Is he right?

[Anonymous No.10941702]

[Anonymous No.10941708]

Ask you're mom, fag

[Anonymous No.10941722]

>>10941702
If it can't be TL;DR'd, it can't be right.

[Anonymous No.10941723]

>>10941702
It's just quasi-solipsism

[Anonymous No.10941728]

>>10941722
PLEASE TLDR HEIDEGGER TO ME
WHAT THE FUCK HE SAYING

[Anonymous No.10941746]

>>10941723
Oh, modular solipsism. It's not possible to be wrong when you don't actually claim anything about reality.

[Anonymous No.10941773]

>>10941702
No because it depends on there being some imaginary cutoff line between the last non- anatomically modern hominid and the first anatomically modern human, as though that last ape couple magically bore a child of a different species all of a sudden in one localized birthing event, and all life including those parents and every entity that ever lived before them or ever lived parallel to them afterwards in any lineage other than the human one are all just stage props or furniture or something because pseud-God in this story only made the universe for you to live every human life and animals, fungi, plants, bacteria, etc. don't count. Because I guess it would start to break down the shit illusion of this shit story the more you allowed yourself to think about lifeforms where sentience and individuality don't have clear or well delineated meanings or boundaries and how you can't really tear our thread out of that tapestry without rendering it a retarded pile of almost profound sounding bullshit.

[Anonymous No.10941943]

>>10941773
you sound like a seething brainlet lmao

[Anonymous No.10941967]

>>10941943
Can you explain how the humans only thing would work here exactly? Is your pet dog or cat just a furry automaton? And where's the cutoff? Story says you're done when you've lived every human life. You know new species don't suddenly delineate during one single birth, right?

[Anonymous No.10941991]

I don't think it's meant to be a hard and fast postulation for the nature of the universe or consciousness. It's a short story, for fucks sake. The point seems to be compelling the reader to be more empathetic and understanding of others by means of an interesting possibility for the greatest question.

[Anonymous No.10942359]

Doesn't time travel has to be true in order for this story to make sense? Well, you can't time travel.

[Anonymous No.10942364]

Doesn't time travel have to be true in order for this story to make sense? Well, you can't time travel.

[Anonymous No.10942365]

>>10941702
SCIENCE FICTION ISN'T /SCI/ENCE AND MATH

[Anonymous No.10942382]

>>10941967
I;m not the guy you responded to. I actually agree with you.

The story is a good story with likely no basis in reality. However, there is, I do think, a connection between people, plants, animals, and subatomic matter. After all, it's all made of the same stuff. I think there's a single root consciousness, and each person is a deviation from the same quality due to circumstance.

For instance, we all become different over time .We at every point in time exist in some way. Most of the time it's matter. Sometimes it's as brains. It comes from sperm inside a male, which came from the womb of a female, ad absurdum, until you return to the same source.

Our source is likely matter slowly forming together. We are all materials in a particularly alike state.
Therefore we all would act and think and feel the same way, IF we we're in the same situation as someone else. You'd have to be in the EXACT situation, with their thoughts and feelings and past and body.

[Anonymous No.10942417]

>>10941702
>>10941708
>>10941722
>>10941723
>>10941728
>>10941746
>>10941773
>>10941943
>>10941967
>>10941991
>>10942364
>>10942365
>>10942382

>samefagging THIS hard

[Anonymous No.10942427]

>>10942382
Prototypicality of essence requires hard determinism, which can't exist with consciousness. No matter how deterministic a system, something outside of it can always bisect it perfectly and install a new mode of free will separate from the entire deterministic shell. Your post refutes its own logic by stating it.

[Anonymous No.10942486]

>>10941702
No phenomena is able to have a real/eternal personality-essence because all phenomena are compounded and/or supported by other phenomena, and also subjected to change and disappear. If something exist it will cease to exist, that's the only way for something to be able to exist and interact with other phenomena. If phenomena wouldn't be able to change, it would not be able to interact and influence other phenomena, hence would be inexistent to other phenomena.

The Egg is just fiction.

[Anonymous No.10942494]

Can all you other me's stop being cringe.

[Anonymous No.10942496]

>>10942486
It is for the precise case that each consciousness appears to be phenomenologically separate from all other consciousness that real/"eternal" personality-essence is factual.

[Anonymous No.10942507]

https://youtu.be/h6fcK_fRYaI

[Anonymous No.10942517]

>>10942496
Emergent phenomena is factual.
Even if you believe the mental realm could be fully independent of materiality, Mental phenomena is still subject to change, it gets produced and ceases in accord to conditions, gets influenced by other mental phenomena, etc. It's not eternal and the only other result apart from all the combinations of it is eventual disappearance. A mirage is a real phenomena, yet for a thirsty traveler a mirage will not be a source of water. Same for those with the crave for existence, mental phenomena is not able to appease your desire for real and eternal existence even if your mind would keep jumping through existence by attaching to different modes of materiality. It's just emergent, vapid. A shadow in a dream.
If there's something eternal and unchangeable, it would not be able to interact and influence our conditionality, that is changeable and subject to be influenced.
Consciousness exist, but it's not an eternal and essential thing, it just pops out of conditions, and when those conditions cease it goes back to the source of unconditional, not leaving trace among other phenomena.

