Why most people is afraid of death?

[Michael 345]

You apparently cannot respond to my comment other than with a distraction.
How is quoting what is apparently a legal definition of human identity a relevant response my comment that before I was, there was no 'me' to be in an unknowing state?

I am guessing that you MIGHT have a different view of when you become you

The legal definition is at the cutting of umbilical cord

A religious definition could be at the moment of conception. This moment is claimed to be the moment when a person's spirit enters the body

If if if this is your definition I can't help you

Perhaps would be helpful if YOU define when you became you?

 

[Halc]

I am guessing that you MIGHT have a different view of when you become you
Perhaps would be helpful if YOU define when you became you?

I just said 9 months earlier to cover the position that an identity is formed before conception.
BTW, conception can't be it since identical twins necessarily are not yet distinct at that point.

My view, for the purpose of this thread, is simply that there is no me 100 years ago that could be in a state at all.

As for my personal definition, I've not really found one that doesn't violate the law of identity, so work with that if you want.

 

[Michael 345]

I just said 9 months earlier to cover the position that an identity is formed before conception.

Doubtful, but if so the question is raised, by whom?

BTW, conception can't be it since identical twins necessarily are not yet distinct at that point.

Identical twins would be distinct at the completion of cleavage
Don't know if, for religious people, that causes a soul problem, but DKDC

My view, for the purpose of this thread, is simply that there is no me 100 years ago that could be in a state at all.

Well the atoms which form the proto you at conception would have been around somewhere, if that can be called a state

As for my personal definition, I've not really found one that doesn't violate the law of identity, so work with that if you want.

Think the law of identity is over blown circular (not) logic and as such flawed

You are you from the cutting of the cord
You are in constant change while still remaining you
At every moment you are the sum total of your physical body imbued with the retention of experience and memory said physical body has endured and the reaction each experience has caused

 

[Halc]

Identical twins would be distinct at the completion of cleavage

Which isn't conception then.

Don't know if, for religious people, that causes a soul problem, but DKDC

I suppose it does, as do several other possibilities, some of which don't occur only due to technological limitations.

Well the atoms which form the proto you at conception would have been around somewhere, if that can be called a state

I have less than one percent of my birth atoms. There are possibly more of them collectively in others than there are in me. So am I not me anymore? Are we going to get into a debate on identity? Ship-of-Theseus pretty much disassembles the 'I am my parts' identity thing.

Think the law of identity is over blown circular (not) logic and as such flawed

Denial of logic laws. Interesting stance.

 

[Michael 345]

Which isn't conception then.

Correct. Was only providing info not disagreeing

I have less than one percent of my birth atoms

Your birth atoms do not define YOU for the extent of your life

So am I not me anymore? Are we going to get into a debate on identity? Ship-of-Theseus pretty much disassembles the 'I am my parts' identity thing.

Ah the ol' Ship of Theseus percentage game

What percentage of replacement and/or additional items do you want to replace or add to change it from Theseus ship to NOT Theseus ship?

And exactly what does Ship of Theseus mean?
Theseus is owner?
Theseus is builder?
Theseus is designer?
Combination?

Ship-of-Theseus pretty much disassembles the 'I am my parts' identity thing.

Don't think so. I think it is just over thought and misleading

 

[Halc]

Correct. Was only providing info not disagreeing
Your birth atoms do not define YOU for the extent of your life

And yet you argue against the ship, which is an example illustrating the above point. You seem to contradict yourself.

What percentage of replacement and/or additional items do you want to replace or add to change it from Theseus ship to NOT Theseus ship?

Per your above comment (with which I agree), I would still be me even if 100% of the material was replaced with new material.

The legal definition also cares not about the material, nor about other things like DNA. The legal definition falls apart for certain identities like that of an amoeba.

 

[Michael 345]

And yet you argue against the ship, which is an example illustrating the above point. You seem to contradict yourself.

Not sure I was taking a against position about the ship

I did request a percentage reply which you answered about yourself later

The post #421 below and my reply below that puts my position about the axe and gives a clue about what my position about the ship would be

FROM THREAD QUOTES TO REMEMBER POST NUMBER 421

from roy underhill:

"This is my grandfather's axe.
My father replaced the handle
and I have replaced the head
but
This is my grandfather's axe.

Obviously the last line is false

At best the axe is a replica replacement which the grandson has imbued with memories of his grandfather

However there is a difference between definining a ship / axe and defining when a ship / axe no longer becomes a original ship / axe and sentient beings who SELF identify

Replacing one nail / stud / screw in a original ship, after its completion, makes it non original

Realistically only a 100% die hard would quibble

And as mentioned apart from the physical component of a sentient being experiences throughout life span are in the mix and comprise, with the physical component, YOU

Obviously ship / axe do not have sentient experience BUT can have a person's emotional feelings protected onto said object(s)

 

[Michael 345]

The legal definition falls apart for certain identities like that of an amoeba.

