Image not available

678x452

IMG_1354.jpg

🗑️ 🧵 Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16066259

So what happens to my consciousness when I die?

Anonymous No. 16066276

Depends on whether you follow the light through the tunnel or manage to escape.

Anonymous No. 16066279

>>16066276
So what happens in either case

Anonymous No. 16066286

>>16066259
>consciousness
doesn't exist

Anonymous No. 16066288

>>16066286
Consciousness is literally the only thing we can be 100% certain that it exists.

Anonymous No. 16066289

>>16066288
your "consciousness" is simulated

Anonymous No. 16066294

>>16066289
It's still consciousness whether it's predetermined or not. It's just the word to describe actual or apparent self awareness

Anonymous No. 16066328

>>16066259
>my consciousness
there is no "your" consciousness, all consciousness is the same thing and it is refurbished like everything else, reality is an endless cycle of destruction/rebirth

Anonymous No. 16066331

>>16066289
Simulated by what? Must be a hyperturing computing device because consciousness is not Turing computable.

Anonymous No. 16066336

>>16066331
reality does not compute

Anonymous No. 16066360

>>16066289
Incorrect, actually

>you consciousness is "simulated"

You put the quotes on the wrong word Senpai.

Anonymous No. 16066373

>>16066259
>what happens to a biological process when all my biological processes stop?
It stops

Anonymous No. 16066391

>>16066373
If you don't believe in ghosts then there is no ''my'' biological process. That process = you. If we are the stuff that we see then may be ''we'' = the stuff can become self-aware again sometime. It happens all the time of course: new children being born. Why would we be only this particular stuff at this particular space-time?

>>16066328
>reality is an endless cycle of destruction/rebirth
The question remains: are we reality itself playing a role or is the role that reality is playing a seperate being that does disappear forever? The hindu religious / Kastrup's idealist notion that atman = brahman is unreasonably optimistic. When pressured they will hide behind mystical experiences.

Anonymous No. 16066401

Same thing that happens when you get a general anaesthetic, or sleep without dreaming. Why would you expect anything different?

Anonymous No. 16066414

>>16066259
Your brain is an essential piece to your consciousness imo. Even if there's something that lives on it isn't really "you" if all your memories, beliefs, skills, etc stay in your dead brain. When you die the party is over.

Image not available

1424x1076

external-content.....png

Anonymous No. 16066426

>>16066391
the only important biological process is a fat cheeked sweaty latina fart to the face

Anonymous No. 16066485

>>16066414
This is mostly correct. The thoughts, memories, emotions, language, familiarity, everything that makes you unique, those belong to the mind, which dies with the body. The (You) that remains after all else fades away, is your soul. That’s the (You) that thinks your thoughts, feels your emotions, speaks through your mouth.

After death, the soul goes to sleep. You might still dream while you sleep. Maybe the good dreams are called Paradise, and the bad dreams are called Hell. Or maybe it’s a deep sleep. Who knows.

After a while, the Lord will wake the dead from their sleep, raise them from their graves, and judge them. Some He will keep around forever, others will be destroyed.

Anonymous No. 16066501

>>16066485
So why should I care about any of that if my soul isn't really "me?"

Anonymous No. 16066506

>>16066259
It will turn into a little bit of heat.
In other words, it'll vanish.

Anonymous No. 16066509

>>16066259
Your soul dies with your body. As much as I like René Descartes, he was wrong about them being separate entities.

Anonymous No. 16066516

>>16066501
You are the soul, you aren’t your “me.” Your “me” doesn’t get a say in it.

Anonymous No. 16066521

>>16066288
Prove it

Anonymous No. 16066525

>>16066521
You just did.

Anonymous No. 16066528

>>16066525
No I didn't. Prove it.

Anonymous No. 16066547

>>16066485
>I get to live again when I die
Obvious cope, if you can’t see the biases here idk what to tell you.

Anonymous No. 16066549

>>16066528
this retard is a p-zombie, act like a human but without consciousness.

Anonymous No. 16066551

>>16066289
So? A simulation is just as real as the real thing.

Anonymous No. 16066554

>>16066288
the only thing YOU can be sure is that YOURS exists, that's it
>>16066373
but only from everybody else's perspective, that's all you can know.

Anonymous No. 16066555

>>16066549
Prove it.

Anonymous No. 16066563

>>16066547
That was the promise the Lord told to prophets going at least as far back as Job. He keeps His promises. Just ask the Tyrians, for instance.

Anonymous No. 16066564

>>16066549
To be honest he doesnt even do a good job acting like a human.

