Star Trek chats: transporters and the new you.

Author: secularmerlin

Posts

Total: 40
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@keithprosser
It is hard to say. I only have  sample size of one and I cannot observe it only ecperience the part if it I am currently engaged in. A subjective individual experience is what it seems like.
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@secularmerlin
My current view is that the self is virtual (as I have tried andfailed to descrbe it!). 

I don't say I won't ever change my mind about that, but that is what the best guess has seemed to me for a while now.

secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@keithprosser
You did your best to say that self is a possibly nonreal thing which you do not understand well. 

Am I misunderstanding any of the salient points?
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@secularmerlin
You did your best to say that self is a possibly nonreal thing which you do not understand well. 
Am I misunderstanding any of the salient points?

I would alter
"You did your best to say that self is a possibly nonreal thing which you do not understand well." to
"You did your best to say that self is possibly a nonreal thing which you do not understand well."

By 'Possibly' I meant 'Seems most likely to me, but I only learned about brains and philosophy off the internet so wtf do I know".

Anyway, given that you are not a philosopher with his professional reputation to lose, do you think the self is real?  You are a great one for fence-sitting. but it's ok to wrong, you know.  It's not as if anybody cares what we say or think....! 




 

secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@keithprosser
Any guess I make would be just that a guess. There is no evidence for or against the idea of self I cannot maintain any belief under those circumstances. I am however prepared to accept self as a conversational convention since it allows is to differentiate between my subjective personal experience and yours whether they are actual or not.
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@secularmerlin
There is no evidence for or against the idea of self I cannot maintain any belief under those circumstances.
Like I said, you are a natural fence-sitter!  Not meant as a criticism.

I like to have a belief and subject it to destructive testing!  Also ig you believe something you can build on it.  If it hangs together prigress has been made and if it falls apart (which is the usual case) at least something can be ruled out!   You seem wany certainly too much.

my guess is that neither of us seperately have a good conception of 'self'.   Presumably collaboration would work better that having a binary 'for or againsts' mentality at the outset.  But how often do you see forums use constructively? It never happens, unfortunately.




secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@keithprosser
How do we subject something to destructive testing if we have no good conception of what exactly the thing in question is? How would the universe be perceptible different to us whether or not we each possess an actual self rather than the persistent illusion of self?
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@keithprosser
Like I said, you are a natural fence-sitter!
Much worse than that, --on some issues-- SM likes to take the post of the fence verticallly split it { micro-V-division } more and more so as to keep them further from clarity and resolution.

i desire > suckle > i desire > suckle > i desire > suckle baby ego {  } plus motion ego not skewed
..........undeveloped ergo  least complex ego....

i  know this or that age 10 onward with ego conceding much is not known beginning around age 25
..more developed ego that knows left from right around age 8.....

i desire > Sex > i desire > Sex  i desire > Sex  > teens ego { i } plus motion with ego partially skewed
....ego and brain skewed by hormones aka puberty till around 25 when brain has finished development ....

I  is mature adult

I desire  to be God >  I desire  to be God > adult narcissist ego { I  } plus motion with ego greatly skewed


Death aka terminal ending of biological life, and end of local-case//special-case ego { virtual ego ergo virtual self }


148 days later

Cogent_Cognizer
Cogent_Cognizer's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 365
0
2
7
Cogent_Cognizer's avatar
Cogent_Cognizer
0
2
7
Can this thread be used for all things Star Trek, or only the transporters? If the latter, I'll create a new "All things Star Trek" thread then. Might want to anyways given the last comment before mine on this one was 148 days ago lol.

Cogent_Cognizer
Cogent_Cognizer's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 365
0
2
7
Cogent_Cognizer's avatar
Cogent_Cognizer
0
2
7
Screw it, I'll create an even broader thread for all sci-fi, space exploring shows.