date:20141221



> On 22-Dec-2014, at 12:15 pm, LizR  wrote:
> 
>> On 22 December 2014 at 20:12, Samiya Illias  wrote:
>> 
>>> On 22-Dec-2014, at 11:38 am, Stathis Papaioannou  wrote:
>>> What if life were not a sacred gift, but a phenomenon in a godless universe 
>>> with no meaning outside of itself? Would murder be OK then? 
>> No. Life is still precious to each individual, and an irreplaceable loss in 
>> this world, even if there are other worlds we could be alive in or move on 
>> to. 
> 
> I agree with you up to "...in this world" but I can't see what the rest of 
> the sentence has to do with the original question.
> 
Multiverse, Many Worlds, and other theories as opposed to Oblivion, even if we 
rule out the possibility of the Hereafter, as per the question: 'a phenomenon 
in a godless universe with no meaning outside of itself?' Or not if I stick 
strictly to the word 'universe'? I dunno :) 
> 
> -- 
> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


Stathis Papaioannou wrote:



On Monday, 22 December 2014, Bruce Kellett > wrote:


Stathis Papaioannou wrote:

On Monday, 22 December 2014, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:

On 12/21/2014 5:09 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:

On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett

Following that reasoning, do you believe there
is nothing
wrong with murder?

How on earth did you get that from what I said?

If there's nothing wrong with oblivion, and murder leads to
oblivion, then there's nothing wrong with murder.

There's nothing wrong with having a lot of money, and bank
robbery
leads to having a lot of money, then there's nothing wrong
with bank
robbery.


Yes, but I did qualify it in a subsequent email with "unless you
can think of a worse effect [than oblivion] of murder".

You could have a go at thinking of a worse effect:

Murder is bad because it breaks God's commandment - but then it
would not be bad if if you didn't believe in God.

Murder is bad because it causes suffering in the person being
murdered - but then it would not be bad if you could murder
someone without causing suffering, for example by killing them
quickly in their sleep.

Murder is bad because of the loss felt by the family and friends
of the victim - but then it wouldn't be bad if you murdered a
homeless person whom nobody would miss.



I think you miss the logical point Brent and I have tried to make.
Your original argument is invalid because you implicitly make the
syllogism:

All oblivion is good. Murder leads to oblivion. Therefore murder is
good.

The fault is in universalizing the first statement. It really reads:
there is nothing wrong with oblivion, but some routes to oblivion
might be wrong. In other words, some oblivion is good, not all
oblivion. Once you take account of the routes to the oblivion of
death, your argument collapses.

This is exactly what Brent's example shows. There is nothing wrong
with having a lot of money, but some ways of obtaining a lot of
money are definitely wrong. There is no contradiction in holding
these ideas simultaneously.

So it is not the consequences of murder that are at issue, it is
that this is an illegitimate route to oblivion. (Although we could
open up a debate on the morality of euthanasia in appropriate
circumstances.)


As I said, I qualified my statement by saying "unless you can think of a 
worse effect [than oblivion] of murder". Robbing a bank is wrong not 
because having lots of money is wrong, but for other reasons. If you 
believe there is nothing wrong with oblivion, what other reasons are 
there for murder being wrong?


It is against the law? It is not the consequences of murder for the 
individual that are the issue. Most societies make laws against murder 
because society could not really function cohesively if there were no 
sanction against indiscriminate murder. It is a matter of social ethics, 
part of the contract that we make with each other in order to be able to 
live together in relative harmony. It is not that there are worse 
effects than oblivion for the murdered person, but that society could 
not function without prohibition of murder. Just as for bank robbery.


Bruce

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


On 12/21/2014 10:20 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:




If there's nothing wrong with oblivion, and murder leads to oblivion, then 
there's
nothing wrong with murder.



There's nothing wrong with having a lot of money, and bank robbery leads to 
having a
lot of money, then there's nothing wrong with bank robbery.


Yes, but I did qualify it in a subsequent email with "unless you can think of a worse 
effect [than oblivion] of murder".


Why should it have to be worse than oblivion.  Any bad effect that outweighs the good 
effect should be enough to make murder wrong. Of course the reason society makes murder 
wrong is that people don't like being killed, even if they were indifferent about being dead.


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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

On Monday, 22 December 2014, Bruce Kellett 
wrote:

> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
>> On Monday, 22 December 2014, meekerdb > meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/21/2014 5:09 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett
>>>
>>> Following that reasoning, do you believe there is nothing
>>> wrong with murder?
>>>
>>> How on earth did you get that from what I said?
>>>
>>> If there's nothing wrong with oblivion, and murder leads to
>>> oblivion, then there's nothing wrong with murder.
>>>
>>>  There's nothing wrong with having a lot of money, and bank robbery
>> leads to having a lot of money, then there's nothing wrong with bank
>> robbery.
>>
>>
>> Yes, but I did qualify it in a subsequent email with "unless you can
>> think of a worse effect [than oblivion] of murder".
>>
>> You could have a go at thinking of a worse effect:
>>
>> Murder is bad because it breaks God's commandment - but then it would not
>> be bad if if you didn't believe in God.
>>
>> Murder is bad because it causes suffering in the person being murdered -
>> but then it would not be bad if you could murder someone without causing
>> suffering, for example by killing them quickly in their sleep.
>>
>> Murder is bad because of the loss felt by the family and friends of the
>> victim - but then it wouldn't be bad if you murdered a homeless person whom
>> nobody would miss.
>>
>
>
> I think you miss the logical point Brent and I have tried to make. Your
> original argument is invalid because you implicitly make the syllogism:
>
> All oblivion is good. Murder leads to oblivion. Therefore murder is good.
>
> The fault is in universalizing the first statement. It really reads: there
> is nothing wrong with oblivion, but some routes to oblivion might be wrong.
> In other words, some oblivion is good, not all oblivion. Once you take
> account of the routes to the oblivion of death, your argument collapses.
>
> This is exactly what Brent's example shows. There is nothing wrong with
> having a lot of money, but some ways of obtaining a lot of money are
> definitely wrong. There is no contradiction in holding these ideas
> simultaneously.
>
> So it is not the consequences of murder that are at issue, it is that this
> is an illegitimate route to oblivion. (Although we could open up a debate
> on the morality of euthanasia in appropriate circumstances.)
>

As I said, I qualified my statement by saying "unless you can think of a
worse effect [than oblivion] of murder". Robbing a bank is wrong not
because having lots of money is wrong, but for other reasons. If you
believe there is nothing wrong with oblivion, what other reasons are there
for murder being wrong?


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

On 22 December 2014 at 20:12, Samiya Illias  wrote:

>
> On 22-Dec-2014, at 11:38 am, Stathis Papaioannou 
> wrote:
>
> What if life were not a sacred gift, but a phenomenon in a godless
> universe with no meaning outside of itself? Would murder be OK then?
>
> No. Life is still precious to each individual, and an irreplaceable loss
> in this world, even if there are other worlds we could be alive in or move
> on to.
>

I agree with you up to "...in this world" but I can't see what the rest of
the sentence has to do with the original question.

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Intelligence & Consciousness

On 22 December 2014 at 12:05, John Clark  wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 2:45 PM,   wrote:
>
> > Yesterday you said you had to conclude if the test detected
>> consciousness well it must also detect intelligence.
>
>
> That's not what I said, you've got it backward. Something can be conscious
> but not intelligent, but if it's intelligent then it's conscious.
> Consciousness is easy but intelligence
>
> > The Turing Test does not detect either one
>
>
The Turing test is a heurstic, one we apply all the time to other people
(and animals, robots, characters in films, etc). It suggests whether some
physical object might have something it is like to be that object.

>
>

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen



> On 22-Dec-2014, at 11:38 am, Stathis Papaioannou  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Monday, December 22, 2014, Samiya Illias  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On 22-Dec-2014, at 11:20 am, Stathis Papaioannou  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 On Monday, 22 December 2014, meekerdb  wrote:
> On 12/21/2014 5:09 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett  
>> wrote:
>> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> John Clark wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>   >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or 
>>> not
>>> you have a fear of death, or of oblivion
>>> 
>>> Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine
>>> Evolution
>>> invented the fear of death in the first place?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely cultural,
>>> and is not even associated with consciousness -- it comes   
>>> only with
>>> self-awareness and an inner narrative. Evolution gave living things
>>> an instinct for self-preservation. But you can have such an instinct
>>> operating healthily and still not fear death. Fear of death probably
>>> comes from a fear of the unknown, and is linked to the fear of
>>> prolonged suffering. But oblivion is oblivion -- it is not something
>>> to be feared because no-one has ever experienced it, or can ever
>>> experience it.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Following that reasoning, do you believe there is nothing wrong with 
>>> murder?
>> 
>> How on earth did you get that from what I said?
> 
> If there's nothing wrong with oblivion, and murder leads to oblivion, 
> then there's nothing wrong with murder.
 
 There's nothing wrong with having a lot of money, and bank robbery leads 
 to having a lot of money, then there's nothing wrong with bank robbery.
>>> 
>>> Yes, but I did qualify it in a subsequent email with "unless you can think 
>>> of a worse effect [than oblivion] of murder".
>>> 
>>> You could have a go at thinking of a worse effect:
>>> 
>>> Murder is bad because it breaks God's commandment - but then it would not 
>>> be bad if if you didn't believe in God.
>>> 
>>> Murder is bad because it causes suffering in the person being murdered - 
>>> but then it would not be bad if you could murder someone without causing 
>>> suffering, for example by killing them quickly in their sleep.
>>> 
>>> Murder is bad because of the loss felt by the family and friends of the 
>>> victim - but then it wouldn't be bad if you murdered a homeless person whom 
>>> nobody would miss. 
>> Murder is bad because life is a sacred gift! Even a homeless person deserves 
>> to live his/her life. Who knows, the homeless person may be happier than 
>> someone living in a palace. 
>> Samiya
> What if life were not a sacred gift, but a phenomenon in a godless universe 
> with no meaning outside of itself? Would murder be OK then? 
> 
No. Life is still precious to each individual, and an irreplaceable loss in 
this world, even if there are other worlds we could be alive in or move on to. 
Samiya 

> 
> -- 
> Stathis Papaioannou
> -- 
> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Monday, 22 December 2014, meekerdb > wrote:


On 12/21/2014 5:09 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:

On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett

Following that reasoning, do you believe there is nothing
wrong with murder?

How on earth did you get that from what I said?

If there's nothing wrong with oblivion, and murder leads to
oblivion, then there's nothing wrong with murder.


There's nothing wrong with having a lot of money, and bank robbery
leads to having a lot of money, then there's nothing wrong with bank
robbery.


Yes, but I did qualify it in a subsequent email with "unless you can 
think of a worse effect [than oblivion] of murder".


You could have a go at thinking of a worse effect:

Murder is bad because it breaks God's commandment - but then it would 
not be bad if if you didn't believe in God.


Murder is bad because it causes suffering in the person being murdered - 
but then it would not be bad if you could murder someone without causing 
suffering, for example by killing them quickly in their sleep.


Murder is bad because of the loss felt by the family and friends of the 
victim - but then it wouldn't be bad if you murdered a homeless person 
whom nobody would miss.



I think you miss the logical point Brent and I have tried to make. Your 
original argument is invalid because you implicitly make the syllogism:


All oblivion is good. Murder leads to oblivion. Therefore murder is good.

The fault is in universalizing the first statement. It really reads: 
there is nothing wrong with oblivion, but some routes to oblivion might 
be wrong. In other words, some oblivion is good, not all oblivion. Once 
you take account of the routes to the oblivion of death, your argument 
collapses.


This is exactly what Brent's example shows. There is nothing wrong with 
having a lot of money, but some ways of obtaining a lot of money are 
definitely wrong. There is no contradiction in holding these ideas 
simultaneously.


So it is not the consequences of murder that are at issue, it is that 
this is an illegitimate route to oblivion. (Although we could open up a 
debate on the morality of euthanasia in appropriate circumstances.)


Bruce

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

On Monday, December 22, 2014, Samiya Illias  wrote:

>
>
> On 22-Dec-2014, at 11:20 am, Stathis Papaioannou  > wrote:
>
>
>
> On Monday, 22 December 2014, meekerdb  > wrote:
>
>>  On 12/21/2014 5:09 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>>>

 On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett >>> > wrote:

 John Clark wrote:

 On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett >>> >
 wrote:

   >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or
 not
 you have a fear of death, or of oblivion

 Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine
 Evolution
 invented the fear of death in the first place?


 Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely cultural,
 and is not even associated with consciousness -- it comes only with
 self-awareness and an inner narrative. Evolution gave living things
 an instinct for self-preservation. But you can have such an instinct
 operating healthily and still not fear death. Fear of death probably
 comes from a fear of the unknown, and is linked to the fear of
 prolonged suffering. But oblivion is oblivion -- it is not something
 to be feared because no-one has ever experienced it, or can ever
 experience it.


 Following that reasoning, do you believe there is nothing wrong with
 murder?

