Why am I here instead of someone else?

Talk about things that are not necessarily related to music or the guitar.
User avatar
AndreiKrylov
Posts: 1602
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 9:22 pm
Location: Canada, USA, Mexico, Portugal, Spain

Re: Why am I here instead of someone else?

Postby AndreiKrylov » Mon Sep 12, 2016 11:03 pm

bear wrote:glassy,
I you had a twin, the twin would not be you. My grandfather was an identical twin and outlived his brother by 20 years, so much for identical. Cloning has become possible and has been done to pets. The pet owners report in many cases that the clone is not exactly the same as the original and although have all of the same markings are probably no more alike than another of the same breed.
You are a culmination of both biology and experiences. The biological contributions of your parents could not be replicated i.e. twins and siblings are not the same. The many experiences and your responses and interpretations to events have shaped your sense of self and personality. All of these things are responsible for you being you and not someone else.
If, you believe that all of those circumstances could be and will be replicated exactly, then there will be another you. I won't hold my breathe, though.

Well... I respectfully disagree...
If nobody could be replicated - when why guitarists replicate each other concert programs? :)
Why people follow same fashions styles etc.? Why man continue to do the same mistakes again and again? Why nations again and again go towards against each other and against themselves? Why all kind of absurd and madness are replicated by humanity again and again? ...
I'd better speak by music...Please listen Andrei Krylov at Spotify, iTunes, Apple Music, Amazon Prime etc. Thanks!

glassynails
Posts: 5368
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:20 am
Location: Westbrook, Maine

Re: Why am I here instead of someone else?

Postby glassynails » Mon Sep 12, 2016 11:50 pm

People are not getting what I'm trying to explain. I don't mean I will be here as an exact copy or anything along that lines! I mean that the "I" is within "me" right now and I'm conscious (as far as I know). When this body physically dies and the "I" that I am now ceases to exist (this is what I believe happens based on science) why will I not be another "I"?

Why would there be another "I" you may ask? Based one the evidence that I understand as myself "being here" right now and conscious. Why is it NOT possible that this phenomenon that I'm experiencing possibly occur again or have occurred at some earlier point in time? You could also ask yourself the same question - "Why won't I be here again in some other form?" After all this whole thing has happened once as far as I know.

Do you see what I'm trying to say?

Also, this has nothing to do with karma type reincarnation. That is a religious pseudo-science in my opinion. I mean reincarnation based on the evidence that I and you are here now experiencing this thing called consciousness. My point is the whole phenomenon has happened once as far as we all know and it's happened to each of us. Why will it not happen again or could have happened before we were in our present body's experiencing consciousness?
"GLASSYNAILS" on Youtoob for my "no edit" - "no fakery" audio recordings. Just me, my Alhambra 7p spruce, and an Olympus ls-10 portable recorder.

User avatar
bear
Posts: 3320
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 10:55 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Why am I here instead of someone else?

Postby bear » Mon Sep 12, 2016 11:51 pm

AndreiKrylov wrote:
bear wrote:glassy,
I you had a twin, the twin would not be you. My grandfather was an identical twin and outlived his brother by 20 years, so much for identical. Cloning has become possible and has been done to pets. The pet owners report in many cases that the clone is not exactly the same as the original and although have all of the same markings are probably no more alike than another of the same breed.
You are a culmination of both biology and experiences. The biological contributions of your parents could not be replicated i.e. twins and siblings are not the same. The many experiences and your responses and interpretations to events have shaped your sense of self and personality. All of these things are responsible for you being you and not someone else.
If, you believe that all of those circumstances could be and will be replicated exactly, then there will be another you. I won't hold my breathe, though.

Well... I respectfully disagree...
If nobody could be replicated - when why guitarists replicate each other concert programs? :)
Why people follow same fashions styles etc.? Why man continue to do the same mistakes again and again? Why nations again and again go towards against each other and against themselves? Why all kind of absurd and madness are replicated by humanity again and again? ...


I think replication is different than re-creation. For instance I have a copy of a Hauser, but it's not a Hauser.
People are animals and each species of animal is known for particular traits. Humans have demonstrated their madness and there is no cure.
2013 Jeff Medlin '37 Hauser 640mm sp
2006 Michele Della Guistina Concert 10 string 650mm ce
2005 Jose Ramirez 4E 650mm ce
2005 Manuel Rodriguez Model C3F 650mm sp
2003 Manuel Rodriguez Model D 650mm ce

mrvegas
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 2:53 am

Re: Why am I here instead of someone else?

