- On Jul 31, 2010, at 7:48 AM, Loart Kelt wrote:
> Ever hear of Pascals wager? An argument according to which belief in God is rational whether or not God exists, since falsely believing that God exists leads to no harm whereas falsely believing that God does not exist may lead to eternal damnation...Pascal's wager is false because (among other reasons) there are infinitely many logically possible Gods who would grant infinite reward (e.g. heaven) only for disbelief in god, and would grant hell to all religious persons. So being religious is not the less risky approach.
-- Elliot Temple
- On Aug 7, 2010 3:11 PM, "Elliot Temple" <curi@...> wrote:
>>> If my physical brain didn't exist or was destroyed, would myAssuming multiple worlds, any fungible object cannot fully be described
>>> psychological state go with it? Are they absolutely and totally
>>> linked, always and forever?
>> If your brain is completely destroyed relatively to some reality, your
>> psychological state will go with the closest consistent reality where
>> your brain has not been destroyed or less completely.
>>> If yes they are inseparable, then what is the meaning of saying the
>>> second thing isn't physical?
>> Physical object, like a brain, has physical properties, like mass,
>> location, impulsion... Psychological states are abstract, immaterial,
>> more comparable to number and program. Consciousness is not made of
>> electron, nor quarks. A pain I feel to be in my finger, is not
>> localizable in the finger, nor in the brain. The very process to make
>> me feel the pain as localized is some computation occurring in some
>> infinite set of locally 'fungible' brain stories/computations.
>>> What is the meaning of taking absolutely inseparable things
>> You are the one coming up with the idea that they are inseparable.
> OK, so you have said they are separable (b/c the psychological state can go
> to a different reality if the brain is destroyed, so that means they can be
> Do you consider this a scientific claim with scientific evidence for it?
> I'm going to guess not. That's OK I just want to be clear. You think it's a
> philosophical(?) claim?
> How did you come to discover it was true that psychological states could
> flee dead brains and go to other realities?
> How did you discover that there are other realities?
> If it's not a scientific thing, is it a logical necessity?
without including the description of all objects it is fungible with.
Therefore, if the brain exists in any universe can it truly be said to have
There is another major flaw with universe jumping consciousness conjecture.
If your consciousness is you and you are only in a single universe at a time
then are all the other instances of you unconscious until "you" get there?
I'm assuming that you're basing this conjecture on the double slit
experiment. If so how do you define all of the physical copies of you in
seperate universes that are no longer fungible? Do they remain available to
your consciousness to jump to? If so, why?
~~ Ammon ;~>