>>>
>>> How on earth did you get that from what I said?
>>>
>>
>>  If there's nothing wrong with oblivion, and murder leads to oblivion,
>> then there's nothing wrong with murder.
>>
>>
>> There's nothing wrong with having a lot of money, and bank robbery leads
>> to having a lot of money, then there's nothing wrong with bank robbery.
>>
>
> Yes, but I did qualify it in a subsequent email with "unless you can think
> of a worse effect [than oblivion] of murder".
>
> You could have a go at thinking of a worse effect:
>
> Murder is bad because it breaks God's commandment - but then it would not
> be bad if if you didn't believe in God.
>
> Murder is bad because it causes suffering in the person being murdered -
> but then it would not be bad if you could murder someone without causing
> suffering, for example by killing them quickly in their sleep.
>
> Murder is bad because of the loss felt by the family and friends of the
> victim - but then it wouldn't be bad if you murdered a homeless person whom
> nobody would miss.
>
> Murder is bad because life is a sacred gift! Even a homeless person
> deserves to live his/her life. Who knows, the homeless person may be
> happier than someone living in a palace.
> Samiya
>
> What if life were not a sacred gift, but a phenomenon in a godless
universe with no meaning outside of itself? Would murder be OK then?


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen



> On 22-Dec-2014, at 11:20 am, Stathis Papaioannou  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Monday, 22 December 2014, meekerdb  wrote:
>>> On 12/21/2014 5:09 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
 On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett  
 wrote:
 Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> 
> On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett  > wrote:
> 
> John Clark wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett 
> wrote:
> 
>   >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or 
> not
> you have a fear of death, or of oblivion
> 
> Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine
> Evolution
> invented the fear of death in the first place?
> 
> 
> Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely cultural,
> and is not even associated with consciousness -- it comes only with
> self-awareness and an inner narrative. Evolution gave living things
> an instinct for self-preservation. But you can have such an instinct
> operating healthily and still not fear death. Fear of death probably
> comes from a fear of the unknown, and is linked to the fear of
> prolonged suffering. But oblivion is oblivion -- it is not something
> to be feared because no-one has ever experienced it, or can ever
> experience it.
> 
> 
> Following that reasoning, do you believe there is nothing wrong with 
> murder?
 
 How on earth did you get that from what I said?
>>> 
>>> If there's nothing wrong with oblivion, and murder leads to oblivion, then 
>>> there's nothing wrong with murder.
>> 
>> There's nothing wrong with having a lot of money, and bank robbery leads to 
>> having a lot of money, then there's nothing wrong with bank robbery.
> 
> Yes, but I did qualify it in a subsequent email with "unless you can think of 
> a worse effect [than oblivion] of murder".
> 
> You could have a go at thinking of a worse effect:
> 
> Murder is bad because it breaks God's commandment - but then it would not be 
> bad if if you didn't believe in God.
> 
> Murder is bad because it causes suffering in the person being murdered - but 
> then it would not be bad if you could murder someone without causing 
> suffering, for example by killing them quickly in their sleep.
> 
> Murder is bad because of the loss felt by the family and friends of the 
> victim - but then it wouldn't be bad if you murdered a homeless person whom 
> nobody would miss. 
> 
Murder is bad because life is a sacred gift! Even a homeless person deserves to 
live his/her life. Who knows, the homeless person may be happier than someone 
living in a palace. 
Samiya 
> 
> -- 
> Stathis Papaioannou 

> -- 
> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

On Monday, 22 December 2014, meekerdb  wrote:

>  On 12/21/2014 5:09 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
>
>
> On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett  > wrote:
>
>> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett >> > wrote:
>>>
>>> John Clark wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>   >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or
>>> not
>>> you have a fear of death, or of oblivion
>>>
>>> Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine
>>> Evolution
>>> invented the fear of death in the first place?
>>>
>>>
>>> Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely cultural,
>>> and is not even associated with consciousness -- it comes only with
>>> self-awareness and an inner narrative. Evolution gave living things
>>> an instinct for self-preservation. But you can have such an instinct
>>> operating healthily and still not fear death. Fear of death probably
>>> comes from a fear of the unknown, and is linked to the fear of
>>> prolonged suffering. But oblivion is oblivion -- it is not something
>>> to be feared because no-one has ever experienced it, or can ever
>>> experience it.
>>>
>>>
>>> Following that reasoning, do you believe there is nothing wrong with
>>> murder?
>>>
>>
>> How on earth did you get that from what I said?
>>
>
>  If there's nothing wrong with oblivion, and murder leads to oblivion,
> then there's nothing wrong with murder.
>
>
> There's nothing wrong with having a lot of money, and bank robbery leads
> to having a lot of money, then there's nothing wrong with bank robbery.
>

Yes, but I did qualify it in a subsequent email with "unless you can think
of a worse effect [than oblivion] of murder".

You could have a go at thinking of a worse effect:

Murder is bad because it breaks God's commandment - but then it would not
be bad if if you didn't believe in God.

Murder is bad because it causes suffering in the person being murdered -
but then it would not be bad if you could murder someone without causing
suffering, for example by killing them quickly in their sleep.

Murder is bad because of the loss felt by the family and friends of the
victim - but then it wouldn't be bad if you murdered a homeless person whom
nobody would miss.


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


On 12/21/2014 9:01 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:



On Monday, December 22, 2014, Samiya Illias > wrote:


If death leads to oblivion, then there isn't much to worry about.


Atheists worry about death as much as theists.

However, if death doesn't lead to oblivion, but rather to another state of 
being,
then there may be plenty to plan about!

None of us remember a life before this life. However, we all entered this 
life! We
entered this life in varied circumstances, and we are all living this life 
in very
varied circumstances. What if death just leads to another life, and what if 
it
depends on what we did with this life?



What if it doesn't?  What if pork is the perfect food?  What if women should be educated?  
What if the Quran is the rantings of a delusional illiterate?  Oh...never mind.  No need 
to speculate; there's actually evidence for all those things.


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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Natural gas: The fracking fallacy

All we know for certain is that oil and gas are finite resources that are
damaging the environment. The exact details of how this will play out are
uncertain, but we're getting more and more "once in a lifetime" weather
events around the world.

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

On Sunday, December 21, 2014 9:29:17 PM UTC, Bruce wrote:
>
> Jason Resch wrote: 
> > On Sunday, December 21, 2014, Bruce Kellett   
> > > wrote: 
> >  > Stathis Papaioannou wrote: 
> >  >> On Sunday, December 21, 2014, Bruce Kellett 
> >   >> wrote: 
> >  >> 
> >  >> What's wrong with oblivion? 
> >  >> 
> >  >>  Most legal systems punish murder more than any other crime, and 
> > those that have the death penalty reserve it for the worst offenders. 
> > Most criminals know that if they threaten a person with death they are 
> > more likely to comply than with other threats. Most religions, in the 
> > absence of any evidence, promise an afterlife. I think this all supports 
> > the fact that it is a common human trait to fear oblivion, even if as 
> > John says it's just a matter of taste. 
> >  >> 
> >  >> Stathis Papaioannou 
> >  > 
> >  > It might be a common human trait to fear oblivion, but it is even 
> > more irrational than belief in an afterlife. 
> > 
> > Why do you think belief in an afterlife is irrational? 
>
>
> If you read more carefully, you will see that I did not claim that. What 
> I said was that fear of oblivion 

Fear of Fearing and Loathing Oblivion while There. That's Irrational.

Fearing Oblivion in a Conscious Mental State While Alive and Well Here. 
That's Rational because Oblivion becomes one of many words all exchangeable 
and adequate. But the Fear is the same rational Fear of Death. Mainly 
having to show up and do all the dying.

I don't fear. Dying is very easy. I know, I've killed lots of people. 

- Snake Pliscin

> was more irrational than belief in the 
> afterlife. 

The afterlife can only be irrational in the fully resolved logics of the 
Science to Come, which between its internal fields and disciplines Reality 
itself finalized and understood. 

People do it and it's so long assumed Rational that deploying a logics in a 
Science that does not begin to approach resolutions for a finalized Reality 
into statements in logic implicitly presuming this were not so, on the 
contrairy done and dusted Death, the Afterlife and did I mention Death. 
More or less. Done and dusted. Well enough for Science Now to resolve 
finalized Reality. Sufficient that our Logics Now makes the legitimate 
binding ruling, the afterlife is [...your answer here]

> That leaves open the question of whether belief in the 
> afterlife is irrational or not. 
>

That's exactly right too. That's the rational most that this can be taken 
in the Science Now

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

2014-12-21 Thread 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List

On Monday, December 22, 2014, Samiya Illias  wrote:

> If death leads to oblivion, then there isn't much to worry about.
>

Atheists worry about death as much as theists.


> However, if death doesn't lead to oblivion, but rather to another state of
> being, then there may be plenty to plan about!
>
> None of us remember a life before this life. However, we all entered this
> life! We entered this life in varied circumstances, and we are all living
> this life in very varied circumstances. What if death just leads to another
> life, and what if it depends on what we did with this life?
>
> Samiya
>



>
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 8:47 AM, meekerdb  > wrote:
>
>>  On 12/21/2014 6:59 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:
>>
>> Who said it was irrational to stop an experience that one finds
>> pleasurable? All I am saying is that death comes to us all, and that it is
>> irrational to fear death per se, because once you are dead you are not
>> around to worry about missing anything.
>>
>>
>> I might be more accurate to say it is irrational to fear being dead.
>>
>> Brent
>> "I'm not afraid of dying. I just don't want to be there when it happens."
>> --- Woody Allen
>>
>> --
>> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
>> 
>> .
>> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
>> .
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>  --
> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
> .
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

RE: Natural gas: The fracking fallacy

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2014 7:01 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Natural gas: The fracking fallacy

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List 
 wrote:

>You are out of touch on energy matters my dear fellow. The EIA and even more 
>so many investment houses such as Goldman Sachs for example where making 
>spectacular predictions about the extent of the capacity of the shale deposits 
>in the continental US; predictions that have proved spectacularly wrong.

That's true, they were spectacularly wrong. Back in 2011 they bought oil at 
$130 a barrel because they predicted the price of oil could only go up. Today 
it's selling at $60 a barrel. So I repeat me request, after that epic disaster 
explain to me why I should pay attention to their latest prognostication

I was specifically referring to published reserve estimates by the EIA, as well 
as by Goldman Sachs and other institutions heavily vested in – and that have so 
far very much profited from -- this tight oil & gas sector bubble. 

You seem to be referring to futures. That is very different. What you refer to 
is simply a bad bet in the market; what I am referring to is shoddy 
unprofessional reporting at best (the EIA), but quite possibly fraudulent 
promotion of false projections and inflated reserves in order to profit from 
bamboozled investors. When the research arm of an investment house is leading 
the booster charge – “America the Saudi Arabia of Shale” etc. and is knowingly 
using these false projections and rosy projections in order for its investment 
arm to lure investors into believing they will profit and to make money from 
servicing the bubble it helped to create… that smells unethical and like 
something that should be illegal.

> The shale gas boom has the smell of a manic bubble 

Manic!? Bubble!? The price of gas is dropping like a rock, how in hell is that 
a bubble?

The entire tight oil & gas sector is in the initial stages of a major collapse 
in the US and Canada (tar sands) that is going to have major implications for 
the wider economy and may cripple our brittle too big to fail crony financial 
system of New York Fed favorites. Wait till we tax payers get the bill when 
these institutions begin imploding on the coming wave of bankruptcies in the 
tight oil & gas sector triggering an even larger financial tsunami off all of 
that worthless paper vanishing from their balance sheets. You will perhaps have 
a clearer idea then of what I intend by bubble.

>  How do you think drillers financed the very significant capital expenditures 
> required in order to horizontal drill and then frack a deposit? There is a 
> very big pile of debt; debt that will never yield a return, now that the 
> market has collapsed.

As I explained, the collapse of oil prices is very bad news for oil drillers 
and those who made a bet on them, but very good news for nearly everybody else. 

No it isn’t. This kind of wild swing in the price of oil is jeopardizing the 
continuity of future supply and development of upstream reserves. What the 
world needs is a steady and slowly rising price of oil, that reflects its 
increasing scarcity. This kind of wild swing is hugely damaging and you and I 
and everyone will pay for it when it swings the other direction and the 
upstream supplies that would have been there – given a steady predictable price 
scenario – are not there.

It takes many years sometimes even decades to fully develop a new field.

For example this current wild price swing is literally killing the North Sea 
oil sector. The whole upstream pipeline of capital allocation and development 
for bringing reserves to market in five to ten years or so of time has been 
badly de-railed.

The very fact you portray this wild price swing in such a vital commodity as 
energy as being a good thing for everyone else betrays your quite casual 
understanding of the energy sector and the very long time frame planning that 
goes on in that sector. If you do not grasp how swings like this wreak havoc on 
projects that may be still many years from market then finance is not your 
strong suite either.