Postby mrvegas » Tue Sep 13, 2016 12:06 am

Perhaps you are not really you in the conscious sense. I saw an article recently suggesting that self awareness was simply an illusion favored by evolution.
Life is too short to be perfectly in tune.

PeteJ
Posts: 324
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 12:52 pm

Re: Why am I here instead of someone else?

Postby PeteJ » Tue Sep 13, 2016 10:51 am

glassynails wrote:When this body physically dies and the "I" that I am now ceases to exist (this is what I believe happens based on science) why will I not be another "I"?


Because you are assuming that there is an 'I' that dies, an 'I' that does not die and an 'I' that is not the original 'I' but is nevertheless still the original 'I' in some sense. I see where you're coming from but this idea looks like a non-starter.

Also, this has nothing to do with karma type reincarnation. That is a religious pseudo-science in my opinion.


Yes. The better idea is rebirth, as Buddhism defines it, which is not reincarnation.

This would say that the mortal self is not a real phenomenon but an illusion, while the real Self (upper-case) would not be mortal but the origin and root of us all.

They speak of rebirth in terms of 'impressions' passing from life to life but there would be no 'I' that does so. The practice reveals the illusoriness of the mortal 'I', so they say. This revelation would be the crucial step towards realising our own immortality. Hence the humbleness of the mythological Grail cup. Thus also an hadith of the Prophet Mohammed, 'Die before your death', while Jesus tells us 'Blessed are those whose end is before their beginning'.

Whatever the truth the topic is certainly all to do with religion, metaphysics and psychology, I won't push the point though. It gets me into trouble.

Rasqeo
Posts: 295
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 11:51 am

Re: Why am I here instead of someone else?

Postby Rasqeo » Tue Sep 13, 2016 12:16 pm

mrvegas wrote:Perhaps you are not really you in the conscious sense. I saw an article recently suggesting that self awareness was simply an illusion favored by evolution.


Yes there are some who believe the self-conscious awareness we have, or the "I" glassy refers to, is an psychological trick and that we are nothing more than than the a complex physical system, a machine if you will. Hence the phrase "ghost in the machine".

Even if true though, I'm not sure how useful this revelation would be. It wouldn't make any difference to the way I think about myself or others or how I go about my life. It's like the realisation that we are all related and made up of the same star dust - yes but that doesn't stop people from blowing each other to bits!

dory
Posts: 1478
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:29 am
Location: Madison, Wisconsin, USA

Re: Why am I here instead of someone else?

Postby dory » Tue Sep 13, 2016 12:25 pm

I am wondering why people assume that if someone's consciousness (all their knowledge and personality) were uploaded to a computer that person's consciousness would go on. We don't even know what consciousness is. For sure I don't believe I would "go on" if some computer shared my knowledge. When I die, either:
A) My consciousness ceases.
B) I go into some sort of afterlife that I cannot easily imagine.
C) I reincarnate.

I don't see any other possibilities.
Dory

philip caldwell
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 7:38 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Why am I here instead of someone else?

Postby philip caldwell » Tue Sep 13, 2016 1:48 pm

You're here as an 'i' because if you weren't you wouldn't be able to ask the question. 'you' whatever that is, must always be 'you'.
We might ask, "but why am I this particular me? " "Why am I not that man over there?" Well, it's the same answer, as you can see. If you were
that 'man over there' you'd still be inside your head; asking the same question; " why am I me" So in a sense ( and to the rest of us) you are that man over there.
You can see each of 'us' is stuck with being 'me'.

It's the same with the idea that our parents might never have met. I have often seen people writing that in that case 'they' wouldn't exist. But this cannot be true.
would I still be here or would it be someone else and I not exist?
. There would never be 'someone' else. How could that be?
It's the language that confuses people. A phrase like " a slight change in events and I wouldn't now exist" is not logical. I couldn't be writing to you and you couldn't have speculated about your non existence unless you did exist.
In fact the phrase " I wouldn't exist" is illogical. What is this "I" that wouldn't exist? It implies that there is an "I" even when it doesn't exist! An "I" that had the possibility of never having being brought into existence.
But that is nonsense. The claim is there is an "I" which doesn't exist. That both A and not A are the case. That "I" both exists, (the "I" that was never born) and yet doesn't exist ( as it was never born).
With non existence comes the total lack of "I". There could be no "I" waiting in the wings to exist, finally thwarted as history is changed...

