Why Roping is Inherently Irrational

[hypernormie]

Then wouldn’t staying alive to minimize suffering also be irrational since you cannot know that you won’t have infinite pleasure and no suffering after death

I don’t think you can rationally make the decision to live or die to end suffering or increase pleasure

What I will say is that the only data point you have on death is that those who die seem to no longer be conscious and therefore no longer be suffering but that’s it. An assumption strictly tied to the physical existence of the person. I would say it is still a gamble to extrapolate this to consciousness because consciousness does not appear to be physical or at least not physical in the way we generally understand physicality. So you still end up with very incomplete information.

You can say you will rationally rope if your goal is to appear to others as if you no longer exist. That would be rational because you have enough data to make a bet on that outcome. You don’t have enough data to make the bet your conscious experience of reality ceases with the destruction of your body.

 

[Bodhisattva]

i wont rope cause im a pussy

 

[(In)CelibatePsycho2]

I

I don’t think you can rationally make the decision to live or die to end suffering or increase pleasure

What I will say is that the only data point you have on death is that those who die seem to no longer be conscious and therefore no longer be suffering but that’s it. An assumption strictly tied to the physical existence of the person. I would say it is still a gamble to extrapolate this to consciousness because consciousness does not appear to be physical or at least not physical in the way we generally understand physicality. So you still end up with very incomplete information.

You can say you will rationally rope if your goal is to appear to others as if you no longer exist. That would be rational because you have enough data to make a bet on that outcome. You don’t have enough data to make the bet your conscious experience of reality ceases with the destruction of your body.

I dont have enough data to be confident about the afterlife, but I can still make predictions. My predictions are not based on the fact that dead people look like they don’t feel anything

 

[hypernormie]

I have knowledge of what exists in the living world, and I think that is sufficient to make inferences.
Just as you treat the world of the living and the “world” of the death as completely separately, I could just as easily treat the world of the past and the world of the future as being separate, and say that since I’m not a time traveler I have no knowledge of the world of the future (for all I know the universe in the future world could implode 5 seconds from now) and therefore cannot make any inferences about it

You have knowledge about what exists in the living world

That’s my point

You have zero knowledge about what exists after you die

You keep giving examples where you have some data, ie: the past. Even if the past is not real, we have data that suggests it is so it would be rational to make a bet that it is.

The same is not true for your conscious experience after death. You have ZERO data about what happens after you die. You don’t even have enough data to make a guess.

You aren’t making an inference off of anything because you have no data to make an inference off of. Have you died before? Do you know someone that has died before that is giving you some data to make an inference on?

You don’t. You don’t even have potentially false data to make an inference on, which is what you are trying to say in your time example. When it comes to death you have nothing at all, not even bad data, you have zilch, nada, zero.

 

[hypernormie]

I

I dont have enough data to be confident about the afterlife, but I can still make predictions. My predictions are not based on the fact that dead people look like they don’t feel anything

So what are your predictions based on?

I keep asking.

What data points have you gathered about the experience after death?

I’m very curious.

 

[(In)CelibatePsycho2]

So what are your predictions based on?

I keep asking.

What data points have you gathered about the experience after death?

I’m very curious.

It’s based on other religions and what makes the most logical sense to me, as well as things I know exist (such as simulations)

All of these are very weak evidence, of course, but I think they are still evidence

 

[hypernormie]

It’s based on other religions and what makes the most logical sense to me, as well as things I know exist (such as simulations)

All of these are very weak evidence, of course, but I think they are still evidence

That’s what I’m asking

What evidence?

All religions are at bottom conjecture because no living person that espouses a religion has previous experience with dying

You seem to be unable to grasp the fact that you have zero information about what happens after you die and therefore zero way to make any logical inference or conjecture

Upon death you could be transported to a teletubbies episode for the next 1,000,000 years for all you know, you literally can’t give any reason why that would be less possible than anything else. I urge you to try.

 

[(In)CelibatePsycho2]

That’s what I’m asking

What evidence?