 >> New technology, in particular fracking, has been very bad news for the oil 
 >> companies bottom line even if it's good new for the economy as a whole.

> Who do you think is doing the fracking?

Oh I don't know, I would guess  companies that are in the oil and gas sector.

> I’ll give you a hint… companies that are in the oil and gas sector.

And why would they do that? Because they know that if they don't somebody else 
will. Selling twice as many barrels at a third the price is bad, but selling 
the same number of barrels at a third the price is worse.  

Yeah go set up a drilling company John. It’s as easy as pie. Let me see 
horizontal drilling, f

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

If death leads to oblivion, then there isn't much to worry about. However,
if death doesn't lead to oblivion, but rather to another state of being,
then there may be plenty to plan about!

None of us remember a life before this life. However, we all entered this
life! We entered this life in varied circumstances, and we are all living
this life in very varied circumstances. What if death just leads to another
life, and what if it depends on what we did with this life?

Samiya

On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 8:47 AM, meekerdb  wrote:

>  On 12/21/2014 6:59 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:
>
> Who said it was irrational to stop an experience that one finds
> pleasurable? All I am saying is that death comes to us all, and that it is
> irrational to fear death per se, because once you are dead you are not
> around to worry about missing anything.
>
>
> I might be more accurate to say it is irrational to fear being dead.
>
> Brent
> "I'm not afraid of dying. I just don't want to be there when it happens."
> --- Woody Allen
>
> --
> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


meekerdb wrote:


On 12/21/2014 6:59 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:
Who said it was irrational to stop an experience that one finds 
pleasurable? All I am saying is that death comes to us all, and that 
it is irrational to fear death per se, because once you are dead you 
are not around to worry about missing anything. 


I might be more accurate to say it is irrational to fear being dead.


I'll accept that -- even the Woody Allen quote!



Brent
"I'm not afraid of dying. I just don't want to be there when it happens."
--- Woody Allen


--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Seeking astrophysicist willing to help an author

On 22 December 2014 at 16:42, Kim Jones  wrote:

>
> Does this mean it doesn't make sense any longer to go to work on Monday?
>

Depends if you've booked your xmas holidays.

If the burst only lasts a few minutes it *might* be OK to be on the other
side of the world from it (but see Larry Niven's "Inconstant Moon" for why
this ain't necessarily so).

Apparenty the latest measurements indicate WR-104's axis of rotation is
30-40 degrees from poniting at Earth so we may be in the clear.

Or maybe that's what THEY WANT YOU TO THINK while they build their
underground shelters...

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


On 12/21/2014 6:59 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:
Who said it was irrational to stop an experience that one finds pleasurable? All I am 
saying is that death comes to us all, and that it is irrational to fear death per se, 
because once you are dead you are not around to worry about missing anything. 


I might be more accurate to say it is irrational to fear being dead.

Brent
"I'm not afraid of dying. I just don't want to be there when it happens."
--- Woody Allen

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Seeking astrophysicist willing to help an author

2014-12-21 Thread Kim Jones



> On 22 Dec 2014, at 9:33 am, John Clark  wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 1:51 AM, Pierz  wrote:
>> 
>> Right. I've been looking into that and decided around 150ly would be about 
>> right for the effects he wants.
> 
> WR-104 is 2 Wolf Rayet stars in a very tight orbit 8000 light years
> away, normally that would be far too distant to cause the Earth any
> trouble but there are indications that when it goes supernovae (or
> more likely hyper-nova) it may produce a highly directional gamma Ray
> Burst, and if it does we know from examining the orbits of the 2 stars
> that the Earth would be very close to the center of the beam, and
> although the burst would only last a few seconds it could cause a lot
> of damage. Some think something similar happened during the
> Ordovician–Silurian mass extinction 440 million years ago and have
> started calling WR-104 The Deathstar.
> 
>  John K Clark
> 

Does this mean it doesn't make sense any longer to go to work on Monday?

K

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

On 12/21/2014 6:14 PM, John Clark wrote:

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 PM, Bruce Kellett > wrote:

>> Bob and Don are crossing a street when a large truck turns
a corner and is heading straight for both of them. Bob has a fear of
death but Don has a instinct for self preservation, please tell me
about the unrelated and very different procedures Bob and Don use to
get out of the way.

> They should both jump for safety! Don's instinct for self preservation
makes this
jump instinctive -- and successful. Bob's fear of death leads him to freeze
in his
tracks, and he is killed.

And for that reason the fear of death was weeded out of the gene pool 500 million years
ago. Oh wait it hasn't been.

>> It [death] is not something to be feared because no-one has ever
experienced it

> Your paraphrase is very telling. I said no-one has ever experienced
oblivion, not
that no-one has died [death].

If death doesn't mean oblivion then what the hell does it mean?

> since we all die at some point, fearing death is scarcely rational.

Having a emotion is neither rational nor irrational, it's just having a emotion. But
never mind, all this started because I said I planned to be cryogenically frozen
someday; explain to me why that demonstrates a greater fear of death than say going to
the doctor or even taking a vitamin pill.

The two are not comparable because I doubt that you think the latter two will prevent your
death or even delay it much. So the decisions differ greatly in both cost and benefit.
Most people estimate that the benefit of having their head frozen is very low because
resuscitation is improbable and a bearable second life is even more improbable and death
is still only delayed. So spending 100K$ on that vs. 1K$ on health care which promises
better quality of life, if not more life, seems to indicate you place an extremely high
value on continuation. On the other hand 100K$ is pocket change to some people and even
spending it on insurance against being abducted by aliens might not be indicative of fear.

Brent

> Fearing suffering is rational, however, because we actually experience that

and rationally try to avoid it.

If true and if somebody gets great joy out of having experiences why is it irrational to
fear that stopping but rational to fear something that gives us great pain will continue?

John K Clark

Bruce

About 57 billion human beings have lived on this planet over the last
million years, and although many have made similar sounding greeting
card style statements not one of those 57 billion has actually taken
that advice to heart and survived. In the last hour of his life I
don't think Robin Williams feared death, or at least there were other
things that he feared more.

John K Clark

John Clark wrote:

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett mailto:bhkell...@optusnet.com.au>> wrote:

>An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or
not
you have a fear of death, or of oblivion

Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine
Evolution
invented the fear of death in the first place?

Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely
cultural, and is
not even associated with consciousness -- it comes only with
self-awareness
and an inner narrative. Evolution gave living things an instinct for
self-preservation. But you can have such an instinct operating
healthily and
still not fear death. Fear of death probably comes from a fear of
the
unknown, and is linked to the fear of prolonged suffering. But
oblivion is
oblivion -- it is not something to be feared because no-one has ever
experienced it, or can ever experience it.

Bruce

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
To post to this group, send email to
everything-list@googlegroups.com
.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
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
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


On 12/21/2014 5:09 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:



On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett > wrote:


Stathis Papaioannou wrote:


On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett mailto:bhkell...@optusnet.com.au>> wrote:

John Clark wrote:

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett 
wrote:

  >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or 
not
you have a fear of death, or of oblivion

Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine
Evolution
invented the fear of death in the first place?


Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely cultural,
and is not even associated with consciousness -- it comes only with
self-awareness and an inner narrative. Evolution gave living things
an instinct for self-preservation. But you can have such an instinct
operating healthily and still not fear death. Fear of death probably
comes from a fear of the unknown, and is linked to the fear of
prolonged suffering. But oblivion is oblivion -- it is not something
to be feared because no-one has ever experienced it, or can ever
experience it.


Following that reasoning, do you believe there is nothing wrong with 
murder?


How on earth did you get that from what I said?


If there's nothing wrong with oblivion, and murder leads to oblivion, then there's 
nothing wrong with murder.




There's nothing wrong with having a lot of money, and bank robbery leads to having a lot 
of money, then there's nothing wrong with bank robbery.


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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett > wrote:


If there's nothing wrong with oblivion, and murder leads to
oblivion, then there's nothing wrong with murder.


You slip too easily from "oblivion is not something to be feared" to
"oblivion [death] is a universal good to be sought by and for everyone".

Do you really think that the only reason people don't go out and
commit widespread random murder is that they fear oblivion? The
reason most people don't commit murder is that they think that
murder is wrong. That has got nothing to do with fearing anything.
Sure, for some religious people, the reason they refrain from doing
wrong things is fear of eternal punishment. But that is a perversion
of religion even more than it is a lapse of common sense.


I think you're missing the point. If murder leads to oblivion and 
oblivion is not bad, then murder is not bad - unless you can think of 
some other worse effect of murder.



Phrase the argument differently:
Oblivion is good. Murder leads to oblivion. Hence Murder is good.

Do you still think this is a valid inference?

Getting to my destination quickly is good. Driving at 300 kph in a 
built-up zone gets me to my destination quickly. Therefore driving at 
300 kph in a built-up zone is good.


The problem arising from over-simplification is obvious in the second 
example. But you make the same mistake in you initial inference about 
murder.


Bruce

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Natural gas: The fracking fallacy

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

>You are out of touch on energy matters my dear fellow. The EIA and even
> more so many investment houses such as Goldman Sachs for example where
> making spectacular predictions about the extent of the capacity of the
> shale deposits in the continental US; predictions that have proved
> spectacularly wrong.

That's true, they were spectacularly wrong. Back in 2011 they bought oil at
$130 a barrel because they predicted the price of oil could only go up.
Today it's selling at $60 a barrel. So I repeat me request, after that epic
disaster explain to me why I should pay attention to their latest
prognostication

> The shale gas boom has the smell of a manic bubble

Manic!? Bubble!? The price of gas is dropping like a rock, how in hell is
that a bubble?

>  How do you think drillers financed the very significant capital
> expenditures required in order to horizontal drill and then frack a
> deposit? There is a very big pile of debt; debt that will never yield a
> return, now that the market has collapsed.
>

As I explained, the collapse of oil prices is very bad news for oil
drillers and those who made a bet on them, but very good news for nearly
everybody else.

 >> New technology, in particular fracking, has been very bad news for the
>> oil companies bottom line even if it's good new for the economy as a whole.
>
>

> Who do you think is doing the fracking?
>

Oh I don't know, I would guess  companies that are in the oil and gas
sector.

> > I’ll give you a hint… companies that are in the oil and gas sector.

And why would they do that? Because they know that if they don't somebody
else will. Selling twice as many barrels at a third the price is bad, but
selling the same number of barrels at a third the price is worse.

  John K Clark

>

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

John Clark wrote:
On Sun, Dec 21, 2014  PM, Bruce Kellett > wrote:

> > Bob and Don are crossing a street when a large truck turns
a corner and is heading straight for both of them. Bob has a fear of
death but Don has a instinct for self preservation, please tell me
about the unrelated and very different procedures Bob and Don use to
get out of the way.

 > They should both jump for safety! Don's instinct for self
preservation makes this jump instinctive -- and successful. Bob's
fear of death leads him to freeze in his tracks, and he is killed.

And for that reason the fear of death was weeded out of the gene pool 
500 million years ago. Oh wait it hasn't been.

 >> It [death] is not something to be feared because no-one has ever
experienced it

 > Your paraphrase is very telling. I said no-one has ever
experienced oblivion, not that no-one has died [death].

If death doesn't mean oblivion then what the hell does it mean?

No one is denying that death results in oblivion. But that is not the 
point. My claim was that no one has experienced oblivion. In common 
parlance, we routinely say that everyone experiences death at the end of 
their lives. Hence the distinction made between death and oblivion in 
this context.

 > since we all die at some point, fearing death is scarcely rational.

Having a emotion is neither rational nor irrational, it's just having a 
emotion. But never mind,  all this started because I said I planned to 
be cryogenically frozen someday; explain to me why that demonstrates a 
greater fear of death than say going to the doctor or even taking a 
vitamin pill.

No, it started because you said that you feared oblivion.

"... Cryonics could literally be the difference between life and death, 
between consciousness and oblivion."

To which I asked:

"What's wrong with oblivion?"

and you said:

"It's just not my cup of tea,"
The idea that oblivion was something to be feared then gradually took 
hold in the conversation.

 > Fearing suffering is rational, however, because we actually
experience that 

and rationally try to avoid it.

If true and if somebody gets great joy out of having experiences why is 
it irrational to fear that stopping but rational to fear something that 
gives us great pain will continue?

Who said it was irrational to stop an experience that one finds 
pleasurable? All I am saying is that death comes to us all, and that it 
is irrational to fear death per se, because once you are dead you are 
not around to worry about missing anything.

Bruce

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

On 12/21/2014 3:47 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote:

-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Kellett
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2014 3:27 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

John Clark wrote:

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett  wrote:

   >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or not
you have a fear of death, or of oblivion

Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine Evolution
invented the fear of death in the first place?

Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely cultural, and is not 
even associated with consciousness -- it comes only with self-awareness and an inner 
narrative. Evolution gave living things an instinct for self-preservation. But you can 
have such an instinct operating healthily and still not fear death. Fear of death 
probably comes from a fear of the unknown, and is linked to the fear of prolonged 
suffering. But oblivion is oblivion -- it is not something to be feared because no-one 
has ever experienced it, or can ever experience it.

