Membership Drive Co-Ordinator, Russell's Antinomy Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls... Posts: 17,348	Originally Posted by Jabba - The reason I've resorted to even fewer and shorter posts is that I've promised my wife to give her needs more of my time. She has all sorts of cleaning, gardening and landscaping that she wants to do but that she needs help with... - I hadn't said anything about it cause you guys haven't wanted to hear my excuses. Good Morning, Mr. Savage! I am turly impressed with your familial dedication, and think that is a fine quality to exercise... Why not take a break, marshal your arguments, gather your evidence, and, when you have all your ducks in a row, come back and present your actual evidence that the "soul" exists?
	__________________ "They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest "The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David "Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze

8th June 2014, 09:53 AM	#31
Loss Leader I would save the receptionist. Moderator Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Florida Posts: 27,909	Originally Posted by Jabba - The reason I've resorted to even fewer and shorter posts is that I've promised my wife to give her needs more of my time. She has all sorts of cleaning, gardening and landscaping that she wants to do but that she needs help with... - I hadn't said anything about it cause you guys haven't wanted to hear my excuses. You are a fantastic husband and a really wonderful guy. How do you understand the concept of "strong emergence"?
	__________________ I have the honor to be Your Obdt. S^t L. Leader

8th June 2014, 09:59 AM	#32
George Banned Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 397	Originally Posted by Jabba - The reason I've resorted to even fewer and shorter posts is that I've promised my wife to give her needs more of my time. She has all sorts of cleaning, gardening and landscaping that she wants to do but that she needs help with... - I hadn't said anything about it cause you guys haven't wanted to hear my excuses. Quote: An explanation offered in defence of some fault or offensive behaviour or as a reason for not fulfilling an obligation http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dic...english/excuse
George Banned Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 397	Last edited by George; 8th June 2014 at 10:00 AM.

8th June 2014, 01:19 PM	#33
Filippo Lippi Illuminator Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 3,840	Originally Posted by Jabba - The reason I've resorted to even fewer and shorter posts is that I've promised my wife to give her needs more of my time. She has all sorts of cleaning, gardening and landscaping that she wants to do but that she needs help with... - I hadn't said anything about it cause you guys haven't wanted to hear my excuses. How very convenient. The honest thing to do would be to admit you haven't any evidence and then retire with a sliver of integrity. You can't even manage that.
	__________________ You can't defeat fascism through debate because it's not simply an idea, proposal or theory. It's a fundamentally flawed way of looking at the world. It's a distorting prism, emotionally charged and completely logic-proof. You may as well challenge rabies to a game of Boggle. @ViolettaCrisis

8th June 2014, 03:03 PM	#34
pakeha Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 12,331	Originally Posted by Jabba - The reason I've resorted to even fewer and shorter posts is that I've promised my wife to give her needs more of my time. She has all sorts of cleaning, gardening and landscaping that she wants to do but that she needs help with... - I hadn't said anything about it cause you guys haven't wanted to hear my excuses. Jabba, cleaning, gardening and landscaping are all great activities and well worth spending time on. While you're doing them, why not ponder the nature of consciousness, which is an emergent property of a functioning neurosystem?
	__________________ How many zeros? Jabba

8th June 2014, 03:19 PM	#35
John Jones Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Iowa USA Posts: 12,131	Originally Posted by Jabba - The reason I've resorted to even fewer and shorter posts is that I've promised my wife to give her needs more of my time. She has all sorts of cleaning, gardening and landscaping that she wants to do but that she needs help with... - I hadn't said anything about it cause you guys haven't wanted to hear my excuses. I'm skeptical by nature, and especially so when I read your posts. You have so many reasons why you can't support your claims in the OP! You ought to write a book about it. Appeals to your wife's needs only make your last 18 months of interlocution more obviously pointless. Admit that you have failed to support your claims of immortality and the authenticity of the T-Shirt of Turin. Tend to your wife, and be done with it.
	__________________ "Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave

8th June 2014, 03:51 PM	#36
Humots Critical Thinker Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 413	Originally Posted by Jabba - Thanks, George. I hope you weren't kidding. But, that is a way to get me to respond -- flattery helps... Originally Posted by Jabba - The reason I've resorted to even fewer and shorter posts is that I've promised my wife to give her needs more of my time. She has all sorts of cleaning, gardening and landscaping that she wants to do but that she needs help with... - I hadn't said anything about it cause you guys haven't wanted to hear my excuses. Helping your family is a totally acceptable excuse for not responding. Insufficient flattery is not. Nor is insufficient (as you measure it) respect. Those are the excuses we don't want to hear.
Humots Critical Thinker Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 413