Itoarguments part 2

convergence and divergent of awarepaths -- physipaths

Innateness of the identireplica theory of consciousness

If nature made your neuropath, once why not again? argument

If nature made your consciousness once why not again. Nature produced your consciousness once why then is it impossible for this to happen again. If nature can do it why not through a conscious effort from people or higher life forms?

1. The first problem with this it is two complicated.

2. The conditions only will exist once in a universe or even once in a multiverse.

3. The experiences that came together to produce your consciousness can never exist again.

4. Nature produced you from a babies consciousness this may be the only way to do it and such you would have to start all over again from no consciousness and develop into your own but this can not happen because your soul is already mature it can not go back to a situation of no consciousness.

The key is that it did produce your consciousness so producing your consciousness was a possibility. Why then is it not possible if all the conditions were applied. What are all the right conditions?

1. It is complicated but a finite problem

2. Conditions can be modified by conscious life to make the problem simpler and more probable.

3. It is the structure and functioning at a particular time that produces a consciousness. Experiences is one of the factors that got the brain to where it is in its structure and functioning it is not the only way.

4. Experiences are not the only way to get a brain to a certain structure and functioning.

5. A particular person’s consciousness covers a large area of physical functioning and structure.

6. A videntireplica does not have to function identically to still have your consciousness.

7. There is no scientific evidence that there is a soul or other irretrievable aspect of a person that can not be recreated with the recreation of the exact structure and functioning of the body.

I don’t experience it bias argument

This is the counter argument to I do not experience what a cidentireplica or videntireplica of my self does so it is not me.

This argument is that If there is a replica of my self I do not experience what he is experiencing nor control that body consequently that person is not me.

Imagine if you and every one else actually always does experience another person’s consciousness or experiences that is a version of you. It would mean that the awarepath that does not experience what ever designated experiences of this version of your self, would not exist. This is because if every time there is a question of why I do not experience it, and you do experience it there will not exist the awarepath without this experience so we have to have the case where we do not experience it. We are also talking about physipaths that can and can not exist.

For there to exist all the different awarepaths there will be many that have no idea of what is happening to all the different aspects of itself or all the different awarepaths in a person’s awarevenue. It is only slightly aware of its own awarepath over time.

The lack of the experience does not mean that the awarepath can not exist or the physipath that produces the awarepath can not exist

The point is that we want the situation where there is distinction between awarepaths. We want the awarepaths where you can experience more than one version of your self and you want the awarepaths that just experiences what you do alone. The identireplica theory predicts that you can have both if you can create the correct physipath.

Not experiencing the other versions of ones awarevenue is a necessary part of the theory. Imagine if you had to experience all the actual awarepaths that exist at one time as a whole unified consciousness the existence or non existence of another physipath would effect the awarepath produced. how would you unite it through stages of life like not and in the past and how do small changes in consciousness are unified. It would be a night mare of complexity. If one or more of the versions of you died how would this effect the consciousness produced? Does it now have memories or do all reference to this previous state vanish? The concept of fitopaths might allow for this type of consciousness. this unity but

This concept of “experience” includes experiencing other selves.

If we take any original and a cidentireplica of that original they will have the same consciousness. But if the cidentireplica is pinched and the original is not the original can say that the cidentireplica is not me because I/ he didn’t feel what the cidentireplica felt or experienced. At the point where the cidentireplica is pinched and the original is not the cidentireplica is now a videntireplica of the original and not a cidentireplica. The identireplica theory does not say that the cidentireplica is the original what it says is that there exists two different physipaths or bodies and one awarepath up to this point and then there is two different awarepath but they are closely alike. The fact that the original does not feel what happens to the cidentireplica is not proof that the cidentireplica does not have the consciousness of the original. The argument is, none the less, if I do not feel experience it, how can it be me? In the same token if I experience it exactly it must be me. This is not true either. You can experience it exactly and it will not be you it is another person. Same awarepath different physipath. Your consciousness can exist in other people. If I inflect pain on a cidentireplica of myself I do not feel it so it is not a distraction from me doing it to him as it would be to myself.