Fear itself (for species that experience this sensation) can become an 
evolutionary dead end... a paralyzing negative force that diminishes rather 
than improves an individual organisms chances for survival. The fear of death 
is often an example of this kind of paralyzing useless fear, providing no 
evolutionary advantage. It is unlike say the -- fear/memory -- of something 
hot, the fear being the useful quick shortcut to the executive mind of the 
memory of past bad experiences with being burned by hot things. This is a 
useful rapid shortcut to the forebrain that is clearly useful in evolutionary 
terms.
Fear can either help the individual to act quickly or it can paralyze the 
individual; while a healthy fear can deliver a lightening quick (possibly 
life-preserving) alert to the conscious mind, paralyzing fear instead, is of no 
use for an individual's survival, and can often be a distinct evolutionary 
disadvantage. When someone is paralyzed with fear, they are worse than useless, 
in a critical life and death situation.

I think that's right.  I've never felt fear while in a life-threatening situation.  I felt 
trepidation before choosing to enter in to the situation.  And I've felt weak in the knees 
afterward.  But during I've always felt complete calm.

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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Democracy


On 12/21/2014 3:36 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
But it's not just the bandits, it's also game theory. Modern democracies suffer from a 
strong tendency to become Keynesian beauty contests. Very easily the optimal strategy 
for the big parties becomes a move to the average opinion. Some people say this is a 
good thing. I think it's a dangerous thing because it's self-reinforcing and because 
consensus and truth are very different things.


So are truth and personal opinion, especially on questions of value.  There are many 
advantages to cooperation and community.  So there is a trade-off between having rules of 
social interaction which support cooperation and limiting the rules so as to allow 
individuality. In general I'd say modern societies provide far more individual freedom 
than did the tribal societies in which humans evolved - just as a big city provides much 
more anonymity than a small town.


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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett 
wrote:

> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
>> On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett > > wrote:
>>
>> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>> On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett
>> mailto:bhkell...@optusnet.com.au>>
>> wrote:
>> John Clark wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett
>> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>   >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to
>> whether or not
>> you have a fear of death, or of oblivion
>>
>> Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you
>> imagine
>> Evolution
>> invented the fear of death in the first place?
>>
>>
>> Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely
>> cultural,
>> and is not even associated with consciousness -- it comes
>> only with
>> self-awareness and an inner narrative. Evolution gave living
>> things
>> an instinct for self-preservation. But you can have such an
>> instinct
>> operating healthily and still not fear death. Fear of death
>> probably
>> comes from a fear of the unknown, and is linked to the fear of
>> prolonged suffering. But oblivion is oblivion -- it is not
>> something
>> to be feared because no-one has ever experienced it, or can
>> ever
>> experience it.
>>
>>
>> Following that reasoning, do you believe there is nothing wrong
>> with murder?
>>
>>
>> How on earth did you get that from what I said?
>>
>>
>> If there's nothing wrong with oblivion, and murder leads to oblivion,
>> then there's nothing wrong with murder.
>>
>
> You slip too easily from "oblivion is not something to be feared" to
> "oblivion [death] is a universal good to be sought by and for everyone".
>
> Do you really think that the only reason people don't go out and commit
> widespread random murder is that they fear oblivion? The reason most people
> don't commit murder is that they think that murder is wrong. That has got
> nothing to do with fearing anything. Sure, for some religious people, the
> reason they refrain from doing wrong things is fear of eternal punishment.
> But that is a perversion of religion even more than it is a lapse of common
> sense.
>

I think you're missing the point. If murder leads to oblivion and oblivion
is not bad, then murder is not bad - unless you can think of some other
worse effect of murder.


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


On 12/21/2014 3:27 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:

John Clark wrote:

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett  wrote:

  >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or not
you have a fear of death, or of oblivion

Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine Evolution
invented the fear of death in the first place?


Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely cultural, and is not even 
associated with consciousness -- it comes only with self-awareness and an inner 
narrative. Evolution gave living things an instinct for self-preservation.


And not exactly "self" preservation.  As Dawkins point out, it's genetic preservation. 
Many animals will sacrifice themselves to save their progency.


Brent
"I'd give up my life for two brothers or eight cousins."
  --- J. B. S. Haldane

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014  PM, Bruce Kellett  wrote:

>
>> >> Bob and Don are crossing a street when a large truck turns
>> a corner and is heading straight for both of them. Bob has a fear of
>> death but Don has a instinct for self preservation, please tell me
>> about the unrelated and very different procedures Bob and Don use to
>> get out of the way.
>>
>
> > They should both jump for safety! Don's instinct for self preservation
> makes this jump instinctive -- and successful. Bob's fear of death leads
> him to freeze in his tracks, and he is killed.


And for that reason the fear of death was weeded out of the gene pool 500
million years ago. Oh wait it hasn't been.

 >> It [death] is not something to be feared because no-one has ever
> experienced it


> > Your paraphrase is very telling. I said no-one has ever experienced
> oblivion, not that no-one has died [death].


If death doesn't mean oblivion then what the hell does it mean?

> since we all die at some point, fearing death is scarcely rational.


Having a emotion is neither rational nor irrational, it's just having a
emotion. But never mind,  all this started because I said I planned to be
cryogenically frozen someday; explain to me why that demonstrates a greater
fear of death than say going to the doctor or even taking a vitamin pill.


> > Fearing suffering is rational, however, because we actually experience
> that

and rationally try to avoid it.


If true and if somebody gets great joy out of having experiences why is it
irrational to fear that stopping but rational to fear something that gives
us great pain will continue?

  John K Clark









>
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
>  About 57 billion human beings have lived on this planet over the last
>> million years, and although many have made similar sounding greeting
>> card style statements not one of those 57 billion has actually taken
>> that advice to heart and survived. In the last hour of his life I
>> don't think Robin Williams feared death, or at least there were other
>> things that he feared more.
>>
>>   John K Clark
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  John Clark wrote:
>>>
 On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett  wrote:

   >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or not
 you have a fear of death, or of oblivion

 Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine Evolution
 invented the fear of death in the first place?

>>>
>>> Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely cultural, and
>>> is not even associated with consciousness -- it comes only with
>>> self-awareness and an inner narrative. Evolution gave living things an
>>> instinct for self-preservation. But you can have such an instinct operating
>>> healthily and still not fear death. Fear of death probably comes from a
>>> fear of the unknown, and is linked to the fear of prolonged suffering. But
>>> oblivion is oblivion -- it is not something to be feared because no-one has
>>> ever experienced it, or can ever experience it.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bruce
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>
>>
> --
> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett > wrote:


Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett
mailto:bhkell...@optusnet.com.au>>
wrote:
John Clark wrote:

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett

wrote:

  >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to
whether or not
you have a fear of death, or of oblivion

Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine
Evolution
invented the fear of death in the first place?


Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely
cultural,
and is not even associated with consciousness -- it comes
only with
self-awareness and an inner narrative. Evolution gave living
things
an instinct for self-preservation. But you can have such an
instinct
operating healthily and still not fear death. Fear of death
probably
comes from a fear of the unknown, and is linked to the fear of
prolonged suffering. But oblivion is oblivion -- it is not
something
to be feared because no-one has ever experienced it, or can ever
experience it.


Following that reasoning, do you believe there is nothing wrong
with murder?


How on earth did you get that from what I said?


If there's nothing wrong with oblivion, and murder leads to oblivion, 
then there's nothing wrong with murder. 


You slip too easily from "oblivion is not something to be feared" to 
"oblivion [death] is a universal good to be sought by and for everyone".


Do you really think that the only reason people don't go out and commit 
widespread random murder is that they fear oblivion? The reason most 
people don't commit murder is that they think that murder is wrong. That 
has got nothing to do with fearing anything. Sure, for some religious 
people, the reason they refrain from doing wrong things is fear of 
eternal punishment. But that is a perversion of religion even more than 
it is a lapse of common sense.


Bruce

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


On 12/21/2014 11:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
There is a difference between fearing oblivion, and fearing having a too much short 
life. That is why we find the death of our parents very sad but somehow acceptable, and 
we find unbearable and unconsolable with the death of a child.


That fear is your genes "fear" of not being propagated.

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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

2014-12-21 Thread 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List

On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett 
wrote:

> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
>>
>> On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett > > wrote:
>>
>> John Clark wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett 
>> wrote:
>>
>>   >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or
>> not
>> you have a fear of death, or of oblivion
>>
>> Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine
>> Evolution
>> invented the fear of death in the first place?
>>
>>
>> Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely cultural,
>> and is not even associated with consciousness -- it comes only with
>> self-awareness and an inner narrative. Evolution gave living things
>> an instinct for self-preservation. But you can have such an instinct
>> operating healthily and still not fear death. Fear of death probably
>> comes from a fear of the unknown, and is linked to the fear of
>> prolonged suffering. But oblivion is oblivion -- it is not something
>> to be feared because no-one has ever experienced it, or can ever
>> experience it.
>>
>>
>> Following that reasoning, do you believe there is nothing wrong with
>> murder?
>>
>
> How on earth did you get that from what I said?
>

If there's nothing wrong with oblivion, and murder leads to oblivion, then
there's nothing wrong with murder.


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

RE: Natural gas: The fracking fallacy

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2014 4:03 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Natural gas: The fracking fallacy

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014  'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List 
 wrote:

>> The fact that just 5 years ago NOBODY predicted the huge increase in oil and 
>> gas production that occurred doesn't exactly fill me with confidence that 
>> those same experts who got it so wrong 5 years ago have got it right this 
>> time.

 J> John – Definitely *NOT* the same experts who got their hyper optimistic 
assumption predictions  so terribly wrong.

NOBODY was making  hyper optimistic predictions 5 years ago, everybody was 
running around screaming about "peak oil" and crying that we were all doomed, 
instead oil and gas production skyrocketed. So I ask you, when a self described 
expert makes a prediction that turns out to be spectacularly wrong how 
seriously should we take their next prediction? 

You are out of touch on energy matters my dear fellow. The EIA and even more so 
many investment houses such as Goldman Sachs for example where making 
spectacular predictions about the extent of the capacity of the shale deposits 
in the continental US; predictions that have proved spectacularly wrong. There 
is a whole lot of conflict of interest in this story; it is important to keep 
in mind the scale of this boom; to understand that huge fortunes were at stake 
and made. The investment banks are in this up to their necks, drunk on the easy 
money of quantitative easement. The derivatives mountain that has been built 
around the shale sector boom is huge; there are massive secondary financial 
bets and securitized debt, packaged up and sold as derivatives that have also 
mushroomed out around this market.

The thing to keep in mind is the scale of this boom. The financial scale of it. 
How much debt it has created and how this debt has been securitized. 

Ask yourself who is holding the risk? Who made the profit?

The shale bubble is a multiple trillion dollar bonanza for the smart money and 
a Ponzi scheme for the general public that – mark my words – will be left 
holding the bill for all those derivatives that now seem about to go belly up.

The shale gas boom has the smell of a manic bubble – and many insiders 
certainly made a lot of money from it. However when, ultimately, the long term 
numbers are crunched and the return on capital invested is figured out the 
fundamental false premise of the mania will become as clear to us (in ten 
years), as the Tulip mania became to the Dutch, after that quintessential 
bubble burst on them long ago. 

Outside of some small sweet spots the shale oil deposits do not yield a 
marginal rate of return on capital. The boom was also built upon and predicated 
on applying the historic data on depletion rates – derived from traditional gas 
wells – to fracked deposits. It turns out – unsurprisingly – that fracked wells 
behave differently from wells producing from traditional non-fracked porous 
deposits; their rates of depletion are *far* higher. Insider petroleum 
geologists have known this for a while, but the shale boosters preferred the 
look and feel of those traditional depletion curves and promoted that alternate 
reality.

> if you look at how interest rates for junk bonds for drillers etc. have 
> recently shot up, the picture becomes clear.

Very clear indeed!  Of course cost of buying a oil bond has gone down and thus 
the interest it produces has gone up, it's economics 101. As recently as 2011 
oil was going for $130 a barrel, today it's about $60, so obviously the cost of 
buying a bond that uses oil as collateral is going to go down and its interest 
rate is going to go up. Today the oil reserves of oil companies is worth less 
than half what it was worth in 2011, so it's going to cost more for oil 
companies to borrow money, and borrowing money is what a bond is all about.

Not just that John. How do you think drillers financed the very significant 
capital expenditures required in order to horizontal drill and then frack a 
deposit? There is a very big pile of debt; debt that will never yield a return, 
now that the market has collapsed.

New technology, in particular fracking, has been very bad news for the oil 
companies bottom line even if it's good new for the economy as a whole.

Who do you think is doing the fracking? I’ll give you a hint… companies that 
are in the oil and gas sector.

Chris

John K Clark

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more optio

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


John Clark wrote:
On Sun, Dec 21, 2014  Bruce Kellett > wrote:


 >> Following that reasoning, do you believe there is nothing wrong
with murder?