The Egg is just fiction.

[Anonymous No.10944271]

>>10942417
I'm not samefagging, retard.

[Anonymous No.10944308]

>>10941702
no

[Anonymous No.10944333]

I certainly hope not. I wouldn’t like to reincarnate into that saudi journalist.

[Anonymous No.10944367]

>>10942417
>22 replies
>17 posters
>13 alleged "samefags"
Thanks for confirming you're mentally handicapped.

[Anonymous No.10944387]

>>10944333
Imagine being Mr Al Saud tho

[Anonymous No.10944392]

>>10942417
Underrated

[Anonymous No.10944453]

>>10944271
>I'm not samefagging, retard.
>>10944367
>Thanks for confirming you're mentally handicapped.
He's making a joke about everyone all being the same one person reincarnating as every human life in existence.
You know, like the entire point of the story this thread is about?
I bet you guys didn't get those Magic Eye pictures to work when you were kids either. You have that autism impulse working against you making you leap at the most immediate literal-minded conclusion that presents itself while failing to grok the bigger picture, ironically assuming everyone else is behind a beat while doing so.
Don't feel bad though. I say this because I was the same way before intensive self-medication with psychoactive compounds throughout my uni years. You might want to look into doing the same FYI.

[Anonymous No.10944499]

>>10944387
No amount of luxury would make up for all the horrible ways people have died. Whenever I feel I am in a tight spot, I always tell myself that there are definitely people in a worse situation.

[Anonymous No.10944522]

>>10944499
>there are definitely people in a worse situation.
And you're all of them per The Egg.

[Anonymous No.10944570]

I think you guys seem pretty cool. Every ONE of you.

[Anonymous No.10944581]

>>10944453
Sometimes I forget how high IQ this board is.

[Anonymous No.10944623]

>>10941702
if it is, surely god wouldn't suddenly go autismo mode and increase the creation of african lives to this high of a degree

[Anonymous No.10944690]

It's a incredibly retarded thing, like turboretarded.

[Anonymous No.10944714]

If you don't even contain the memories or experiences of any past lives and each life has a completely different personality then is anyone else really you?
To me it implies humanity would be united into one consciousness to become a god like third impact form end of evangelion.

[Anonymous No.10944744]

>>10942417
a joke too high iq for /sci/ apparently...

[Anonymous No.10944765]

>>10942417
i laff'd

[Anonymous No.10945005]

>>10944623
God wants us to suffer

[Anonymous No.10945012]

>>10944714
You may laugh at me but I entertain the idea of us being able to feel far beyond usual conscious awareness, it just depends on accessing certain neural formations

[Anonymous No.10945030]

Seriously though, I hope no nutjobs create a cult around this, since the endgame of this is the extinction of humanity.

[Anonymous No.10945242]

>>10945030
explain

[Anonymous No.10945272]

>>10945242
it has an end, being lived every human life, therefore it has a finite amount ergo the extinction of humanity

[Anonymous No.10945295]

>>10942417
>samefagging your own samefagged posts
t. also the very same fag

[Anonymous No.10945348]

Metaphysically, having all beings be the same being does make things simpler. But metaphysics is nonsense so who cares?

[Anonymous No.10946213]

cloud atlas did it better

[Anonymous No.10946328]

>>10945348
>implying science isnt nonsensical

[Anonymous No.10946331]

>>10941702
He said himself it's just a story and he doesn't believe it for real.

[Anonymous No.10947245]

>>10942417
I get it

[Anonymous No.10947418]

>>10944453
FUCK YOU AUTOSTEREOGRAMS ARE FUCKING GAY! ONLY FAGGOTS CAN SEE THEM! and i got the joke btw so FUCK YOU

[Anonymous No.10947423]

>>10942417
i get it too

[Anonymous No.10947764]

>>10942417
lel

[Anonymous No.10947892]

>>10941702
no
>Andy Weir
>Andrew Taylor Weir (born June 16, 1972)[3] is an American novelist
>He also worked as a computer programmer for much of his life
A novelist and a code monkey. Dropped.

[Anonymous No.10948954]

The time travel part does not even make any sense.

Entropy says there is no going back in time because time is just motion. So why would I be reborn as somebody in a past life?

[Anonymous No.10949013]

>>10948954
Doesn't time travel through causal loops make sense? They are unlikely to appear, but they have no paradoxes.

[Anonymous No.10949023]

>>10941728
Search the 50 mins interview of Dreyfus on Heidegger on youtube

[Anonymous No.10949222]

>>10944623
Well that's only on Earth, what if Earth is a complete shit hole in the universe and all the other inhabited planets are paradise compared to it

[Anonymous No.10949229]

>>10949222
Look at every other planet in our solar system.

[Anonymous No.10949575]

>>10941702
Terrible, assumes a meaning to the universe, assumes consciousness and that it matters, assumes an ultimate goal, assumes literal new age consciousness "we're all linked" bullshit. Fuck this book and fuck Kurzgesagt for promoting it.