If we look at our selves in the future or the past we will not be feeling or experiencing what we did experience then or in the future. If the future and the past person hat has no relation to the present person The future or past you does have a relation ship to the current self In the same way that a videntireplica or a cidentireplica has.

Another version of the I don’t experience it argument is that when we fall asleep at night we seem to be unconscious for a while if there were other identireplicas out there that are supposed to carry on our awarepath why do we not revert to them when we are unconscious with sleep? This is the same as being dead as far as consciousness is concerned. First there may not be any other physipaths to carry on the awarepath. And the point is that there is not a conscious process to do this switching or caring on of the awarepath. This whole ideas of the caring on of the awarepath after the death of a physipath is from a vantage point beyond the actual awarepath. There may be an actual awarepath that in different ways sees the carrying on of the awarepath between two physipaths but since there can be many different physipaths at all sorts of different points in the life or on the awarepath of the of the original which one carries on the path? All of them do! The concept of a singular soul caring on is not what is happening between the end of one physipath and a point on another physipath that has the same consciousness. The awarepath will only be what it is. If the awarepath happens to have the experience of switching between physipaths them it will experience it. But there exists many different awarepaths that have no awareness of what is producing them. For example, in an awarepaducer, in a fidentireplica or even in the place that the original exists in. People do experience strange feelings that things are different than they we. This does not imply that their consciousness or awarepath is then been moved or is now being produced by another physipath. This is because the original physipath may be producing a functioning that produces this type of consciousness. You do not carry a different awarepath with you than the one that the physipath is producing. What would be the result if you did carry a awarepath with you that was different than the physipath? There might be some kind of awareness of the difference. It seems that this awarepath could be produced but not where the physipath and awarepath do not correspond but where the awarepath produced by the physipath creates this reality. How again do you actually create this? First you would need some awareness of the physipath then a feeling that there is a difference. This can be accomplished by changing the sensepath with out changing the physipath. For instance, if the things that you though you remembered were some how altered for instance you walk down the street and there is a different name to the street that you live on or there is a house missing on the street not there. there is a vacant lot but that there is no space where this house used to exist. The change in the sense path can be any way so you will think that things should be one way and in fact they are different this is an example of a person thinking that they are in a different physipath where condition are different but in fact the sensepath is different. In reality we do not think that we can change our sensepath this much (space with a house in it disappearing) but if we exist in an awarepaducer that can generate any sensepath

Time passes with out awareness when we are in the deep state of sleep The question do you ever experience nothing? You think that you do because time passes with out you being aware of it. There are all sorts of different states between awareness and total deep sleep where you are unaware of time passing

What is happening with the different consciousnesses when they die how does a consciousness move from one point to another? Andrew's question: to him it seems strange that when you die your consciousness moves from point to point. It does not move from point to point it is already there

The I don’t experience it so it must not be me bias argument

If this was the case then any past or future part of your awarepath would not be you either because you not experiencing what you were or will experience either.This means that you do not experience all of what you are at the same time.

You do experience exactly what the cidentireplica of you experiences. A cidentireplica and you do not experience the same things so it is not you. The cidentireplica in fact does experience the same thing as you do.

The closest continuer theory is that the closest continuer produces personality. The criterion for personal identity, for you, by other people is different than the criterion of personal identity for oneself. The closest continuer theory is fine for others in determining your personal identity but it is not a good way for one self. If the closest continuer does not have your consciousness you are not there to experience it you are gone. For your self, you actually have to experience what this closest continuer is experiencing.

The private experience bias argument

Counter argument:Because the identireplica theory makes it possible for the same experiences to be generated by more than one person, the identireplica theory can not be true because experiences are private.

It is just from our perspective that experiences are private. There may well be conscious forms produced by physipaths that can exist in this universe that actually can feel your pain and others as well. A particular experience may well be able to be built on to imagine taking a physipath that produces a particular experience then removing all functioning that does not need to exist to produce that experience then adding other functioning in any way desired to combine that experience to that expanding consciousness When you see a picture of blue it may be exactly like someone else sees it. Our experiences may not be private if they were it might be impossible to communicate because we would not share the same meaning for our experiences, feelings and memories.