 


 > How on earth did you get that from what I said?


I don't think Stathis needed to make a very big step to get to that from 
what you said.



 A small step in the wrong direction can be fatal..

Bruce

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


John Clark wrote:

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014  Bruce Kellett  wrote:


Evolution gave living things an instinct for self-preservation. But you can 
have such an instinct operating healthily and still not fear death.


Unrelated? Bob and Don are crossing a street when a large truck turns
a corner and is heading straight for both of them. Bob has a fear of
death but Don has a instinct for self preservation, please tell me
about the unrelated and very different procedures Bob and Don use to
get out of the way.


They should both jump for safety! Don's instinct for self preservation 
makes this jump instinctive -- and successful. Bob's fear of death leads 
him to freeze in his tracks, and he is killed.





It [death] is not something to be feared because no-one has ever experienced it


Your paraphrase is very telling. I said no-one has ever experienced 
oblivion, not that no-one has died [death]. Plenty of people have died, 
and many have suffered from the experience of dying. But since we all 
die at some point, fearing death is scarcely rational. Fearing suffering 
is rational, however, because we actually experience that and rationally 
try to avoid it.


Bruce



About 57 billion human beings have lived on this planet over the last
million years, and although many have made similar sounding greeting
card style statements not one of those 57 billion has actually taken
that advice to heart and survived. In the last hour of his life I
don't think Robin Williams feared death, or at least there were other
things that he feared more.

  John K Clark










John Clark wrote:

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett  wrote:

  >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or not
you have a fear of death, or of oblivion

Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine Evolution
invented the fear of death in the first place?


Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely cultural, and is not 
even associated with consciousness -- it comes only with self-awareness and an inner 
narrative. Evolution gave living things an instinct for self-preservation. But you can 
have such an instinct operating healthily and still not fear death. Fear of death 
probably comes from a fear of the unknown, and is linked to the fear of prolonged 
suffering. But oblivion is oblivion -- it is not something to be feared because no-one 
has ever experienced it, or can ever experience it.


Bruce

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.




--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014  Bruce Kellett  wrote:

>> Following that reasoning, do you believe there is nothing wrong with
> murder?
>


 > How on earth did you get that from what I said?
>

I don't think Stathis needed to make a very big step to get to that from
what you said.

  John K Clark

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014  Bruce Kellett  wrote:

> > Evolution gave living things an instinct for self-preservation. But you can 
> > have such an instinct operating healthily and still not fear death.

Unrelated? Bob and Don are crossing a street when a large truck turns
a corner and is heading straight for both of them. Bob has a fear of
death but Don has a instinct for self preservation, please tell me
about the unrelated and very different procedures Bob and Don use to
get out of the way.

> It [death] is not something to be feared because no-one has ever experienced 
> it

About 57 billion human beings have lived on this planet over the last
million years, and although many have made similar sounding greeting
card style statements not one of those 57 billion has actually taken
that advice to heart and survived. In the last hour of his life I
don't think Robin Williams feared death, or at least there were other
things that he feared more.

  John K Clark









> John Clark wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett  wrote:
>>
>>   >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or not
>> you have a fear of death, or of oblivion
>>
>> Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine Evolution
>> invented the fear of death in the first place?
>
>
> Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely cultural, and is 
> not even associated with consciousness -- it comes only with self-awareness 
> and an inner narrative. Evolution gave living things an instinct for 
> self-preservation. But you can have such an instinct operating healthily and 
> still not fear death. Fear of death probably comes from a fear of the 
> unknown, and is linked to the fear of prolonged suffering. But oblivion is 
> oblivion -- it is not something to be feared because no-one has ever 
> experienced it, or can ever experience it.
>
>
> Bruce
>
> --
> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


Stathis Papaioannou wrote:


On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett > wrote:


John Clark wrote:

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett 
wrote:

  >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or not
you have a fear of death, or of oblivion

Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine
Evolution
invented the fear of death in the first place?


Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely cultural,
and is not even associated with consciousness -- it comes only with
self-awareness and an inner narrative. Evolution gave living things
an instinct for self-preservation. But you can have such an instinct
operating healthily and still not fear death. Fear of death probably
comes from a fear of the unknown, and is linked to the fear of
prolonged suffering. But oblivion is oblivion -- it is not something
to be feared because no-one has ever experienced it, or can ever
experience it.


Following that reasoning, do you believe there is nothing wrong with murder?


How on earth did you get that from what I said?

Bruce


--
Stathis Papaioannou



--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

On Monday, December 22, 2014, Bruce Kellett 
wrote:

> John Clark wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett  wrote:
>>
>>   >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or not
>> you have a fear of death, or of oblivion
>>
>> Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine Evolution
>> invented the fear of death in the first place?
>>
>
> Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely cultural, and
> is not even associated with consciousness -- it comes only with
> self-awareness and an inner narrative. Evolution gave living things an
> instinct for self-preservation. But you can have such an instinct operating
> healthily and still not fear death. Fear of death probably comes from a
> fear of the unknown, and is linked to the fear of prolonged suffering. But
> oblivion is oblivion -- it is not something to be feared because no-one has
> ever experienced it, or can ever experience it.
>

Following that reasoning, do you believe there is nothing wrong with murder?

-- 
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Natural gas: The fracking fallacy

2014-12-21 Thread 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014  'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

>> The fact that just 5 years ago NOBODY predicted the huge increase in oil
>> and gas production that occurred doesn't exactly fill me with confidence
>> that those same experts who got it so wrong 5 years ago have got it right
>> this time.
>
>
>  J> John – Definitely *NOT* the same experts who got their hyper
> optimistic assumption predictions  so terribly wrong.

NOBODY was making  hyper optimistic predictions 5 years ago, everybody was
running around screaming about "peak oil" and crying that we were all
doomed, instead oil and gas production skyrocketed. So I ask you, when a
self described expert makes a prediction that turns out to be spectacularly
wrong how seriously should we take their next prediction?

> if you look at how interest rates for junk bonds for drillers etc. have
> recently shot up, the picture becomes clear.

Very clear indeed!  Of course cost of buying a oil bond has gone down and
thus the interest it produces has gone up, it's economics 101. As recently
as 2011 oil was going for $130 a barrel, today it's about $60, so obviously
the cost of buying a bond that uses oil as collateral is going to go down
and its interest rate is going to go up. Today the oil reserves of oil
companies is worth less than half what it was worth in 2011, so it's going
to cost more for oil companies to borrow money, and borrowing money is what
a bond is all about.

New technology, in particular fracking, has been very bad news for the oil
companies bottom line even if it's good new for the economy as a whole.

John K Clark

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

RE: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen



-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Kellett
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2014 3:27 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

John Clark wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett  wrote:
> 
>   >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or not 
> you have a fear of death, or of oblivion
> 
> Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine Evolution 
> invented the fear of death in the first place?

>>Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely cultural, and is 
>>not even associated with consciousness -- it comes only with self-awareness 
>>and an inner narrative. Evolution gave living things an instinct for 
>>self-preservation. But you can have such an instinct operating healthily and 
>>still not fear death. Fear of death probably comes from a fear of the 
>>unknown, and is linked to the fear of prolonged suffering. But oblivion is 
>>oblivion -- it is not something to be feared because no-one has ever 
>>experienced it, or can ever experience it.

Fear itself (for species that experience this sensation) can become an 
evolutionary dead end... a paralyzing negative force that diminishes rather 
than improves an individual organisms chances for survival. The fear of death 
is often an example of this kind of paralyzing useless fear, providing no 
evolutionary advantage. It is unlike say the -- fear/memory -- of something 
hot, the fear being the useful quick shortcut to the executive mind of the 
memory of past bad experiences with being burned by hot things. This is a 
useful rapid shortcut to the forebrain that is clearly useful in evolutionary 
terms. 
Fear can either help the individual to act quickly or it can paralyze the 
individual; while a healthy fear can deliver a lightening quick (possibly 
life-preserving) alert to the conscious mind, paralyzing fear instead, is of no 
use for an individual's survival, and can often be a distinct evolutionary 
disadvantage. When someone is paralyzed with fear, they are worse than useless, 
in a critical life and death situation. 
-Chris

Bruce

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Democracy

2014-12-21 Thread Telmo Menezes

On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Bruno Marchal  wrote:
>
>
> On 18 Dec 2014, at 10:58, Telmo Menezes wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Bruno Marchal  wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 17 Dec 2014, at 13:03, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
>>
>> Starting from the fact that The NHS was introduced by Bismark in the
>> German Empire. for the same reasons that it is sustained today by
>> "democracies": populism.
>>
>> Since the introduction of NHS in England no new hospital was constructed
>> until recently.
>>
>> Democracy, an element of the liberal state, lives on premises that it can
>> not itself guarantee. (Bockenforde). It is based on the idea that people
>> will not act or vote for their inmediate interests  but will vote for
>> anything that maintain the common good forever.  That is absolutely false.
>> The only thing that maintain democracy is not democracy, but the morality
>> of the people. That morality is contunuously underminded by democracy
>> itself by means of the logic of populism and the formation of majorities
>> that produce false and impossible and incompatible political promises for
>> different groups of people. That divides and confront ones with others.
>>
>> It is based on the idea that a million idiot votes within an urn produces
>> wise decissions. On the idea that consensus produce truth.
>>
>> Democracy is destined to be hyaked by false democrats that do not believe
>> in democracy but want to abuse it from inside . They are the worst
>> antidemocrats. And the responsibles of that hyaking are te dumb people that
>> believe  acritically in democracy.
>>
>>
>>
>> I disagree. Democracy is based on the fact that people will vote for
>> their immediate interest, and that it will be implemented reasonably well
>> by opportunist politicians, and if they don't succeed people will stop
>> voting against them. (so it is not just vote, but a promise that you can
>> vote again if dissatisfied).
>>
>
> Given a currency that cannot be manipulated by a central bank and that is
> based on some limited resource, why not just implement democracy through
> the free market?
>
>
> OK, with some regulation, and a way to tackle propaganda, etc.
>
>
>
>
> Everything you pay for is an instant vote.
>
>
>>
>> Democracy is not perfect, and indeed it can regress easily to tyranny.
>> Like a living being can die, or a cell become cancerous, democracy can
>> easily be perverted and misused by bandits or ideologues. There is nothing
>> we can do about that, except investing in means (like education, logic,
>> reasoning, ...) helping people to not fall in the trap of the demagogs.
>>
>
> But once the education system is both compulsory and under the control of
> the state, if the state gets corrupted how to spread education logic and
> reasoning and still work within the system?
>
>
> Well, if the state is corrupted up to the point of teachning 2+2=5, it
> means the democracy does no more exist. In that case you need a revolution
> (non violent if possible).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> It is not the system which makes bad people. It is bad people which makes
>> the system bad.
>>
>
> I disagree. Systems can make bad people by learned helplessness.
>
>
> How?
>

In my view: by showing you over and over that virtue is not rewarded.
Brains are adaptive survival machines, very attuned to learn what works in
their environments.


>
>
>
>
>>
>> How americans have ever accepted prohibition remains a bit of a mystery
>> to me. In this context, I am not so much for legalization of drugs than for
>> penalization of prohibitionists, and education explaining how prohibition
>> illustrates well a technic to kill democracy and its most important key
>> features like the separation and independence of the different powers,
>> including the press.
>>
>> But the institutionalization of religion, especially when the state and
>> the religion are not well separated is a deeper cause of the problem for
>> democracies. It is that mentality which has made possible prohibition: the
>> very idea that other people can decide for you between the good and the
>> wrong. That would not have happened if the spiritual domain remained what
>> is really: an investigation domain like any others, calling for
>> experiments, experiences and dialog, and no normative rules ever. Those are
>> object of laws, voted by the people or representative delegates of the
>> people.
>>
>> What would you suggest in place of democracy? If a democracy can be
>> hijacked, don't you think that anything else couldn't even more
>> easily be hijacked?
>>
>
> I still have problems with discussing "democracy" as if it was a single,
> well defined system. If you tell me that a state is a democracy, I still
> want to know more, especially along two lines that I could call ethical and
> scientific:
>
> Ethic: what are the limits on what the majority can impose on the
> individual? How were these limits derived?
>
>
> The majority cannot impose anything, except rules of laws. "not killing,

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
And, the question *not* to ask Twain would have been, "did you feel like 
this when your young daughter died?" See, its not just about the 
splendid ego of the jolly, smug, atheist; but involves everybody. As 
good as the atheist is at shuffling off to Buffalo, there' other 
individuals involved. Its not just about us.


"I do not fear death, in view of the fact that I had been dead for 
billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered 
the slightest inconvenience from it."'