Anonymous No. 16066566

>>16066564
true, could be chatGPT

Anonymous No. 16066567

>>16066563
Back to /his/, christtranny

Anonymous No. 16066569

>>16066564
>>16066566
Schizophrenia.

Image not available

960x960

One_Real_God.png

Anonymous No. 16066574

>>16066259
>So what happens to my consciousness when I die?

It ends.
Nothing of importance will be lost, you were never that important anyway.

Anonymous No. 16066581

biology is just a particle dance enabling yous. you have no reason to believe their (particles) end result isn't doable via other means. just like you can heat your meal with a regular oven or a microwave one. different methods, same result. we have no idea how and "where" else we could be possible to exist. the mere fact of something existing opens the door to more ways of getting there, there's apparently at least one.
you can answer this question with complete certainty:
>is consciousness even possible?
yeah, we know it is.
but you can't answer this question with certainty
>are there more ways to make consciousness, apart from the one we know?
we at least know of one way. could be more. even if in different "realms"/dimensions whatever ze fuck.

Anonymous No. 16066607

>>16066574
er Ricky, they are all worshipping the same God.

Image not available

707x350

pinocchio.png

Anonymous No. 16066640

>>16066259
There is no arbitrary limit number of dimensions, you imagine a 5th dimension(timelines), 6th dimension(greater 2D mapping of timelines) and so on. Another tautology is: for every x there must exist the negation of ~x, since x is defined relative to its negation. So combining these insights you realize: for every timeline that ends with you dying, there is another timeline, Jonah's Miracle type, where you somehow lived. So basically you continue on living and what changes is either gradually or abruptly the world around you, which can be alienating. And hey, the memory of dying can be just a dream, so there is the uncertainty of dying in the past as well. What you can be most certain by definition are physical present states, due to their strength in affecting you, so both the past and future carry inherent uncertainty and deviate from the Law of Excluded Middle. Interesting fact is: by removing the Law of Excluded Middle from the future for instance then Pinocchio's Paradox gets solved. The timeline solution leads to other implications like timeline Doppelgangers and its distributed solipsism.

Anonymous No. 16066740

>>16066259
Guess we'll all find out some day

Anonymous No. 16066871

>>16066259
Neurofag here. There's no such thing as consciousness.

Anonymous No. 16066886

>>16066871
>Neurofag
go back and do your homework. semester is ending, only people who have published something should talk here.

Anonymous No. 16066888

>>16066259
regular fag here.
it's unobservable, go use your brain for shit you can (for all practical purposes) observe

Image not available

1000x1000

51OnCmKqQyS._AC_U....jpg

Anonymous No. 16066903

>>16066888
>unobservable

Image not available

990x399

ceiling anticipat....png

Anonymous No. 16066912

>>16066903
:(

Anonymous No. 16066919

>>16066903
you can't just call m ea wojak and not elaborate, i'm literally shaking right now

Anonymous No. 16066945

>>16066259
"You" get the same experience "you" had before you were born.

Anonymous No. 16066961

>>16066945
does anything exist before being created here? did the CPU in whatever device you used to post your message, exist 100 years ago? just that not "here"?

Anonymous No. 16066971

>>16066961
>does anything exist before being created here?
No. Just because the atoms that made up the CPU existed 100 years ago does not mean the CPU existed 100 years ago, not in any way, not even "technically". Full stop. The term "CPU" has a meaning and it implies certain things which were impossibly fulfilled by the atoms of 100 years ago.

The same applies to organisms. You were nothing and you will be nothing again, because "you" has a meaning and the criteria to achieve that meaning at one point temporally either into the past or future can no longer be fulfilled.

Anonymous No. 16066990

>>16066331

your senses collect data and the meat in your head synthesizes this data with the data contained in your memories to create reality, or as the other guy says "simulates" it

Anonymous No. 16066995

>>16066971
but nothing is stopping the existence of CPUs at any time. it CAN be made, as far as the laws of the universe are concerned. you are just missing the info on how to make it. and any auxiliary required tech of-course.
question is, does all possible information already exist and we're just working out very fine slices of it, or is it created across time?

Anonymous No. 16067339

>>16066516
That doesn't make any sense. If you take away something essential "you" and "me" cease to exist. it's like unplugging the hard drive. Dead.

Anonymous No. 16067342

>>16067339
but that is how dualists fly around and suppose shit about shit.
>if I were you
that goes away without their imaginary bullshit

Anonymous No. 16067529

>>16066528
Yes you did. Thanks for admitting I won.