Center of the universe argument

We only experience a limited existence and consciousness so it appears that we are the center of our conscious world. There are many us’s that we do not experience because our perspective is to narrow. There is only one awarepath that we experience so that we do not experience the others. Even if an original lives forever and becomes enhanced, from its present perspective today it can not see this infinitely long awarepath to experience it but this is none the less you in the future.

He is not me if; I can not control him, sense what he is sensing, feel what he is feeling etc. A replica is not me if I can do none of these things. Consequently, he is not me. He can not control me nor I control him. Just because you can not sense another person’s feelings emotions etc, does not mean that another person or consciousness being can not feel your feelings, emotions, etc.

Not seeing that a replica of you can have a version of your consciousness, is like believing the sun and stars revolves around the earth and the corollary the earth is the center of the universe. Each correct belief takes a more complicated understanding of reality. It appears that the sun and stars raise in the east travels across the sky and then sets in the west. The earth does not appear to move at all. To say that the earth is moving and the sun and stars do not is ridiculous. Since the every thing revolves around earth, the earth has to be the center of the universe. In the same way, since I do not experience what the replica does, nor can I control him or have access to his thoughts etc. he is not me. It takes a more complicated and sophisticated theory from science to understand what is in fact happening

Copernicus developed a theory from the motion of the planets that created a simpler theory. This is in a way like when we first saw moons circling jupiter as proof that we were not the center of the universe.

We only experience a limited existence so we think that we are the center of our conscious reality, in the same way as we thought the earth was the center of the universe.

Feeling of uniqueness bias argument

The feeling that we are unique and singular does not mean that we are. We have many different feelings, sensations, beliefs and perspectives that are not true. The feeling or belief that we are singular and unique in terms of our consciousness is not true. To say that there are any unique aspects of ourselves may even be false. For instance, to say that we are in a unique place and time that can not be duplicated in anyway may be false as well. Because, maybe more than one can exist at the same place and time. One’s consciousness can feel that it is in more than one place in time.

Feeling like we are the center of the universe is an aspect of consciousness. It is an aspect of the ixperiencit concept. It confuses us in the sense that we feel apart from other consciousness and hides the knowledge that others can have the same ixperiencit that we do. It hides the concept that different physipaths can produce the same awarepath. This is not the only conscious feeling that is available to us.

Experience of other selves bias argument

If these other selves were really me, I would experience them as well as my self. A person will not experience the other selves because there is no connection between them. A person will only experience the awarepath that the physipath is producing. There will only be awareness of other minds identical to yours if an enhanced physipath produces that awareness of other minds different than yours.

There can exist awarepaths that can experience the reality that the identireplica theory is correct. How is this possible? What can they experience? If you feel the consciousness in one person and then can compare this consciousness to the other one.

A person’s awarepath contains the concepts of a past and a present for an individual. With out this awareness of future and past we would only live in the moment never realizing that there is a past and a future. Our awarepath do not contain the experiencing of other awarepaths like ours. It might not be evolutionairly needed. But is it possible to create a brain that produces a consciousness that senses the facts that other awarepaths you can experience also?

Superpath argument

There can exist superpaths that can tie different versions of you together. For instance, at different times in your life, different versions of yourself and different views of the same awarepath like incorporating an outside view of where and how each is created. The superpath could even see how the brain produces the mind in ways we can not. There can exist super physipaths. They will produce super awarepaths. Many awarepaths will not understand these ideas about consciousness. This lack of understanding is part of their awarepaths. It might be because they are not exposed to these ideas or their brian can not be manipulated to functioning in such a way as to understand these ideas. As awarepath become more enhanced it will be easier for them to understand these ideas. What is the percentage of paths that understand these ideas to the total number of paths. Does this percentage change if we consider only super paths or normal human paths in the grouping?

