Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Kratom Eye
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]
The Case Against Immortality
    #1828652 -

Read this article.

No matter your beliefs, it is well-thought out piece of journalism from the skeptical / scientific perspective, but sincerely tries to look at popular parapsychological models as well, and a good launchpad for further discussion.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Case Against Immortality [Re: Swami]
    #1828744 -

dude, I started, but it was, like, waaaay too long.

I am not stoked.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Case Against Immortality [Re: Swami]
    #1828794 -

Excellent article!

The long description of the parapsychology experiments is a good refutation of the claims that real scientist don't take parapsychology seriously. I especially liked the experiment with the screen that flashed messages to people having out-of-body experiences, and the experiment where a computer program outperformed psychic mediums when trying to receive a message from the dead. :smile:

The only thing I would have liked to see elaborated a bit more was the brief discussion of what it means to be "the same". I think this question lies at the heart of most philosophizing about the nature of the self.
 

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Case Against Immortality [Re: Swami]
    #1834509 -

From the link you provided...

"Further experimental evidence for mind-brain dependence is derived from "split-brain" patients who have undergone an operation that severs the corpus callosum to reduce epileptic seizures (Beyerstein 45). The corpus callosum is a broad band of fibers that directly connect the left and right hemispheres of the brain. If information is only presented to one hemisphere of a "split-brain" patient, the other hemisphere is unaware of it and is not capable of understanding the reactions of the informed hemisphere (45). The result of "split-brain" surgery is the formation of two mental systems, each with independent mental attributes (45)."
-----------------------


I've read about such a study once in a book called: After Death  [Darryl Reanney].

On page 73, the result of such an operation gave way to the following interesting tidbit: 

" Experiments like these have convinced many researchers that each side of the brain has a seperate personality-- a seperate self.  We may literally be split personalities. "



[  Ha ha ha...  I am Schizophrenic...  And so am I !!!  :lol:]



An interesting question...

What, then, gives us our vivid sense of being a single individual, a personality, a self?

 


--------------------


Dei Gratia de integro,

Veni Vidi Vici:

In Nomine Domini..

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Case Against Immortality [Re: Deiymiyan]
    #1834634 -

Quote:
What, then, gives us our vivid sense of being a single individual, a personality, a self?


I'm not sure, but it could be the same thing that gives us the impresion of a single visual perspective even though we are technically recieving two seperate signals  :wink: 


--------------------


"Only those who risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go..." T.S. Eliot

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Case Against Immortality [Re: Mystical_Craven]
    #1834669 -

I am not in a reading mood right now but I wanted to add that there are lots of skeptics that into science that still beleive immortality will become possible. Think about how much humans life spans have increased! And lots of scientists throughout history always think things are impossible that become possible.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Case Against Immortality [Re: Swami]
    #1835149 -

uh, didn't you hear? rationalism hasn't had anything to say to faith in a long time, and vice versa. it's meaningless to hold faith up to rational standards. (well, not quite true. there's one thing to be said, which is that, rationally, if the sacred does exist, it would be unspeakable/ uncommunicable through rational means. not to say it can't be communicated, it can, through affection. as soon as rationalism comes up with an explanation for the value of affection, talks might be able to commence, but until then either go live in an affectionless box or stop trying to pester faith.)


--------------------
The ultimate meaning of our being can only be fulfilled in the paradoxical leap beyond the tragic-demonic frustration. It is a leap from our side, but it is the self-surrendering presence of the Ground of Being from the other side.
- Paul Tillich

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Case Against Immortality [Re: Malachi]
    #1835920 -

pERSONALLY... i WOULD H8 tO LIVE FOREVER... bUT THATS JUST ME... i LOOK FORWARD DEATH... iM READY FOR IT... bRING IT!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Case Against Immortality [Re: Deiymiyan]
    #1835988 -

Quote:
What, then, gives us our vivid sense of being a single individual, a personality, a self?


I think the boundary between the body and the outer world contributes a lot to this. Within this boundary there are lots of mind-processes that share the same information (unless you're a split-brain patient). But we have no immediate perceptions of what goes on outside the boundary, only indirect ones via the senses. This separation gives us the categories of self and non-self.

There is also the social self, which we construct in order to be perceived by others as one coherent social agent instead of the bunch of fighting and scheming schizos that really inhabit our brains. :wink:
 

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Case Against Immortality [Re: whole9]
    #1835989 -

whole9 said:
pERSONALLY... i WOULD H8 tO LIVE FOREVER... bUT THATS JUST ME... i LOOK FORWARD DEATH... iM READY FOR IT... bRING IT!


Think about what you will be missing out on thouse with all the future technology. I think you get reincarnated anyways to life. I don't think death is nothing new except the other side of life.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Case Against Immortality [Re: Earth_Droid]
    #1835994 -

Frank Tipler is a scientist who is into the resurrection type of immortality. He has written a book about this, called "The Physics of Immortality". I haven't read the book, but there is a short summary of his theory here.

