On 30 Oct 2011, at 23:51, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
On the other hand, I don't see why we would ignore immortality of
consciousness, considering that the "I" is just a psychosocial
construct/illusion anyway. We don't find an actual "I" anywhere. It
very relevant to know that the actual essence of experience can indeed
survive eternally. Why would I care whether an imagined "I"
How would you call this, if not immortality?
Could you imagine making a dream where you are someone else?
Can you imagine waking up, and remembering your life as a dream, and
at the same time remembering "the" previous life?
I think we can dissociate from memories. I think we can identifying
our identity, if I can say, with something deeper than the memories.
Memories are important, if only to avoid painful loops, and to
progress, which is the making of histories. But like bodies, it makes
sense that we own them, we are not them, I mean, not necessarily are
We might be more our possible values, than the past local necessities.
We might be more what we do with the memories than the memories
themselves, which are very contingent and local.
Perhaps we should allow ourselves thought experiences with amnesia,
and dissociation. We practice dissociation and re-association all
night, but usually we forget all of this.
Who are we?
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at