Superpath can exist. Superpaths can exist for originals. What is the proof that superpaths can be related to an original? Do superpaths have Ixperiencits? Superphysipaths will relate or can correspond to super awarepaths can we have then superixperiencits What is a superixperiencit? It seems that there could be variations in the ixperiencit The ixperiencit may be just the construction of the awaremoment

The existence of superpaths that have a continuation of the originals ixperiencit can other consciousness have your memories etc sure

The concept of the superpaths can be applied for support to other arguments

For instance for support of a positive world argument superpaths give an even larger base of awarepath for a person to exist in thus it is even more likely for immortality to occur for a person.

Superpath existance proofs

What is the proof that superphysapaths exist potentially?

What is the proof that if a superphysapath exists potentially it can exist actually?

What is the proof that if a superphysapath exists actually it can produce a superawarepath?

What is the proof that superphysacontinuums and superawarecontinuums?

What is the proof that a person can have a super or enhanced awarepath that they can experience?

What is the proof that an awarepath can be enhanced and still have the same ixperiencitness?

What is the proof that the principles about normal itofazpaths apply to superitofazpaths

What is the proof that an same ixperiencitness can continue with enhancements to the consciousness?

What is the proof that an awarepaths can be enhanced and still have the same ixperiencitness?

What is the proof that there can be superawarepaths that a person can actually experience?

Principle of continuation

1. A person consciousness can continue exactly in other bodies --- the concept of cidentireplicas. His consciousness can also continue in many different versions the concept of videntireplicas Proof of awarepoint or awaremoment continuation is the fact that identical or closely identical physapoints or physamoments can be produced in another bodies, and continuation of these physamoments produce the continuation of the corresponding awaremoments

Principle of existence for superphysipaths

2. He can have a super physipath. Super physipath can exist. What is the proof that super physipaths can exist? Physipaths can be modified or changed in many different ways. Some of these ways will be enhanced thus producing superphysipaths.

Principle of external modification of physipaths

3. Any person’s physipath can be modified or changed. Some of these changes will be enhancements that lead to superphysipaths. Drugs, sensepaths are forms or externapaths that can change the functioning of the physipath. The effect of the functioning of the physipath can effect the physipath some time very drastically like suicide but all physipaths functioning does not have to be negative.

Principle of body immortality

4. Science could allow a person to live forever during that time modifications and enhancements can occur. This person would be technically you. Because it is a continuation of your body.

Principe of destruction and restoration of consciousnesses

Supporting evidence: When certain senses or abilities are taken away from your consciousness you are still you but a diminished you. If we then add conscious abilities you will still be you but re - enhanced.

Principle of existence for superawarepaths

6. We can imagine being enhanced. We can imagine having more memories, better memories and more complete memories. We can imagine having more senses or better senses. For example, see in infrared, sonar like bats, better sense of smell, etc. etc.. We can also imagine a better knowledge of things easier to remember better at mathematics like a calculator. We can imagine feeling things more intensely. We can imagine having more memories and to have them be more realistic and accurate. Just about any aspect of consciousness experience we can imagine enhancing. Super awarepaths can exist.

Principle of enhancement of memories

7. This superawarepath can have all your memories and can remember them better and more accurately, vividly, intensely, that you can. It can even have memories that you do not remember. It can be made to remember being the original awarepath and the modifications that have occurred to it.

8. If the consciousness of the superawarepath is not you or a version of you, then whose is it then? And why is it not you, if we start with your physipath and modified it to be you with a continuation of you?

Not only can super awarepaths be enhanced in areas that it already has, it can be enhanced in with entirely new ways of looking at things

If the superawarepath is not you it is someone's so some one can have a superpath. Each superawarepath has to belong to some one if it has an ixperiencit. Some one might say that these different superpaths have a different ixperiencit than any regular awarepath. If this is the case then as we develop from an egg we have a different ixperiencit as well. But we still consider the child as us or a predecessor of us. With this line of reasoning the superawarepath may have a modification of the ixperiencit in the same way that a baby has a modification of the ixperiencit when he grows up

Principles of deconstruction or denhancement of superpaths

Every superphysipath can be deconstructed back to a particular person or any person for that matter with enough of the right types of changes.

Some deconstructions will be easier than others this does not means that a particular awarepath that is closest to a superawarepath will have the same ixperiencit.