All religions are at bottom conjecture because no living person that espouses a religion has previous experience with dying

You seem to be unable to grasp the fact that you have zero information about what happens after you die and therefore zero way to make any logical inference or conjecture

I have zero information about what happens in the future because I’m not a time traveler, doesn’t mean I can’t make inferences

 

[wollet2]

nothing matters

your presuming that you can improve but you can’t because there’s no such thing as good or bad

you only feel value becuase of evolution, but outside of your animalistic emotions there’s nothing that makes life better than death

if you want to know why you should kill yourself more read pg.20-31 of https://archive.org/details/MitchellHeismanSuicideNote/page/n21/mode/1up?view=theater
and listen to adam lanzas my antinatalism video here

there is subjective good and bad in conscious experience
eating chocolate is usually good. stubbing ur toe is usually bad

 

[noobs]

there is subjective good and bad in conscious experience
eating chocolate is usually good. stubbing ur toe is usually bad

why does it matter if you stub your toe?

 

[wollet2]

why does it matter if you stub your toe?

because you feel pain and you dont like that. it might not matter to the universe but it matters to most people

 

[noobs]

because you feel pain and you dont like that. it might not matter to the universe but it matters to most people

all emotions exist because of sociobiology, but there’s no reason to care for evolution. so killing yourself and living is equal

you need to argue the point for living over death

 

[longjohnmong]

"we must imagine Sisyphus happy"

oh yeah? what about Prometheus, you dumb frog. is he happy too?

 

[wollet2]

all emotions exist because of sociobiology, but there’s no reason to care for evolution. so killing yourself and living is equal

most people include in their self made meaning that they dont want to suffer and that they want to feel good

 

[noobs]

most people include in their self made meaning that they dont want to suffer and that they want to feel good

they feel it and thus their intuitive reasoning is baseless since it’s based on sociobiology

the reason you say it’s subjective is because there is no inate meaning

 

[wollet2]

they feel it and thus their intuitive reasoning is baseless since it’s based on sociobiology

the reason you say it’s subjective is because there is no inate meaning

how is it baseless if its based in biology

you dont need inate meaning to enjoy eating a chocolate. also arguing that there is no meaning gives a meaning to life paradoxically
idk

 

[noobs]

how is it baseless if its based in biology

you dont need inate meaning to enjoy eating a chocolate. also arguing that there is no meaning gives a meaning to life

because sociobiology is meaningless

you enjoy chocolate for the same reason you might enjoy a video game or drug. it’s a meaning you create and inflate yourself

 

[wollet2]

bc there’s no reason to choose death or life

i want to live irrationally

ill make a guess you have a reason other than irrationality

 

[vulcan_]

the reason you feel anything is to evolve and succeed

i exist to evolve and succeed darwinistically

Looking back at this yeah, this starting to make a lot of sense we exist to evolve and succeed Darwinistically but for modern society, it's not the way forward to advance humanity I would say. I'm curious what you think is the best way @noobs

 

[hypernormie]

I have zero information about what happens in the future because I’m not a time traveler, doesn’t mean I can’t make inferences

You are not understanding. You do have inferences about what happens in the future because you currently exist in time. Whether that time actually extends into the future or it’s all an illusion is irrelevant because you currently DO exist in some state. Therefore you can make inferences, those inferences may not be accurate. The universe could be deleted out of existence the very next moment and that wouldn’t change the fact that in this moment you have some piece of data (accurate or not) to make an inference about the probability of that. This does not hold true for death, a state in which you do not exist and have no way of conceptualizing. You cannot make inferences from a state you have zero information on.

 

[(In)CelibatePsycho2]

You are not understanding. You do have inferences about what happens in the future because you currently exist in time. Whether that time actually extends into the future or it’s all an illusion is irrelevant because you currently DO exist in some state. Therefore you can make inferences, those inferences may not be accurate. The universe could be deleted out of existence the very next moment and that wouldn’t change the fact that in this moment you have some piece of data (accurate or not) to make an inference about the probability of that. This does not hold true for death, a state in which you do not exist and have no way of conceptualizing. You cannot make inferences from a state you have zero information on.

