Experiencing death argument 3

File name experiencing death argument File created date 01:02 am Monday, September 22 2008

The experiencing death argument against multiplicity

Does not experiencing death prove that death is linear and final. This has not convinced people that it is final because we come into and out of consciousness as a matter of existence.

The argument is this if you actually experienced multiplicity you would hop over to a multiple you or version of you upon death. You would not experience going into nothingness. Your not going to experiencing hoping over to a version of you unless this other you has the structure and functioning that produces in this other person at this particular time this feeling of becoming some other version. This is possible but it will not be connected to the actual event because it is connected to the structure and functioning of the particular body and not to the event. So something will have to happen to this versions of you for this change in structure and functioning to occur. A version of you dying will not o this directly. On the other hand it can be created by this possible external influence. A third consciousness being or more is involved. He for what ever reason see that there is this death and then finds or creates a second person or awarepaducer that can be modified to produced the consciousness of the dead original with any kind of transitional experience desired. So the original can experience death in one body and then carry over this experience to another body with an experience of having been someone else and now being alive again.

You should not look at multiplicity as something you will or have experienced but what you are experiencing. That other person that has a conscious version is you

This belief system accepts the right of consciousnesses to exist but it also believes that the goal of consciousness is to create and understand all types of consciousnesses. The problem is that not all consciousness have the ability to produce all consciousnesses because of limited abilities, knowledge, or biases. There is a distinction between a hitler, stalin, produced in an experience machine and one that effects reality in the way we think they did. We do not have to have the destruction to society that was produced by these people just to produce their consciousness.

Have we actually ever experienced being dead? What would this be like?

1. Just being, no transformational experience no memories of another time or existence. You are in this other state of existence but not aware that anything has happened. 2. Not being aware of anything including the passing of time. 3. Experiencing a transformational experience with memories of a different previous reality 4. Experiencing a certain set of experiences that one believes to be a dead person’s experiences like being a ghost or spirit. 5. Having memories of a transformational experience, or memories of previous different reality, or memories of what you think should be a dead mans experiences.

For the passage of time to occur and we not to be aware of it when it is happening, we have to have some external clues. If you shut your eyes and open them again and the clock says no time has passed and nothing around you has changed you think that no time has passed. But if you shut your eyes and open them again to find the clock changed by hours and the sun or stars have moved an equivalent amount you now think that time has passed that you were unaware of. If any amount of time had passed and everything was the same you would think that no time had passed.

We want to imagine the transfer of consciousness from one you to the next upon death. The transferring of “you” from the original to the cidentireplica upon death of the original is a linear thought. Considering the cidentireplica you at the same time as considering the original you is capturing the concept of multiplicity. There is no transferring you to the cidentireplica you are already the cidentireplica