Some one has the ixperiencit of the superphysipath. There will be versions of super awarepaths as there are versions of regular human awarepaths.

Principles of convergence and divergence of superpaths

Because of convergence and divergence of awarepaths and physipaths many different physipaths can converge into the same superpath. But for every physipath there are many more superpaths. What is the proof of this? A more complex system can be constructed in many more ways and consequently will have more ways to function than a simpler system. But why will all these functioning be conscious? They may not all be conscious. Why will more be conscious than at a lower level of functioning? There can be the same percentage of nonconscious superphysipaths as regular physipath but since there are so many more superphysipaths than regular human physipaths there will be more conscious superphysipaths producing superawarepaths than physipath producing awarepaths. If we consider a dog for instance there are many more ways for a human brain to function than for a dogs brain to function. What is the proof that all these superawarepaths will actually be consciousness in a meaningful way. Why might they not be crazy, disjointed meaning less etc. superawarepaths. There should be more crazy, disjointed, meaningless, nonsensical awarepaths but there are many more different superphysipaths

The development from a fertilized egg, to a fetus, to a baby, to a child, to a teenager to an adult is a progression of consciousness that is tied to an individual person. This process is the same type as taking a person and making a super conscious person. A fetus has very little consciousness but though the development of the brain it becomes more and more conscious. It might be possible to add genes that allows the increase of the brain in such a ways as to make it more conscious. Why do we tie ourselves to this lesser individual (baby-- child) we tie ourselves to this lesser individual because of physical continuity and identity. So we technically tie our selves to any sequence that leads to the position that we are now. This is not necessary the can because we want the ixperiencit in each. If the ixperiencit of the original is not in all the awarepaths that lead to the present original they are not that person at that stage. Can the ixperiencit change even if there is bodily continuity? If the ixperiencit is a variable that produces a continuum even if not a smooth continuum how does this effect the theory? We can say that the ixperiencit has changed so much that it is no longer the original but at what percentage is this change no longer the original’s ixperiencit? We can imagine where many different situation a person can experience these different experiences will change the person ixperiencit. It may be that the ixperiencit is just a perspective problem. The consciousness feels that it is experiencing the consciousness as a separate being or as an I where the I is the consciousness itself but then the I like consciousness is always changing.

What is the proof that a person can have many different super awarepaths or super or enhanced videntireplicas? Because there are many different superphysipaths that correspond to or can be derived from a persons physipaths. If we apply one sequence of enhancements to a person’s physipath to achieve a superphysipath, we then have numerous different sensepaths that can be applied to this superpath each producing a different superawarepath.

The numerical principle of superpaths for superpath chapter

There are more version of superpaths for an individual than there are of less enhanced paths. What is the proof of this? A super physipath can process a senpath in more different ways than a lesser physipath? What is the proof of this? The starting conditions of a superpath can be greater so the consequence awarepath base on a given sensepath is greater. But who is to say what Ixperiencit a superpath will have? A superphysipath will be able to function in more ways than a simpler path it will have more different states that it can be in there are more combinational sequences.

There are many different sequences of enhancements that can be applied to a person. There are many different sensepath that can be applied to a person. There are many new kinds of senses that can be applied to a person There are many different ways to integrate the sense into a epistemological whole

Transcendence of species for principles

Awarepaths ixpepaths can transcend species. What does this mean? This means that a different species can carry on your consciousness or version of it. How? Certain conditions have to be met. This different species would have to create a being that is a superphysipath of you. This means that through genes a version of you is created same as one that is modified -- enhanced form the original human.

How do you prove that a superawarepath has the same ixperiencitness that the original's awarepath. If the ixperiencit is variable then like the awarepath it will be a ixperiencitpath or ixpepath that describes the change of the ixperiencit over time. How do you prove that the ixperiencit is variable for an individual over time rather than a set constant? How do you prove that the ixperiencit exists? How do you prove that it has the properties that you assign it?

If it is a set constant then there is no question if a superpath has the originals ixperiencit or not. Either it does or it does not.

