On 1/16/2014 10:14 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 11:44 AM, meekerdb <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:On 1/15/2014 11:25 PM, Jason Resch wrote:On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:44 AM, freqflyer07281972 <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I totally agree with you that science, when you really start getting into the implications of things like QM (and relativity for that matter), provides some rather unsettling (and yet very exciting!) conclusions. And yet... they always rest on the tip of uncertainty. Either that, or else the conclusions are so terrible that I can't bear to think of them. I have come to think few things could be more certain than universalism. If you take a few moments to consider why you were born as you, and not someone else, the only possible answer that fits that answer is for "me" to be born, an exact arrangement of matter or genes had to come into being. If the exact matter was necessary, then that means if your mom at something else, or took a sip of water at the wrong time, then you would never have been born. If the exact genes are required, then that means you had a 1 in 100 million chance that the right sperm met the right egg for you to be born, otherwise you would not exist at all. The odds become that much more staggering when you consider not only your begetting, but all other begettings of all your ancestors would have to be EXACTLY right, otherwise you would not be born and would never have existed.So what? Someone wins the lottery no matter how many tickets there are.But can you a priori expect to be one of the winners? Should you not have some level of surprise when you find out you are a winner, and possibly seek some more probable explanations (my kids are pranking me, I am dreaming, etc.)?On the other hand, if you believe even if one gene or two were different, you would still have been born, this means there really was no specific requirement for you to be born as you, and if a completely different sperm or egg were fertilized, then maybe you would instead be one of your brothers or sisters. If this is true, then shouldn't that mean you are in fact, also your brothers and sisters.So my Volkswagen is actually the same as my neighbors Volkswagen because there was no specific requirement for them to differ except for one on two bumps in the ignition lock. I think I'll suggest that to him; his has a lot fewer miles on it than mine.No, you are missing the point. It is not that they are similar enough to be you, it is that they share everything that was necessary for /you /to be present in them. Your current perspective does not rule out that you are seeing from their eyes,
Then why don't I always win at poker?
just as seeing only one branch does not mean the wave function collapsed, and nor does seeing only one time prove presentism. The simpler hypothesis by far is that you are born as all of them,
Simpler, but contradicted by observation. "God did it." is even simpler.
rather than believing there is some special or privileged person which is the only person in the whole universe whose entire life /you /will experience.
Except that is the definition of "you": the life you experience Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
