The concept of generic subjective continuity has led me to consider and ponder the lives that will follow mine, which will be imposed. Since conscious experience is inescapable, a new “I” will emerge continually. I wonder what experiences these lives will experience when they’re hurled into this existence.
If there was no life on this planet, there would be no experience. So, how is the aim for ending life on this planet not a valid goal of ending all suffering?
@@Trent-s4v You don't know that, thus you are not morally responsible for it. You know the suffering here. So you can do something about it. The rest means nothing
OK so I believe this is the case, the "no gaps" theory. But even if YOUR experience was exclusive to YOU, then there's something else at play here. After you die, if it were possible to rearrange the atoms that make you up back to their functional form, you'd reappear and so would your experience. Now, if time is infinite, and the recreation of the universe happens an infinite number of times, those atoms will not only be in that configuration again one day (infinity makes the possible actually happen), but it will happen again an infinite number of times. Each iteration being separated by an unthinkable number of universe recreation scenarios until the exact conditions are met once again for you to be created.
Naturalisted, when you say eternal recurrence Do you mean that this will be the only life I will ever experience or that I will eventually experience this life again under the right conditions, although it isn't the only life I will experience?
@@user-bw6sy1yg2j All lives will eventually come, but in no particular order. It'll be completely random each time. But due to infinity, those exact chaotic orders will be repeated, and the current life will be repeated every once in awhile, but each life sees itself as "this life", and so when my life eventually follows your's, it'll be "this life". I hope that makes sense.
@@user-bw6sy1yg2j Also, it won't be you experiencing other lives, it'll just be other lives that have no connection to the current one. The way I like to convey this is if you imagine you're the only being in the universe, then you die and another you comes to exist, but the first you didn't go _into_ the second you. The second you is just a completely separate instance of you. It has no idea there was a you that existed before the new you. Then that you dies, and a you comes to exist after that, and so on, ad infinitum.
@naturalisted1714 okay, got it. Listening to Sam Harris talk about the illusion of the "self" and how we aren't separate from experience but literally experience itself I think allowed me to discover generic subjective continuity and leave antinatalism behind, thank you.
"Better to have never been" is valid, because it's simply expressing the idea that existence is bad. This idea applies to every single life. It's better for that giraffe to have never existed, better for a future elephant to have never existed, better for the first hippo to have never existed...it applies to every single life past, present, and future. It's better to not get in a car crash where I break my neck is a valid idea. It doesn't matter how many car crashes there were before, that are ongoing now, or any future car crashes -- it's better to not crash applies to every single car crash. It's simply a value statement, like Honesty is the Best Policy. By uttering such a statement doesn't mean I somehow magically erased all lies past present and future.
@@naturalisted1714 I do believe in the theory of evolution both physical and psychological If you observe closely you'll realize that life emerged from tiny organisms up to what we are now So I guess the experience transfers data to the next form of experience in order to actualize itself Just a theory of mine , nice video btw 🤍
@@naturalisted1714 if we suppose the theory of evolution is true. Doesn't that mean that the tiny organisms that evolved to forms of life that we are right now transferred data to each other in order to become more evolved species ? Just a guess
I see what you mean. As far as genetics and words (books etc.) go, yes, that's right. But GSC, as far as I can tell, is completely random. So one bring's death could be followed by a life that's somewhere far far away: a galaxy unimaginably far away. So nothing could transfer.
The concept of generic subjective continuity has led me to consider and ponder the lives that will follow mine, which will be imposed. Since conscious experience is inescapable, a new “I” will emerge continually. I wonder what experiences these lives will experience when they’re hurled into this existence.
Problem with philosophy is that 15minute explanation could have been summed into less than 2 minutes, and still make sense.
If there was no life on this planet, there would be no experience. So, how is the aim for ending life on this planet not a valid goal of ending all suffering?
There's almost certainly life on myriads of other planets, and it's all "you"
@@Trent-s4v You don't know that, thus you are not morally responsible for it. You know the suffering here. So you can do something about it. The rest means nothing
Its a continuum , in fact GSC is similar to the buddhism's point of view
OK so I believe this is the case, the "no gaps" theory. But even if YOUR experience was exclusive to YOU, then there's something else at play here. After you die, if it were possible to rearrange the atoms that make you up back to their functional form, you'd reappear and so would your experience. Now, if time is infinite, and the recreation of the universe happens an infinite number of times, those atoms will not only be in that configuration again one day (infinity makes the possible actually happen), but it will happen again an infinite number of times. Each iteration being separated by an unthinkable number of universe recreation scenarios until the exact conditions are met once again for you to be created.
Exactly! GSC would make Eternal Recurrence true too.
Naturalisted, when you say eternal recurrence Do you mean that this will be the only life I will ever experience or that I will eventually experience this life again under the right conditions, although it isn't the only life I will experience?
@@user-bw6sy1yg2j All lives will eventually come, but in no particular order. It'll be completely random each time. But due to infinity, those exact chaotic orders will be repeated, and the current life will be repeated every once in awhile, but each life sees itself as "this life", and so when my life eventually follows your's, it'll be "this life". I hope that makes sense.
@@user-bw6sy1yg2j Also, it won't be you experiencing other lives, it'll just be other lives that have no connection to the current one. The way I like to convey this is if you imagine you're the only being in the universe, then you die and another you comes to exist, but the first you didn't go _into_ the second you. The second you is just a completely separate instance of you. It has no idea there was a you that existed before the new you. Then that you dies, and a you comes to exist after that, and so on, ad infinitum.
@naturalisted1714 okay, got it. Listening to Sam Harris talk about the illusion of the "self" and how we aren't separate from experience but literally experience itself I think allowed me to discover generic subjective continuity and leave antinatalism behind, thank you.
"Better to have never been" is valid, because it's simply expressing the idea that existence is bad. This idea applies to every single life. It's better for that giraffe to have never existed, better for a future elephant to have never existed, better for the first hippo to have never existed...it applies to every single life past, present, and future. It's better to not get in a car crash where I break my neck is a valid idea. It doesn't matter how many car crashes there were before, that are ongoing now, or any future car crashes -- it's better to not crash applies to every single car crash. It's simply a value statement, like Honesty is the Best Policy. By uttering such a statement doesn't mean I somehow magically erased all lies past present and future.
No one exists to benefit from not existing, making “better never to have been” irrelevant.
Faxx🎉😊
I am anti natlist and would love to have a discussion with you. I find your theory truly fascinating and would live to learn more through discussion.
Where would we conduct this conversation?
Do you think experience carries data from past experiences in order to regenerate a new more evolved experience
Does experience evolve ?
That would require some sort of transfer from body to body. Generic Subjective Continuity doesn't imply any kind of transfer.
@@naturalisted1714 I do believe in the theory of evolution both physical and psychological
If you observe closely you'll realize that life emerged from tiny organisms up to what we are now
So I guess the experience transfers data to the next form of experience in order to actualize itself
Just a theory of mine , nice video btw 🤍
@@naturalisted1714 if we suppose the theory of evolution is true.
Doesn't that mean that the tiny organisms that evolved to forms of life that we are right now transferred data to each other in order to become more evolved species ?
Just a guess
I see what you mean. As far as genetics and words (books etc.) go, yes, that's right. But GSC, as far as I can tell, is completely random. So one bring's death could be followed by a life that's somewhere far far away: a galaxy unimaginably far away. So nothing could transfer.
@@naturalisted1714 even randomness is not that random sometimes , things cause other things to happen