Does there exist a super ixperiencit? How do you prove this? It seems that there can be constructed cases where super or enhanced awarepath would not have to have enhanced ixperiencits

How is the ixperiencit different from the self awarepaths? You can be aware with out being aware of a body or self How does a mentapath come into the concept the mentapath can tie together other types of mentality like fidentireplicas and isofidentireplicas.

Other principles

Indented line Existence principles Existence principle of awarecontinuums is that awarecontinuums can be created and exist. Existence principle of physicontinuums The existence of awarecontinuum is different from the existence of videntireplicas or awarepaths

There exist different levels of existence there is actual existence, previous existence, future existence potential existence potential existence that will never exist potential existence that until it happens it is not certain if it will or not

awarepaths awarevenues

Correspondence principles

Principle of awarecontinuum / physicontinuum correspondence -- Physacontinuums can be mapped to awarecontinuums within the mapping there can many physapaths that map to one awarepath.

The more complex a system-- structure is the more different ways there are for it to function.

What is the proof that super awarepaths can exist? Super physipaths can exist. What is the proof. We can imagine more complex physipaths. We can imagine enhancements in many different ways. Ideally they are possible. But are they technologically possible? Can they be made artificially or produced through genetic manipulation does this universe allow for enhanced human physipaths? If superphysipaths can be made then we can have superawarepaths. Super physipath can be made from lower level physipaths the corresponding memories of the lower level physipath can be maintained in the higher level physipaths. Thus if we take a person and make enhanced modifications to his brain we will have an enhanced awarepath. If we make enough enhancements to the physipath we will have a superphysipath and we then have a super awarepath. We can imagine numerous enhancements. If technology becomes advanced enough we will be able to make superphysipaths. An adult is a superphysipath compared to a new born baby or fetus

Enhancement argument for chapter on enhancement

What to prove or show: That enhancement is possible and conceivable. That enhancement of the physipath is possible. That enhancement of the awarepath is possible. That enhancement of the ixperiencitness is possible. Enhancement does not necessarily lead to a totally different ixperiencit. It will still be you experiencing the awarepath. Knowledge of enhancement is possible. Knowledge of how to enhance is possible. The concept of itopath enhancement is understandable

This theory allows that awarepaths, physipaths etc., can be enhanced. Which we already know. These enhancements will contain the ixperiencitness of the original. This seems obvious also if the enhancement are not too severe or in a way that we can understand. Enhancement is common sense. This theory take to a higher level and explains it better. From an egg to an adult your body is enhanced your awarepath is enhanced as well.

Enhancement of the physipath can lead to enhancement of the awarepath. Enhancement of the awarepath can lead to the enhancement of the ixperiencitness which is you being more aware or more conscious. Or it can start with your ixperiencitness, and through a different path of modification of the physipath, end up with an enhancement of some one else's ixperiencitness.

Physipaths can be enhanced consequently awarepaths can be enhanced also. The ixperiencit may be enhanced as well.

Enhancement leads to superpaths. Enhancement leads to the first type of scientific immortality. This means living for ever this is because with out enhancement our bodies will eventually grow old.

What is the proof that we can enhance the ixperiencit or physipath or awarepath and it will still be yours. We can scientifically imagine enhancements to the physipath and awarepaths. Can we imagine enhancements to the ixperiencit. What would be enhancements to the ixperiencit? Enhancements to the “I”, to the “experiencing” and to the “awarepath sensepath-- it” can be imagined within enhancements to the physipath.

Option argument

Free will: to be able to do other than we did or will do.

We have the option or potential to be aware of the awaretheory or not. We also have the option to experience other awarepaths or not. There are many options to awarepaths that would not exist if we knew from experience that others had our ixperiencitness or versions of our awarepath.

