Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Frumpagumpus t1_j6iung4 wrote

Reply to comment by Steven81 in I’m ready by CassidyHouse

i think we disagree, I think your version of "platonism" is solipsistic lol, since it places so much emphasis on your point of view.

my version of platonism (which is not pure by any means but possibly just as aligned w/original platonism's theory of forms if not moreso than yours) is more: abstract and physical world can both be described with coordinate systems, e.g. numbers. So just like it turned out space and time were actually spacetime, there might be something similar going on.

and yes i don't believe in souls. (in particular there is no a priori reason to believe in them and even if it was a real concept it wouldnt' change much since the soul would also live in a reality similar to our own, e.g. that of space describable by a coordinate system, probably some timelike dimension as well in order to map to our own reality, in my estimation)

> In one case Uploading yourself is killing yourself, in another it is living forever without the need of pesky mediums.

uh, it can be killing yourself in both of them, because causal continuity is a "material" property...

the question is more of how much difference does it make, people die all the time, is it so bad to die, etc. You think maintaining your personal narrative is of paramount importance because it's tied to some trans dimensional soul or something. I see myself as more about fighting for my ideals, and making sacrifices when necessary or important.

Though i'm not sure it will really be much of a sacrifice actually, seems like that to us but we see things differently as exclusively embodied agents than future intelligences will.

1

Steven81 t1_j6j0968 wrote

> You think maintaining your personal narrative is of paramount importance

If we live in a materialistic universe , I don't think that concepts like "importance" can even enter the conversation.

Things either are or they are not in such a universe. In a materialistic universe your end is akin to the end of the world because there is a lack of observation in the particular timeline you always occupied. Yes the world will go on in some abstract way, but not in a manner that can -even in principle- matter to you. Say the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics ends up being true (basically time is multidimensional), in such a world how can it matter what happens in a parallel reality that is not ours. One's death in a materialistic universe is neither important nor unimportant, it does have a definite effect on the individual though (he gets stuck in a dead end version of the universe).

That's why I find a materialistic universe (if we indeed live in one) a partially solipsistic one.

I dont know how Platonism can be sollipsistic though. Plato certainly did believe that we live in a universe made of ideals and that we embody an image of them. The concept of a soul was paramount to his belief and especially to that of neo platonists. That's where Christians got it from (early Christians believed in bodily resurrection, there was no concept of an immortal soul, until neo platonists had their influence on Christianity around the 4th century ce, but I digress)...

2

Frumpagumpus t1_j6j0vr4 wrote

> If we live in a materialistic universe , I don't think that concepts like "importance" can even enter the conversation.

what, why does a soul or whatever have anything to do with importance? (my suspicion here would be you are trying to do something impossible to do with an axiomatic system)

> Yes the world will go on in some abstract way, but not in a manner that can -even in principle- matter to you

we just went over how "abstract" and "material" (the world) aren't necessarily so different... they are both spaces in a geometric sense mapped by coordinate systems

1

Steven81 t1_j6jvvdd wrote

> why does a soul or whatever have anything to do with importance?

It doesn't, I was reacting to something else entirely (namely a phrase of yours that I quoted).

> we just went over how "abstract" and "material" (the world) aren't necessarily so different...

A description of a thing (an "abstraction") is not the same as the thing in a materialistic universe. I can see how they can be neighbours in a platonic or more generally an idealistic universe.

Which is why it is crucial for us to know in what type of universe we find ourselves into.

1