Non-existent entities can't speculate about their non-existence. The 'someone else' would be you.

Another pint, Veronica?

Andrew Pohlman
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2015 8:24 pm
Location: SF Bay Area

Re: Why am I here instead of someone else?

Postby Andrew Pohlman » Tue Sep 13, 2016 2:45 pm

bear wrote:
gitgeezer wrote:Wow, this is fun isn't it? I would respond to the questions and comments regarding my last posting (with the utmost cleverness and with ideas and information that would astound the world), but I have to get some dinner, then it's time for "Dr. Blake Mysteries," and after that "Midsomer Murders." I'll get back to you tomorrow.


Our evenings are similar. I didn't care for Dr. Blake initially, he was a little overdone. Last season he seemed a little more believable. I pass on watching re-runs of the earlier seasons. I like Midsomer, Father Brown and Miss Fisher. My wife like all of those plus Grantchester, that's a little too soap opery for me.
Yes. Yes. This is all very good. But is there only one Miss Fisher, and why not some other elegant flapper ? And will she ever be here again? Ah ha! We have the answer! She will be back in the form of re-runs!!!
2013 Rodriguez FF Sabicas blanco
2015 Trevor Gore custom Neoclassical
- redwood top, Palo dorado B+Ss.

User avatar
bear
Posts: 3320
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 10:55 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Why am I here instead of someone else?

Postby bear » Tue Sep 13, 2016 4:55 pm

Andrew Pohlman wrote:
bear wrote:
gitgeezer wrote:Wow, this is fun isn't it? I would respond to the questions and comments regarding my last posting (with the utmost cleverness and with ideas and information that would astound the world), but I have to get some dinner, then it's time for "Dr. Blake Mysteries," and after that "Midsomer Murders." I'll get back to you tomorrow.


Our evenings are similar. I didn't care for Dr. Blake initially, he was a little overdone. Last season he seemed a little more believable. I pass on watching re-runs of the earlier seasons. I like Midsomer, Father Brown and Miss Fisher. My wife like all of those plus Grantchester, that's a little too soap opery for me.
Yes. Yes. This is all very good. But is there only one Miss Fisher, and why not some other elegant flapper ? And will she ever be here again? Ah ha! We have the answer! She will be back in the form of re-runs!!!


She was here (or there) and now somewhere in the further past leaving a doubt as to whether she'll be here again. However, in the place where she now is, the life expectancy is short, so she may be here (or there) again. We can only hope.
2013 Jeff Medlin '37 Hauser 640mm sp
2006 Michele Della Guistina Concert 10 string 650mm ce
2005 Jose Ramirez 4E 650mm ce
2005 Manuel Rodriguez Model C3F 650mm sp
2003 Manuel Rodriguez Model D 650mm ce

6strings

Re: Why am I?

Postby 6strings » Wed Sep 14, 2016 1:44 pm

glassynails wrote:I was born in 1973 and am now conscious typing on a computer. I am me. I am part of this phenomenon called life. When this consciousness ends who is to say that I won't experience consciousness in another body just as I am now?

This is my point.

Hmm, kind of a not obvious from the first post :-).

Obviosly the science hasn't answered the question about how/what consiousness really is (yet), but one obvious reason why you will not continue as same consciouss being in "another life" is already touched by your first post in somewhat implicit form. You are a set of atoms and particles comming together and forming your consciousness Thus your (and mine and everybody's else) conscussness is a product of that constellation of particles, however it might come, and when that constellation dissolves, after we die and are consumed by orgnaisms living in dirt, or through burning in a owen, or whatever method you choose, that constellation dissapears and thus the necessary precondition for your consciussnes dissapears as well. Actaually it goes away long before, in the moment we die, since after our death the body can't provide necessary means of air, energy etc to feed the cells and keep all necessary particles in our brain in the right balance and the mechanism we call consciusness dissapears as well as a consequence.