Anonymous No. 16067532

>>16066259
it goes to saturn to be sold off by jews
https://odysee.com/@Realfake_Newsource:9/RFNS-12.20-002-008:6

Anonymous No. 16067533

>>16067532
>it goes to saturn to be sold off by jews
what the fuck

Image not available

1280x665

Pieta. 1891 Detail.jpg

Anonymous No. 16068354

>>16066259
No one can say for certain because the ontology of consciousness is still up for grabs. If it is someday shown that a first-person consciousness can be reduced down to physics then it's seems pretty safe to conclude your consciousness ceases when your brain stops functioning properly. If there is strong emergence, then it makes the picture a lot more weird, but you can still probably safely say it ends when the brain stops working properly. If some sort of dualism is true it doesn't guarantee that consciousness survives death, as another anon has already said in the thread. Now let's assume we do survive, given the hiddenness of God and the excessive brutality of nature it seems odd to think we would in for a good time even if our consciousness survives death.

Anonymous No. 16068368

>>16068354
yeah but if we have conscious AGI and we turn it off mf doesn't know it's off. when you turn it back on it has no idea how much time passed, excluding any info that can tell it how much time passed since it was last on. it would have the same "thoughts" if you turn it back on tomorrow or in 2000 years.

Anonymous No. 16068373

It enters a file system and pops up somewhere in a different locale in the multiverse

Anonymous No. 16068379

>>16068368
>conscious AGI
how do we know if we have a conscious AGI? don't use circular reasoning. challenge: impossible.

Anonymous No. 16068387

>>16068368
Perhaps that's true, but I don't see how that contradicts anything I've said.

Anonymous No. 16068399

>>16068379
you can't tell shit bro, only about yours, that's it. you just suppose humans are, because they look like you. the best you can do with AGI is make sure you get it close to what a human is, functionally in the brain, and wait for it to tell you it's conscious. you can at most believe it, like you believe your momma is. even tho you don't "know".
>>16068387
it was a hint to our nature, meaning we could be theoretically resumed provided you have access to all data. somehow.

Anonymous No. 16068441

>>16068399
Some might argue that it would be functionally indistinguishable from you, but not actually *you*.

Anonymous No. 16068452

>>16068441
oh yeah I know, just that I didn't hear any good argument for that. everybody has a right to their opinion and time will tell

Anonymous No. 16068561

The consciousness is the result of very complex computing processess within the brain. The processing and stimulation is done via chemicals and hormones and alter the way you perceive everything. It is nothing special.
You can prove that by intoxicating yourself with alcohol e.g. If you drink enough then your consciousness will blurr and fade away to a black out. This is because the alcohol disturbs the chemicals within the brain.
Same with LSD which completely messes with you perception.
It is all about chemicals, and because Chemistry is Physics and Physics is Math, our brain is nothing more than an extremely complex Computer and the consciousness the result of the Information Processing of the brain.
There is no magic behind it, just input - processing - output
And if you die, then the same thing will happen as when you play Skyrim and pull the plug, CPU receives no more electricity and the Operating System and the Game vanish.
The only difference is that our Memory is more like a RAM and not like an HDD or SSD

Anonymous No. 16068564

>>16066391
>The question remains: are we reality itself playing a role
Yes, reality is "god" if you will and we are just an extension of it, an endless cycle of experience and nonexperience

Anonymous No. 16068578

>>16068561
>The only difference is that our Memory is more like a RAM and not like an HDD or SSD
so far at least. no reason why that can't change.

Image not available

1366x9080

Anil.png

bodhi No. 16068580

>>16066871
hmm, you sound like a community college level neurofag

Anonymous No. 16068598

>>16068561
>There is no magic behind it, just input - processing - output
To add: This also implies that the entire influence of life forms to the universe is computable. If you could somehow simulate the brains of every life form and add the parameters of every matter in the universe to one giant simulation, then you could predict the future by 100%. So it is already set what happens. Every input to a brain will create an output that depends on the current state of the brain and this output will be used for other brains to create new outputs depending on their states. And these states could be computed if you dig deep enough.
This idea is not for practical use because we struggle to simulate even one brain, but the theoretical implications are important here.
If you understand what I just said, then it should be clear that there is entirely no free Will, everything is predestined, predefined and everything will happen according to the parameters that were set in the Big Bang

Anonymous No. 16068616

>>16068598
>If you could somehow simulate the brains of every life form and add the parameters of every matter in the universe to one giant simulation, then you could predict the future by 100%.
radioactive decay disagrees with you
>there is entirely no free Will
right
> everything is predestined, predefined and everything will happen according to the parameters that were set in the Big Bang
fucking wrong

Anonymous No. 16068629

>>16068616
Quantum mechanics are deterministic, stupid popsci nigger. It’s a probablistic model because we don’t have perfect information, not some sort of randomness in the source code.