If we could control another person’s external behavior with your consciousness, and experience what he experiences it would generate another awarepath than the one you do create. If this was the case there would not be the opportunity for convergence and divergence of awarepaths because there would be only one superawarepath that includes all the subawarepaths in a person’s awarevenue. Different persons even if they are cidentireplicas of each other can diverge and converge at any point on their physapath differently. There is always that option, but if we were to be part of that consciousness as one, it can not diverge or converge from us because it is us. You do not loose the ability to be different if you only experience the others path or part of it

Even though we are considered to be our past person and future person we do not experience nor control them directly. We have some memories that are supposed to correspond to what they were experiencing and doing but our memories have been scientific proven not to be very accurate. In the same way versions of you in the form of videntireplicas even though they have your consciousness or your ixperiencitness you will not control or experience. But you may actually have memories of event that occurred to your videntireplica and not to you How is this possible? If your memories are not about you exactly who are they of? Since there are many different ways that a body can function there are many different physipath and awarepaths that are you

We experience many different experiences and memories that are not related directly to us but to different version of us, so we are actually tied to videntireplicas and their awarepaths other than our own, with in our awarevenue. We will have memories and experiences of what other people have actually done or have the potential to do.

If every one or some one experienced his cidentireplica or all his cidentireplicas what would he experience? Nothing different. If one could control the cidentireplica how would the behavior or consciousness of you or it be different? It wouldn’t be any different. The cidentireplica can be in a different place with a different environment as soon as this happens it is not a cidentireplica of you. At this stage you have an awarepath of the original and a awarepath of the videntireplica of the original. To be aware of the two awarepaths at the same time we have to have a third awarepath that can be a number of different ways. One might be a split screen of different sensepaths and a split screen of different consciousnesses as well as any number of different interpretations of the two from the perspective of a third consciousness.

Just because you can not experience an awarepath different than your own, it does not mean that at any point your awarepath can not be enhanced or modified in may different ways. You can not see the consciousness of your awarepath in the past nor in the future you can only remember some of the aspects of it and these memoriesmay be incorrect.

Why can’t a videntireplica have the ixperiencitness of the original in it? The ixperiencitness is a sub aspect or part of consciousness. Being only a part there will be other aspects of consciousness that can be added and taken away with the same ixperiencitness in it. We have proof of this because a persons consciousness is always changing, but the ixperiencitness is of the same person. At least we think this to be true.

Innateness of the identireplica theory of consciousness

A person is not innately aware of the identireplica theory of consciousness it is some thing that is learned. ( or created by producing the right structure and functioning of the neuropath. There may be a reason that it is not innate to know this information about the superimmortality. It might not be as good for the survival of the individual, so people that have the idea innately might work at surviving less diligently. what are more innate What are innate ideas or knowledge? This is information about the environment that is passed through the genes by the structure of the brain and body that the genes produce. Fear of falling might be one example.

It would seem possible that innateness for these ideas are more likely with some structures of brains than others. So for certain people and certain conscious species they may have an innate understanding of these ideas or they may be able to understand them easily.

For other chapters move

Bundle theory is that consciousness is a bundle of different perceptions.

I think that the bundle theory is too limited in scope epistemologically. Ideas relate in a much more complex fashion than this. Ideas relate in a much more complex fashion than just bundling. They intertwine and over lap and effect each other in many different ways one concept can change the whole structure of the bundle.

The interchangeable bundle theory of consciousness. This theory is that consciousness is a grouping or bundle of different perceptions and these perceptions are interchangeable over time and between people. Over time the bundle that is effecting you changes.

Explain predictive predict illustrative

Survival of death, like life, is an adventure. You do not know what to expect. The other conscious life forms in the universe will understand these ideas if they become intellectually advanced. You never know what physipaths will exist of you in the future. You also do not know what the quality of these physipaths will be. Will they be enhanced? Will they tie together different levels of memories of from different versions of you.

We could actually define survival of death as a continuation of the awarepath after death of the physipath. We can define potential survival of death or potential immortality as the potential for the awarepath to continue in the future. We can also define it as an awarevenue.

See also:

Awaretheory arguments superlist, Itoarguments, Itoarguments part 1, Itoarguments part 2, Itoarguments part 3, Itoarguments part 4, Itoarguments part 5, Itoarguments part 6, Itoarguments part 7, Itoarguments part 8, Itoarguments part 9, Itoarguments part 10, Itoarguments part 11, Itoarguments part 12, Itoarguments part 13, Itoarguments part 14, Itoarguments part 15, Itoexistence arguments, Fazexistence arguments, Fazarguments