Personally I think all such theories and metaphysics are just projections of the ego: "There must be some way to survive death, because otherwise I have failed my job as an ego!"

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Case Against Immortality [Re: Malachi]
    #1835996 -

Malachi said:
uh, didn't you hear? rationalism hasn't had anything to say to faith in a long time, and vice versa. it's meaningless to hold faith up to rational standards. (well, not quite true. there's one thing to be said, which is that, rationally, if the sacred does exist, it would be unspeakable/ uncommunicable through rational means. not to say it can't be communicated, it can, through affection. as soon as rationalism comes up with an explanation for the value of affection, talks might be able to commence, but until then either go live in an affectionless box or stop trying to pester faith.)



I am sure when telepathy technology becomes available, there will be more communication about that which is hard to put into words.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
immortality [Re: Earth_Droid]
    #1836141 -

I guess the closest we could get to immortality would only happen either very close to a black hole, or in a ship capable of travelling much beyond the speed of light. I think the age of a human at the speed of light would be 22.4 times longer.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Case Against Immortality [Re: Swami]
    #1836277 -

That's a bit of a long read but I scanned it enough to get the gist of it. And I completely agree with your summation.

Here is where I see the author going wrong:

Quote:
I think I have presented a fairly accurate representation of the evidence on both sides of this issue....



Keith? Think again.

While you may have given the various views from contemporary philosophers and parapsychologists you completely missed the ancients, including Aristotle. And there are other contemporary philosophers whose views you missed. Their arguments against yours are devastating.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: immortality [Re: sh1ver]
    #1841510 -


Edited by Xibalba (09/30/05 02:15 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: immortality [Re: sh1ver]
    #1841757 -

sh1ver said:
I guess the closest we could get to immortality would only happen either very close to a black hole, or in a ship capable of travelling much beyond the speed of light. I think the age of a human at the speed of light would be 22.4 times longer.


I don't understand?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: immortality [Re: Earth_Droid]
    #1841784 -

in a million years when we or aliens have the technology we will all be resurected in some shape way or form. If that is the case..

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: immortality [Re: whole9]
    #1842858 -

I was incorrect when saying at the speed of light you live 22.4 times longer, when its really at 99.9% of the speed of light.

** Taken from "The Quantum and The Lotus" **

In 1905 the idea of absolute time was questioned by Einstein in his article on the special theory of relativity. According to Einstein, time was no longer independant of the universe in which it was supposedly flowing invariably but became elastic and dependant on the motion of an observer. The faster we go, the slower time elapses. For example, for someone moving in a spaceship at 87 percent of the speed of light, time would slow down by one-half. He would age half as quickly as his twin on earth. The age difference would be perfectly real. His twin would have more wrinkles and more white hair. His heart would have beaten more often and he would have eaten more meals, drunk more wine, and read more books. This example is known as Langevin's twin paradox (named after the French physicist who invented it). But it's only a paradox according to our sometimes misleading common sense. The theory of relativity precisely accounts for this slowing down of time. This is imperceptible when it comes to speeds that we encounter in our daily life. But it becomes important with speeds that are near the speed of light (186,500 miles per second). At 99 percent the speed of light, time slows down 7 times. At 99.9 percent, 22.4 times. This slowing down of time is no mental game; it has been observed for particles launched at high speeds in accelerators.

So, if you were to travel at these speeds, you could technically live for quite a long while. At least in the eyes of everyone else.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: immortality [Re: sh1ver]
    #1842868 -

So, then, if you were moving at the speed of light, would you be immortal? I have no clue on the subject, just curious...
Peace.


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you
:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: immortality [Re: fireworks_god]
    #1842880 -

well, at the speed of light time stops. So I would assume so. The only problem being that anything with mass cannot travel at the speed of light, making it still currently impossible to be immortal

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Immortality
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 EyelessVagabond 3,695 65 12/07/09 12:35 AM
by Icelander
* Immortality is Paradoxical in its Nature
( 1 2 all )		 Poid 1,810 29 10/24/09 02:13 PM
by Poid
* Biological Immortality for the Human Race?
( 1 2 all )		 ILoveMushroomsMan 1,579 22 05/05/12 06:15 PM
by desert father
* Immortality?
( 1 2 3 all )		 PriitK 3,721 50 08/05/05 06:52 PM
by other
* Immortality
( 1 2 3 all )		 Huehuecoyotl 3,301 41 05/21/06 10:26 PM
by Huehuecoyotl
* Does the bible actually promise immortality?
( 1 2 3 all )		 White Beard 2,277 48 03/14/13 08:40 PM
by MarkostheGnostic
* Would immortality cause the loss of consciousness?
( 1 2 all )		 Samlet 953 26 11/05/16 07:32 PM
by laughingdog
* The search for immortality Dead Shaman 1,118 3 09/02/01 04:17 AM
by EuphoricDream

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
3,098 topic views. 0 members, 44 guests and 66 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.031 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 18 queries.