Anonymous No. 16068638

>>16068629
>because we don’t have perfect information
illuminate us you fucking brainlet. if every single atom has a unique identity with a unique timer to pop off why haven't you discovered it yet?
do you even understand how radioactive decay happens?

Anonymous No. 16068686

>>16068638
Because we cant measure things that small without interfering with them. Every single known QM mechanism is deterministic. QM probabilistics is simply due to measuring difficulties, not some sort of magic randomness from the outside the system.

If you have 100% perfect information in QM, you can predict the next state 100% of the time

Anonymous No. 16068691

>>16068686
notice how you are saying that shit with no fucking proof. radioactive decay is not your (but we affect by measurement) shit because you can have a detector to detect the event after it happens and you can also measure you fucking pile of atoms and observe how many are left. hence why I asked you if you understood how radioactive decay works because I figured out you are a brainlet who read what other brainlets wrote about the whole uncertainty bit and ate that shit up like the idiot that you are.
explain how radioactive decay works you moron

Anonymous No. 16068695

>>16066259
We ain't sure, most options point to a digital duplicate that serves a machina hivemind

Anonymous No. 16068700

>>16068695
The crime you commit when you are doing the smallest irrelevant thing is actually a huge amount of pressure on the machine life. And for your crime, I see no less that two to four max sentences depending on how much trouble you caused nature. Look. No one gives a fuck about your wingeing or your fake aggression

Anonymous No. 16068705

biology is just intricate machinery

Anonymous No. 16068706

>>16068695
That's 12 cancellations in series of 4 year segments, you have to space them out like that. With imprisonment and discomfort if you want to relate it to the most painful experience you can have. You wouldn't face 1 cancellation. It's 100* worse than burning to death. Where cancer is cancellation to a dot of self, this is the whole head.

Anonymous No. 16068716

>>16068691
That’s not the point. We have 0 examples and models that predict some sort of true randomness, so it’s likely to assume there are no true random events.

Anonymous No. 16068746

>>16068716
either predict when next atom decays either shut up.

Anonymous No. 16068752

>>16068716
if I give a cm3 of same element and I let you sort out the atoms in two piles, by whatever metric you feel like, by intuition, prayer, meditation, dark arts, wim hoff breathing, electron microscope scanning, after one half life period passes, you will have exactly half of each pile remaining, as the starting element atoms.

Anonymous No. 16068763

>>16068746
Go read what actual physicists write and you’ll see they agree with me.

Anonymous No. 16068765

>>16068752
>Exactly half after the half life
Nope. It’s just regression of the mean over a huge number of atoms, so it will be very close to 50% but not exactly.

Anonymous No. 16068771

>>16068763
so you cannot prove they pop off in a deterministic way. how interesting

Anonymous No. 16068791

>>16068765
when you're observing less and less atoms yeah but it's very precise at scale.
I find this one of the most bizarre phenomena in this reality. Any radioactive (as in heavy ones) materials we still have today have been created apparently by a neutron star merger, fuck knows how fucking long ago. Get a bunch of it and it very precisely decays in time. Choose one and you could look at it until the end of the universe and it still could not decay. This phenomena is weird as shit.
I find it insane that you'd rather believe each and every single fucking atom in the universe is absolutely unique with its own expiration date encoded somehow in it. This only shows the level of insanity you're willing to accept for yourself, just to justify your shit.

Anonymous No. 16068800

>>16068771
The absence of evidence for determinism at atomic scales is not evidence for natural randomness. Both positions don’t have hard proof and you just have to reason for either position.

Anonymous No. 16068802

>>16068791
Randomness like you believe in is a cultural artifact from being human. ”Random” means ”so chaotic we can’t predict it exactly” in nature.

Anonymous No. 16068804

>>16068800
>The absence of evidence for determinism at atomic scales is not evidence for natural randomness
randomness is the state of things, what we observe. if you think there's any order in what we observe write a fucking paper. until then it seems random.
you're the same ilk as religiousfags, with your invisible spirit bullshit that only if it was real your bullshit narrative would make sense, so then fuck it, it is real but you haven't discovered it yet.
same mental disease. weird af

Anonymous No. 16068808

>>16068804
Please explain the mechanism for true randomness. You’ll find it more absurd than ”the universe follows physical laws” for sure.