Please explain about the amoeba

Thanks

 

[Halc]

Your birth atoms do not define YOU for the extent of your life

As I said, we seem to agree on this. I am not defined by the matter of which I originally consisted, and yet you assert the axe is not my grandfather's axe when all of its original matter is gone. So apparently the rules are different from one thing to the next with you.

There is a difference between definining a ship / axe and defining when a ship / axe no longer becomes a original ship / axe and sentient beings who SELF identify

Yes, you definitely assert that people and axes are different, but the word sentient is in your sentence there, meaning you consider something like the big oak tree to not be the same one you planted 20 years ago. Still seems inconsistent.

Anyway, I said I don't define identity as a function of the identity of the components, so all this is moot.

What exactly makes the axe today the same axe as it was yesterday? Same question with yourself. Apparently your answer with the axe is that it has either the original head or the original handle, which just defers the question as to how we know either of those parts are the same ones as yesterday. I suspect you've no rational answer to this. What if I swapped parts with another similar axe? Which one is my grandfather's axe, the one with the original handle or the one with the original head? Most definitions of identity don't hold up to this sort of analysis.

At best the axe is a replica replacement which the grandson has imbued with memories of his grandfather

That's actually a far better answer. Perhaps that's all I am myself: A replica replacement imbued with memories of being a certain child years ago, except most people have no memory of their birth, so does that mean that baby was somebody else? The legal definition doesn't care if I remember my birth or not, and it is not clear how it would deal with the axe.

Replacing one nail / stud / screw in a original ship, after its completion, makes it non original

So I can take a boat after any work has been done on it and the law will not arrest me because it isn't the boat the rich guy owns. This is your stance? I said you're not making rational sense, and this is a nice example of that.

Please explain about the amoeba

Amoebas don't have their umbilicals cut, so apparently they don't legally exist as a life form. When one splits into two, which is the original and which is the new one? Your legal definition declines to comment on this.

 

[Michael 345]

So apparently the rules are different from one thing to the next with you.

Yes

sentient is in your sentence there, meaning you consider something like the big oak tree to not be the same one you planted 20 years ago. Still seems inconsistent.

Oak trees are not sentient

What exactly makes the axe today the same axe as it was yesterday?

ABSOLUTELY no change occurs. Which does NOT happen as atoms are in constant motion. Mark a definitive moment it becomes THE AXE next micro mini nano pico second later THE AXE becomes the axe

Of course the changes are not noted. Nor are other small changes, the small amount of grease on handle just from holding, the wear on head from the first use etc etc, so THE AXE is still considered THE AXE

Perhaps that's all I am myself: A replica replacement imbued with memories of being a certain child years ago, except most people have no memory of their birth, so does that mean that baby was somebody else? The legal definition doesn't care if I remember my birth or not, and it is not clear how it would deal with the axe.

You sure do overthink stuff

Just because you are unaware of something which happened to you does not mean it had no impact on you

The legal definition of your birth defines when YOU become YOU for LEGAL reasons only, NOTHING else. .PERIOD.

Forget the rest of your rambling

So I can take a boat after any work has been done on it and the law will not arrest me because it isn't the boat the rich guy owns. This is your stance? I said you're not making rational sense, and this is a nice example of that.

Rambling

Amoebas don't have their umbilicals cut, so apparently they don't legally exist as a life form. When one splits into two, which is the original and which is the new one? Your legal definition declines to comment on this.

Rambling

Again note

The legal definition of your birth defines when YOU become YOU for LEGAL reasons only, NOTHING else. .PERIOD.

ie nothing to do with amoebas

ps When one splits into two, which is the original and which is the new one?

Neither. Both are half of the original. Sorry you could not work that out

 

[Halc]

What exactly makes the axe today the same axe as it was yesterday?

ABSOLUTELY no change occurs. Which does NOT happen as atoms are in constant motion. Mark a definitive moment it becomes THE AXE next micro mini nano pico second later THE AXE becomes the axe

Sorry, but I don't know the distinction between the same two words, but one in all caps. It just looks like you're shouting. I never referenced the caps version, whatever that is. Both mine were the lower case one, and you're saying that they're not the same axe, ever, except your final comment says it is, which seems a contradiction in your assertion.

You sure do overthink stuff

Thank you. You asked. We didn't need to go into this. The original point concerned you describing me being in a state of unknowing when there is no me to be in that state. That seems contradictory.

The legal definition of your birth defines when YOU become YOU for LEGAL reasons only, NOTHING else. .PERIOD.

Really, the caps make you look like you're losing it. I don't know why you brought up the legal definition if it has no bearing on the point just above.

When [an amoeba] splits into two, which is the original and which is the new one?

Neither.

Good answer. I don't think I'm so different from the amoeba. I actually like your shouted answer about absolutely no change. It's consistent with my comment earlier that I couldn't find a definition of 'me' that obeyed the law of identity. That one does, and so it works when nothing else does. The one point on which we disagree is about people being different from axes.