 --- Mark Twain



You are confusing a number of issues. A person can grieve for the loss 
of a loved one -- the death of the child or close friend, but that does 
not mean that one fears death, or that one should feel that life has 
been 'stolen' from the dead child. The dead child is not around to 
suffer any loss. It is only those who survive that can suffer loss. The 
child is not still there somewhere grieving because "bugger me, I am 
dead, and I have lost all the joys that are possible in a long and 
healthy life." The dead are not in a position to suffer -- loss or 
anything else.


Bruce

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


LizR wrote:
On 22 December 2014 at 08:06, meekerdb > wrote:



"I do not fear death, in view of the fact that I had been dead for
billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not
suffered the slightest inconvenience from it."'
--- Mark Twain

I have a suspicion that wasn't really Mark Twain, although I know it's 
often credited to him. People didn't say "billions and billions of 
years" much in those days (they do a lot more now, perhaps thanks to 
Carl Sagan). But I'd be happy to be proved wrong - do you know the 
original source?


I merely copied it from Brent -- and he has used it many times over the 
years.


Bruce

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

On 22 December 2014 at 08:06, meekerdb  wrote:

>
> "I do not fear death, in view of the fact that I had been dead for
> billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the
> slightest inconvenience from it."'
> --- Mark Twain
>
> I have a suspicion that wasn't really Mark Twain, although I know it's
often credited to him. People didn't say "billions and billions of years"
much in those days (they do a lot more now, perhaps thanks to Carl Sagan).
But I'd be happy to be proved wrong - do you know the original source?

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


John Clark wrote:

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett  wrote:

  >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or not
you have a fear of death, or of oblivion

Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine Evolution
invented the fear of death in the first place?


Evolution did not "invent a fear of death". That is purely cultural, and 
is not even associated with consciousness -- it comes only with 
self-awareness and an inner narrative. Evolution gave living things an 
instinct for self-preservation. But you can have such an instinct 
operating healthily and still not fear death. Fear of death probably 
comes from a fear of the unknown, and is linked to the fear of prolonged 
suffering. But oblivion is oblivion -- it is not something to be feared 
because no-one has ever experienced it, or can ever experience it.


Bruce

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Intelligence & Consciousness

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 2:45 PM,   wrote:

> Yesterday you said you had to conclude if the test detected consciousness
> well it must also detect intelligence.

That's not what I said, you've got it backward. Something can be conscious
but not intelligent, but if it's intelligent then it's conscious.
Consciousness is easy but intelligence

> The Turing Test does not detect either one

I am certain you have met people in your life that you wouldn't hesitate to
call brilliant, and you've met people you'd call complete morons, but if
you don't examine the same thing that the Turing Test does, behavior, how
do you make that determination?

 John K Clark

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 , Bruce Kellett  wrote:

  >An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or not
you have a fear of death, or of oblivion

Unrelated?? Don't be ridiculous! Why the hell do you imagine Evolution
invented the fear of death in the first place?

  John K Clark

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Seeking astrophysicist willing to help an author

2014-12-21 Thread 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 1:51 AM, Pierz  wrote:

> Right. I've been looking into that and decided around 150ly would be about 
> right for the effects he wants.

WR-104 is 2 Wolf Rayet stars in a very tight orbit 8000 light years
away, normally that would be far too distant to cause the Earth any
trouble but there are indications that when it goes supernovae (or
more likely hyper-nova) it may produce a highly directional gamma Ray
Burst, and if it does we know from examining the orbits of the 2 stars
that the Earth would be very close to the center of the beam, and
although the burst would only last a few seconds it could cause a lot
of damage. Some think something similar happened during the
Ordovician–Silurian mass extinction 440 million years ago and have
started calling WR-104 The Deathstar.

  John K Clark

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

2014-12-21 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List


And, the question not to ask Twain would have been, "did you feel like this 
when your young daughter died?" See, its not just about the splendid ego of the 
jolly, smug, atheist; but involves everybody. As good as the atheist is at 
shuffling off to Buffalo, there' other individuals involved. Its not just about 
us. 

"I do not fear death, in view of the fact that I had been dead for 
billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered 
the slightest inconvenience from it."'
 --- Mark Twain


 
 
 
-Original Message-
From: Bruce Kellett 
To: everything-list 
Sent: Sun, Dec 21, 2014 4:31 pm
Subject: Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


John Clark wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 Bruce Kellett  > wrote:
>  
> 
>  > It might be a common human trait to fear oblivion, but it is even
> more irrational than belief in an afterlife.
> 
> 
> The fact that you've obviously lived long enough to learn how to read 
> and write is proof positive that you too have a healthy fear of death.

An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or not you 
have a fear of death, or of oblivion. I think Mark Twain got it about 
right in the quote Brent gave:

"I do not fear death, in view of the fact that I had been dead for 
billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered 
the slightest inconvenience from it."'
 --- Mark Twain

Bruce

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

 

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

RE: Natural gas: The fracking fallacy

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of zibblequib...@gmail.com
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2014 11:53 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Natural gas: The fracking fallacy

On Sunday, December 21, 2014 6:40:21 PM UTC, John Clark wrote:

On Sat, Dec 20, 2014  'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List 
 > wrote:

>> In depth article in Nature warning against the current unfounded euphoric 
>> optimism regarding the scale of the future supply of shale gas (&oil).

The fact that just 5 years ago NOBODY predicted the huge increase in oil and 
gas production that occurred doesn't exactly fill me with confidence that those 
same experts who got it so wrong 5 years ago have got it right this time.  

John – Definitely *NOT* the same experts who got their hyper optimistic 
assumption predictions  so terribly wrong. This is pure misdirection on your 
part; not worthy of any response other than to point out that it is an attempt 
to misdirect. Don’t talk about the facts of the findings; throw up some 
irrelevant string of verbiage implying that these are the same set of 
researchers who produced the inaccurate future reserve and production 
predictions that were used by the shale sector to get Trillions of dollars of 
easy (Fed quantitative easement fueled) credit (much of which the tax payer may 
be on the hook for when this bubble blows up in our face)

Just like I mentioned around six months or so ago – the smart money is already 
fleeing the shale sector in the US and in fact if you look at how interest 
rates for junk bonds for drillers etc. have recently shot up, the picture 
becomes clear. It is a classic bubble and it is about ready to blow – will it 
sink the global economy with it?

Chris

  John K Clark

I aim to be in the fracking business by the year after next. For the past few 
months and foreseeably another 18 months I've been using things like forex 
spreadbetting as an objective basis for prediction construction using my theory 
of something that can be 'run' and followed up with analysis and testing. 
Basically the obvious primary measure is profit. 86M USD up last looked. 

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


John Clark wrote:
On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 Bruce Kellett > wrote:
 


 > It might be a common human trait to fear oblivion, but it is even
more irrational than belief in an afterlife.


The fact that you've obviously lived long enough to learn how to read 
and write is proof positive that you too have a healthy fear of death.


An instinct for self-preservation is unrelated to whether or not you 
have a fear of death, or of oblivion. I think Mark Twain got it about 
right in the quote Brent gave:


"I do not fear death, in view of the fact that I had been dead for 
billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered 
the slightest inconvenience from it."'

--- Mark Twain

Bruce

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


Jason Resch wrote:
On Sunday, December 21, 2014, Bruce Kellett > wrote:

 > Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
 >> On Sunday, December 21, 2014, Bruce Kellett 
mailto:bhkell...@optusnet.com.au>> wrote:

 >>
 >> What's wrong with oblivion?
 >>
 >>  Most legal systems punish murder more than any other crime, and 
those that have the death penalty reserve it for the worst offenders. 
Most criminals know that if they threaten a person with death they are 
more likely to comply than with other threats. Most religions, in the 
absence of any evidence, promise an afterlife. I think this all supports 
the fact that it is a common human trait to fear oblivion, even if as 
John says it's just a matter of taste.

 >>
 >> Stathis Papaioannou
 >
 > It might be a common human trait to fear oblivion, but it is even 
more irrational than belief in an afterlife.


Why do you think belief in an afterlife is irrational?



If you read more carefully, you will see that I did not claim that. What 
I said was that fear of oblivion was more irrational than belief in the 
afterlife. That leaves open the question of whether belief in the 
afterlife is irrational or not.


Bruce

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

2014-12-21 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List

Head freezing is the best of a bad lot, so to speak. I am that loony, voice in 
the wilderness, that believes scientists and philosophers should dedicate their 
time to coming up with proposals for preventing death (medical science), 
creating an afterlife (uploading?), and the answer to Humpty Dumpty's dilemma, 
resurrection. I expect to hear the chirping of crickets on this issue, but 
that's my view. 

-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: everything-list 
Sent: Sun, Dec 21, 2014 1:23 pm
Subject: Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 Bruce Kellett  wrote:

> It might be a common human trait to fear oblivion, but it is even more 
> irrational than belief in an afterlife.

The fact that you've obviously lived long enough to learn how to read and write 
is proof positive that you too have a healthy fear of death. 

  John K Clark

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen



On Thursday, December 18, 2014 5:46:05 PM UTC, John Clark wrote:
>
> Although I am in good health I have just signed up with Alcor to have my 
> head cryogenically frozen at 320 degrees below zero (77 degrees Kelvin) 
> after my death. I am not convinced it will work but I am convinced that if 
> it doesn't work it won't cause me to be any deader.  I'm curious if anyone 
> else on this list has done the same.
>
>  John K Clark  
>

I thought you'd said you were 77 for a moment. Do you tell your age? I'm 
nearly 6

This dude is like a spit for me, save I'm totally better looking and don't 
bump into everything walking down the road 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lyu1KKwC74

 
 

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

2014-12-21 Thread Jason Resch

On Sunday, December 21, 2014, Bruce Kellett 
wrote:
> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sunday, December 21, 2014, Bruce Kellett 
wrote:
>>
>> John Clark wrote:
>>
>> Somebody said that they didn't want to sign up for Cryonics
>> because they were worried about ending up as a brain in a vat,
>> and in any case they believed in Everett's Many Worlds so it is
>> unnecessary. Well, if Everett is correct then you've already
>> signed up for Cryonics in some universe and you are going to end
>> up as a brain in a vat regardless, so that eliminates that
>> objection for taking action now in this universe.  So if there
>> is no reason (other than economics) for not doing it is there
>> any positive reason for actually doing it? I believe there is.
>>
>> Consider the possibility that Everett is not correct, or at
>> least not 100% correct in the way you think, then Cryonics could
>> literally be the difference between life and death, between
>> consciousness and oblivion. In my opinion Many Worlds is the
>> best interpretation of Quantum Mechanics that has so far been
>> found, but I'm not willing to bet my life that a even better one
>> won't be found someday.
>>
>>  John K Clark
>>
>>
>> What's wrong with oblivion?
>>
>>  Most legal systems punish murder more than any other crime, and those
that have the death penalty reserve it for the worst offenders. Most
criminals know that if they threaten a person with death they are more
likely to comply than with other threats. Most religions, in the absence of
any evidence, promise an afterlife. I think this all supports the fact that
it is a common human trait to fear oblivion, even if as John says it's just
a matter of taste.
>>
>> Stathis Papaioannou
>
> It might be a common human trait to fear oblivion, but it is even more
irrational than belief in an afterlife.

Why do you think belief in an afterlife is irrational?

Jason

>
> Bruce
>
> --
> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen



On 19 Dec 2014, at 22:09, LizR wrote:

On 20 December 2014 at 07:04, spudboy100 via Everything List > wrote:

Yeah, the brain freeze headache to end all headaches.


My son was in a short movie called Brainfreeze, I think he was 11 at  
the time. He's Bjorn.


http://www.veoh.com/watch/v188754075k7Qdnfj?h1=Brainfreeze+The+Movie



Well done. Almost a parody of the salvia experience, except for the  
end of course ...


Bruno






--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Plotinus

On 15 Nov 2014, at 09:30, Samiya Illias wrote:

On 15-Nov-2014, at 12:31 pm, LizR wrote:

Organised religion in its entirety is a veiled threat.

Temporally, yes, because it is abused by humans against humans.
However, temporal worries and troubles should not deter us from
seeking the eternal. We come alone and we leave alone, and where we
came from and where we are headed are giant question marks. Is our
temporal existence without any purpose? Something within me says
that there is a purpose and there is much more before and after our
temporal existence, and we are here to figure that out, so that we
can head in the right direction when it's time to head onwards in
the eternal journey, or that is my fairytale.

If you limit it at that, this is close to what all universal machine
can already apprehend a similar fairytale. It is easier for them as we
humans have many layers of contextual prejudices.

We don't really come alone, as we are deeply linked to our mother, and
we don't leave alone but we are confronted to peopled realities.

You are the one capable of giving a purpose to your life. The trust
has to reside in the heart (in its philosophical or theological
meaning).