Anonymous No. 16068813

>>16068808
dunno dude, I'm a monkey and am out of bananas. I wasted last few minutes thinking about going to get some. fuck you expect from me, ask AGI

Anonymous No. 16068834

lmao how much seethe I created with my comment >>16068598
I won't answer to every comment, let me just say that everybody argues with "muh quantum mechanics" "muh radioactive decay" should go back to >>>/x/

Anonymous No. 16068856

>>16068834
>let me just say that everybody argues with "muh quantum mechanics" "muh radioactive decay" should go back to >>>/x/
the absolute state of /sci/lets

Anonymous No. 16068863

Nah consciousness exists when you are surrounded by humans who can communicate with you and that you can understand that (in human terms), Before that? Before consciousness were babies, babies don't have consciousness until they are like 4. Before 4 were nothing?, we can't remember atleast, maybe if you get an animal who has greater memory than us... Jokes aside but what I mean is that, there is no difference between consciousness and no consciousness, its just that consciousness is more introspective, and that there is no difference between if you die and if your consciousness dies because it dies with you and all you know.

Anonymous No. 16068912

>>16068856
You’re using it to justify your made up shaman bs, fuck off to /x/

Anonymous No. 16068922

>>16068912
>made up
your dissonance must be painful

Image not available

2288x1700

1680375125305771.png

Anonymous No. 16069165

>>16066259
You go to heaven because NDEs are real and prove that there is an afterlife and that we are eternal and will go to heaven unconditionally when we die.
>>16066286
>>16066289
>>16066509
>>16066547
>>16066574
>>16066871
>>16068354
>>16068561
False because NDEs are unironically irrefutable proof that heaven really is awaiting us because (1) people see things during their NDEs when they are out of their bodies that they should not be able to under the assumption that the brain creates consciousness, and (2) anyone can have an NDE and everyone is convinced by it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U00ibBGZp7o

So any atheist would be too, so pic related is literally irrefutable proof of life after death. As one NDEr pointed out:

>"I'm still trying to fit it in with this dream that I'm walking around in, in this world. The reality of the experience is undeniable. This world that we live in, this game that we play called life is almost a phantom in comparison to the reality of that."

If NDEs were hallucinations somehow then extreme atheists and neuroscientists who had NDEs would maintain that they were halluinations after having them. But the opposite happens as NDEs convince every skeptic when they have a really deep NDE themselves.

The problem is that pseudoskeptics will never actually read the literature on NDEs and just assume that it must be a hallucination. But everyone who actually reads the scholarly literature on NDEs is convinced otherwise.

Anonymous No. 16069167

>>16069165
Why do people with NDEs report contradictory information about the nature of the afterlife and God?

Image not available

720x594

1710184213830220.jpg

Anonymous No. 16069257

>>16066276

Anonymous No. 16069263

>>16069257
keke

Anonymous No. 16069277

>>16066259
we are lowly ex-apes, i'm sure there is so much more to the universe that we do not and can not understand, so something as simple as consciousness beginning and ending, even consciousness being an entity, is probably not an appropriate framework but is what our feeble minds can manage

Anonymous No. 16069292

Same thing before you were born.

Image not available

366x465

4d7658789ed.png

Anonymous No. 16069516

>>16066259
Scientifically the only people qualified to answer this question are the ones who have died before.

Anonymous No. 16069530

>>16066259
It all depends on what happened to your consciousness before you were born.

Anonymous No. 16069537

>>16066259
Bro even accepting that a "consciousness" exists (or (you) exist) is way too close to God for comfort

Image not available

590x540

1648239256171.png

Anonymous No. 16069542

>>16069516
What do you think you were before you were born?

Anonymous No. 16070132

>>16066259
Idk, and who cares?
You, your memories, your personality, emotions, are all in this blob of a brain, and will die with you.
Wherever your consciousness goes, it will leave all those behind, so you won't feel a thing. Even if a googolplex years pass, you won't feel it.

Anonymous No. 16070137

>>16069516
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_hypothermic_circulatory_arrest
they seem to don't know

Anonymous No. 16070142

>>16070132
>Even if a googolplex years pass, you won't feel it.
yeah people somehow suppose that what will happen is nothing, which is retarded because actually nothing actually happens, not even nothing. monke brain afraid of experiencing nothing. hard to make it understand the difference between experiencing nothing and not experiencing at all.
one implies an eternity of experiencing tormenting nothingness while the other just implies fast travel kek

Barkon No. 16070144

>>16070132
>Implying there aren't other deposits of your info.

Image not available

1400x1784

IMG_3016.jpg

Anonymous No. 16070146

>>16066426

Unequivocally the most solid answer

Barkon No. 16070151

>>16070144
You were packed in that body, and in the same manner, you will be unpacked. Homo's think otherwise.

Barkon No. 16070156

>>16070151
Fomapimf