That of course does not proof in any way that there is necessarliy no other form of consciusness but our evidence has not yet found "free form" of consciusness floating around in space, and until then for our sanity we are better to believe in reality we have evidence for. Some people prefer to belive in fantasy stories about afterlife since it supports their human ego, but with just a little common sense and intelligence, prospect of no afterlife is actually even more appealing than any abrahamian promises I have heard yet.

glassynails
Posts: 5368
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:20 am
Location: Westbrook, Maine

Re: Why am I?

Postby glassynails » Wed Sep 14, 2016 8:28 pm

6strings wrote:
glassynails wrote:I was born in 1973 and am now conscious typing on a computer. I am me. I am part of this phenomenon called life. When this consciousness ends who is to say that I won't experience consciousness in another body just as I am now?

This is my point.

Hmm, kind of a not obvious from the first post :-).

Obviosly the science hasn't answered the question about how/what consiousness really is (yet), but one obvious reason why you will not continue as same consciouss being in "another life" is already touched by your first post in somewhat implicit form. You are a set of atoms and particles comming together and forming your consciousness Thus your (and mine and everybody's else) conscussness is a product of that constellation of particles, however it might come, and when that constellation dissolves, after we die and are consumed by orgnaisms living in dirt, or through burning in a owen, or whatever method you choose, that constellation dissapears and thus the necessary precondition for your consciussnes dissapears as well. Actaually it goes away long before, in the moment we die, since after our death the body can't provide necessary means of air, energy etc to feed the cells and keep all necessary particles in our brain in the right balance and the mechanism we call consciusness dissapears as well as a consequence.

That of course does not proof in any way that there is necessarliy no other form of consciusness but our evidence has not yet found "free form" of consciusness floating around in space, and until then for our sanity we are better to believe in reality we have evidence for. Some people prefer to belive in fantasy stories about afterlife since it supports their human ego, but with just a little common sense and intelligence, prospect of no afterlife is actually even more appealing than any abrahamian promises I have heard yet.


My point is that I'm in a body now experiencing life. It has happened so far this once as far as I know. I realize I won't "come back" as the same person that likes guitar, etc, but who's to say that I could not experience consciousness in another whole form given the fact that I am conscious now. At one time "I" was not conscious, now I am, and than I won't be. Why can't that cycle happen again and again and again?

I also realize this could mean that I could be conscious as an insect, a bird, etc. Who's to say that I couldn't exist on some other planet or another Universe or whatever at some point? Who really knows? Maybe a future consciousness would be nothing like what we experience now and we wouldn't be able to recognize it. Maybe there is no I, maybe this is all a big dream .... who really knows.

I also don't believe in life after and agree with everything you said towards the end of your above statement. I have an ego as everyone does, but I'm perfectly happy with expiring and never returning. I amazed by this life and am a very curious person and always have been. I take life as it comes and accept all of its realities. That's the problem though, figuring out it's realities!

Thanks :)
"GLASSYNAILS" on Youtoob for my "no edit" - "no fakery" audio recordings. Just me, my Alhambra 7p spruce, and an Olympus ls-10 portable recorder.

User avatar
petermc61
Posts: 5519
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2012 12:11 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Why am I here instead of someone else?

Postby petermc61 » Wed Sep 14, 2016 8:39 pm

6strings

You make two major claims in your comments that are highly contentious.

Firstly, that science can explain everything that needs to be explained. This implies philosophy and religion have no place in discussion amongst intelligent people. This is frankly a very shallow worldview. Any competent scientist knows the limits of science and what questions it best answers and which it does not, indeed cannot.

Your dismissal of some of the questions on the meaning of human existence and related philosophical questions is rather sad. There is much richness thinking about things beyond the measurable, quantifiable and physical.

Peter

6strings

Re: Why am I here instead of someone else?

Postby 6strings » Wed Sep 14, 2016 11:40 pm

petermc61 wrote:6strings

You make two major claims in your comments that are highly contentious.

Firstly, that science can explain everything that needs to be explained. This implies philosophy and religion have no place in discussion amongst intelligent people. This is frankly a very shallow worldview. Any competent scientist knows the limits of science and what questions it best answers and which it does not, indeed cannot.

Your dismissal of some of the questions on the meaning of human existence and related philosophical questions is rather sad. There is much richness thinking about things beyond the measurable, quantifiable and physical.