Have you read the book I suggested once on Plotinus by Brian Hines? It
is not too bad. It might help you in your quest, I think.

http://www.amazon.com/Return-One-Plotinuss-Guide-God-Realization/dp/0977735214/ref=la_B001K8G0E6_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1419194448&sr=1-1

Bruno

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-
l...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Natural gas: The fracking fallacy



On Sunday, December 21, 2014 6:40:21 PM UTC, John Clark wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2014  'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List <
> everyth...@googlegroups.com > wrote:
>
> >> In depth article in Nature warning against the current unfounded 
>> euphoric optimism regarding the scale of the future supply of shale gas 
>> (&oil).
>>
>  
> The fact that just 5 years ago NOBODY predicted the huge increase in oil 
> and gas production that occurred doesn't exactly fill me with confidence 
> that those same experts who got it so wrong 5 years ago have got it right 
> this time.  
>
>   John K Clark
>
 
I aim to be in the fracking business by the year after next. For the past 
few months and foreseeably another 18 months I've been using things like 
forex spreadbetting as an objective basis for prediction construction using 
my theory of something that can be 'run' and followed up with analysis and 
testing. Basically the obvious primary measure is profit. 86M USD up last 
looked. 

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Intelligence & Consciousness

On Sunday, December 21, 2014 5:53:39 PM UTC, John Clark wrote:
>
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 12:39 AM, meekerdb  > wrote:
>
> > A part of its information processing system that is highly integrated 
>> will indeed be conscious. However, IIT research has shown that for many 
>> integrated systems,one can design a functionally equivalent feed-forward 
>> system that will be unconscious. This means that so-called “p-zombies” can, 
>> in principle, exist: systems that behave like a human and pass the Turing 
>> test for machine intelligence, yet lack any conscious experience 
>> whatsoever. Many current “deep learning” AI systems are of this p-zombie 
>> type. Fortunately, integrated systems such as those in our brains typically 
>> require much fewer computational resources than their feed-forward “zombie” 
>> equivalents, which may explain why evolution has favored them and made us 
>> conscious.
>>
>
> If correct then it would be easier to make a super intelligent conscious 
> computer than to make a super intelligent non-conscious computer; as I've 
> said consciousness is easy but intelligence is hard. But the trouble is 
> even if the Integrated information theory is correct there is no way you 
> could ever prove it's correct. And I don't know why he said "made us 
> conscious", he should have said "made me conscious".
>

What I really feel sure of, is that you'd do your own theory no injury, and 
almost certainly develop it further and better.should you entertain 
taking a couple of concrete steps such as for instance, performing a 
personal reassessment of Turing's Test, and what that Test defined and what 
it simply did not, and could not have. One good reason is getting sight of 
the genius Alan Turing. There's a lot of things that get asserted or 
assumed round these parts, that Alan Turing simply would not have asserted 
or assumed in any circumstance. 

Basically because he would not have attached positive value in speculative 
conjecture involving advances with no foreseeable day of reckoning its 
value. There an exponentially larger prospect of leaving the overall 
situation greatly worsened by any action such as this, that involves, 
basically large assumptions. 

Look at his test. I only thought about his Test properly a day or two back. 
Prior to that I had regarded it as totally worn out and redundant long 
since. I had reasons. One strong one being that Turing himself had he lived 
would have returned to this matter many times. Many times. Had he lived, 
there would be little or nothing in play now that was the same unvarnished 
thing Turing said 65 years before. Turing would have gone on to invent 
theories with profound and enlightening predictions. He would have finished 
what he barely started in the domain of the universal principle of 
computation. That wouldn't have been in play for 50 years. 

The exception would be the Turing Test. Which is not to say it would not 
have superceded by much higher precision, much more knowledge rich tests. 
That may well have been so. But the Turing Test would still remain an 
extremely well designed structure, by a man who self-evidently by the Test 
itself, was and knew what it was to be, a genius. He was so minimal in 
everything he sought to break ground on. 

Yesterday you said you had to conclude if the test detected consciousness 
well it must also detect intelligence. The Turing Test does not detect 
either one to any definable standard. It does not. Nor depend in any sense 
that it would. Had Turing defined the test differently, such that the 
proposal was a human would apply intelligence tests in psychometrics and 
I.Q. and perhaps one of the ultra high I.Q. untimed tests such as the Mega 
Test or the Titan or whatever, one of those questions. Had Turing designed 
a test to be that way, his test would have been exactly what I had been 
assuming it was. Low or no, noteworthy value-add. It'd be another half 
assed boiled egg about A.I. 

it's almost as if you want his test to be like that. you surely see that 
the price would be a test that no longer embodied the property of 
self-evident truth, and the tautological value given to Darwin of "Once 
heard understood backdated to birth independently invented by moi" in short 
we say of NS "it must be true". Same Turing Test. 

But that property is only there because Turing never steps on speculative 
turf like "intelligence" or "consciousness". Had, then we'd have a 
speculative theory. Instead he returned to the self-conception of human 
conscious intelligence as a human universal familiar to every human. Turing 
didn't say our best and brightest would nee to be there. He didn't raise 
the A.I. massively higher I.Q. as a problem for the Test. Because it wasn't 
a problem, regardless what the differences were. Because it wasn't about 
intelligence. Nor consciousness. It was about and only about the event an 
A.I. emerged that identically replicated human conscious intelligence. 
Identically

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen



On 21 Dec 2014, at 05:45, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:




On Sunday, December 21, 2014, Bruce Kellett  
 wrote:

John Clark wrote:
Somebody said that they didn't want to sign up for Cryonics because  
they were worried about ending up as a brain in a vat, and in any  
case they believed in Everett's Many Worlds so it is unnecessary.  
Well, if Everett is correct then you've already signed up for  
Cryonics in some universe and you are going to end up as a brain in  
a vat regardless, so that eliminates that objection for taking  
action now in this universe.  So if there is no reason (other than  
economics) for not doing it is there any positive reason for  
actually doing it? I believe there is.


Consider the possibility that Everett is not correct, or at least  
not 100% correct in the way you think, then Cryonics could literally  
be the difference between life and death, between consciousness and  
oblivion. In my opinion Many Worlds is the best interpretation of  
Quantum Mechanics that has so far been found, but I'm not willing to  
bet my life that a even better one won't be found someday.


 John K Clark


What's wrong with oblivion?

Most legal systems punish murder more than any other crime, and  
those that have the death penalty reserve it for the worst  
offenders. Most criminals know that if they threaten a person with  
death they are more likely to comply than with other threats. Most  
religions, in the absence of any evidence, promise an afterlife. I  
think this all supports the fact that it is a common human trait to  
fear oblivion, even if as John says it's just a matter of taste.



There is a difference between fearing oblivion, and fearing having a  
too much short life. That is why we find the death of our parents very  
sad but somehow acceptable, and we find unbearable and unconsolable  
with the death of a child.


In the fear of death, they might be, or not, a fear of oblivion. Death  
means the end of your (present) life. It is sad, as an ending, but not  
necessarily as a "possible state for which no experience is possible",  
or any image we could (not) make of oblivion, if that exists.


For some suffering people death is a hope. As much as I am against  
death penalty, I am against normative rules in the domain of health,  
physical and spiritual. It is not the business of any organizations,  
although it should be a right to trust diverse organizations, (if  
diverse enough), but beware the con shaman/doctors which can only  
pullulate if the "diverse" criteria is too low.


I don't think it is a matter of taste. It is our basic program: eat  
and mate as much as possible, as long as you can,  ... and then the  
humans/Löbian infer infinity.


Bruno





--
Stathis Papaioannou

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen



On 21 Dec 2014, at 19:23, John Clark wrote:


On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 Bruce Kellett  wrote:

> It might be a common human trait to fear oblivion, but it is even  
more irrational than belief in an afterlife.


The fact that you've obviously lived long enough to learn how to  
read and write is proof positive that you too have a healthy fear of  
death.


Is it not an heathy fear of life? The fear to be wounded or sick, or  
not well?


To get my head frozen is a frightful idea to me, because you might  
give your code to the some madscientist in the future. Surviving might  
be easy, but surviving with some quality of life might not be that  
easy. I would do it, I would the society making some solid contract  
preventing this, but I am not sure I could even find the terms  
disallowing future unknown procedure.

The lives of the pioneers of immortality might be not be easy.

Theologically I tend to think that computationalism can make you  
understand that such material immortality is a sort of self- 
imprisoning. The hinduists might be right: the problem of death is  
more like how to avoid rebirth.


But I am aware that there is a "theological trap" here, something  
which is in some intensional variants of G* minus G instantiated  
formula, which is true, but wrong if asserted as if justified.


I think that comp can make you understand that we are already  
immortal. The problem is that we might not be who we usually think we  
are. The other problem is that if the fear of death can vanish, it  
might be replaced by a bigger fear of life and possible lives, other  
lives, etc. It replaces the mythical death (from the first person  
point of view it can only be a myth) to the concrete living suffering  
problem.


Bruno






  John K Clark


--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Democracy



On Sunday, December 21, 2014 12:41:41 PM UTC, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 04:34:30PM +1100, Kim Jones wrote: 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > > On 20 Dec 2014, at 3:23 pm, LizR > 
> wrote: 
> > > 
> > >> On 20 December 2014 at 16:56, Kim Jones  > wrote: 
> > >> Oops. "Taupo" 
> > > 
> > > Damn, for a moment I thought that Raymond Smullyan had moved here and 
> started his own town (not difficult in NZ) 
> > 
> > 
> > Yes the Tao is very silent in Taupo. 
> > 
> > Except when Ruapehu belches. I've climbed that thing and peered into the 
> crater lake from a snowy flank 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > Yes house prices are pretty good, I would say, on what may well be the 
> Southern hemisphere's biggest supervolcano. 
> > 
> > 
> > Of which we speak. Yes, Aotearoa is safe from guns but not from Nature. 
> Oz (here) has just failedthat test once again and does so on a daily basis 
> and don't forget Australia is "no guns". A perfect example of why 
> prohibition never works but merely hands supply to the black marketeers as 
> B points out so often. The problem is apparently that humans have never 
> invented a safe way of killing each other except perhaps in cartoons and 
> other Freudian wish-fulfilment media 
> > 
> > K 
> > 
>
> Except that in the recent brouhaha, only two innocent lives were 
> lost. Similar recent events in the US seem to see hundreds of lives lost. 
>
> Yes - criminals and madmen will always get guns, but they're less likely 
> to be 
> the more dangerous automatic variety if most citizens are not armed. 
>
> I still remember the first time I saw a police officer on this side of 
> the country. Police in the East carry handguns - in the West they 
> don't, or at least didn't when I lived there. It didn't make me feel 
> safer! 
>
> Cheers 


I'm still in love with you Russell because you're just one life's 
hero's and that's what you are. If you just say one word - well, one word 
but you'd have to put a sentence around it. One word: Infinity. Sentence 
around it:  Infinity remains at the core of many outstanding questions, and 
has many useful deployments and contributions made, and yet to make. All of 
this remains unchanged...all uses and contributions and contexts for 
infinity values are as before. Save just One. And that is the instantiation 
of an infinity value directly fundamental to the coherence, assembly, 
value, problem solution, and explanatory stipend of a scientific theory. 

Russell my love, say that one word, say it loud say it proud, and all of 
this will go away and we can be the way we used to be. Give it up 
Russellcome on man...cough that poison out! 

Sorry just fooling around. Hope you're well Merry Christmas you and yours.

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen


On 12/20/2014 11:05 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:
Most legal systems punish murder more than any other crime, and those that have the 
death penalty reserve it for the worst offenders. Most criminals know that if they 
threaten a person with death they are more likely to comply than with other threats. 
Most religions, in the absence of any evidence, promise an afterlife. I think this all 
supports the fact that it is a common human trait to fear oblivion, even if as John 
says it's just a matter of taste.


Stathis Papaioannou


It might be a common human trait to fear oblivion, but it is even more irrational than 
belief in an afterlife.


Bruce 



"I do not fear death, in view of the fact that I had been dead for billions and billions 
of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it."'

--- Mark Twain

--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

2014-12-21 Thread Telmo Menezes

Hi John,

What about supplements? Do you take anything to try to extend your lifespan
meanwhile?
There are a lot of ideas, with several degrees of support from research.
One of the is the humble aspirin...

I'm sure people here are familiar with Kurzweil's "live long enough to live
forever" proposition.

Telmo.

On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 6:46 PM, John Clark  wrote:
>
> Although I am in good health I have just signed up with Alcor to have my
> head cryogenically frozen at 320 degrees below zero (77 degrees Kelvin)
> after my death. I am not convinced it will work but I am convinced that if
> it doesn't work it won't cause me to be any deader.  I'm curious if anyone
> else on this list has done the same.
>
>  John K Clark
>
> --
> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Natural gas: The fracking fallacy

On Sat, Dec 20, 2014  'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

>> In depth article in Nature warning against the current unfounded
> euphoric optimism regarding the scale of the future supply of shale gas
> (&oil).
>

The fact that just 5 years ago NOBODY predicted the huge increase in oil
and gas production that occurred doesn't exactly fill me with confidence
that those same experts who got it so wrong 5 years ago have got it right
this time.

  John K Clark

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 Bruce Kellett  wrote:


> > It might be a common human trait to fear oblivion, but it is even more
> irrational than belief in an afterlife.
>

The fact that you've obviously lived long enough to learn how to read and
write is proof positive that you too have a healthy fear of death.

