Re: Are we eternal? (Eternal Recurrence)
Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2015 10:20 pm
And a "place"...is? For it is only a memory, something you sense in your mind...Lev Muishkin wrote:
.... the past is not a place.
For the discussion of all things philosophical, especially articles in the magazine Philosophy Now.
https://forum.philosophynow.org/
And a "place"...is? For it is only a memory, something you sense in your mind...Lev Muishkin wrote:
.... the past is not a place.
Haha. You are ridiculous. I'm not information. I'm matter or energy. I have mass and volume. Information is just part of me.Lev Muishkin wrote:You are being ridiculous. Information can be lost forever, this does not transgress the laws of nature.Nibbana wrote:Lev Muishkin wrote:
The grammar is perfect, except the second 'we' ought to have a capital. My apologies.
You have the essence of the meaning.
What makes me is a unique and complex structure of matter. Not the atoms that form the structure.
Romeo and Juliet is not the Latin alphabet, but the order in which the letters of that alphabet are gathered. If you separate the words and letters - you just get a pile of nonsense.
Humans have the same atoms as a dog, a banana or a cat: mostly C, O, H, N, a little P and P, some Na and a few traces of other things.
We are not eternal, just because are atoms persist after our death. Death is the disorganisation of matter.
No. We are eternal. It's against the law of conservation of energy if we are not.
Right, after death we are disorganized. Our forms of human change. But we still exist in the new forms of matter. New forms of energy. We as a matter or energy are immortal. Matter or energy never dies. It just changes its form.
New things are actually the new forms of old things. Old things are actually the new forms of new things.
For example, I bought a new chair. What is it? It's now the combination of old things, ie wood, nails, etc. After five years, that chair will change. It will be old, of course, new form.
It does not matter a dingo's kidney about matter and energy.
You chair is only comprised of atoms. It is the atoms that remain, not the chair. Burn the chair! You can't get it back, ever.
What makes you, you is the information, not the atoms which are the same as any chair.
Why do you fear being put in a blander then? If you are not your unique organisation of matter then you would not fear falling under a road roller. But you do. Because you know you are nothing without your structure.Nibbana wrote: Information may be lost, but not forever. It's still there in genes. It can be transmitted from generation to generation.
Yeah, I may not get the chair back. But the chair still remains. But it's not called chair. It just changes its form.
A sperm and an egg made me. Apparently, I'm not information. And I'm immortal because my sperm( I'm male and straight) will make another 'I' that is called a son or a daughter. I will be part of him or her. I will always be part of my great great great...
grandkids. I'm obviously eternal. Haha.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5X3Rj2uLPgkImmanuel Can wrote: That means the state in which the universe contains nothing but a thin soup of equally-dispersed energy particles, and no new creative or generative action is even possible, forever. Dark, eternal, unrelenting night.
You're completely wrong. Information in genes can be changed. That's why we can see human mutations in the world.Lev Muishkin wrote:Why do you fear being put in a blander then? If you are not your unique organisation of matter then you would not fear falling under a road roller. But you do. Because you know you are nothing without your structure.Nibbana wrote: Information may be lost, but not forever. It's still there in genes. It can be transmitted from generation to generation.
Yeah, I may not get the chair back. But the chair still remains. But it's not called chair. It just changes its form.
A sperm and an egg made me. Apparently, I'm not information. And I'm immortal because my sperm( I'm male and straight) will make another 'I' that is called a son or a daughter. I will be part of him or her. I will always be part of my great great great...
grandkids. I'm obviously eternal. Haha.
Your great greats are dead as door nails. You are living a childish myth born of your fear of death and the inevitable nothingness.
You child will forget you when they die. You will be not even dust and ashes.
Allow me to disavow you of your notion of genes.
The genes you are born with and the same ones you die with. Your life makes no difference to their structure. "YOU" cannot change the information in your genes. Your sperm cells are only half of that, they loose their integrity when they recombine with a female.
You do not affect or change your genes in your lifetime. You are nothing but a carrier for that information. Everything that makes you you, is coded in the structure of your brain, all of which is utterly lost upon death; your learning , experiences and hopes and fears.
This is the same for us all whether or not we have children.
You are not you then. You are your forebear. Just another iteration of something before you, as will be your kids, by your account. So, either you are you, and mortal, or you are a distant immortal forbear. Which is it?Nibbana wrote:
A sperm and an egg made me. Apparently, I'm not information. And I'm immortal because my sperm( I'm male and straight) will make another 'I' that is called a son or a daughter. I will be part of him or her. I will always be part of my great great great...
grandkids. I'm obviously eternal. Haha.