 

[Michael 345]

Sorry, but I don't know the distinction between the same two words, but one in all caps. It just looks like you're shouting

Sorry not shouting

In another thread TIME is used to indicate the concept of TIME, time is used in reference to the everyday use

Really, the caps make you look like you're losing it

Nope, but granted it is hard to convey verbal emphasis in written text

The one point on which we disagree is about people being different from axes.

Axes are not sentient, don't self identify

I did have some thoughts along the lines of the brain body along with a thread (? this forum?) Which ask - where do thoughts come from?

I'm sure you know conscious actions are first constructed in the subconscious before (<---- better for emphasis? ) the conscious mind knows?

I contend this not knowing ie appearing not to have control of your thoughts, is the mind / body problem

I look at the problem as not being a problem. My subconscious is still ME and I have faith instructions passed to my conscious brain are in MY best interest

Just my thoughts

 

[Halc]

I did have some thoughts along the lines of the brain body along with a thread (? this forum?) Which ask - where do thoughts come from?

You do like straying off topic...

I'm sure you know conscious actions are first constructed in the subconscious before (<---- better for emphasis? ) the conscious mind knows?

I contend this not knowing ie appearing not to have control of your thoughts, is the mind / body problem

Probably not since biologists have pretty much mapped all that stuff out. The self-identity thing is very primitive and the most rudimentary creature has one.
The sentience is a mammalian thing and comes from the limbic system, which is actually generally in charge. It has final word in all decisions and, coupled with the cerebellum (the primitive thing) has all the controls for the actions at its disposal. The limbic system isn't particularly smart, but it's in the driver seat because it is efficient. The conscious part (that allows introspection, language, and generally intelligent stuff) is like a slow but smart adviser to the king. The king takes advice from it, but when things need fast processing, it is set aside.
The limbic system has memory and some core beliefs, and will not necessarily give them up if the Cerrebrum has worked out different beliefs.

Thus, if that is the mind body problem, it has pretty much been worked out by science.

Edit: The italics are the standard way to convey emphasis, but I notice this site changes all quoted stuff to italics font, so your emphasis on 'before' is lost. That's kind of hostile of the software the site uses. Maybe better to choose bold or underline instead of italics, at least when posting here.

I look at the problem as not being a problem. My subconscious is still ME and I have faith instructions passed to my conscious brain are in MY best interest

What if it lies to you? I've mapped out a number of lies it tells because such lies make you fit, and if one is more fit for belief in a lie, then evolution will select for the holding of that belief. Things like: You and the person 1 second ago are the same person, which is false if a thing now is the same as a thing one second ago only if :

ABSOLUTELY no change occurs.

Still, there are some interesting consequence of holding that position, such as the fact that you cannot die.

 

[Michael 345]

You do like straying off topic..

That Theseus ship sailed long ago

Still, there are some interesting consequence of holding that position, such as the fact that you cannot die.

True, except NOTHING changing means nothing happens which equals to no life or death

 

[Halc]

True, except NOTHING changing means nothing happens which equals to no life or death

There is definitely change and life. In 1980 an acorn is planted. In 2005 there is an oak tree and 5000 acorns on the ground around it. The difference in state is change. The 5000 acorns being caused in part by the one acorn is life. Pointing out that the acorn possibly doesn't share an identity with the tree doesn't alter any of that.

 

[just me]

Why most people is afraid of death?
The atheists also afraid of death, although they don't believe human got spirit.

I am an ashiest, and I believe humans have spirits.
I mean, not having a perspective from ones own perspective is a bit paradoxical, so, I think I must have a perspective from my own perspective.
I could be unaware forever but never to myself.
that period would pass in no time to me.
I'm afraid of death because I don't know what comes after it and it could be something I don't want.

 

[Luchito]

We are afraid of death because "we don't understand WHY come to this world in the first place?"
We have no idea, what particular reason we live in this world?
Is it by chance?
A chance that happens randomly, and there is no ultimate purpose of your existence.

You have a very good point with that.

 

[Luchito]

I think that people are afraid of death because evolutionary biology has programmed us to want to stay alive at any and all cost. I think that's the only reason that people want to live so much. But if people knew the truth maybe many people would start to question their will to live and the meaning of their life.

I think that life has no meaning and there is also no God who loves us and cares about us. I also do not believe in a spiritual world of any kind.

For many people life is very scary and they are always worrying about their future so some people actually have it very hard in life.

I think that life is so scary and cruel precisely because of the fact that there is no loving God who cares about us and protects us from any trouble.

I think different.

Evolutionary biology promises a better out coming for humans, a complete absurdity. This is the reason why the theory was called "evolution*".(*From worst to better, from simpler to more complex, from inferior to superior)

To me, death will come one way or another, I can't be afraid of that but to ignore it and let it to happen when it happens.

 

[Dennis Tate]

Why most people is afraid of death?
The atheists also afraid of death, although they don't believe human got spirit.

One of the reasons may be that we have far more memories in our subconscious than we tend to imagine. Do a search for Dr. Ian Stevenson for more information on what I mean by this.

 

[Saint]

can we prove Jesus' resurrection.