Peter
Are you trying my ego now? I don't understand what my dismissal of meaning of human existence is. To be honest we didn't even touch that subject :-). I think you are missunderstadning me here. I cetainly don't hold the absolutistic view that science, at least has, or even that it will answer all the questions we can ask. I said that science don't really know what consciusness is. There is nothing that says we will not know about it at some point. Maybe we will not, who knows. There are questions that we can't possibly answer that lie outside of our human posibbility to answer ever. For example, if you believe in cosmologic explanation of God, that Got created universe, thus he/she should be outside of our universe, and since we can by definition get outside, we can't possibly answer that question. I have no idea if it is either important or even a valid question though, importance might be one of those personal attachments we humans attach to things and ideas. There is real physical world that exists out there, with us in it, and there is our own view and experience of the world with values attached to it. Those are two different things.

I have actually written a paragraph about philsophy in the other thread about time and observers. I see philosphy as a part of real world and as scientific as math, but I differ between philosphy and new age nonsense, including sectarian religious off-shots (these days everybody seems ot have personal belief and explanation of supernatural etc). I have no idea if I am intelligent or not, but I certainly don't see how philosophy would not have a place in discussion among intelligent people and how you manage to derive to that. I have no idea how you come to conclusion that I don't find it valuable to think beyond what is measurable or valuable, but I assure you, that is solely your very own personal conclusions. We might find different things measurable or valuable, I don't know you personally so I have no idea what you find valuable or measurable. Since I wrote both that post above and other one about time, I think it is pretty clear I find philosophy and questions about life and meaning very interesting, so I am not sure if you are testing my ego here or it's something else here to be honest.

You also sound like I am missing some deeper intellectual, profundly higher dimension of life if I would like to explain things like conscusness. I don't either see why would our knowledge abouot something made it less rich, vauable or interesting to us, or why we should not be able to gain knowledge about conscusness ever? After all it is part of our human existence. Why does it have to be somehow so drastically different than other parts of our body? I have no idea if it is or not, but why do we have to put it on a piedestal, and somehow be less profane beings if we try to understand it and explain it? Should it somehow take away a crown from consciousness if we knew what it is? Should we be less rich somehow if we knew what it is? Should we be a tiny bit more sad and less of persons if we dissect it and learned abouot it? It's a little bit arrogant view that you imposed there don't you think?

When it comes to this about being, as said in beginning, there are questions we can't possibly answer, at least yet. We can't communicate with insects, plants or animals, at least not at that level so they can speak to us about their consciusness. My personal view is that at least animals have a degree of consciusness and a kind of reason like we, just in maybe less degree than humans, To be honest, I see humans just as another animal art. Oh yes, I am soul-less too. If you think you are better person than me bc YOU believe you have soul, that can we disopute :).

Anyway, I haver perfectly understood what you said glassynails, you didn't need to explain it twice, but what if I said that you have a prt of Hitler and Himler in you? As the matter of fact we all have. We consist of such incredible number of particles that get spread all over the world and become a part of other molecules and other living beings. Somewhere there are parts of Socrates and Plato floating around. Anyway, we have no proof that conscusness is part of those particles, or those atoms making up stones, water or floating free through the universe as photons, myons, neutronons etc. At least I hope you don't have Hitler's consciusness (or me). There are many questions one can ask that can not be answered, but many of those are not valid. Sure we don't know if your conscusness or soul will continue to exist after the life and can't answer it, but does it have any meaning to you at all? But just because one can't proof it wrong, it does not by necessity mean it is correct either. Also as you explain, if your conscusness is going to turn into something radically different such as conscusness of an insect, is it then same constuesness, and is it even relevant (if you are not living in some of Kafka's novels of course)? Furthermore, do we have any proof of such thing then? Our evidence thus far points toward that conscusness does not exist outside living beings. We can make fantasies about parallell worlds and parallell lifes and so on, but thing is how much of fantasies and how much of reality those are.

User avatar
petermc61
Posts: 5519
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2012 12:11 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Why am I here instead of someone else?

Postby petermc61 » Thu Sep 15, 2016 1:03 am

I simply don't believe everything has to be reduced to atoms and a physical dimension. You appear to. We will have to disagree on that point it seems. :D


Return to “The Café”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], gitgeezer and 9 guests