Do you think anyone person on earth can cease to exist?

Started by NellGwyn, February 19, 2018, 05:51:39 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

NellGwyn

Do you think people can cease to exist?  And do you think they can do it out of their own will?  But how?
I believe in science more than God.

Sal1981

Quote from: NellGwyn on February 19, 2018, 05:51:39 PM
Do you think people can cease to exist?
Yeah. It's called dying.

Quote from: NellGwyn on February 19, 2018, 05:51:39 PMAnd do you think they can do it out of their own will?  But how?
Some rope and an overhang.

NellGwyn

Quote from: Sal1981 on February 19, 2018, 06:13:37 PM
Yeah. It's called dying.
Some rope and an overhang.

No, there is a big difference between dying and ceasing to exist.  After a person dies, his/her soul still exists.  Cease to exist means their soul will no longer be anywhere.
I believe in science more than God.

Hakurei Reimu

Warning: Don't Tease The Miko!
(she bites!)
Spinny Miko Avatar shamelessly ripped off from Iosys' Neko Miko Reimu

NellGwyn

I believe in science more than God.

Hakurei Reimu

I want your definition of a soul. That way, I'm not arguing against a strawman.
Warning: Don't Tease The Miko!
(she bites!)
Spinny Miko Avatar shamelessly ripped off from Iosys' Neko Miko Reimu

Shiranu

QuoteAfter a person dies, his/her soul still exists.

Evidence please.
"A little science distances you from God, but a lot of science brings you nearer to Him." - Louis Pasteur

Baruch

Puts up hand .. "I am a theist".  Going shortly to teach Biblical Hebrew ... we are studying Psalm 23 ;-)

So ... I would say, what "exists" means is the primary dispute.  I don't think you can tell, when you don't exist (from personal POV).  So from that POV, you have always existed.  Other people's POV .. there was a time when you didn't exist (but you may have been elsewhere in metaphysical terms) ... and there will be a time when you won't exist (same reason).  But that is the difference between the objective and the subjective view.  Most atheists over-emphasize the objective exterior POV.  Spiritual people over-emphasize the subjective interior POV.  I know what I prefer ;-)  But both are true ... and if that breaks logic, that is because consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds (Emerson?)
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Munch

This seems to defeat itself. If someone leaves a memory of themselves, they continue to exist, but if nothing is left of them, we can't say that because we'd be acknowledging their existence. sort of bends back in on itself there.
'Political correctness is fascism pretending to be manners' - George Carlin

Baruch

Quote from: Munch on February 19, 2018, 08:03:04 PM
This seems to defeat itself. If someone leaves a memory of themselves, they continue to exist, but if nothing is left of them, we can't say that because we'd be acknowledging their existence. sort of bends back in on itself there.

You are breathing a molecule of oxygen that Caesar once breathed.  Does that mean he survived the Ides of March?
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

SGOS

Quote from: Baruch on February 19, 2018, 07:34:23 PM
Most atheists over-emphasize the objective exterior POV.  Spiritual people over-emphasize the subjective interior POV.  I know what I prefer ;-)  But both are true ...
"Both are true," but only in YOUR imagination.  That's how the goat herders got so much in the Bible wrong.  They wrote what spilled out of their brains in a state of primitive ignorance.  This they called "the truth" and the "light", but it was just wild unverified claims of imagination.  Anything they said that was actually the truth was purely accidental.

Baruch

Quote from: SGOS on February 20, 2018, 05:31:19 AM
"Both are true," but only in YOUR imagination.  That's how the goat herders got so much in the Bible wrong.  They wrote what spilled out of their brains in a state of primitive ignorance.  This they called "the truth" and the "light", but it was just wild unverified claims of imagination.  Anything they said that was actually the truth was purely accidental.

But you aren't ignorant, you are a Bright, from Alpha Centauri, right?  So you ignore your desire for Mexican food, because 99.9% in a carefully controlled experiment prefer hamburgers?  If you have a desire for Mexican food, isn't it true that you have that desire?  But nobody can tell if your desire is true, even with brain wave scanning (people can learn to scam lie detectors and other biofeedback devices).  You might be lying.

If one is overly skeptical ... maybe nobody should trust you if you tell them what your desire is, because it can't be proven.  Or if you are paranoid, then you mustn't believe yourself if you seem to desire Mexican food, it could be alien brain wave influence.  The truth of subjective is different but not completely, from the objective.  Objectivity is controlled experimental subjectivity.

So in the case of the Bible, say one of the Psalms.  It is poetry.  Did Robert Frost actually "take the path less taken" and can you prove it?  A smart person recognizes poetry as such, and journalism as such (and journalism isn't worth much).  Ape men can't tell their chocolate pudding from fresh shit.  Is that the fault of the shit?

Not everything is epistemology.  Not everyone is obsessed with knowing how we know (that is a circular logic if I ever met one, no matter your answer).  Knowing what we know is a bit better, we simply assume that how we know is given.  So if I read something in Wikipedia, I can say, on such and such a date, the following article in Wikipedia says X (it could read differently on different days because it is re-edited).