[Anonymous No.10951391]

>>10942417
This
this is quality fuckery right here

[Anonymous No.10951399]

>>10941702
open individualism
he is mostly right

[Anonymous No.10951450]

>>10941702
Sounds like something a bitch writes in a sympathy card, like they're helping.

[Anonymous No.10951458]

If I were to find out that this was the case, I would dedicate the rest of this life's life to murdering others as brutally as humanly possible as a form of self harm

[Anonymous No.10951462]

>>10941702
dumb new age shit

[Anonymous No.10951482]

so /sci/, how many times have you fucked yourself?

[Anonymous No.10951503]

>>10941773
jeez you dont get evolution man

[Anonymous No.10951506]

>>10942486
>subjected to change

you just named an 'eternal personality' here, odd term for 'attribute' btw.

[Anonymous No.10951509]

>>10942517
grow up atheist

[Anonymous No.10951530]

>>10951462
not an argument

[Anonymous No.10951717]

>>10951462
Its actually ripped off of hinduism mostly

[Anonymous No.10951741]

I like it because it means I have a chance at being a woman in my next birth.

[Anonymous No.10951798]

>>10942417
so deep

[Anonymous No.10951946]

>>10941702
so, does this mean we're all samefagging?

[Anonymous No.10951965]

>>10941702
Its a story, its not mean to be "right".

[Anonymous No.10952110]

>>10942364
There is nothing in any physical equation that says Time Travel is impossible

[Anonymous No.10952167]

>>10948954
Entropy doesn't "say" anything. Entropy is an emergent statistical property. If wormholes are shown to exist, then we will just update statistical mechanics accordingly.

[Anonymous No.10952171]

If we end up becoming a God, why is it important to learn the lesson? After all, once we are a God, we know we aren't the other gods, so why not be a dick to them?

[Anonymous No.10952417]

>>10951503
You probably misread that post because it's pretty trivially true and doesn't even have all that much to do with evolution in the first place. Let me break it down for you:
A) Egg story says the world was created just for one entity
B) Egg story says this one entity is going to live every *human* life before it will hatch into a baby god
C) "Living every human life" would mean you're defining some literal set of organisms with a finite number of members each born at some point in time
D) This set would necessarily have one or more members who were born at the earliest point in time
Per D, where's your cutoff exactly? Pick any one human as far back in the past as you want to go and call it your cutoff. Great, now what about that particular ancient human's parents? Are you going to call them non-human? Are they not going to be part of the one entity the world was created for?
Well that's retarded then since you're saying those parents who are, in the bigger picture view of things, almost genetically identical to their child are a couple of soulless automatons. And for some inexplicable reason their child is the first body being lived through by the one conscious entity in the world.

[Anonymous No.10952429]

>>10952171
>once we are a God, we know we aren't the other gods
You don't know that.

[Anonymous No.10952443]

>>10952429
In what since are we a good if we can die?

[Anonymous No.10952446]

>>10952417
I don't think the book subscribes to evolutionary theory. The god in that book probably just created the first humans.

[Anonymous No.10952449]

>>10942364
Look up the one electron theory. There is some real work done along the line of thinking the story poses.

[Anonymous No.10952462]

>>10952446
>The god in that book probably just created the first humans.
That only raises even more questions, like why would that god bother to make the massive quantity of evidence suggesting evolutionary biology if what really happened is he just created humans suddenly with no connection to the rest of life on Earth?

[Anonymous No.10952475]

>>10952449
>Look up the one electron theory.
Feynman immediately shot that idea down after first hearing it because there's nowhere close to an equal number of electrons and positrons in the universe.

[Anonymous No.10952482]

>>10952443
You don't have to die to not know whether you will die.

[Anonymous No.10952565]

>>10952462
That is basic theology mate. "Evidence" only "suggests" things to a flawed human mind. If we were infinitely smarter, we would notice patterns and logic that are incomprehensible to humans. Humans are only marginally more capable at making sense of the universe than goldfish are.

[Anonymous No.10952569]

>>10952475
That isn't really proven. We have no way of knowing if other galaxies are made entirely of antimatter or not. If the standard model is correct, there must be the same number of positrons as electrons.

[Anonymous No.10952591]

>>10952569
>If the standard model is correct, there must be the same number of positrons as electrons.
No. The standard model existed when Feynman was around.

[Anonymous No.10952595]

>>10952565
That's a retarded, borderline schizophrenic rationalization you can use to convince yourself literally anything you want to believe is true.

[Anonymous No.10952597]

>>10952591
>No.
Yes. Standard model predicts equal amounts of matter/anti-matter.

[Anonymous No.10952608]

>>10952595
And? Do you think humans are the most intelligent of all possible beings, and nothing could be more intelligent? Do you not think that there are patterns or symmetries in nature that we haven't discovered? Do you think there is no new physics, say hidden dimensions or fields that don't interact with us regularly, that could radically change our existing scientific understanding? Why do you think the universe is so restricted and boring?

[Anonymous No.10952627]

>>10952608
>And?
And an argument that could be applied to literally anything really says nothing.

[Anonymous No.10952652]

>>10952597
Charge conjugation parity symmetry is not incompatible with the Standard Model.