You are arbitrarily assuming that the state of death vs life is “different” to such an extreme degree that they should be viewed as completely separate, and thus the state of life cannot be used to make inferences about the state of death. I can also argue that the state of the future is “different” to a very extreme degree from the state of the “past”. However this difference does not prevent me from making inferences
Sorry for late reply I was studying for my niggerslop exams

 

[Pakicel]

Roping is a perfectly valid solution to many problems but it’s the last resort.

 

[FoolYoungHi]

Roping is ending suffering. Humans dont want to suffer in general unless you are a devout Christian

 

[Pakicel]

Roping is ending suffering. Humans dont want to suffer in general unless you are a devout Christian

Yes.

It’s sad that we don’t offer assisted suicide to people with awful lives. It would prevent so much suffering.

 

[Jonas2k7]

@Carbine

 

[hypernormie]

You are arbitrarily assuming that the state of death vs life is “different” to such an extreme degree that they should be viewed as completely separate, and thus the state of life cannot be used to make inferences about the state of death. I can also argue that the state of the future is “different” to a very extreme degree from the state of the “past”. However this difference does not prevent me from making inferences
Sorry for late reply I was studying for my niggerslop exams

You can’t make anything but an arbitrary assumption about the state that is death because you literally have no data on it. This does not hold true for the future because that is not an arbitrary assumption, even if your data is incomplete or wrong, you still are in a position to make some assumption, ie: your seeming current existence in time. This does not hold true for death, a state that you have zero data on entirely, not even bad data to make false assumptions.

 

[(In)CelibatePsycho2]

You can’t make anything but an arbitrary assumption about the state that is death because you literally have no data on it. This does not hold true for the future because that is not an arbitrary assumption, even if your data is incomplete or wrong, you still are in a position to make some assumption, ie: your seeming current existence in time. This does not hold true for death, a state that you have zero data on entirely, not even bad data to make false assumptions.

I simply disagree. I believe that you can only make weaker assumptions, but assumptions nonetheless.

Agree to disagree? This conversation is going nowhere

 

[hypernormie]

I simply disagree. I believe that you can only make weaker assumptions, but assumptions nonetheless.

Agree to disagree? This conversation is going nowhere
View attachment 3355376

That’s what I’m asking you, on what basis are you making an assumption on a state you have zero information on?

You can’t use information from the state of being alive to conjecture about the state of being dead because you have zero information about the state of being dead to make such a conjecture.

It’s clear you are mainly having a problem understanding the state of zero information because you keep claiming you can make an assumptions but assumptions can only be made with some information. However you don’t even have some information on the state of death, you have none. On what basis are assumptions being made if no data point you currently have can reliably be applied to said assumption?

It’s literally impossible to make an assumption because literally anything can happen after you die. You have no way of measuring the likely odds of any scenario over any other because you don’t have any information from which to weigh those odds. There isn’t a disagreement here, you are simply incorrect.

 

[noodlelover]

You can’t make anything but an arbitrary assumption about the state that is death because you literally have no data on it. This does not hold true for the future because that is not an arbitrary assumption, even if your data is incomplete or wrong, you still are in a position to make some assumption, ie: your seeming current existence in time. This does not hold true for death, a state that you have zero data on entirely, not even bad data to make false assumptions.

When you die you cease to exist.

There is no "after death" experience.

It's some crap people made up without any evidence.

An After life is about as equally probable as the moon being an alien life form that's only pretending to be the moon. Or an invisible pink unicorn in your living room.

When your brain is severed, you separate into two consciousnesses. Because consciousness is information processing. If two brains were merged, they would become one person.

When the brain deteriorates you loose memories and everything that makes up your personality.

The brain literally grows when you learn new information. If your memories magically existed in a soul, that wouldn't need to happen.

When you learn things new neural connections form.

We know enough about neural networks to create brains that learn.