But suppose it is re-edited ... and when you read it, the article says Y?  Am I a liar?  Oh yes, truth are the things that never change.  And Heraclitus eats your shorts thank you very much.  The Bible, being relatively less edited and of long publication does get a kind of pseudo-verity, compared to a Wikipedia article.

Skeptics are semi-nihilists, they choose for now to not go full retard like a full nihilist.  Skepticism is good, particularly when buying a used car.  Nihilism or paranoia isn't so useful, even when buying a car.  If I am a skeptic of a used poem (and Psalms are very used) ... what does that make me?  A Philistine of course!
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

SGOS

Quote from: Baruch on February 20, 2018, 06:27:06 AM
But you aren't ignorant, you are a Bright, from Alpha Centauri, right?  So you ignore your desire for Mexican food, because 99.9% in a carefully controlled experiment prefer hamburgers?  If you have a desire for Mexican food, isn't it true that you have that desire?  But nobody can tell if your desire is true, even with brain wave scanning (people can learn to scam lie detectors and other biofeedback devices).  You might be lying.

If one is overly skeptical ... maybe nobody should trust you if you tell them what your desire is, because it can't be proven.  Or if you are paranoid, then you mustn't believe yourself if you seem to desire Mexican food, it could be alien brain wave influence.  The truth of subjective is different but not completely, from the objective.  Objectivity is controlled experimental subjectivity.

So in the case of the Bible, say one of the Psalms.  It is poetry.  Did Robert Frost actually "take the path less taken" and can you prove it?  A smart person recognizes poetry as such, and journalism as such (and journalism isn't worth much).  Ape men can't tell their chocolate pudding from fresh shit.  Is that the fault of the shit?

Not everything is epistemology.  Not everyone is obsessed with knowing how we know (that is a circular logic if I ever met one, no matter your answer).  Knowing what we know is a bit better, we simply assume that how we know is given.  So if I read something in Wikipedia, I can say, on such and such a date, the following article in Wikipedia says X (it could read differently on different days because it is re-edited).

But suppose it is re-edited ... and when you read it, the article says Y?  Am I a liar?  Oh yes, truth are the things that never change.  And Heraclitus eats your shorts thank you very much.  The Bible, being relatively less edited and of long publication does get a kind of pseudo-verity, compared to a Wikipedia article.

Skeptics are semi-nihilists, they choose for now to not go full retard like a full nihilist.  Skepticism is good, particularly when buying a used car.  Nihilism or paranoia isn't so useful, even when buying a car.  If I am a skeptic of a used poem (and Psalms are very used) ... what does that make me?  A Philistine of course!
You may believe what you just wrote.  You may even believe it's germane to my criticism, but I can never verify whether you actually believe your own shit or if you just want to jerk people around with words.  Either way, it doesn't matter.  It amounts to useless blather.  The problem is that you can't support your original brain fart by simply adding more brain farts half which are irrelevant to the original claim to begin with.  You don't even  convince me that you know what you are talking about.

Baruch

Quote from: SGOS on February 20, 2018, 06:53:06 AM
You may believe what you just wrote.  You may even believe it's germane to my criticism, but I can never verify whether you actually believe your own shit or if you just want to jerk people around with words.  Either way, it doesn't matter.  It amounts to useless blather.  The problem is that you can't support your original brain fart by simply adding more brain farts half which are irrelevant to the original claim to begin with.  You don't even  convince me that you know what you are talking about.

And because you can't verify it, it isn't true?  Man who has one clock, knows it is time to go to work.  Man with two or more clocks is never quite sure ;-)

Yes poetry is useless, because it isn't physics that G-d stopped the sun in its path for Joshua?  Well the Odyssey didn't happen either, but it remains one of the greatest and oldest products of European civilization.  And if you are a nihilist, nothing will convince you of anything.  Your bubble chamber will be a safe place for your snowflakes.  I wasn't trying to convince you, but I do this for the great unwashed audience.  And if you don't know who Robert Frost is, I would suggest looking him up.  It will improve your life, in a way that QFT will not.  One thing I will regret, is not spending more time, with our late great AF poet before he passed last year.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

SGOS

Quote from: Baruch on February 20, 2018, 07:34:08 AM
And because you can't verify it, it isn't true?
No, it's irrelevant because neither YOU or I can verify it.  It doesn't warrant consideration as anything beyond the imaginary.

Quote from: Baruch on February 20, 2018, 07:34:08 AM
Yes poetry is useless, because it isn't physics that G-d stopped the sun in its path for Joshua?  Well the Odyssey didn't happen either, but it remains one of the greatest and oldest products of European civilization. 
And how does this verify imagining something as true?

Quote from: Baruch on February 20, 2018, 07:34:08 AM
And if you are a nihilist,...
Which I am not so I will disregard any further lecture on that point.

Quote from: Baruch on February 20, 2018, 07:34:08 AM
And if you don't know who Robert Frost is, I would suggest looking him up.  It will improve your life
Oh, Pa-leese.  Anybody who went to high school knows who Robert Frost is.  But nice attempt to flounder off the topic.