Dalek Prime wrote:You are not you then. You are your forebear. Just another iteration of something before you, as will be your kids, by your account. So, either you are you, and mortal, or you are a distant immortal forbear. Which is it?Nibbana wrote:
A sperm and an egg made me. Apparently, I'm not information. And I'm immortal because my sperm( I'm male and straight) will make another 'I' that is called a son or a daughter. I will be part of him or her. I will always be part of my great great great...
grandkids. I'm obviously eternal. Haha.
(My pardon if this has been covered)
I'm familiar with big bang nucleosynthesis, and later stellar nucleosynthesis. I'm also familiar with conservation of matter and energy. I agree that these elements have been around, and will always be, give or take. But that's not what I was talking about. I was referring specifically to this fellow saying about his sperm making another him. And I said it wasn't him. Please read it again.thedoc wrote:Dalek Prime wrote:You are not you then. You are your forebear. Just another iteration of something before you, as will be your kids, by your account. So, either you are you, and mortal, or you are a distant immortal forbear. Which is it?Nibbana wrote:
A sperm and an egg made me. Apparently, I'm not information. And I'm immortal because my sperm( I'm male and straight) will make another 'I' that is called a son or a daughter. I will be part of him or her. I will always be part of my great great great...
grandkids. I'm obviously eternal. Haha.
(My pardon if this has been covered)
The elements of your body have been around since the beginning, the Big Bang, and will continue for a very long time. In the beginning there was mostly Hydrogen and a little Helium, but over time some of that has been combine and converted into heavier elements, and here you are now, and your elements will continue to exist for a very long time. Yes, you, or your parts, are going to be around forever, eternity is another matter altogether. Temporal existence is not eternal, but it can last forever.
I read it correctly, I was just being a bit picky. You are correct each person is an individual, but also each person has some elements of their predecessors within them. So in a small way Nibbana is correct, and you are correct that you are not your father or grandfather exactly, only a little bit.Dalek Prime wrote:I'm familiar with big bang nucleosynthesis, and later stellar nucleosynthesis. I'm also familiar with conservation of matter and energy. I agree that these elements have been around, and will always be, give or take. But that's not what I was talking about. I was referring specifically to this fellow saying about his sperm making another him. And I said it wasn't him. Please read it again.thedoc wrote:Dalek Prime wrote: You are not you then. You are your forebear. Just another iteration of something before you, as will be your kids, by your account. So, either you are you, and mortal, or you are a distant immortal forbear. Which is it?
(My pardon if this has been covered)
The elements of your body have been around since the beginning, the Big Bang, and will continue for a very long time. In the beginning there was mostly Hydrogen and a little Helium, but over time some of that has been combine and converted into heavier elements, and here you are now, and your elements will continue to exist for a very long time. Yes, you, or your parts, are going to be around forever, eternity is another matter altogether. Temporal existence is not eternal, but it can last forever.
The concept of immortality through procreation is silly. Yes, the elemental building blocks are "forever". Hence the saying "we are stardust". But I am not my father. And my father is not his father. Even genetically. Every generation dilutes, like a half-life.
It’s possible that we don’t. Human beings have a hard time conceptualising it, let alone defining it. In fact, we have a hard if not impossible time defining anything satisfactorily, which is why arguably no philosophical question has ever been ultimately answered to everyone’s satisfaction. We simply have satisfying questions and paradoxes to play with and delight in over tea, coffee, a beer, glass of wine, toke or tab.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:07 pm
But if that's so (and hard-nosed empiricism surely takes us there), then what is the empirical explanation for us having any "sense of eternity," or even being able to formulate the concept in the first place? We have just said that "real eternality" is impossible, from a scientific perspective: so we cannot have gotten the idea itself from the "empirical."
So why and how do we even know what "eternity" is?
In a sense, yes -- if by "know" we mean, "know comprehensively." How could any finite entity "know" eternity in that way? We don't even know the oceans on our own planet in that way...let alone the universe, or time itself.Ezra wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 2:46 amIt’s possible that we don’t.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:07 pm
But if that's so (and hard-nosed empiricism surely takes us there), then what is the empirical explanation for us having any "sense of eternity," or even being able to formulate the concept in the first place? We have just said that "real eternality" is impossible, from a scientific perspective: so we cannot have gotten the idea itself from the "empirical."
So why and how do we even know what "eternity" is?