Cyclone Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 What's the problem with playing the what if game? This thread was set up as a what if game from the first post. Anyone is permitted to state an IF, and then ask questions about how that if could be. I don't have a problem with it, except for the misleading title that suggests that science is involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 My parents were not dead, so you are right I was born not resurrected, you have to wait until I am dead for that to happen. So if you made from a frozen spermatozoa and egg, after your parents had died, then you'd consider yourself resurrected??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blanco Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Cyclone, in the spirit of this [previously] fun thread, rather than just debunking all the interesting suggestions, would you care to speculate about ways the artificially contructed question could be true, however improbable - IF there was an afterlife, what scientific method could it be provided through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grahame Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Similarly, anything brought into existence from the DNA of a dodo will be born and not resurrected. How can it be born when it doesn't come out of a womb? The dodo's mother is dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blanco Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 I don't have a problem with it, except for the misleading title that suggests that science is involved. Nothing misleading at all. The question was set up that way. Assuming something that we have no evidence for is true (we are allowed to suppose questions that we do not know are true), what scientifically plausible methods could possibly be involved. In any case it is very scientifically rigorous to suppose the opposite of something you dont believe and try to prove it. If only more people did this the world would be a more sensible place. Apart from that, this thread is one of the most fun well tempered threads involving afterlife discussion there's ever been Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Cyclone, in the spirit of this [previously] fun thread, rather than just debunking all the interesting suggestions, would you care to speculate about ways the artificially contructed question could be true, however improbable - IF there was an afterlife, what scientific method could it be provided through. An artificial afterlife would be the easiest postulation. Brain scan of some kind, download into 'heaven'. Quite common in the sci fi genre. Or 'transcendence' is another one. Use technology to transcend this state of being. It's normally a pretty vague concept though (by nature I expect). Read your consciousness (similar to the download) but have your mind imprinted into the vacuum energy or quantum foam or some other not really understood (or explained) fundamental structure of the universe. They aren't afterlives though, they're just a shift in the type of life. The very term suggests non scientific things though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Nothing misleading at all. The question was set up that way. Assuming something that we have no evidence for is true (we are allowed to suppose questions that we do not know are true), what scientifically plausible methods could possibly be involved. In any case it is very scientifically rigorous to suppose the opposite of something you dont believe and try to prove it. If only more people did this the world would be a more sensible place. Apart from that, this thread is one of the most fun well tempered threads involving afterlife discussion there's ever been Okay, but if you assume it's true, any possible explanation for it would have to be based on the evidence you'd now got that made you think it was true. Otherwise the exercise is meaningless, you can't come up with a hypothesis to explain something that you don't have any evidence for, even assumed evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 How can it be born when it doesn't come out of a womb? The dodo's mother is dead. The species will be resurrected, the individual will be a test tube baby (chick). Presumably a dodo will hatch anyway, I doubt that they were ever born, what with that being a mammalian thing to do! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grahame Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 The species will be resurrected, the individual will be a test tube baby (chick). Presumably a dodo will hatch anyway, I doubt that they were ever born, what with that being a mammalian thing to do! Was there a pig that was cloned, Dolly the pig or something like that? Isn't a clone supposed to be identical? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blanco Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Quantum foam - like it, someone should start designing it. I take it you cannot experience anything, unless designed to have inputs. Would it be considered more purgatory than heaven ? I see your point about non-scientific now; if its constructed purposefully, its more a shift in understanding than afterlife. Afterlife suggests natural, as in its been happening for ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.