Re: Accepting mortality WAS bickering

From: R. W. (
Date: Mon Jul 31 2006 - 12:25:46 MDT

I have so much work to do but I keep getting drawn into this. I'm having too much fun.
  I should go back to lurking and smiling.
  In short,
  I. Completely conquering death is very different from extending one's useful lifetime for the purpose of finer organization of consciousness.
  II. In order to conquer death:
       a. one would have to assume we exist in an independent reality separate of any higher organization of mind. i.e. we are not a child reality created from a prior singularity or higher being.
        1. One being (assuming you Phil) would have to assume singular control over all energy within this reality including all random quantum effects and all aspects of consciousness. In order to prevent any random deviation of this control or any deviation period, this mind would have to enjoin a steady state of being.
  rq1. Without the ability to deviate from a singular mindstate and utterly alone, how is this any different from death? (In fact, being completely aware that you are utterly alone without the abililty to grow or change or differentiate would be lame to me!)
   ra1. There is no possibility of fun in this state -- there is no meaning to draw from it because there are absolute constraints with no possibility of growth. You can't grow from a steady state. You wouldn't even be able to think because thinking requires comparison of alternatives and since you are the only existence in an eternal steady state with your chosen alternative, there is nothing else to think about.
  ra2. If by chance you did not choose absolute control and were near the monotone, you would ultimately have a binary choice -- exist or not. You could hold on for only a moment because there is no relative time to you. The logical choice would be to let go at some point, any point, every point when you realize you would have absolute control and nothing to do with it. So before you conquer that last bit of quantum consciousness and go monotonous remember there is no turning back. If we are in an independent reality, your future is eternal monotony with plenty of boredom and quiet solitude. Again, how is this any different then death?
  rq2. Given the 'possibility' of discretely recursive beingness as a unique energy pattern emerging at some future point in reality, accepting mortality -- a discrete end to a continual process -- seems much wiser.
     b. assuming we do not live in an independent reality; but a dependent reality part of a much more complex organization of mind, it would be impossible to ever achieve a1.
  The higher consciousness could simply 'pull the plug' for lack of a better metaphor or redistribute your consciousness at will.
  Ultimately accepting dependent reality is accepting constraints. It is the constraints which allow us to experience consciousness as we know it as well as consciousness we don't know with the exception of the prime reality. There are finer and finer expressions of consciousness within dependent reality. If this is your goal -- to achieve finer existence -- then have fun with it! Just know that G-d is the only independent reality. Evertyhting else is dependent by causality. How many ways over countless realities does this have to be explained?
  Of course, this is only philosophy and what does that have to do with reality anyways?
Philip Goetz <> wrote:
  On 7/26/06, Olie Lamb wrote:
> Below...
> I've long thought it a pity that Transhumanists-in-general put such
> emphasis on staving off death. An excessive fear of death has long
> seemed to me to be an indicator of... I don't know whether
> "childishness" or "lack of wisdom" is the better way to put it.

I've long thought it a pity that non-transhumanists equate trying to
conquer death with a childish fear of death and a lack of wisdom.
This is like saying Sir Edmund Hillary had a childish fear of

There are reasons why over-attachment to one personal consciousness is
problematic... but I'm unlikely to discuss them with someone who says
that accepting mortality is wisdom. Not because that statement is
wrong, but because, in decades of discussing the matter, I have so far
found that
a) many people explain their acceptance of mortality as wisdom, and
b) not one of those people was wise.

- Phil

Do you Yahoo!?
 Next-gen email? Have it all with the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:56 MDT