  John K Clark

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Intelligence & Consciousness

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 12:39 AM, meekerdb  wrote:

> A part of its information processing system that is highly integrated
> will indeed be conscious. However, IIT research has shown that for many
> integrated systems,one can design a functionally equivalent feed-forward
> system that will be unconscious. This means that so-called “p-zombies” can,
> in principle, exist: systems that behave like a human and pass the Turing
> test for machine intelligence, yet lack any conscious experience
> whatsoever. Many current “deep learning” AI systems are of this p-zombie
> type. Fortunately, integrated systems such as those in our brains typically
> require much fewer computational resources than their feed-forward “zombie”
> equivalents, which may explain why evolution has favored them and made us
> conscious.
>

If correct then it would be easier to make a super intelligent conscious
computer than to make a super intelligent non-conscious computer; as I've
said consciousness is easy but intelligence is hard. But the trouble is
even if the Integrated information theory is correct there is no way you
could ever prove it's correct. And I don't know why he said "made us
conscious", he should have said "made me conscious".

  John K Clark

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Seeking astrophysicist willing to help an author



On Sunday, December 21, 2014 6:57:34 AM UTC, Pierz wrote:
>
> On Sunday, December 21, 2014 3:17:15 AM UTC+5:45, zibble...@gmail.com 
> wrote: 
> > On Friday, December 19, 2014 11:48:34 AM UTC, Pierz wrote:So a close 
> friend of mine is a novelist whose latest book has a supernova in it. It's 
> not a sci fi novel and the supernova is really quite secondary but provides 
> a nice backdrop to the literary main fare. I've read the manuscript and 
> though I'm no astrophysicist I can see his science is full of glaring flaws 
> - for example the star causes an aurora! And gamma ray headaches... Anyway 
> he needs an astrophysicist or similar to help him with these details and I 
> said I'd ask on here if anyone would be prepared to help. He's a full time 
> author and a serious writer. His last novel has been translated into 
> several languages and was long listed for Australia's biggest literary 
> award, the Miles Franklin. So you wouldn't be helping some mug with an 
> unpublishable manuscript. The book is good. 
> > 
> > 
> > Science literate, Physics Factual, story telling, is FICTION. He doesn't 
> need to worry what current physics says a supernova is all about. He dreams 
> a consistent worldview that is shocking and unsettling, that leaves nothing 
> as we imagined. That's science fiction. The framework of real accurate 
> scientific knowledge is the genius author barometer of his worldview being 
> equally consistent with empirical observation as the incumbent world view. 
> More and better is incumbent worldview to the same detail explained equally 
> well by his worldview. 
> > 
> > 
> > I think the imagery of the loneliest theory as the one most true, 
> resorting to lonely hearts coloumbs of planet earth for an astrophysicist 
> or anyone remaining still curious what is really true. No one has a lot of 
> time for it these days. The truth will be tolerated in small POLITE 
> doses Conditioned on reciprocity of equal acknowledgement of diversely 
> ranging perspectives of Truth. Otherwise, Truth is despicable.and an 
> embarrassing association with potential for future blowbacks of the most 
> career limiting variety. 
> > 
> > 
> > Oh yay! The stuff of intrepid truth seekers spread out before us; the 
> stuff is all asunder; above below and under; the EVERYTHING LIST. 
> > 
> > 
> > YES. YES. YES IT IS HERE > BUT OH THANKY FOOK THE TRUE WORLD VIEW 
> HAPPENED TO COINCIDE IN OUR TIME WITH WHAT IS ALLOWED TO SAY, AND ALL THAT 
> IS NOT ALLOWED TO SAY IS ALL THAT HAPPENS TO BE THE UNTRUTH. THANK 
> GOODNESS...because were things different then what a bunch of craven 
> traitorous cowards you'd pretend the other not to be, for reciprocated 
> sensitivity. 
> > 
> > 
> > Ooops...sorry. Lost the struggle with schizophrenia once again. I 
> apologize. I obviously did not mean anything literally or truly. It was 
> just because I trusted you. I trust you. This does not end with you. There 
> are many worlds. Many worlds. Seek others out. Just do what you can. Do 
> what you can. 
>
> Oky... Well thanks for that. I think. He's willing to be somewhat 
> loose with the science but on the other hand he wants it to be passably 
> plausible to a scientifically educated reader. Btw I disagree on your 
> definition of science fiction. Many sci fi authors aim for a very high 
> level if scientific accuracy. Of course there are many exceptions (most 
> popular sci fi films and tv for example). 
>
>
of course high standards and accuracy. As you say this is a must because 
saying something dumb in a fiction really kills the magic...it's a killer. 
We all know it's making up a story but on some level we are not 
enthuisiastic for sitting there reading and reading and reading, a mind not 
superior to our own. Or illusion that way. Which makes everyone probably 
much too harsh about gaffes and gross ignorance of the cosmos. 

I said as much, but I was incoherent and slightly psycho at the time. All I 
was saying was the accuracy is a must at the empirical, settled measurement 
end of cosmology. The things likely to be largely true and not moving much 
in the future. Like the nearest star being 4 light years or whatever. 

But accuracy in terms of abstract theory...incumbent or notwell it 
depends how far in the future you are supposed to be. It isn't very 
plausible being 150 ly enjoying champagne supernovas in the sky 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3C7DECI0jU in a world devoid of ball 
busting fuck-me-that-cannot-be-true moments in science that leave 
everything on the floor save dicks nailed to the door. I mean...that is 
what happens in a moderate scientific revolution. not a lot is the same and 
won't be again. How do you figure for that in your accuracy goals? 

One way would be that you up your game to envisioning a consistent world 
view...that could be like the shape of the next worldview to come. Accuracy 
in that context would be in terms of your worldview being absolutely 
consisten

Re: Democracy

2014-12-21 Thread Jason Resch

On Saturday, December 20, 2014, Russell Standish 
wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 04:34:30PM +1100, Kim Jones wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 20 Dec 2014, at 3:23 pm, LizR  wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 20 December 2014 at 16:56, Kim Jones 
wrote:
>> >> Oops. "Taupo"
>> >
>> > Damn, for a moment I thought that Raymond Smullyan had moved here and
started his own town (not difficult in NZ)
>>
>>
>> Yes the Tao is very silent in Taupo.
>>
>> Except when Ruapehu belches. I've climbed that thing and peered into the
crater lake from a snowy flank
>>
>>
>>
>> > Yes house prices are pretty good, I would say, on what may well be the
Southern hemisphere's biggest supervolcano.
>>
>>
>> Of which we speak. Yes, Aotearoa is safe from guns but not from Nature.
Oz (here) has just failedthat test once again and does so on a daily basis
and don't forget Australia is "no guns". A perfect example of why
prohibition never works but merely hands supply to the black marketeers as
B points out so often. The problem is apparently that humans have never
invented a safe way of killing each other except perhaps in cartoons and
other Freudian wish-fulfilment media
>>
>> K
>>
>
> Except that in the recent brouhaha, only two innocent lives were
> lost. Similar recent events in the US seem to see hundreds of lives lost.

To my knowledge there's never been hundreds killed in one incident. I think
the most was at Virginia Tech where 31 were killed if I remember correctly.

Two interesting observations regarding mass shootings in the US:
1. The shooter is almost always a male in teens to 25 on SSRIs which in
Europe are banned for kids due to their side effects which include
homicidal rage.
2. Every mass shooting, defined as an instance where 3 or more were killed,
took place at a location where legal carrying of guns by citizens was
banned.



>
> Yes - criminals and madmen will always get guns, but they're less likely
to be
> the more dangerous automatic variety if most citizens are not armed.

Automatic weapons have been used once to commit a crime in the US since
1980, and it was by a police officer. Automatic weapons are very rare
uncommon and expensive in this country.

Jason

>
> I still remember the first time I saw a police officer on this side of
> the country. Police in the East carry handguns - in the West they
> don't, or at least didn't when I lived there. It didn't make me feel
safer!
>
> Cheers
>
> --
>
>

> Prof Russell Standish  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
> Principal, High Performance Coders
> Visiting Professor of Mathematics  hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
> University of New South Wales  http://www.hpcoders.com.au
>
>  Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret
>  (http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html)
>

>
> --
> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Democracy

2014-12-21 Thread Russell Standish

On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 04:34:30PM +1100, Kim Jones wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> > On 20 Dec 2014, at 3:23 pm, LizR  wrote:
> > 
> >> On 20 December 2014 at 16:56, Kim Jones  wrote:
> >> Oops. "Taupo"
> > 
> > Damn, for a moment I thought that Raymond Smullyan had moved here and 
> > started his own town (not difficult in NZ)
> 
> 
> Yes the Tao is very silent in Taupo.
> 
> Except when Ruapehu belches. I've climbed that thing and peered into the 
> crater lake from a snowy flank
> 
> 
> 
> > Yes house prices are pretty good, I would say, on what may well be the 
> > Southern hemisphere's biggest supervolcano.
> 
> 
> Of which we speak. Yes, Aotearoa is safe from guns but not from Nature. Oz 
> (here) has just failedthat test once again and does so on a daily basis and 
> don't forget Australia is "no guns". A perfect example of why prohibition 
> never works but merely hands supply to the black marketeers as B points out 
> so often. The problem is apparently that humans have never invented a safe 
> way of killing each other except perhaps in cartoons and other Freudian 
> wish-fulfilment media
> 
> K
> 

Except that in the recent brouhaha, only two innocent lives were
lost. Similar recent events in the US seem to see hundreds of lives lost.

Yes - criminals and madmen will always get guns, but they're less likely to be
the more dangerous automatic variety if most citizens are not armed.

I still remember the first time I saw a police officer on this side of
the country. Police in the East carry handguns - in the West they
don't, or at least didn't when I lived there. It didn't make me feel safer!

Cheers

-- 


Prof Russell Standish  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics  hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of New South Wales  http://www.hpcoders.com.au

 Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret 
 (http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html)


-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

On Sunday, December 21, 2014, Bruce Kellett > wrote:

> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sunday, December 21, 2014, Bruce Kellett 
>> wrote:
>>
>> John Clark wrote:
>>
>> Somebody said that they didn't want to sign up for Cryonics
>> because they were worried about ending up as a brain in a vat,
>> and in any case they believed in Everett's Many Worlds so it is
>> unnecessary. Well, if Everett is correct then you've already
>> signed up for Cryonics in some universe and you are going to end
>> up as a brain in a vat regardless, so that eliminates that
>> objection for taking action now in this universe.  So if there
>> is no reason (other than economics) for not doing it is there
>> any positive reason for actually doing it? I believe there is.
>>
>> Consider the possibility that Everett is not correct, or at
>> least not 100% correct in the way you think, then Cryonics could
>> literally be the difference between life and death, between
>> consciousness and oblivion. In my opinion Many Worlds is the
>> best interpretation of Quantum Mechanics that has so far been
>> found, but I'm not willing to bet my life that a even better one
>> won't be found someday.
>>
>>  John K Clark
>>
>>
>> What's wrong with oblivion?
>>
>>  Most legal systems punish murder more than any other crime, and those
>> that have the death penalty reserve it for the worst offenders. Most
>> criminals know that if they threaten a person with death they are more
>> likely to comply than with other threats. Most religions, in the absence of
>> any evidence, promise an afterlife. I think this all supports the fact that
>> it is a common human trait to fear oblivion, even if as John says it's just
>> a matter of taste.
>>
>> Stathis Papaioannou
>>
>
> It might be a common human trait to fear oblivion, but it is even more
> irrational than belief in an afterlife.
>

If you don't like the idea of having no further experiences, then it is
rational to fear oblivion. The fact that once oblivion occurs you will not
be worrying about what you missed out on does not invalidate your feelings
about it now.


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Intelligence & Consciousness



On Sunday, December 21, 2014 2:20:01 AM UTC, John Clark wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 3:07 PM, > 
> wrote:
>
> > Part of how you sum up your core insight: that consciousness has no 
>> detectable objective reality
>>
>
> No, I'm saying that consciousness DOES have a detectable objective reality 
> if and only if it's a brute fact that consciousness is the way data feels 
> like when it is processed intelligently. And I'm saying that human beings 
> can detect intelligent behavior and so can the process that produced them, 
> Evolution. 
>  
>
>> > evolution cannot detect consciousness.
>>
>
> If I accept that Darwin was correct and if I also accept that John K Clark 
> is conscious then I am forced by logic to conclude that consciousness is 
> indeed the way data feels like when it is processed intelligently. 
>
> As a corollary I  MUST also conclude that to whatever degree the Turing 
> Test is successful at detecting intelligence then it must be equally 
> successful at detecting consciousness.   
>
>   John K Clark
>

 With the other parts all cut away, it isn't obvious what you have 
there amounts to a case. Do you have such thing in US English common law 
as the ruling common enough here of "No case to answer" - grounds for 
dismissal. 

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Intelligence & Consciousness